PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

Fliegenmong 24th Feb 2012 10:21

I know Wiley, these two were from, down south, as soooo many are up here, but it drove it home for me in no uncertain fashion, I had always suspected, you know, the old guy in the pub with no teeth and a three legged cattle dog, packet of winny blues in the shirt sleeve, kinda ignorance. Sure....but these 2 are most certainly not of that mould!

Federal MP Bob Katter sings Slim Dusty's song Cunnamulla Fella - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

:ok: Bob opening QLD Parliament each morning with a rendition :eek::ok:

Oohh:ooh: Just found a better rendition....sorry Bob


Flying Binghi 24th Feb 2012 10:47


Bob opening QLD Parliament each morning with a rendition...

Heh-ha, any song from Bob would be better then sumthing sung by the Kev and jools muppet show. They only know one word.... ME ME ME ME....

Owed To Me: Gillard vs Rudd Ğ Barnaby Is Right


sisemen 24th Feb 2012 12:35

A comment by Philip Adams on radio tonight (and he's so far left he could fall over)....

"Democracy is a wonderful thing. It gives the lemmings of the ALP a choice of which cliff to jump over"

Fliegenmong 24th Feb 2012 13:38

Bwahh ha ha ha ha .......thanks for relaying that Sise, classic!

Here's some stuff I found funny............

Clare Prop 24th Feb 2012 15:00

So the way I see there is a choice between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. And the situation in Canberra does seem more and more like Alice in Wonderland every day. (Off with their heads! etc)

Yet the taxpayer doesn't get to make that choice, it will be made for us. So why are we being bombarded with what sounds like an election campaign (ie smug, patronising and full of empty promises and slagging off the "other side") when all we can actually do is sit and watch what seems to be a slow motion train crash that we are paying for.

Even if Rudd wins the poison chalice and does some kind of deal with the independants, surely it will still be Bob Brown who dictates policy?

Is Australian education really so lacking that people think you can "vote for a Prime Minister" (a position that doesn't even exist under the constitution)

Meanwhile the sun still rises every morning and we trudge to work off to pay our taxes. And I am left wondering if in fact federalism has run its course as we seem to have been managing fairly well with no effective federal leadership for quite a while now. Honestly, we may as well have Sir Les in charge, at least we could have a good laugh.


Lex Talionis 24th Feb 2012 22:32

It's obvious that most here agree that the current situation is deplorable and is more about the ego of the people concerned (as it is with most politicians) than what is good for Australia.

Whether Julia Gillard or Kevin Rudd is the leader on Monday night,Tony Abbott would have to make the biggest blunder in Australian political history not to win.

Although,the Federal election in 1993 was considered exactly that but after the infamous 'Birthday cake interview', John Hewson (who Keating described as a feral abacus) lost what everyone considered an election that Keating could not possibly win.So if Tony does something completely stupid which he is more than capable of and that we have seen with some of the interviews he has made then anything is possible.Tony does have a certain similar personality that Mark Latham had and in which does not go down well with the majority of Australians.

I think that with kevin Rudd as we have seen here the sympathy vote for a guy who was knifed in the back may serve him well and the numbers may not be as some would suggest.Remember that any party will elect a PM who they think will win them the next election.

If the numbers are against Gillard then Rudd may get the numbers or if the challenge result is a draw they might very well pick another candidate to put to the Australian voters so they may have a chance against Tony Abbott.

To those who continue to say that this sort of situation would only happen under a Labor Government seem to have a forgotten the poisonous relationship between John Howard and Peter Costello.

If John Howard had not lost the election and had not given the job to Peter Costello as we were told was a promise then this same scenario might have happened with the Liberal party.

This is all about egos and control and was the main reason why John Howard lost his election and seat.

To those here who say that the Government is completely incompetent can you give examples of the disaster which we supposedly find ourselves in?

Do we have rampant inflation...NO

Do we have massive numbers of people unemployed...NO

Do we have one of the best economies in the Western world...YES

Can you imagine the posts here if it was Rudd or Gillard who made the statement about children being thrown overboard or the PR disaster that was the Tampa?

Honestly,I do not want to vote for either Julia Gillard,Kevin Rudd or Tony Abbott.The Greens have shown they have as much idea of reality as a new born baby does of nuclear physics.

