NSW Libs' Right-Wing Attack Lindsay

Five Liberal Party members have used leaflets giving false information about Muslim group supporting the ALP has backfired.

The Muslim groups on the leaflet doesn't exist, and the statements about the ALP are false. Involved in the distribution are at least 5 Liberal Party members and supporters. The most significant members of the group that misrepresented Muslims and the ALP are:

• NSW Liberal Party executive member, Jeff Egan
• Retiring Liberal MP Jackie Kelly's husband, Garry Clark
• Greg Chijoff, husband of the Liberal candidate fro Lindsay

Five Liberal Party members have been expelled, including Mr Egan. While John Howard distanced himself and condemned the action, Jackie Kelly, as retiring MP and wife of one of the participants, told the ABC it was a "joke". She said it was like a "Chaser" TV show stunt. While she thought it a joke, the Liberal Party was in full "damage control" over the stupidity of the action - an action that might be likened to Mark Latham's intimidatory handshake with John Howard, and showed the at temped bullying by him. Some will liken it to Mr Howard's "children overboard" mistruth.

Here, the action has racist and xenophobic undertones, and both Kelly and Chijoff are probably tarnished as part of the racist faction within Right-wing of the NSW Liberal Party. That the matter has been passed from the Electoral Commission to the Federal Police should stop them laughing.

John

Leaders' To-Do Lists

Kevin Rudd released his top5 "To-Do" list in an interview with The Sun-Herald last weekend.

They were:

• climate change
• education
• health
• broadband
• computers in schools

This gives him the "soft", people-centred tasks. Signing the Kyoto Protocol and setting interim targets is largely symbolic, but allows us to have a greater say at the next round of negotiations in Bali. The Coalition won't sign, and we'll be in the back blocks, left out of key negotiations.

Education, health, fast broadband (especially for regional areas) and computers in schools will appeal to most sections of the community.

John Howard has reacted with:

• strong economy (growth)
• security
• "election promises"
• Takeover of the Murray-Darling Basin
• talking about recognition of Indigenous people in the Constitution

The trouble for Mr Howard is that economic growth is not what is needed, and his election promises, if implemented, will drive inflation for years after he retires. Further, his economic record speaks of WorkChoices, a term he now avoids, but which he did not tell voters about last time.

He gave no detail about further "security" legislation that he wants. (shades of WorkChoices?)

John Howard believes his use of "economic management" will win votes. If voters think about his promises, and the current state of the economy, it could be political poison for him.

John

Election 2007 Prediction

With the Federal election next Saturday, and many pollsters predicting a Labor landslide, the following is my prediction, based on a combination of Antony Green's Election Predictor at the ABC's Election 2007 site, polls, "history" and "art of prediction" (whatever that is!)




In fact, the predictor suggested Labor 78; Coalition 70; Other 2.
However, I believe there are a few seats that will not conform to the "State-based swing" result: The Prime Minister's seat of Bennelong will possibly be retained, on the back of a "sympathy vote"; the Seat of Dobell will be a 50-50 proposition, as will be Malcolm Turnbull's seat of Wentworth in Eastern Sydney, and the SA seat of Boothby. Eden-Maonaro will be won by the ALP.

Now, we just need to wait and see.


John

Howard vs Labor - the Election Promise Effects

Both major parties have now launched their election campaigns. We've had almost 4 weeks of the unofficial election campaign where travel and living expenses of our politicians have been paid by taxpayers. Many would argue that, ethically, once the election writs have been issued by the Governor-General, political parties should be paying, not the taxpayer.

John Howard, at the Liberal Party launch, promised an extra $9.5Billion to voters. This brings his total to almost $65 Billion.

Kevin Rudd, claiming the economic conservative high ground, promised an extra $2.3Billion at the Labor Party's launch. this brought his total to almost $57Billion.

The possible effects of election spending by the end of 2009 are:

• Home Loan Interest Rates under John Howard: 11% - 12%
• Home Loan Interest Rates under Kevin Rudd: 9% - 10%

The inflation figure from John Howard's spree is exacerbated by his ideological, but economically bad, drive to put ever more money into the hands of middle-class and wealthy taxpayers, many of whom spend it on consumer goods. This drives consumption inflation, one of the current problems identified by the Reserve Bank.

Of course, John Howard could have some "non-core" promises that he won't implement; and Kevin Rudd could increase the amount of budget surplus retained from 1% to 1.5%-2% during the current boom.

John Howard has gone for the "Go for Growth" slogan - the problem is that there is no room for growth without inflation. Both he and Peter Costello are ideologically locked into retaining only 1% of GDP, even as the economy is overheating and creating inflation. Excessive growth is NOT what the economy needs at the moment.

Kevin Rudd has gone for the "New Leadership" slogan. If elected, his leadership will be tested by the economic conditions he inherits. An overheated economy with rising inflation and significant overseas pressures. Increasing the retained budget surplus from 1% to 1.5% will be a challenge.


John

Non-Exclusive Interview - Rudd & Howard Talk

"Mr Howard, thanks for your time. I know you're busy with the election."

"Yes - so much money to give away - baby bonus, tax cuts... And so many Liberal seats to try to keep."

"But won't that be inflationary? Won't the economy suffer?"

"Inflation, schminflation - look, I won't be around next election so it won't matter .... to me at least. That'll be Peter's job, if I win"

"Yes, Mr Rudd, thanks for your time. You've also promised tax cuts."

"Yes, John, but ours aren't inflationary. See, I'm an economic conservative, unlike that economic thug, John Howard. He just throws money around willy-nilly. And it's not even his money."

"But the Reserve Bank says that inflation is likely to be higher till at least 2009, and more interest rate rises are likely. That will affect homeowners with a mortgage."

"John, Janette and I own our own home, so they won't affect us. And they won't affect the rich too much either."

"Me, too".

"Don't either of you care?"

(Howard) "Is that a rich private entity I can give taxpayer money to?"
(Rudd) "Of course the Labor Party cares - we are the caring party."

(Howard) "Any interest rate rises are because of union thugs - it's not my fault. It's not, mum"

John

Banks Interest in Greed

Banks have tried to "talk up" the possibility of raising interest rates by more than the 0.25% rise in the rate set by the Reserve Bank, announced on Wednesday.

They claim they have been carrying costs asociated with the troubled sub-prime markets, mostly in the US. The decision to lend money in such markets forms part of a bank's overall business strategy and business decisions are made on that basis.

Let's look at the 2007 profits for the major banks (results reported to Sept-November 2007):

• St George:

"Net profit for the year to September was $1.163 billion, an increase of 11 per
cent over 2006. After adjusting for hedge fund accounting, cash profit was
$1.160 billion, an increase of 13.1 per cent over the previous year."

• Westpac:

"3.45 billion, 12 per cent higher than this time last year."

• Macquarie Bank:

"Macquarie says its profit for the six months to September should be up strongly
on last year's corresponding result of $730 million", and is expecting a record
profit for the current six month period.

• National Bank:

"met forecasts with a 20 percent rise in second-half profit, driven by strong
loan growth, and said it targeted revenue growth above the industry average in
its key consumer banking"

• Commonwealth Bank:

"For the 12 months to 30 June 2007, statutory net profit after tax was $4,470 million", a 14 percent increase, and reportedly has less exposure to the US sub-prime market.

• ANZ:

ANZ recorded a record profit of $4.18 Billion, an increase of 13 percent.

In the face of record profits and increases of 4-5 times that of inflation, and because they admit they made business decisions that have not made as much profit as regular mortgages and bank fees, and that therefore they need to increase lending rates of existing mortgages by more than 0.25% is, I think, wrong.

If the business decisions they made are not as profitable, then they need to examine their strategic plans, and redirect their money to customers who will generate a stable return on their investment ... but not increase their loan rates by more than 0.25%.

John

Interest Rates Up - Howard says 'Sorry'

There were no surprises at all today, when the Reserve Bank announced it has lifted interest rates by 0.25%. The banks and financial institutions will follow suit.

Over the last 3 budgets (2005-2007), John Howard and Peter Costello have pumped about $70 Billion into the Australian economy in personal tax cuts alone. In May 2006, John Howard defended his tax cuts, saying they were not inflationary! He issued another $37 Billion in 2007.

His redistribution of tax money seems to favour those who are wealthier, with households in the top 10% of income taking about 30% of the tax cut money. See here.

A look at the RBA's interest rate rises shows increases in: May 2006, Aug 2006, Nov 2006, Aug 2007, Nov 2007.

The economy, for its part has had to generate an extra $100+ in value of GDP as consumers spent up big. There are only 2 ways it can do this: create more goods and services - difficult in an economy at full capacity - or the increase prices - inflation.

