It was an extraordinary complaint from Tony Abbott. “It’s very difficult to have a sensible debate,” he said, “when you are confronted with a feral government”.

Watching Question Time every day turned Fluffykins into quite the animal. Pic: Paul Hutton.

Politicians don’t come any more ferocious and brutal than Abbott. He reverted to the wild the moment he got his paws on the Liberal leadership. His style is pure attack dog, as feral as you’d get. Everything, irrespective of merit, has to be opposed and torn to pieces.

The mining tax is a case in point. It is now glaringly obvious that the benefits of the mining boom should be shared around so that the overall economy benefits rather than just a small and privileged section. Opposition to the tax is shrinking.

As long as the government can deal with some last-minute peripheral concerns of Independents, particularly Tony Windsor, it will get through the Parliament. But Abbott is sticking to his decision that he will abolish the tax - and all the benefits it will pay for - as soon as he becomes prime minister.

That means he will repeal tax cuts for business, big and small. He will slash proposed infrastructure spending. And he will take back superannuation increases for workers.

And why? Because he claims the mining companies exploiting Australia’s mineral wealth cannot afford to pay more tax.

The risk for the opposition leader is that those he would deprive of benefits might eventually see that for the nonsense it is. Someone showed me some fascinating statistics the other day. They compare increases in mining company profits in recent years with what has happened with wages and salaries.

Between 2004 and 2010, gross operating profits for Australian mining companies increased by 246%, from $25.4 billion a year to $87.7 billion.

If salaries had risen by the same rate as mining profits,  doctors would now be getting on average $352,419 a year instead of $151,418, school teachers $186,825 instead of $72,979, plumbers $146,995 instead of $60,215, construction and mining labourers $178,390 instead of $79,643, hospitality workers $110,246 instead of $44,170, receptionists $117,815 instead of $42,184, and so on.

The three mining companies that would pay the bulk of the tax - BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Xstrata - accept it. Abbott should accept it too, in the national interest, as a means of dealing with our patch-work economy.

Feral might be fine in opposition, but the advantages are short-term. Abbott is making a rod for his own back in government.

Abbot’s feral irresponsibility was also on view in Parliament over the government’s decision to support improved resourcing of the International Monetary Fund as it deals with the fall-out from Europe’s financial crisis.

Pointing to Australia’s Budget deficit, the opposition leader thundered: “Why is the government planning to provide money it does not have to prop up the Eurozone, which is the world’s largest economy?”

Abbott knew - or should have known - that Australia’s contribution to the IMF would be in the form of a loan, with no impact on the Budget bottom line. In fact, it will earn interest.

He also knew - or should have known - that money provided to help the IMF handle new contingencies will not go towards any European rescue package.

Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey, who sometimes shows a disturbing tendency to match his leader’s cheap populism, asserted that “the suggestion that we should be putting money into the IMF to bail out the Eurozone when not even the British are prepared to do so is extraordinary”.

But Hockey knew - or should have known - that British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne had also said: “There may well be a case for further increasing the resources to the IMF to keep pace with the global economy.”

Within hours of Abbott and Hockey advocating their feral version of economic isolationism, British PM David Cameron left them egg-faced by calling for a boost in IMF funding at the G-20 summit in France. Australia has a vital interest in global financial security. That is why support for Australia’s IMF contributions has always been bipartisan - until now.

The Business Council, normally sympathetic to the coalition, did not hide its disapproval. Australia, it said, should act as a good global citizen and be prepared to support the IMF as it did in the 1990s during the Asian financial crisis. John Howard and Peter Costello would have recoiled in horror at the sight of Abbott and Hockey going feral over the IMF.

The issue that prompted Abbott to squeal about the government being feral was industrial relations. In the debate over Qantas grounding its fleet and stranding tens of thousands of passengers, Julia Gillard gave the opposition leader a dose of his own medicine.

The incident demonstrated yet again Abbott’s inconsistency and lack of policy on industrial relations, something that is opening up divisions inside the coalition.

The prime minister laid into him for supporting the actions of Qantas management against its passengers and workers, and used that to argue that the Liberals were still the party of WorkChoices. Abbott, who displayed his timidity over industrial relations by going into last year’s federal election without a policy, did not enjoy getting belted.

The result, almost certainly, will be to make him even more feral.

Laurie Oakes is political editor for the Nine Network.

170 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • iansand says:

      05:52am | 05/11/11

      No, no, no.  This can’t be right.  Whatever Abbott does is right and Gillard is hopeless.  Oakes is a front for the global communist conspiracy.