The independents made a deal with Julia Gillard just as Tony Abbott was trying to do and was rumoured to say to Windsor that he would agree to anything as long as he gained power.So if the Liberals had gained the agreement with the independents nothing would have changed.We would have a minority Liberal Government that would be doing deals with the independents as we do now.

I don't know how we will ever attract someone who is actually capable to lead the country and maybe Federalism and the entire current political system has seen it's day and we should look at another system but what would that be?

Australians have a reputation for apathy and a completely naive understanding of how politics or anything works.The majority would vote for the first politician who removed the tax on alcohol and cigarettes and gave us a 2 day working week with a 5 day weekend.

We need politicians who look at the bigger picture and not just the next election.We need someone who his not in the pockets of either the environmentalists,the mining giants or corporate Australia.

Unfortunately,I cannot think of anyone in either party who fits that description.

We can continue with the current mess or vote for a man who has no real economic concept and who will bring in industrial relations policies that put us back 50 years.When Tony wins and he is making the decisions and cannot say 'NO' to everything we will be in the same boat as we find ourselves in now.

Lex Talionis 24th Feb 2012 23:21

Thought I would suggest an idea as to who actually decides who will be Prime Minister.

When we are voting for which ever party we want there should also be a question of which person in that Party we want to for Prime Minister and that position is decided on who gets the most votes.

This way all politicians within any party have to let it be known during the election what he/she will do not only to be in the winning party but what they stand for and will do if elected for prime Minister.

There could also be a vote given to the person who you would want as a deputy PM so that in the event of the elected PM passing away or having to resign for health or personal reasons it is not the party who decides who will be PM but the deputy as voted by us.

In other words it is us who decides who will be the PM and not the faceless factional groups in either party who makes that decision.This could also be the basis for a Republican system where Australians decide who will be head of state and not the politicians.

One of the main reasons why the last referendum failed was because the majority of Australians do not want to or would trust a head of state picked by our politicians.
It's no surprise that as the cartoon depicts it was John Howard who pushed this version of a republic because he knew it would be defeated.In fact the Howard government spent $300 million pushing this version of a republic.The last thing John Howard wanted was for a 'YES' vote to get up.

alisoncc 25th Feb 2012 01:42

Reckon Kevin Rudd will get the nod as there will be lot thinking about their job prospects after they lose in the next election. Kevin Rudd is their best chance to retain their current positions, and few of them are stupid enough to deliberately choose unemployment.

Anthony Albanese came across as a person of integrity in his press conference. Spoke a lot of truths about the ethics of roleing a new Prime Minister in his first term of office. Said it was a chance to redress the balance.

CoodaShooda 25th Feb 2012 02:15

In the straw poll, I'd back Gillard - as it will guarantee labor will lose the next election and give it an opportunity to reform itself while in opposition.

That said, what if Turnbull was to pull a Rudd between now and the election on the basis of doing better in the polls than Abbott?

Would the resulting inner-party turmoil push voters back to labor, or strengthen the liberal cause?

If we had a straw poll on that scenario, I would back Abbott as having more of a social conscience than the merchant banker and being the lesser of two potential evils.

PS Could someone smarter than me explain how labor delivered us from the worst financial collapse in generations while being, by their own admission, in a state of severe disfunction/chaos/paralysis? Seems either Australia was buffered from the northern hemispherean storm (as some economists have claimed) or we were saved by non-government influences. Either way, why do we really need the bastards?

Frank Arouet 25th Feb 2012 03:16


Your part:

If John Howard had not lost the election
Sums up the whole situation we now have. Rudd and Labor didn't win the last election, a tired electorate gave Howard and his government the shove because they became too arrogant and forgot their social responsibilities. As you say, Howard lost the election.

Rudd lists as his achievements, saving us from the global financial crisis. What he and Jools fail to tell everyone is they, (their collective governments), spent the "Future Fund" set aside by the Liberals to "stimulate" the economy. $20 something billion from memory and borrowed more to put us in the debt we have now.

Abbott is the only person offering an election that will rid us of the parasitic "Independants". His party have a proven track record as fiscal managers. Gillard and Co are too delusional to contemplate asking what the "pleb's" want.

To give Rudd some cred' he is using the "people power" to help sway the Caucus vote on Monday. (Should be called raucus)! Pity he's such a proven "dud" and also wouldn't call an election.