Part of the RBA's statement says:

Inflation in Australia has increased. ... During 2007, the pace of growth of
demand and output has also increased.

It is this growth in demand that needs to be managed. The Federal Budget needs to remove more money from the economy to help reduce demand - but that would not be popular in an election year, so political expediency takes precedence. Good economic management doesn't count.

Today, John Howard said "sorry", but 'sorry' doesn't mean "good economic management"

John

Inflation - it's not my fault says Howard

On Wednesday, we will find out if the Reserve Bank lifts interest rates yet again. It would be the 6th interest rate rise since the last election. John Howard promised voters keep interest rates "at a record 30 year low".

Today, he told the ABC there are some factors that might lead to another interest rate rise: the strength of the economy, which he manages; the growing price of oil, and the drought (which is affecting food prices).

But, as with most political statements, it is what John Howard is NOT telling us that matters. In determining the underlying rate of inflation, the Reserve Bank discounts the effects of items seen as volatile, including the price of oil, and of food.

That leaves John Howard's contribution - the "strength" of an overheating economy; an economy managed by his & Peter Costello's budgets. Within hours, Mr Howard promised to pump an extra $10 Billion into the economy, as he tried to buy votes in the politically important areas of Sydney, Victoria, and south-east Queensland. These are areas with electorates he must retain to continue his (otherwise) unannounced agendas.

There are two elements in the fine print, though: the road/rail funding is targeted till 2020 - 4 government terms away; and it is as though he wants to ensure that inflation continues to grow, whatever the outcome.

Economically responsible - you bet it's not!

John

Madness, The Monk & The Rock Star

The last few days must have John Howard and Kevin Rudd wishing, praying, that their charges would stop having moments of madness.

Tony Abbott, Minister for Health, has been called "the mad monk". His madness erupted this week, with public abuse of Bernie Banton for (trying to) deliver a petition for PBS support for a drug to treat asbestos-related illness. Mr Banton will die from such an illness, and campaigned with unions to get compensatin from James Hardie.

Then there was the the debacle at Mersey Hospital: the Federal Government was supposed to take control, but somebody forgot to arrange for federal supervision of state doctors, and to solve the problem of not using "Workchoices" on the new emeployees. Workchoices is a particularly sensitive area for the government, and it is desperate to retain seats in Tasmania.

Then, in Victoria with Prime Minister Howard for a "policy launch". John Howard was having such a good time he kept Tony Abbott waiting to return to Canberra for a televised debate with Labor Health spokeswoman, Nicola Roxton. He was overheard saying "that's bullshit" to Roxton's taunt that he could have been on time.

All he could do was "grin and bear it" - and apologise ... often.

Today, a radio shock jock reported Labor's Peter Garrett saying to him that, if elected, Labor would "change everything" - presumably its promises and policies. And the Liberal Party wants to (as a Federal Government) take over Grafton Hospital. They haven't yet solved the (Workchoices) problems at Mersey Hospital.

Madness ... sheer madness!

John

Big Tax Bucks for Private ATCs

John Howard today announced his $2 Billion plan for 100 more Australian Technical Colleges. Thirty of these would be "offered" to States and private schools - for which they will receive $10 Million. That's a total of $300 or 15% of the $2 Billion. 30% (state/private schools) get 15% of the money. 70% - all private entities- get 85% of taxpayer money.

The other 70, will receive $1.99 Billion of taxpayer money, to go to private organisations. The private organisations will get 85% of taxpayer money for just 70% of the ATC's. States and private schools will get 0.5% of funding for 30% of the ATCs. This seems to be another instance of John Howard splurging taxpaer dollars to private entities.

Then ther eis the issue of performance and accountability. The Auditor-General's (Performance) Report #3 on DEST's funding of current ATCs showeed that enrolments were only 2/3 of those projected by ATCs in their requests for funds, and funded by DEST. They also show that they are not achieving the numbers of School-Based Apprentices and Trainees required. (only 74 of projected 460). There were problems of accountability identified by the A-G, but which won't be addressed till 2008-2009. Significant numbers had problems with their RTO status, and have had to "sub-contract" to TAFEs

ATC's are inefficient in terms of their funding model, and represent John Howard's policy of providing great amounts of taxpayer dollars to private entities, at the expense of public facilities. The current arrangements are unsatisfactory, but Mr Howard will continue to fund private entities with 99.5% of the funding for only 70% of the facilities. Meanwhile, universities, TAFE and public schools have had their share of federal funding cut.

John

Coalition At Odds with Itself

"A week is long time in politics" is a well-worn clichè. Kevin Rudd had his blooper this week at a gathering of seniors in Tasmania, where he received a spray from one Howard supporter. Then there were the days of Coalition criticism of Kevin Rudd about his removal of CFMEU Assistant Secretary Joe McDonald's from the ALP.

This weekend must seem an eternity to John Howard, his minions, and his minders. Consider the following weekend events:

• Joe Hockey told journalists that the Coalition is simply running a "fear campaign" about unionists.
• While John Howard would not commit to a % of unionists that would be representative, Hockey said 20%. He then struggled to name 3 former union members who were ministers. He tried to count a student association and the AMA as unions. Tony Abbott might be the only one - hardly "representative", as Hockey would want.
• The Sunday Telegraph ran a story that Malcolm Turnbull had previously urged Mr Howard to sign the Kyoto Protocol (on global warming). No only had Cabinet discussions been leaked, but this was contrary to the position Mr Howard enforced on his ministry. Liberal sources were blaming Mr Turnbull for the leak - possibly to destroy any future leadership roles he might desire - saying he was only interested in retaining his own seat.
• Mr Howard was questioned by Channel 9's Laurie Oakes about his promise to keep interest rates at the "lowest levels for 30 years". There have been 5 interest rate rises sisnce the last election, and a sixth seems likely on 6 November when the Reserve Bank board meets to discuss inflation.
• The Sun-Herald today revealed that Federal Territiroes Minister, Jim Loyd, has tried to have a memorial to the people of SIEV-X who died at sea, removed. The memorial was previously approved, by the government, the ACT Government and the NCA. IT became unacceptable after the election was called. It is consistent with John Howard's policy that refugees, boat people, and "foreigners" should be dehumanised, and used to create fear in the comunity.

John Howard must be cringing that he can't hold all his ministers' hands, all the time. Cher's "If I Could Turn Back Time" would be an appropriate chorus for them.

John

Howard's Inflation His Own Poison

Today's economic news was all about interest rates and inflation. Treasurer Costello tried to use the media to put pressure on the Reserve Bank to not lift interest rates when it meets on Melbourne Cup Day by citing only the official 12-month figure for inflation. He avoided any mention of: the underlying rate of of inflation (the cpi was almost 1% for the quarter) or the rate at which that figure is increasing.

With a big budget surplus, Howard and Costello are spurging in election-promise spending. But it is not good economic management. In November 2006, I wrote:

"Monetary Policy (interest rates) is a blunt instrument against inflation. ...
Successive "tax cuts" have produced more spending than the value of the tax
cuts. That is, we created more money and inflation than the tax cut."

The underlying rate of inflation, and the speed at which that is increasing is a concern for the Reserve Bank. In July 2006, John Howard said that it was important that the Reserve Bank focus on underlying inflation. (it was when banana prices were very high after a cyclone ruined much of Nth Queensland's crop). That Peter Costello is studiously trying to ingnore that fact right now is a measure of his desperation and lack of candour with the Australian people.

High, and an increasing rate of, underlying inflation indicates poor economic management by the Federal Government in its budget spending - poor management that will likely see an unprecedented rate rise in an election campaign.

It's as though the government has decided that, if it's going to lose, it should make things as difficult for the Australian people and the next government as possible.

John

Election Debate: Skills Crisis

A John Howard and Kevin Rudd exchanged insults during the "Election Debate", it became apparent that, as always, it was about many things. Debating wasn't one of them. It was about TV image and political point-scoring before a panel of journalists, and a government tantrum about "the worm"

John Howard was critical of the use of the "worm" to show audience reaction to his and Mr Rudd's statements: he knows he doesn't always argue well. However, the journalists panel was critical of his attitude, saying that there was ever-more government interference in the media for purely political purposes. Indeed, the Federal Government cut Channel 9's feed when the "worm" went to air. Media manipulation by the Federal Government is, indeed, something that ought to frighten voters.

