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

NSW Public Transport

Today's and recent headlines about public transport in Sydney include:

• one of the contractors building new Millenium trains for Sydney (Downer EDI) had a profit downgrade, and its Managing Director resigned. Deputy Premier & Minister for Transport tried to reassure voters that Downer EDI was only one part of the consortium that has the contract.



• criticism of Minister Joe Tripodi for being slow to ensure that Cremorne Wharf was repaired quickly after July Storms.



• "kite-flying" by the government about privatising the ferry service, which might lead to a doubling of ferry fares. At least Treasurer Michael Costa would be happy to receive a bucket-full of money, and with the passing of responsibility for services.



• there is still no single ticketing system for Sydney's public transport, and nor are services linked. People can leave one service (train, ferry, bus) only see a connecting service disappear. (SMH)
  

The contract to the consortium for Sydney trains, which also includes AMP Capital, ABN AMRO and Babcock & Brown is a significant shift in government spending policy, because it is the largest public-private partnership contract ever. That included the more than $2 Billion contract for the "western orbital" for Sydney. (info from SMH)

A profit downgrade, even the third one this year, doesn't mean the contract won't be fulfilled. But it IS cause for concern. Voters would be keen to know what safeguards have been built into the contract.

The Project for electronic tickets on public transport has been running for 10 years, but there seem to be no results. How much has been spent? Who oversees the project (there has been a procession of Ministers)? Victoria and Tasmania seem to have them operating - what's wrong with NSW?

Furthermore, there have been significant problems with maintenance, track maintenance, safety and timetables.

All in all, public transport in NSW is in a mess. Furthermore, successive governments, from the time of former (Liberal) Premier Nick Greiner, through former Labor Premier Bob Carr to the current Labor Government have had policies of developing private toll roads with public money, but nothing for public transport. They need a re-think.

John

Rudd Targets WA

Yesterday, Prime Minister John Howard targeted the marginal Tasmanian seat of Braddon,by effectively taking control of a public hospital that teh State government proposed to downgrade to a day-surgery and Emergency Department.

Today, Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd promises that, if elected, some of the Federal Government's income from the Pluto gas project would be put back into WA infrastructure.

Mr Rudd said "I think we would want to be generous in order to make sure that people here in the West in the State Government can plan properly into the future." Well, yes, winners would be grinners. As much as John Howard's Tasmania stunt was about buying votes, so too is Kevin Rudd's.

Not that states shouldn't be better funded by the Federal Government - they should - but that is the policy position that should be put.

John

Howard's Takeover of Mersey Hospital

Prime Minister John Howard has indicated that the Federal Government will fully fund Devonport's Mersey Hospital.

The hospital has the following characteristics:

• it is in a marginal seat in Tasmania (Braddon)
• the Hospital, a lower-level "Community Hospital", has neither obstetrics, nor an Emergency department
• the Hospital has a history of losing money. Mayne Health sold it in 1993 to Healthscope
• Healthscope signed a 15 year (+10 year option) with the (then) Liberal Tasmanian Government to run the public hospital and provide health services.
• the hospital has had several service downgrades, because it keeps losing money.
• the hospital was eventually handed back to the (now Labor) Tasmanian Government to run as a public hospital.
• there are two other, larger, hospitals nearby

Mr Howard has responded to allegations of political pork-barrelling by saying:
"They wouldn't regard it as cynical pork barrelling, they would regard it as saving a vital community service."

But is it a "vital community service" when there are two other, larger hospitals; it has no Intensive Care Unit, no obstetrics and no Emergency Dept?

Other questions to be asked by voters are:

• Will the Federal Government use its financial influence to insist that all workers be on AWA's? Is that want nurses, doctors, cleaners, adminstrative staff want? Does the community want lower incomes?
  
  AND
  
  
• If a Community-grade hospital is so vital, what about the 600+ other regional public hospitals in Australia? Why are they not being funded?

Mr Howard claims the hospital serves a regional population of about "70,000 people". As with many statements made by politicians, there is a "but": that figure includes the population of Burnie and surrounding districts. Devonport and surrounding regions have a population of about 30,000. That's less then half the figure quoted by Mr Howard.

John Howard appears to be being very selective, with the electorate he has chosen, the population figures he quotes, and the selective (even exclusive) nature of this "policy". Such behaviour almost certainly indicates that he his acting in his own interests, and not those of the wider Australian community.

A previous study of the Mersey Hospital saga, dated 2005, can be found here .


John