Go Jools!

Andu 25th Feb 2012 06:25

That said, what if Turnbull was to pull a Rudd between now and the election on the basis of doing better in the polls than Abbott?
I wouldn't put it past the Libs (and in particular, Malcolm Turnbull), to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory (yet again) with some half-arsed, crazy stunt just like that.

Turnbull is first and foremost a merchant banker who sees the carbon tax as a licence to print money for him and his once employer, Goldman Sachs. I believe he's a very good local member, but as a federal leader, he was utterly hopeless and allowed his Labor counterparts to run rings around him.

The fact that damn near everyone in each of three polls announced today overwhelmingly preferred Rudd to Gillard speaks more of how incredibly badly Gillard has performed rather than how popular Rudd really is with the electorate. I suspect he could go very close to pulling it off on Monday (self interest wins out every time, and you can bet each and every backbencher will be reminded by the Rudd camp over the weekend that with Rudd, they stand a better chance or re-election). However, even if he loses, he will have damaged Gillard grievously - he has already, with serving Ministers publicly backing Rudd over the serving PM.

If the Libs can't milk this to the extreme, to the point where Gillard loses all credibility**, they don't deserve to win government.

(** not that she's had any for months now.)

As much as I'm underwhelmed at the thought of Rudd returning to centre stage, it does have an upside - we wouldn't have to hear that dreadful Welsh atonal bray any more.

sisemen 25th Feb 2012 07:26

The Liberal party machine will be busy at work storing all those tele-visual grabs for inclusion in the ads prior to the next election (which is probably only weeks away).

It doesn't matter who wins the ballot on Monday. It's either going to be constant grabs of various Gillard ministers saying that Rudd was a scumbag and can't be trusted or it's going to be constant grabs of various Rudd supporters saying that Gillard was a scumbag and can't be trusted.

And they're probably dusting off this one :E

I think that the true believers are in for a world of pain for quite a long time.

I don't think that the Liberal party are such fools or as indisciplined to snatch a cock-up in place of this golden opportunity.

And despite the petty bleatings of the last vestiges of the ALP faithful I rather suspect that Abbott may surprise most people by being an excellent and inclusive Prime Minister.

hellsbrink 25th Feb 2012 09:07

Do we have rampant inflation...NO

Do we have massive numbers of people unemployed...NO

Do we have one of the best economies in the Western world...YES
I would question that, Lex, there's plenty material out there that say things aren't as rosy in the Garden of Eden.

For example, corporate insolvencies went up by over 9% in 2011 compared to 2010 and the number of small businesses going insolvent went up by 48%. Over 6000 jobs from fairly large companies (and large ones when you look at Qantas and BHP) have been lost in the last 2 months and another 10,000 are at risk from large companies (never mind the small businesses going bust, with 128,000 facing "financial stress" in 2012 and a 92% drop in the amount of new businesses being started).

You can cite unemployment figures as going down, but, if I read things right, anyone working more than TWO HOURS per week is classed as "employed"!! That's right, work two hours and claim benefits and you do not count in the official "unemployment" figures. Start looking closer at things and you can argue that the true unemployment figure is around 10% and rising sharply as companies move from full-time employees to part-time and casual ones, as well, of course, as having ridiculous definitions of "employed".

Then we move to credit. As interest rates rise (that's the rates banks charge, not the official rate set by the Federal Bank. Just wanted to be clear on that), businesses find it harder to get funding. Add in the extra "taxes" like the Carbon Tax (as well as no tax cuts for "the working man" meaning less disposable income as day to day costs like energy go up) and you see how businesses will be stretched further. That's why there are so many facing "stress" this year, especially as consumer confidence and consumer spending has been going downwards for an entire year

Add in the signs of the Chinese economy slowing down, meaning that the growth in the mining industry may be short lived as demand drops, and the continuing economic issues in Europe and you see that, no matter how much of a rose tint on your glasses, things might not be so good in Australia in the near future and that's before we think of the damage being caused by the in-fighting in the Labor Party and the Government as a whole.

david1300 25th Feb 2012 10:47

@Hellsbrink - agree fully with your post.