Among the issues raised during the debate were:

• education: Mr Howard looked uncomfortable when Mr Rudd talked about a recent OECD report that was critical of Australia's investment in public tertiary education. It is certainly true that John Howard, Julie Bishop and Andrew Robb have been responsible for funding cuts to universities and TAFE across Australia, as a % of GDP. They have also used threats to withhold funding unless universities and TAFE adopted the Liberal Party's agenda on WorkChoices.
• optimism: despite both leaders expressing optimism, John Howard's response was to assert that Kevin Rudd is "pessimistic". No argument, just an assertion.
• industrial relations: John Howard was very careful to NOT mention the "W" word (Workchoices) when IR was discussed. He does not like voters' response to the lowering of wages, and tries to avoid the issue, or rattle off statistics hoping to confuse people.
• climate change: Mr Rudd wants to set targets, sign the Kyoto Protocol and work locally and internationally to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Mr Howard has a reactionary view that "whatever you do, don't damage the economy". The reality is that climate change will damage the economy, to our land, our rivers, our coastal living if we do nothing; if we do, there will still be some damage to the economy in reducing carbon emissions, but it can adapt and remain strong.
• economic management: Mr Howard is still seen by many voters as economically responsible. It is an assertion he repeats often, hoping that voters will not remember the 5 interest rate rises since the last election, that his economic management redistributes wealth to those who have most, that poverty has risen from 7% to 10% of our people. Those are parts of his economic management he tries to avoid people remembering.

As I have said before, to win this election both sides must target the 12-15% of voters who are "undecided". Whether this debate helped either leader do that, or whether voters see it like as one long policical ad remains to be seen.

John

Tax Cuts, Interest Rates and Public Facilities

Tax cuts and negative name-calling: it must be election time.

John Howard has once again trotted out tax cuts during an election campaign. He asserts that HE is the most responsible economic manager for Australia, yet he knows that the $34 Billion in tax cuts he is offering will surely lead to higher interest rates and higher inflation. There are enough arguments to NOT have these tax cuts:

• by themselves, they will be inflationary. The economy will have to produce nearly $50 Billion of EXTRA GDP. It is already groaning under the strain of other pressures such as the US sub-prime mortgage market, rising oil prices, rising food prices, and rising prices of other goods.
• many voters believe such money would be better spent on public facilities that benefit society: public education (universities, TAFE, public schools); public health and hospitals, and public roads (national highways, and major state roads). Providing funding to states for public facilities goes against what John Howard stands for. He will willingly give public money to private entities, and redistribute wealth to those who have more, but providing adequate funds to states for public benefit is not high on his agenda.
• there will be less money to spend on climate change and renewable energy sources. Again, this is not one of John Howard's favourite topics, having picked his position as a "climate sceptic".

John Howard is hoping that voters will not think about the implications of such large tax cuts, much of which will go to those with more wealth. Kevin Rudd is probably smart to pause and give a considered response, rather than a "me-too" reaction.

It seems as though whatever economic responsibility John Howard might have had went out the window when he mentioned the word "election". We need responsible economic management, not inflationary tax cuts.

John

It's the 24th November!

After several months of speculation, Prime Minister John Howard has called the Federal election for 24 November 2007. He announced the date at a media conference at Parliament House at noon today.

In his following speech, he made a number of assertions:

• "people must decide who is most able to not only to preserve Australia's prosperity, but build it to make sure it is fairly spread"
  QUESTION: Is WorkChoices designed to fairly spread the nation's wealth, or to reduce pay and conditions of millions of "worker units"?
  COMMENT: in his 11 years as Prime Minister, the number of people living in poverty in Austrlia has increased from 7% to 10% of people.
• "There is no reason why the current unemployment can't go lower"
  QUESTION: An admirable aim. What effect will even lower employment have on inflation? Interest rates? When interest rates have moved in the last two years, what has been the movement? (UP)
• "I have always wanted to achieve reconciliation (with indigenous people)", he said.
  QUESTION: Demonstrate your track record on reconciliation over the last 11 years?
• Mr Howard said that if reelected as Prime Minister, Peter Costello would be Treasurer.
  QUESTION: Won't Peter Costello become Prime Minister next term?
• Mr Howard asserts that there is "nothing balanced" in having a Federal Labor Government and Labor state governments.
  QUESTIONS: When has the financial bullying and political blackmailing by the Federal Government over funding to states been balanced? Is forcing a politically-set history curriculum on states "balanced"?
• Climate Change and reconciliation positions seem have have been reversed, or at least seemingly altered.
  QUESTION: Is that just political opportunism, cynicism, or both?

Update: Kevin Rudd's Response

Kevin Rudd has said, in response

• that the election IS about a new style of leadership that is needed. That was John Howard's attack on Paul Keating way back in 1996!
  COMMENT: Kevin Rudd's leadership, like John Howard's, is "Presidential" in style. John Howard like power, Kevin Rudd wants voters to focus on his popularity.
• he has a plan, and understands the challenges facing Australia.
  COMMENT: Perhaps, but it is not yet fully articulated, except for Workchoices. That will come during the campaign, we hope.
• he will ratify the Kyoto Protocol, and will NOT develop nuclear power stations.
  COMMENT: this will certainly attract voters away from John Howard, whose plan is really about extra profit-driven "Carbon-trading", but this will mean reliance on coal, or gas-fired, power stations.

This campaign will be a long six weeks for many voters. Much of it is likely to be negative.

John

Leaders Campaign But No Date Yet

John Howard and Kevin Rudd are both campaigning in Sydney today.

John Howard is promising Federal funding for storm-water harvesting ... but only in his electorate of Bennelong. Kevin Rudd is continuing his criticism of John Howard's "government advertising" just before the election is called. It will stop when the Parliament is dissolved: then the Liberal Party will pay for advertisements that support the government.

Mr Rudd has announced $50 for a cancer centre for Sydney. A worthy cause. Federal funding, as a % of GDP has fallen, while states share of hospital funding has increased. A visionary government/leader would recognise that what voters want is a commitment, from either party, that they will provide a greater share of funds to the states for public hospitals. John Howard's vision from the last 11 years has been to foster private entities at the expense of public ones.

Short-term electioneering is a reality near elections, but neither side has yet articulated well enough its vision for services to the public, by public utilities.

Many voters are already disengaging from the campaign, and just want the election to be called, and over. Meanwhile there is still much speculation in the media about when the election will be officially called, and dates of 17th or 24th November are being mentioned. John Howard will only use those dates if he bets the Reserve Bank will NOT raise interest rates after its November meeting. I still believe he will use 1-December for the election.

John

Reba's Health Woes

NSW Health Minister Reba Meagher has been under intense pressure and media scrutiny over problems in the NSW hospital system. Royal North Shore Hospital (RNS) has been a constant problem since a pregnant woman miscarried in the emergency waiting room toilet became known about 2 weeks ago. Yesterday, there were reports about missed cancers and delayed x-ray reports at Liverpool Hospital.

NSW Premier Morris Iemma is supporting his minister, despite calls for a parliamentary inquiry from the Opposition. Mr Iemma will resist such an inquiry for a number of reasons:

• Mr Iemma is a former Minster for Health
• party factionalism
• personal friendship
• the mere fact that the Opposition wants an Inquiry
• the total Health budget is essentially determined by Mr Iemma (as Premier) and Michael Costa (as Treasurer). Neither want to be called to give evidence.

There probably should be a Parliamentary Inquiry: it is an important step to determine what is actually wrong and, perhaps, recommend ways to fix it. It would also be one way to ensure accountability and responsibility from our State politicians. Politics will determine that there isn't one.

In the meantime, Reba Meagher will be accountable through media scrutiny and analysis. They seem to hang on every nuance, inflexion and facial expression. Some time after the Federal election, Morris Iemma might decide on a Cabinet reshuffle. Perhaps Reba Meagher will move to a ministerial position more suited to her talents. At this stage of her career, Health seems to have been too much of a challenge.

John

A Reading From the Book of History by John Howard

Today, the Prime Minister will announce that Federal funding to States for schools will only be provided if they teach an Australian History curriculum set by John Howard.

The curriculum move comes after John Howard dumped recommendations by a Melbourne history academic, and had them rewritten on his terms by right-wing (conservative) historian and a supporter of John Howard. Further, John Howard seems to have set the curriculum: students will have to learn about 70 facts of Australian History: emphasis on "facts". But history is not just about facts. Date-and-event is pretty dry content. History needs to be about people, context, environment, and ... not included in Mr Howard's curriculum ... balance.

There are some significant omissions from Australia's history, from which valuable lessons could have been learnt:

• the White Australia Policy, and its parallel in current xenophobic policies
• the "Rum Rebellion": a conflict between Governor William Bligh and Macarthur & his army officer supporters over the reduced number & size of land grants, especially to the wealthy
• the Eureka Stockade
• the Stolen Generation; and the broarder issue of treatment of orphans
• attitudes and treatment of indigenous people, apart from 1 or 2 major incidents
• other aspects of changing attitudes of the world and Australia. eg Britain's nuclear weapon testing in Australia (MonteBello Islands & Maralinga), and subsequent move to the EU; Australia's change to follow US foreign policy

What John Howard wants:

• power over states
• power to personally set school curricula
• a politically-set quite prescriptive curriculum (HIS curriculum) It is similar to Japan's former politically-set history of WWII- a history that denied Japanese atrocities and war crimes - in that important key facts and political sensitivities are omitted or treated lightly.