      Just saving the Usual Suspects some key strokes.  They don’t have to contribute now.

    • They're all toxic says:

      08:48am | 05/11/11

      “Whatever Abbott does is right and Gillard is hopeless.”

      The last bit’s true (Gillard is hopeless) iansand, only now I’ve decided they’re all toxic.

      The G20’s been told “good on you Julia” A carbon tax is courageous, but we’re not dumb enough to do it. We’ve got these other pesky issues, like feeding a massive population. meanwhile Julia has no plan. Continuing to allow the sale of Australian farms. So, yes iansand, as it should be, anyone with a brain should be criticizing Gillard and her ridiculous government.

    • mick says:

      09:28am | 05/11/11

      A great comment.  I have been reading the same propaganda from the liberal party implants for a while.  Never a discussion of the facts or the failings (a nice word) of one T. Abbott, just mindless attacks on the other side.  Have we not seen the same behaviour from the leader of the opposition?

      The comment after yours is precisely what I an getting at.  I mean how can the mining tax be anything other than fair and equitable.  We all know that the mega rich miners are taking 81% of the profits out of the country and depositing them straight into the pockets of overseas investors.  End of argument unless taxpayers are to subsidise the tax, which is exactly what Tony Abbott intends doing.

      Maybe the next election is already in play.

    • Martin says:

      10:40am | 05/11/11

      What a lot of Labor rubbish. Oh, yes another tax, that must be what we need! Global economy on the brink, only thing making any money in Australia is mining so what do we do? Well, we are a Labor government so, LETS CREATE a NEW TAX!!!. Fair dinkum, and yeah it’s all Abbott’s fault.

      Abbott this, Abbott that. More like Labor BS here, Labor BS there, Labor BS everywhere.

      These diversionary articles are all very fine from the left leaning Canberra press bunker, however the polls have been pretty well locked in for most of the year now and Labor are toast.

      Now they running back to Rudd!!! Labor desperates know no bounds. They have no decency and no self respect, so they will end up with what they deserve that being a huge kick in the a%$e at the next election.

    • ZSRenn says:

      10:53am | 05/11/11

      @iansand I am assuming that comment was tongue in cheek and an admission regarding the article

      How much more can the electricity consumer expect to pay when the cost of coal goes up.

      What about the extra tax we have to pay for floods in this country but apparently we have enough to lend to Europe. 

      We are being held ransom by England to pay the money because it was brought up by David Cameron and hardly leaves TA with egg on his face I am kind of wondering if Europe would lift a finger for us in the same situation. Probably not as they would feel we were insignificant. Is it feral isolationism or prudent fiscal policy by not spending money we don’t have because tough times are coming?

      QANTAS lost millions in the recent strike action and like Australian manufacturing QANTAS now needs to move overseas to survive or close forever due to high wage costs. That this week Holden mentioned it may have to do the same because Unions have gone feral. This is a loss for Julia who did not trust her IE package that she wrote in the courts so she wimped out and costing AU millions

    • Denny Crane says:

      10:56am | 05/11/11

      Mick - maybe you believe that the Mining tax will pay for an increase in superannuation contributions. Most labor fools believe this because Swan or Shorten or Gillard said so. I even heard Doug Cameron say so. It must be right.

      In my own situation the reduction in company tax will save me nothing but the increase in SG contributions will cost about $10K per year. payrises will not be as large as we will offset this obligation. Its pretty simple.

      Too bad labor could not earmark this money for debt reduction and maybe making a contribution to the future fund. Putting something aside for a rainy day. Kind of like what Howard and Costello did to save us from the GFC.

      Saving, however is not in the DNA of Labor. Spending is. Spend spend spend. Its not their money so why not? Why take a responsible course of action when you can use money to try and buy a seat on the UN security council or bribe the electorate with wasteful spending.

      Like everything else this government does, the mining tax has not been thought thru and will cause much more damage than it does good. The really big miners, those who fit into the labor fabian utopia, will be fine but smaller players will be hurt. Labor dont care because they are at odds to control the workforce of small business so its better to see them go under than have no workforce control.

      Not suprising that Laurie sees the splinter in Abbott eye while ignoring the log in Gillards.

    • waiter keen and impatient says:

      01:42pm | 05/11/11

      They (Abott and Gillard) are both animated by the same global power. Laurie is just a s**t stirring to make it look real…

    • mick says:

      04:01pm | 05/11/11

      Interesting to see the Liberal implants at work.  Mindless and illogical attacks like the one who spawned you.