And if anyone wants further evidence of labors economic incompetence, consider this: the average Aussie battler complains bitterly about the big 4 banks (lending practices, interest rates etc) while Treasurer Wayne Swan & PM G beat their chests saying there must be more competition blah blah blah. Yet one of their 'masterstrokes' during the GFC was to guarantee investments in the big 4, effectively sounding the death knell of competitive lending practices by smaller players (who now have almost all been taken over by the big 4, thereby reducing competition). Labor cannot see the bigger picture implications of their fiscal strategies and actions. To many of them have never actually been in business, or held a job in the private sector to really understand what happens at street level.

Andu 25th Feb 2012 11:00

I fear we've created a new class, a distinct class from which all but a very few of our politicians are drawn. These people go straight from university (where they're thoroughly indoctrinated by an almost totally Left Wing staff) into jobs as aides to politicians (or alternatively, into union rep 'jobs') and faithfully serve within the 'parallel universe' system of political Canberra, never once seeing the real world, as they wait to be offered a safe seat, when they're elevated to that grand prize.

The more I think of it, the more I think those ancient Greeks and Romans had it right - no one should be eligible to hold political office until he or she has reached a mature age and has served in a number of capacities to both prove their ability and to to broaden their life experience.

Sarah Hansen-Young take note.

bnt 25th Feb 2012 11:41

In the OP, siseman asked

What other country in the world got rid of a Prime Minister whilst in office, supplanted that PM with his deputy (and the first woman PM in Australia), then decided that she wasn't cutting the mustard and now appears to want the previous PM back. What message does this send to the rest of the world, and in particular Asia - our region, about the system here?
Happens all the time in the USA, though not at the very highest level. Governor Gray Davis of California was removed by voters by means of a "recall election" in 2003, and replaced by Arnold Schwarzenegger. Davis was urged to run for the job again, but declined. (California has almost double the population of Australia, and a much higher GDP.)

It's not weird for the voters to want a former leader back. What is weird is for a party in a parliamentary democracy to want their old leader back as PM. After the Conservatives in the UK replaced Thatcher with Major, or Labour replaced Blair with Brown, the predecessors were happy enough to walk away for good, and the party to see them go. It's different when a party's in opposition, of course - then anything goes!

Lex Talionis 25th Feb 2012 12:23


ums up the whole situation we now have. Rudd and Labor didn't win the last election, a tired electorate gave Howard and his government the shove because they became too arrogant and forgot their social responsibilities. As you say, Howard lost the election.
Spot and on the same applies exactly to Tony Abbott or whoever leads the Liberal party into the next election.They have themselves to blame and personally,I think both Gillard and Rudd should both be sacked and even the backbench is too good for them.

Rudd lists as his achievements, saving us from the global financial crisis. What he and Jools fail to tell everyone is they, (their collective governments), spent the "Future Fund" set aside by the Liberals to "stimulate" the economy. $20 something billion from memory and borrowed more to put us in the debt we have now.
Not so, it has been recognised that if the Australian did basically nothing in terms of a stimulus package as the rest of the western world did then the cost to Australia would have been far higher in terms of unemployment leading to increased welfare payments not to forget the business that would have gone under as well.

bbott is the only person offering an election that will rid us of the parasitic "Independants"
That is the one hope that we all have with the next election.I think most Australians are fed up with the 'few' telling the majority what to do.If we can get a government with a majority it will be a huge improvement but I wouldn't hold your breath that Tony can do it although with enough people sick of Labor you never know.

His party have a proven track record as fiscal managers.
This is another myth that the Toorak true believers like to vociferate to anyone willing to listen.

To say that Tony Abbott is a financial light weight is an understatement.His only claim is to take Australia back to the good old days of the Howard Government.
However,when you look at the real figures under John Howards leadership Australia had one of the highest tax rates ever seen in this country as well as many of his Ministers having to resign because of various scandals.Howard also had to spend very big to make compromises to sell of the first stage of Telstra.

Then we all remember 'Work Choices' which is the bane of every blue ribbon Liberal supporter and one of the main reasons why he lost the election.It was his arrogance and almost Thatcher like attitude that was his undoing as it was with Thatcher herself.

If Tony Abbotts grand plan is to emulate everything that John Howard did then God help us.

I would question that, Lex, there's plenty material out there that say things aren't as rosy in the Garden of Eden.
HB,While it's certainly true that one of the reasons currently for our prosperity in Australia is the mining boom we have had other sources of wealth as well.For years it was said that Australia rode on the sheeps back.Whatever the reason our economy is in far better shape than most other Western economies.