The Prime Minister has also insisted on the attendance of the Principal and school captains at Moorebank High School. They are on school holidays and Mr Howard wants to use them for his own media promotion. He wants voters to think, by association, that the Principal and children are on his side. It is marketing manipulation, paid for by us voters.

Should politicians set the content of school curricula? Vote now - see top right section of my blog.

John

Social Happiness and Government Policies

Many economists find the concept of "social happiness" too difficult. This is especially true of those who subscribe to economic rationalism, where the main argument is for less government intervention.

John Howard would like to think of himself as an economic rationalist. He has expressed the view "let the market decide", most recently about a carbon emissions trading scheme. That is, if business thinks there's money to be made, let them do it. He certainly did not want his government to interfere and set binding emissions targets. At the other end of the spectrum, he has been most happy for government intervention when it is to his own political advantage: the takeover of Mersey Hospital in Tasmania is an example. So is the growth of "public servants" and "media advisers" for government self-promotion. Kevin Rudd might be a little less "dry" in his economic thinking, but he, too, is prone to promised intervention if it suits.

"Social happiness" is sometimes expressed as the "sum of all individuals' happiness". But this is difficult to measure. Are people happy because they have another tax-cut? Are they happy knowing that the collective money could be used for public good? Individual people know that Public utilities (public hospitals, other health facilities, public schools, national highways) are essential, but are "happy" to take the money themselves ... until they need to use the public facilities. Then they ask "why isn't the government funding this properly?"

Government policies at State and Federal levels have been geared to individualism and privatism for too long. It is time to better fund our Public utilities for public good, rather than political expediency.

John

Polls Still Bad But PM Has Hope

The latest Herald-AC Nielson Poll continues the bad news for Prime Minister John Howard. The numbers show voter consistency of opinion over months: The 2-party-preferred count shows Labor 56%; Coalition 44%. However, as with other polls, this does not include the "uncommitted", a figure of about 12%.

Number-crunching shows the approximate figures as:

• Labor: 49%
• Coalition: 39%
• Uncommitted: 12%

It is this 12% of uncommitted voters that gives John Howard hope. I expect that about 7 in 10 of these will vote for the government (Coalition), just because they are in government, and because such voters are more likely to be befuddled by a government scare campaign. That would give figures close to:

• Labor: 52%
• Coalition: 48%

and result in a much closer election result.

The challenge for John Howard is to harness the scare campaign. He really only has 3 bullets: voter perceptions of his economic management (multiple successive rises in interest rates notwithstanding) and fear of refugees. He and his ministers will continue their assertions on these issues. The third bullet is pork-barrelling the voters. He's started with highway funding, and will continue on to hospitals, both of which are areas of voter concern. "But wait, there's more - ..."!

The challenge for Kevin Rudd is to continue to push the image of a leader who has a vision, and who wants to restore public faith in public structures such as health, education and transport; and the image of leader who wants to undo the worst degradations of WorkChoices without alienating businesses.

John

Hospitals Can't Heal Themselves

Assertions about Hospital funding, emergency department procedures, ministerial competence, a promised inquiry and changes of minds, and much finger-pointing have been the result of a recent traumatic miscarriage at Royal North Shore (RNS) Hospital in Sydney.

Since 1995-96, the proportion of Federal Government funding towards public hospitals in NSW has fallen from 45% to 41% (2005-06) of the the total funding. The States increased their proportion from 55%-59%. Many will also find unsurprising that the proportion, and dollar amounts, going to private hospitals has increased. Much of that probably comes through the 30% Health Insurance rebate given to taxpayers who then use private hospitals. Still, in NSW 30o people per 1000 people will visit an emergency department - that's a number equivalent to 30% of the population.

Education, transport, universities, TAFE, health. The Federal Government's agenda is to provide more taxpayer support for "private", rather than "public". (The same is true for NSW roads.)

"The time has come", the Walrus said, "to talk of many things ..."

• We taxpayers might need to pay more tax to fund the public services, such as hospitals, that we want.
• Or, since State Governments are severely hamstrung in raising revenue by taxes, the Federal Government needs to increase its spending on these.
• The Federal Government has restricted the number of doctors that can be trained by our universities. It is time they went, with a plan to increase the number of graduating doctors. The plan might also involve lower degree costs for doctors who work in public hospitals after completing their training. Similarly, for nurses.
• The proposal for local hospital boards is simply about divide, conquer and control by the Federal Government. Let's put that plan to rest.
• NSW Health Minister Reba Meagher needs to be more productive in her office, and spend more time understanding her portfolio, and less on holidays.
• Federal Health Minister Tony Abbott must spend less time trying to snipe at, and blame, others (states) and look for ways to work for the people of Australia.
• NSW Area Health Services need to find failures in all their procedures, staffing levels, staff training, staffing needs (in terms of experience) and infrastructure needs. Then, they can be brutally honest with their departmental and political masters. Only through such a traumatic and cathartic evaluation will a viable 5-10 year plan be possible. We will need that long to fix the systemic and political errors of the last 10 years.

All of these will require a radical change in perspective from all participants.. Economically, we cannot just pump more money in: it needs to be redistributed from elsewhere. As a society we need to set the agenda. We also need politicians and governments who will act in the public interest, not the party interests. Instead of being belligerent, controlling, and blackmailing, governments must actually consider the public good in how they deal with each other.

John

Federal Election Date

There has been weeks of speculation in the media bout when the Federal election will be held. Senior Government members will only say "between now and Christmas" or "well before Christmas".

Given that this weekend has a public holiday, and is the start of school holidays in NSW, my prediction is as follows.

• John Howard will call the election during the seek after school returns. The Governor-General is overseas, and to call the election during the holidays would not go well with voters psyche.
  
  
• If he calls the election during that week (15-20 October), the election will be held on Sat 1st December. John Howard would not want it to be any later - that would interfere with voters' Christmas shopping, and be too close to the start of school Christmas Holidays, neither of which would please voters.

So, Saturday 1st December is my prediction for the date of the Federal election.

John

Australian Farming Audit

Last week, Opposition Shadow Minister for the Environment, Peter Garrett, agreed that an audit of farming land would not be a bad thing. He said this in response to a direct question.

The Federal Government's (junior) Parliamentary Secretary for the environment, John Cobb, immediately responded by trying to "shoot the messenger", saying that Garrett was "the grim reaper" of farmers. Such a response contributes nothing to the discussion. It's a discussion teh Government does not want to have. There has been a number of media stories and editorials supporting John Howard's plan to provide more assistance to farmers.

Much of Australia has been in drought for more than 6 years, the average temperature has been higher than in other droughts, possible due to climate change, and rain events that have occurred have been less common and more extreme. Add to this, the mix of high-water use irrigated crops such as cotton and rice planted in the very dry Murray-Darling Basin, and there would seem to be a good case for a national audit of what we produce on farms, where it's produced, what water is needed to produce it, and whether some areas currently farmed are viable. Some years years ago, both the manufacturing, sugar and dairy industries were restructured, and the Federal Government encouraged some farmers to leave the industry: there might be other areas where this is appropriate, with suitable financial inducements.

A national audit of farming land, production and water use is a worthwhile response to the effects of climate change/"shift" on our farmland, drought and our farmers and their families.

The question is not whether our politicians have the "ticker" to do it; the question is, are we willing to insist on action for Australia's benefit.

John

Federal-State Health Funding

On Tuesday (25-Sep), a woman had a miscarriage in a public toilet at Royal North Shore Hospital in Sydney. On Wednesday, another lady contacted the media to say she had had a similar experience 2 years ago. Both had gone to the hospital, and been waiting for more than 1.5 hours. The experience of both could only be described as shattering.

Triage sets priorities for waiting patients. Those most at risk (chest pains, breathing difficulties) are treated sooner. The process relies on assessment, and on available nurses and doctors. Both are in short supply. RNS has vacancies for over 60 registered nurses, and an unknown number of doctors. It underwent a restructure last year - presumably to reduce costs.

Health is one of the "big 3" budget items in NSW (the others are educations and police), the proportion of the budget spent on each of them is increasing. Health now uses about 26% of NSW's budget. While many call for more funding, no one disputes the need.

How to properly fund the provision of State services is a much bigger issue. States cannot reasonably borrow to pay for recurrent expenditure. ie money spent each year in running the services, the same way that we cannot relentlessly borrow to pay for food and regular household bills.