Our export industry has always been a source of wealth for us and China might have slowed down but that is also a good thing because their rate of expansion I think was unsustainable so an economic correction for them is not a bad thing.

If you want to start quoting statistics then you might be interested in the OECD prediction for the UK as the slowest growing economy in the G7 and the IMF has downgraded the growth forecast for the UK to 1.7% and this is the third downgrade in a year.I can say emphatically,that I know where I would rather be living both in the financial sense and as for our quality of life.This probably explains why so many UK expats choose to live here.

You really don't want to start talking about Europe then do you? :E

Getting back to the next election and I sincerely hope that whoever wins does so without having to bend over for a few independents.For the record I don't believe in the carbon tax if no one else is doing anything about it but I wonder if like the fringe benefits tax Abbott will actually repeal it.No Government ever wants to reduce it's source of income and the Liberal party is certainly in that group especially if Tony Abbott ends up taxing us like John Howard did.

CoodaShooda 25th Feb 2012 21:53


I'll have to pick you up on one point.

if Tony Abbott ends up taxing us like John Howard did.
Labor has effectively raised taxes on at least 10% of the community through refusing them compensation under the carbon tax, demanding a greater proportion of the Qld flood levy of them by making it a % of income contribution and removing the private health insurance assitance etc etc.

My family was doing a lot better financially before 2007 than we have in the last 4 years. We just fall on the wrong side of labor's magical line when it comes to means tests. But we are not flush with funds in a community where the cost of living is aeound 25% higher than down south.

PLovett 25th Feb 2012 22:14

Lex, thank you for your voice of reality. Some people on here have very short memories.

However, to pick up on one point about the people selecting the Prime Minister. There is no reference to the position of Prime Minister in the Constitution, it is really an artificial position and therefore cannot be voted for by the public.

As an aside I am not actually adverse to minority governments as I feel that absolute majority (in both houses) leads to a very unhealthy situation. I much prefer the concept of a government having to sway over others to be able to get controversial legislation through parliament. I realise, of course, that party politics stands in the way of this concept but I am sometimes given to wondering what would happen, if say, any party was limited to no more than 40% of the available seats in any house.

As to what happens after Monday, I see they have rearranged the deck chairs again.

Lex Talionis 26th Feb 2012 02:34

Thanks PLovett as I believe that I am impartial or at least do my best to be.I find it remarkable that some here refer to the Prime Minister as Juliar.

I agree that this is a case of something that if you say 'No' it means 'No' unless there are understandable and mitigating reasons for a change in policy.Unless that is the case then you have to wait for the next election and put it forward with reasons for it's introduction.

John Howard after the debacle of the GST told us it would never be a policy in any government he led.Now he did go to the next election with it as a policy but the fact remains that he did say it was dead and would never be Liberal party policy as it was killed off by the Australian voters.

John Howard had this to say about the truth
"'Truth is absolute, truth is supreme, truth is never disposable in national political life".
We all know that Tony Abbott has told us that you can only rely on what he has said if it is in writing.So using Abbotts logic Gillard cannot be held for what she said about the Carbon tax issue.

John Howard also said this about the GST and it's rumoured affect on the price of fuel.
""The GST will not increase the price of petrol for the ordinary motorist . . ." -

Now Tony Abbott is claiming that the price on carbon will add 6.5 cents per litre to the cost of fuel but after the GST was introduced and a promise was made that it wouldn't increase in cost to the motoring public the price of fuel went up 10.4% in the next quarter and was a full 23.6% higher one year after the GST was introduced.

John Howard also said that the GST would not increase the price of beer of more than 1.9%.The price of beer actually rose 4.8% the next quarter and was 8.5% higher the same time next year.The classic broken promise was in an interview in which John Howard emphatically told the interviewer that there would be no new taxes or tax increases during the next 3 years.

Howard said this ""That promise is quite explicit"

The reality was that by 2002 John Howard had either increased or introduced 130 new taxes.

The list goes on and on yet a lot here continue to call Julia Gillard Juliar.John Howard made breaking election promises an art form.

If Tony Abbott lives up to his promise to bring back the glory days and methods of the Howard era then God help us.

All times are GMT. The time now is 21:13.

Copyright İ 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.