Since the Hawke-Keating years, the % of GDP provided to the states has fallen. Under John Howard and Peter Costello is is at its lowest point - just 5% of GDP. Yet the costs borne by states has risen inexorably. If the states, and NSW in particular, cannot adequately fund the required levels of service using the money we pay in GST, there are only 2 options:

1. we pay more tax - eg by increasing GST from 10% to , say 12%, or more income tax to the Federal Government
2. the Federal Government releases more money to the states, possibly as tied grants for specific service areas.

John Howard has 3 fundamental objections to increasing Federal Government grants to the states:

1. He considers the budget surplus his, to be used for the benefit of the Liberal Party, and his re-election. Last election he splurged $6 billion in voter "sweeteners": we're paying higher interest rates partly because of that largess.
2. He has a fundamental objection to helping fund Labor governments to provide services. That doesn't help him.
3. He has a fundamental objection to public services: he would much rather spend Federal money helping private companies deliver the same services, because he retains a measure of control, and he can take "credit".

States need to be have increased funding to provide the services we "demand". That money must come from our taxes, either new, increased, or existing income tax. Perhaps we really do need to look at a new Federal-State funding model. We will need a different Federal Government to do it, though.

John

Workchoices - the Christianity Test

On 9 August, John Howard & Kevin Rudd both professed their Christianity in a broadcast to the Hillsong Church, a church that has mostly supported John Howard.

He told the audience "The predominant religious culture in our society is Christianity" and that the parable of the talents is all about capitalism.

A friend sent me a passage from the Old Testament.
It is from the book of Job 8:4-7 It reads:

Listen to me, you who trample on the needy
and try to suppress the poor people of the country,
...
Then by lowering the bushel, raising the shekel,
by swindling and tampering with the scales,
we can buy up the poor for money,
and the needy for a pair of sandals,
...
The Lord swears ..
'Never will I forget a single thing you have done!'

It reminded me of the effects of WorkChoices legislation. I wonder what lesson John Howard and Kevin Rudd would draw from that passage.

Today's news also had stories about WorkChoices ads that have been withdrawn. The embrassing withdrawals of both ads reflect the need to for both the government and business consortiums ( the ad was from a groups of 19 employer organisations and pretended to show union bosses closing a dressmaking shop) to portray accurately what happens: neither ad does that. As with all ads from governments and big business "Caveat emptor" - let the buyer beware. The ads and the scare tactics are untrustworthy.

John Howard professes Christianity - but does his legislation practice it?

John

NSW - The Gambling State

NSW is set to allow even more opportunities for problem gamblers to fill Treasurer Michael Costa's moneybag. On Fr 22-Sep, NSW Minister for Gambling and Racing told ABC Radio

"The Gaming Machine Act is under review and that means everything is under review, from harm minimisation through to poker machine entitlements. We are not ruling anything in or out."

NSW Hotels and clubs will be mighty pleased - they will be lobbying hard to allow extra poker machines. The government is likely to be sympathetic: it wants the tax revenue, especially given it is losing millions in revenue from lost horse racing, and might yet have to be seen to be supporting the industry.

The NSW government is also under some pressure over hotel trading hours, given the increasing levels of violence surrounding some big hotels, and nightclubs.

The NSW branch of the Australian Hotels Association has been a significant lobbyist of the NSW government. Electoral Commission data shows the owners of 2 hotels where there have been problems with violence have donated tens of thousands of dollars to the NSW ALP. Presumably they see it as a "business investment", and want a return.

All this comes at the same time as Russell Crowe and Peter Holmes a Court plan to dump poker machines from South Sydney Leagues Club. There desire is driven by their recognition of the social cost of gambling, and the manner in which it is promoted: no sunlight (so patrons lose track of time), ATMs nearby, and the desire for clubs and hotels, and the NSW government, for ever more money from punters.

This is indeed a serious social issue, but the big players - the NSW government, clubs and pubs - have just one phrase: "show me the money"! Their cynicism in the face of significant social problems is nothing less than mind-blowing.

John

Poll Spin - Howard Says He Can Win

Today's Newspoll survey results seemed to bring good news to John Howard. The Liberal Party was back to his previously losing position, as shown by polls from 6 July onwards. The only exception was the last poll. (2 September). All others had (2-party preferred) the Coalition at 44-45% and the Labor Party at 55-56%.

From that, John Howard told the Party room that "I can win it". Well, politicians do like to talk up their underdog status, to at least appear to have a chance. In truth, he does. The polls have shown a fairly consistent % of 'uncommitted' that are not included in the poll results. Those undecided on polling day are more likely to vote for an incumbent government, than for a change. So, we can expect future polls to show a narrowing of the gap.

In terms of voter satisfaction/dissatisfaction with the leaders, the numbers stay the same.

• John Howard: 45 % Satisfied; 44% dissatisfied.
• Kevin Rudd: 65% satisfied; only 18% dissatisfied.

The same is true for voter perceptions of who would make a better Prime Minister

• John Howard: 38%
• Kevin Rudd: 48%

The challenge for both parties, and especially the Liberal Party, is to win the hearts and votes of those uncommitted: about 10-14% of voters. The other numbers will change a little, but it is this group that will really decide the election.

Meanwhile, Kevin Rudd has been cautioning his team against any displays of hubris or arrogance: Government ministers have already tried lining up to tell voters that's what's happening. The mind games continue, from both sides.

It is 5 days since John Howard talked about his team. Since then, not a single one of his press releases has mentioned the word 'team', but there have been plenty of 'I's.

John

Howard Government's Green Advertising

As John Howard prepares an advertising campaign to tell voters about his Climate Change "green" credentials, it is appropriate to look at his own record.

Kirribilli House, used by John Howard instead of The Lodge, had rainwater tanks fitted in 2007. If they had not been, John Howard faced the embarrassment of being named a large water user, as Sydney residentsstruggled to cope with water restrictions.

Parliamant House, where he could have shown considerable leadership, has been less than an ideal model of a "green" citizen. While there are government websites and documentation afor householders to use to benefit themselves and the environment, John Howard's government:

• still uses large, petrol-engined cars. No Toyata Priuses here.
• 2004-05 figures show there were 133929000 MJ of energy used at Parliament House. Only 10274386 (7.8%) came from renewable/green energy sources
• A 2002 Senate Inquiry on "The Value of Water" recommended specific measures, including "Upgrading all Commonwealth buildings for higher standards of water efficiency" and "The Joint House Department to be funded to change all toilet cisterns in Parliament House to dual-flush and to fit water efficient shower roses".
  
  (Recommendations 9 & 10, under "Leading by Example")
  
  As at May 2007 only the toilets in the carpark, forecourt and Parliament House Recreation Centre had been fitted with waterless urinals (no dual-flush toilets) and only the Recreation Centre has water efficient shower roses.

You''ll soon see slick advertisements espousing the green "climate change" credentials of John Howard & co. So much for the political will of John Howard's Government to show leadership in their own backyard!

John

John Howard's New Team

John Howard has a new team. At least he says he has a team. After years of presidential-style domination of his party and coalition members and Ministers, John Howard would have voters believe they are a team.

Consider his 3 press releases today:

• Nurses Education: one "I"; no mention of "team"
• Address to the RSL National Congress: more than 30 "I"s; no mention of "team"
• Australian Nursing Schools: 19 "I"s; no mention of team

So much for having a team. This is not about teams: the Coalition has members and Ministers who firmly believe that John Howard should NOT be leading the party, let alone the country. Yes, they are self-interested: they stand to lose their seats at the election.

The presentation of a "team" to voters is like a quick slash of gloss paint over a facade that is crumbling, cracked and very much in ruins. It's glossy, but has no substance. John Howard's leadership, and his governement, has almost certainly run its course

John

Howard's Nursing Agenda

Today Prime Minister John Howard released his plan for nnursing education. Pointedly, he made the announcement at a private hospital (St George Private Hospital, in Sydney), rather than at a public hospital.

In his press release, he also pointedly talks about "I" - no mention of the new "team" in the whole press release - and says:

"What we are going to do is to provide $170 million over a period of five years to create 25 Australian Hospital Nursing Schools and essentially what that means is that the Federal Government will fund individual hospitals, either public or private, we'll adopt the same approach irrespective of whether it is a public or a private hospital; for them to provide training facilities within the hospitals themselves for people training to become enrolled nurses. "

Here we need to draw parallels with the Australian Technical Schools - remember those - most of which have been unable to find apprenticeships for their students, and most of which have to sub-contract the training to TAFE, because they don't have RTO status.

It also says that the Federal Government "will fund individual hospitals." Let's draw further parallels with universities, which this year had the option of no increase in funding, or an increase in funding if they offered only Workchoices. Yes, it's political blackmail, and yes the university Vice-Chancellor's had Hobson's Choice: Workchoices or nothing.

From John Howard, this offer might look good, but the offer is really about 2 things:

• Concentration of Political power for John Howard
• The Federal Government using financial "leverage" to push more people onto Workchoices.

John

NSW Electricity Sale to Benefit Budget - Not People

On 4 May 2007, the NSW Premier, Morris Iemma, told Parliament

"there will be no sale of electricity generation, transmission or distribution"

On 11 September the Owen Inquiry into Electricity Supply in NSW was released. Its recommendation is a s follows:

"... there is a need to be prepared for additional investment in
baseload from 2013-14. Further, the most efficient means of
providing for baseload is to improve the commercial and policy
signals used by the private sector when investing in generation
capacity in New South Wales. My key recommendation,
therefore, is that the Government of New South Wales divests
itself of all State ownership in both retail and generation. ..."

That is, Professor Owen, having looked at the National electricity market, carbon-trading schemes present and planned, the need for increased baseload power generation, and the budget, has recommended NSW sell its electricity infrastructure.

How does this fit with Morris Iemma's prmise on 9 May? Professor Owen raised the possibility of long-term leases to power station plant to private companies as way out. He argues that a long-term lease will encourage private lessees to maintain the power stations. But this doesn't solve the problem of the extra need.

The solution, it seems is to remove the pricing caps, to allow private companies to build new power stations, while politicians tell us that "iremoving the pricing cap will have no effect because competition will keep the prices low". If that is the case, they should be left. Fair go - they must think there's one born every minute! The NSW ALP government is really looking to avoid investment in infrastructure that would provide essential service (electricity) to the people of NSW.

By so doing they will make the budget look good (Treasurer Costa beams with happiness) while avoiding having to (gasp) use the State's AAA+ credit rating to borrow money to provide long-term investments to benefit the people of NSW.

The sell-off is so that the State Labor Government can avoid their responsibility to the people of NSW. They ought to be ashamed.

John

Howard Survives His Own Coup

In the time leading up to the APEC forum in Sydney, during and this week ( after the forum) there has seemingly been much whispering and talk within the Liberal Party about John Howard's leadership future. Nothing surprising there - it has been happening for months - because the polls (by Newspoll, SMH/The Age and internal Liberal polling) have never showed any improvement in either John Howard's, or the Liberal Party's, standing with voters.

This morning, John Howard's leadership was not challenged in a quickly-convened Liberal Party meeting. To do so would mean admitting he should have handed over to Peter Costello last year. And it would hav ebeen politically stupid for the Liberal Party to change now: no new leader could hope to capture the voting public's imagination in such a short time.

Indeed, the most recent polls show a further swing to both Kevin Rudd as preferred Prime Minister, and the APL's vote. Backbenchers and Ministers are in danger of losing their seats, and are paranoid about it: they feel John Howard is leading them to oblivion. Ministers at risk include: John Howard (NSW), Alexander Downer (SA), Brendan Nelson (NSW), Gary Hardgrave (Qld)

What is surprising, is that John Howard says the speculation was all his fault - he claims he asked senior ministers including Alexander Downer, Malcolm Turnbull and Brendan Nelson, to talk about him and his future. Peter Costello wasn't invited.

Mr Howard told a press conference

"... I have never run from a fight before and I don't intend to
do so now."

Ominous words from a leader who seems likely to lose the election, even allowing for some convergence in the polls after the election is formally called. It is reminiscent of a leader who knows he'll die in battle, but is determined to sacrifice his own troops to do it.

John

APEC - Hot Air on Climate Change

The Sydney Declaration on Climate Change at the Sydney APEC Forum contains just over 2000 words.

It reaffirms signatories' commitment to the UN principles on Climate Change.

It commits nothing till after 2012.

It says, in part, that members of APEC will:

• "work(ing) towards achieving an APEC-wide regional aspirational goal of a reduction in energy intensity of at least 25 per cent by 2030 (with 2005 as the base year);"
• "work to achieve an APEC-wide aspirational goal of increasing forest cover in the region by at least 20 million hectares of all types of forests by 2020"

Have another look at point 1:

"work towards achieving an ... aspirational goal" means that the aspirational goal might never eventuate. There is no requirement of members. China apparently almost baulked at this - it wanted something stronger (to its credit).

Nevertheless, there is a target - 25% less energy intensity than 2005 by 2030. But there are no intermediate targets; no requirement for members to start acting; nothing has to be done in the political lifetime of the leaders.

Increasing the forest cover is a fine aspirational goal. APEC countries apparently account for 54% of the worlds managed and natural forests ( Abare Economics) . However, a nuber of APEC countries where these forests are being denuded (legally or illegally) includes: Australia;
Indonesia; Phillipines; Thailand; China; Mexico; Papua New Guinea; Chile; Peru; and Viet Nam.
These represent a significant portion of APEC nations. Australia, for example, is still waiting on a decision on a Tasmanian woodchip mill that would partly use old-growth forest timber; some other countries have significant problems with illegal timber clearing.

The aspirational target to increase forested area has no timeline of commitments, and the statement allows countries to argue economic differences to avoid doing anything.

Overall, the document has escape clauses to avoid doing anything, even after 2012; and, if anything is done, it could well be after the current political leaders are no longer in office.

The reality is, it was about John Howard, in particular, trying to look good before an election - without him having to do anything.

John
"The Analyst"

APEC Protests

Today's protests in Sydney, to coincide with the APEC forum turned out to be quieter, and more orderly than many expected, and planned for.

There might be a number of reasons for that:

• some individual people and groups, known troublemakers, were warned off. They included Mutiny, a left-wing group that distributed a manual for APEC that detailed how cause trouble; Resistance, a group that acknowledged on its website that other groups feared it would cause violence; and AC/DC, an anarchist political group (not the band)
  
• Police have lessons have been learnt from the Cronulla and Macquarie Fields riots of 2005
• rain, or the threat of rain, kept some people away
• the public holiday in Sydney
• pre-warning by Police that they would tolerate no trouble at all, and had the numbers and equipment to show it
• Protester fears that the protest could be high-jacked by those individuals and groups seeking violence.
  

Reports this afternoon indicated 18 people had been arrested: not many out of 3000 - 5000 estimated protesters. Some protesters, as they seem to do, and some parts of the media have questioned the force used by Police in their zero-tolerance approach. One journalist was pushed back, and fell to the ground, while trying to push into the middle of a Police arrest to get a photo. The journalist seemed to have only minor injuries from the push and fall, but some defended the action as part of "the media just doing its job".

Well, no - it is not the media's job to put themselves into a position that interferes with Police officers' work. The photo could have taken from the 3-5 metres without interfering with Police.

Whether the Police operations, and the special APEC laws, were excessive ought to be discussed as part of a debriefing. If a disaster plan, including preventive measures, means a disaster (riot) didn't happen, that is one measure of its success.

APEC: Howard, Rudd Gush to Impress Voters

Since Tuesday, John Howard has been basking in his friendship with US Presidetn Bush. Yesterday, he even issued a press release of the "media conference of mutual admiration and political praise."

John Howard was gushing in how well the war in IRaq is going, and how much we need to stay. Recent media stories of the progress towards teh 11 criteria set for the Iraq government shows 2 of 11 performance indicators only. Better than none; but hardly war-winning.

Goerge Bush, having said he wanted to stay out of Australian political campaigns was at pains to tell voters that John Howard was a man of "vision" and "a leader". Certainly John Howard has led Australia to follow George Bush's Foreign Policy on Iraq. (war, more war; and more troops, for longer)

Today, Kevin Rudd countered with his meeting with George Bush: a meeting at which he confirmed Labor's policy of withdrawing (some) troops from Iraq; but offered to send more troops to Anghanistan. Diplomacy is a 2-sided coin, after all. Details of the conversation will remain private, at Mr Bush's request.

Chinese President Hu Jintao has arrived, and announced improvements to ensure the safety of toys (following a number of toy recalls by Mattel) and while the governemnt announced a gas deal, Mr Rudd apparently spoke in Mandarin during a social event with the Chinese. He is trying to show Australian voters, and the Chinese, that he is better able to communicate by talking one-to-one with the Chinese in trade, energy or other matters. Certainly, his time as a working Diplomat gives him that advantage over John Howard.

John

Howard Slips Further in the Polls

Today's Newspoll results did not bear good news for John Howard. They show a widening gap between the Coalition and the Labor Party on a two-party preferred vote: 59% to the ALP and 41% to the Coalition. The fall in coalition voting intention is due to the fall in Liberal Party vote.

But there is worse for John Howard: he continues to fall as "preferred Prime Minister" to 37%, down by 2%, while Kevin Rudd's approval has gone up by 2% to 48%. For both men the approve/disapprove changes seem to come from those voters willing to express an opinioni: neither man is convincing the"uncommitted" percentage.

The primary vote results are particularly worrying for the Coalition Parties:

• the National Party vote is down from almost 6% at the last election to 4%
• the Liberal Party vote is down from 41% to 33%
• the overall Coalition vote is down from 47% to 37%
• the Labor vote is up from 38% to 51%. The increase here is greater thatn the decrease in Coalition voting intentions, indicating that opposition to the Coalition government is concentrating in Labor's intended primary vote.

John

Andrew Johns, Football and Drugs

Drugs in sport are nothing new. Some sports have had the legitimacy of whole events questioned. Cycling's Tour de France and other endurance races have been the subject of individual and team doping for some years.

This week's revelation and cathartic confession by Andrew Johns that he did take drugs, including ecstacy, during competition times; that he ran the gauntlet of drug testing; and that others in his team, club and family knew of his drug-taking brought many comments. Today's news stories are that he not only suffered from depression, but the more serious bipolar disorder, and was/is taking medication for it. However there are still questions to be asked, and actions to be taken. Johns has admitted that drugs are not the only problem; alcohol abuse is another. Many would believe such abuse is common among footballers (soccer, AFL, rugby league and rugby union). One of the last things a person suffering depression needs is a depressive drug like alcohol.

So:

• what responsibility does a player have to inform their club of psychological problems that could affect their performance? (Johns admitted that some days he went through the motions of playing)
• what responsibility does a club have in promoting and ensuring responsible use of alcohol (not more than 6 standard drinks (4 schooners only) in any 24-hour period; and at least 2 days a week without alcohol)? Alcohol is often provided in vast quantities after important games - win or lose! Should restrictions on alcohol use be part of every player's contract?
• what responsibility does the NRL bear in its testing regimen? Should players be tested on weekends, after playing Friday night? Out-of-season testing? Just how far does the NRL go in testing?
• how much will his near and extended family have to do to support him?

Andrew Johns will need the support of many people: his doctors, family, friends, his club and the NRL. Most of all, he will need help to avoid the circumstances that lead to taking excessive amounts of alcohol and drugs. He will have to avoid nightclubs, late-night outings at pubs and clubs without a sober minder. I hope he can do it - but I despair that he can't: behaviours learnt from a football culture that includes binge drinking and playing-up from teenage years will be extraordinarily hard to change.

John

John Howard Scared of Labor's IR Plan

Prime Minister John Howard must be very afraid of voter perceptions of Workchoices, and the obvious differences in the ALP's (& Kevin Rudd's) modified IR proposal.

Today, Mr Howard issued a press release about Labor's proposal. Because the media run these press releases as news, almost without question, Mr Howard will mention the "scary moster" word "union" every 20 words i his 330 word press release.

But, as with most things said by politicians, it is what was not said that is important. Mr Howard had no argument: he is simply trying to scare voters. He said nothing of his plans for "WorkChoices v2"; he did not argue against any of the content of the ALP's policy, other than to criticise a system of arbitration and conflict resolution. His tactic is simply to repeat the untested assertion that is his position: no facts, no policy, just repetition.

It seems to be all he has, or wants to tell us. Voters can only hope that the media recognise that, and report it.


John

Big Kev's 'Big' IR Changes

Kevin Rudd has released his proposed changes to IR Laws. The changes, he says, are to make the system fairer, and will be introduced soon after the 2007 Federal election. His proosals include:

• awards will not be used to cover those whos epay is above $100,000 (indexed to inflation) For many "ordinary Australian" workers, this is a figure chosen for its 6-figures - much more than they earn.
• workers earning less than $100,000 would be covered by an award.
• secondary boycotts stay- there is no change. The ALP can never go back to allowing them - the political risk is much too great.
• those whose AWA's were signed before the so-called "fairness test" are likely to be stuck, some for the next 4 1/2 years! It would be infeasible to try to legislate backdated cancellation of such contracts. The best that the ALP, and those on AWAs can hope for, is that the proposed "transitional arrangements" will ease the burden on both.
• Flexibility in awards would not allow employers to reduce pay and conditions. That would seem to be fairer, since AWA's can, and do, reduce not just pay, but other conditions such as public holidays.

The ALP claims that fewer than 5% of workers are on AWA's and that most of them are among the lowest paid workers in hospitality and retail. These are areas that use a large proportion of casual, part-time employees, many of them women, or young people.

There are undoubtedly many old-time ALP members and supporters who will be upset that the changes will not go far enough, and that the 1970's power of unions will not be restored. That is a good thing in many voters' minds, and will severely limit the level of valid criticism that could be used by John Howard's Parliamentary and Industry representatives. They will still use invalid, "bogyman" tactics to try to scare voters, though. It's worked in the past.

John

An Inconceiveable Conversation?

The following story comes from a fly on the wall. I do not know the whereabouts or identity of the fly - it is one of billions.

PC Plod: That lawyer is soooo bad! Fancy releasing the transcript of the umpteenth interview with that fellow we called a terrorist ….whatisname? … !

Minister For Foreigners: Yes – absolutely disgusting! Doesn’t do much for the AFP, though!

PC Plod: Don’t you talk – you wanted a political decision. We just told you the interpretation you wanted … Idiot.

Minister For Foreigners: Idiot! IDIOT! Listen, should I release more of the reasons you gave me for my decision??

PC Plod: NO. That would only make matters worse. No way, Minister. (THINKS: would make the AFP, and ME, look like an idiot.)

Minister leaves to address a press conference ... Later news reports carry the following quote:

"I’ve been advised that I cannot release any more information about what I’ve
been told about (that terrorist-fellow)."

Couldn't happen in a robust democracy ...

John

Howard vs Rudd - Some Differences Appear

As we get closer to the 2007 Federal Election election, voters a re now starting to see some differences in language and concepts used by both John Howard and Kevin Rudd. To soem extent, Kevin Rudd has been coerced into highlighting differences, as Government ministers ahve lined up to say that either Kevin Rudd has no differeences, so stick with us; or tried to assert that a Labor Governemnt should scare everyone.

On the 20-August, the John Howard outlines in both a press release, and in an "Australia Rising" speech, nailed some of his colours to the mast. Others have come from his public and parliamentary comments.

John Howard wants:

• a Nationalist government - that should worry many Australians. Nationalism was a concept based on ethnic and religious intolerance and led to the formation of the nations of Germany and Italy, causing of some of the most dramatic and divisive events of the 20th century


• greater concentration of power (to held by himself, and fitting with his Nationalist ideas)
• more takeovers without consultation
• actions to be "outcome focused" - (subtext: never mind due process, cooperation or consultation)
• further economic reform. (WorkChoices 2)
• Nuclear Power - however, has has given a (non-core) promise that communities can have a referendum on whether they want one in their suburb/area. I'm sure Ziggy Switowski would vote for one in his 'backyard' - he recommended them, after all.
• "All the way with GWB"
• Climate change - as long as big business and mining interests can make money from it.

Kevin Rudd wants

• greater cooperation with and among states, especially regarding hospitals. Indeed he has stated that he will give the States just 18 months to work with him to fix the problems. If they can't or won't he will take a proposal for a Federal Government takeover of public hospitals to the 2010 election.
• Economic and IR reform (the proposal is to remove the excessively adverse effects of WorkChoices on women, families and young people)
• a withdrawal of troops from Iraq at a "convenient time" - while much of Mr Rudd's policy is ideal, it is likely that Australia will be asked to make a greater commitment to Iraq, given the US major escalation of troop numbers and a number of other countries (Britain, among them) looking to reduce their involvement in what has become a mire. Forcing a country to have democracy when it was artificially created from historically warring parties and has been ruled by warlords is proving particularly troublesome.
• Action on climate change - here he is treading carefully, knowing the interests involved - including the use of "clean coal" technologies.

John Howard would also like Peter Costello to stay in the background: leadership talk by others unsettles him.


John

Kevin Rudd and the "Celebrity' Strip Club

A strip club's a strip club - they all provide tacky "entertainment", usually sleazy.

Today's media is full of the story of Kevin Rudd visiting strip club Score's in New York, led by Glenn Milne's reporting in one of News Ltd's Sunday papers. Milne is a long-time fan of Prime Minister John Howard, and it would be difficult to think other than that this story was fed to him. {Readers will recall that it was Milne, in a drunken state, that pushed Stephen Mayne, from crikey.com, off stage while he was presenting an award in 2006}

Rudd confesses it happened; that he called his wife the day after; and that he'd had too much to drink with others who accompanied him.

By any measure, Rudd's visit to such a club was politically stupid. Yet Australians have often forgiven those in public office who breached the usual bounds of decency: Malcolm Fraser wndering hotel corridor without his trousers, and Bob Hawke's prediliction for swearing come to mind.

John Howard was absent from Media interviews today, but many feel sure he would have supported Mr Rudd, having supported Australian soldiers "letting off steam" just a few weeks ago. Both leaders cultivate their image: this will almost certainly hurt Kevin Rudd and the ALP in this week's NewsPoll survey. The reult will allow John Howard to tell the media, voters, and especially the party room that he will be 'good for' the election - although he won't publicly phrase it that way.

John

Costello The Fortune-Teller

Yesterday's and today's news is about what Treasurer Peter Costello did, or did not say to journalists and supporters.


Three Journalists had dinner with Mr Costello, who is reported to have spoken "off the record" about leadership, in 2005. The reporters, as would any journalist, kept notes, and say that Peter Costello said:

• John Howard could not win the next (this coming) election


• John Howard had to step down as Prime Minister by the middle of 2006, for him. If John Howard did not stand down he would work to undermine him, to the point of going to the backbench.


• Only he (Peter Costello) could lead the Liberal-National Parties Coalition to victory in this (2007) election.

Peter Costello today claims he did nothing, and said nothing to his supporters. It is, perhaps, difficult to think he said nothing in private to at least some of his supporters, but that the politics of numbers was such that he would not win any challenge. In 2006, John Howard held sway, both with voters, and in the party room.

However, the polls this year show voter disenchantment with John Howard. They believe him to be "mean and tricky"; his economic credibility is taking a battering from interest rate rises and housing affordability; and his leadership dominance is not as it once was. Yesterday, Peter Costello's 50th birthday, saw Liberal MP Wilson Tuckey send faxes to John Howard and other members, effectively demanding that John Howard should resign as Prime Minister. The ALP asked the Prime Minister in question time if, after 11 years, he would finally invite Peter Costello and his wife to a private dinner for his birthday. John Howard did not do that.

Peter Costello's remarks might well turn out to be prophetic. Perhaps the Liberal Party's best chance at this election is to change leader and hope that Peter Costello is still enjoying a "honeymoon" period as Liberal Party leader and Prime Minister when the election is held. Even this close to an election!



John

Economic Management-2

In a previous posting ( here ) I suggested that:

"The Reserve Bank (RBA) uses monetary policy (interest rates) when fiscal policy (the budget) is ineffective, or having an adverse effect on the economy"

Today, the Reserve Bank has used its Quarterly review of monetary policy to foreshadow further increases in interest rates. It believes further rises will be necessary because the economy is still overheating (see economic streetracer ) and has revised its expected rate of inflation for 2007 and 2008 from 2.5% to 3%. It doesn't seem like much, but that is redlining the economy, and is unsustainable.

John Howard has two political problems on economic management:

1. if he pushes "electoral sweeters" at voters before the election, he will pump even more money into the economy, and will be responsible for even more interest rate rises, and will be seen as being economically irresponsible.
2. the Reserve Bank is showings its independence from government in ways that John Howard does not like.

John Howard has a history of taking effective control where he does not like outcomes. He took responsibility for wage increases away from teh independent judiciary, and put it within a Ministry; he put the once-independent tribunal that determines politicians' salaries under his own department (& effective influence); he wants control of water; he wants selective control of hospitals.

John Howard has a history of wanting "control". If he wins the election, he might well consider removing the Reserve Bank's independence, and put it under effective control of himself and the Treasurer.

John

HMAS Sydney Found - Possibly

There is news tody that a group has claimed to have found the wreck of HMAS Sydney off the coast of WA.

The mystery of the final resting place of the Sydney has been along one.

HMAS Sydney was commissioned on 24 September 1935. She was a "light cruiser", and was sunk on 19 November 1941.


(Picture: HMAS Sydney at Circular Quay in 1939)

She was sunk in a battle with the German raider Kormoran, somewhere near Shark Island, off the coast of Western Australia.

The Sydney's total complement, 645 crew members, were lost. It was the largest ship, and greatest single loss of ship's crew in WWII. The (then suspected) loss was reported 15 November, as in the picure below.

(Source: National Archives of Australia)

If the wreck is that of HMAS Sydney, it will be formally declared a war grave; and its find will bring closure to the families and relatives of all those lost, and for all Australians.

Lest We Forget

John

Economic Street Racer

(Digital Mischief by The Analyst)

(Orginal drawing from http://www.houseofcars.com/ )

John

Interest Rates and Economic Management

Back in July, I predicted interest rate rises (so did many others)
I also discussed them in May - and there were tax cuts in the budget, just enough to pour even more money into the economy.

That the RBA has had to take such a blunt economic instrument, the first time in an election year, since its independence from government, and the 9th rise since 2002, is a serious blow to John Howard's claim of being a "good economic manager".

The Reserve Bank (RBA) uses monetary policy (interest rates) when fiscal policy (the budget) is ineffective, or having an adverse effect on the economy. Before the 2004 election, Peter Costello put a number of "electoral sweetener" options to Mr Howard. He wanted Mr Howard to use one. Mr Howard used not one, but all of the possible put to him by Peter Costello. The result was an EXTRA $6 Billion put into the economy. With an "average" multiplier effect of about 1.4-1.5 across the economy, the economy had to produce an extra $8.4-$9Billion worth of GDP. And that's before the $multi-Billion tax cuts; the mining boom; the housing boom; rising levels of personal debt.

No wonder there were 5 interest rate rises since the last election. The RBA had to slow spending somehow.

Have a look at:
http://truepolitik.blogspot.com/2007/07/cpi-reserve-bank-and-interest-rates.html

and

http://truepolitik.blogspot.com/2007/04/low-infaltion-figure-interest-rates.html

Whatever spin is put on this by both the Coalition Government and Labor Opposition, the fact remains that the economy has become too strong; John Howard's government has been too loose with its "voter-pleasing" spending, and its budgets (fiscal policy) have not been as effective as they would have people believe.

With an election shortly, voters will be acutely aware of the hip-pocket effect of this latest rise, in particular.

John

Andrews Inconsistent on Haneef's Departure

Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews has made conflicting statements about Dr Mohamed Haneef's departure from Australia.

On ABC TV's Insiders program, Mr Andrews said

“Dr Haneef has been protesting his innocence, there's an appeal on foot, normally people stay around to see the outcome of their appeal."

This is at odds with his statement to reporters in Melbourne on 28-July, when he said

"… he (Haneef) should depart Australia”

(http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/haneef-can-leave-andrews/2007/07/28/1185339311724.html)

The government has been at pains to show it is "tough on terror", but having been denied a judicial trial, is now seeking "trial-by-media".

John

Haneef Case Review

There have been calls from the Federal Opposition and Green Parties for a judicial review of the handling of the investigation into Dr Mohamed Haneef.
Following are the "findings" a reasonable person might have made:

• Dr Haneef was granted a 457 visa so he could work in Queensland, because there is a shortage of (hospital) doctors.
• Although he made some comments early, Prime Minister John Howard left most of the media commenting to Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock, and Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews. This does not mean he had nothing to do with them. His office alone employs 40-odd people, and Ministers do not make comment without Mr Howard knowing what they are saying.
• While the AFP rightly claim that intelligence information can, and does change quickly, they seem to have been reticent to incorporate changed information into questions asked of Dr Haneef'.
• There are still allegations that AFP officers made some entries into Dr Haneef's diary, then asked him about the entries.
• The AFP, and its officers and analysts, was under considerable political pressure because politicians kept making comments during the investigations. Perhaps, if they had been silent, as they should, a death might have been prevented.
• AFP Commissioner Mick Keelty showed some political promise when "passing the buck" for mistakes, including blaming the media. One would hope that he remedies the causes of the mistakes in the organisation he leads.
• There is no doubt that the Federal Government was very keen for Dr Haneef to leave the country: the case had brought significant bad press for the Federal Government, particularly in relation to the use of Section 501 (ministerial discretion) to cancel Dr Haneef's visa, and to leave it cancelled after the DPP reviewed the case and dropped all charges. That the Commonwealth Solicitor-General gave legal advice that the visa cancellation was perfectly legal, even where no case exists, highlights the need for oversight of such "Ministerial discretion".

I'm certain the Federal Government doesn't want the formal judicial review: it could only make them look worse.

John

WorkChoices Ad Campaign

WorkChoices, as it is still known by many people, remains unpopular with those most affected: families, their children and Mr Howard's so-called aspirational Australians.
(Digital manipulation by 'The Analyst'; Photo from The Age )

John