      The response to the Mining Tax is simple.  If this goes out of the budget then ordinary wage and salary earners will be asked to make up the difference.  I have heard no explanation from those bloggers who are mindless slaves of the Liberal Party as to why the tax is bad and what happens when this goes out of the national budget.  There simply is no answer to miners taking 81% of the profits overseas.  The mineral wealth in the ground is Australian owned and a fair return to the nation is expected.  So when the mindless slaves spew out the Abbott venom and deceit I say indeed ‘why do you live in this country if you are working against the interests of the nation and its inhabitants?’.......these being selling what we have for a fair price. 

      And to repeat what was stated earlier I am not affiliated with Labor in any way and normally vote Independent.  I like to “keep the bastards honest”.  Some of the Abbott ferals who live on this site clearly cannot say the same for their allegiances.

    • RyaN says:

      08:49pm | 05/11/11

      @mick: or is that Seano again, iansand is a Labor plant. It is nice to see him speaking the truth for once.

    • acotrel says:

      06:59am | 06/11/11

      Both sides of politics are as bad as one another, it’s just that Tony Abbott is more better - he really cares about everyone ! He’s a real man’s man !

    • acotrel says:

      10:44am | 06/11/11

      @They’re all toxic
      “Whatever Abbott does is right and Gillard is hopeless.”

      If Julia Gillard can achieve only one single thing in the face of such a negative and poisonous opposition, she will have proven herself as a leader !
      If the NBN is successful - watch out Tony Abbott and the LNP !

    • iansand says:

      03:35pm | 06/11/11

      RyaN - QED

    • Little Joe says:

      10:40pm | 07/11/11

      From past experiences with high speed broadband around the world very few people take up the service ...... the only way the NBN will be successful will be if we are all forced to use it!!!

      Ps. I surely do not need it!!!

    • Jordan says:

      02:07pm | 08/11/11

      Good on you Laurie. Its about time journalists started holding Abbott to account for his non-sense!

    • Super D says:

      05:57am | 05/11/11

      The mining tax and associated spending are just silly.  Well more than silly they are stupid.  Well more than stupid they are completely moronic.

      Firstly let me say I support the proposition that the states (who own the minerals, not the federal government) should be receiving more from the mining industry.

      There is a mechanism for this, it’s called royalties.  Royalties are a fixed percentage charge against revenue and ignore profitability.  This is the correct way to tax a finite resource.  If a resort is finite its exploitation should attract a charge.  All the state should care about is that when the resource is exploited the charge is paid, not how efficiently or profitably it is done.  That is if you buy the finite resource option then a profitability based tax is certainly not the way to ensure you’re getting paid.

      Now while revenue from the mining tax will be highly volatile - being leveraged to profitability rather than the level of economic activity the expenditure associated with it will be far less volatile.  We certainly do not hope to live in a world where employment and wages are as volatile and uncertain as mining profits.  What we are left with is a highly volatile income stream funding a fairly constant expenditure - in the form of higher superannuation.  This is just plain silly.  It ensures that any sustained decline in commodity prices will put pressure on the budget - with the exception being if they coincide with mass unemployment.

      Finally I’m against increasing mandatory superannuation.  Not because I don’t want to see higher retirement incomes but because we have already got a disproportionately large financial sector and this will exacerbate the situation.  Furthermore around half of all superannuation goes into Industry super funds which, despite the claims to look after their members, often act in the interests of the organised Labor movement.  This was Keating’s unrecognised genius.  Under the guise of boosting retirement incomes he was able to give the union movement control over both capital and labour. 

      So in summation the mining tax places a profit based charge over a finite resource (silly) which provides a highly volatile income stream to fund a relatively stable expenditure (stupid) and further expands the already disproportionately large financial sector (moronic).

    • Chris L says:

      08:56am | 05/11/11

      I disagree Super D. The main opposition to the tax on super profits (that I’m aware of) was the concern that it would make small operations unprofitable and hamper new investment. A fixed charge could have that effect, but if it’s based on profitability then we avoid hamstringing the industry and only draw from those sections that can easily cover it.

      In regards to where superannuation gets invested, I’ve moved my own fund to invest in the areas I wish to (utilising advice from professionals, of course) and I don’t see a reason anyone concerned with Industry super funds couldn’t do the same.

    • Dissident says:

      02:27pm | 05/11/11

      Super D, I don’t think I have ever agreed any more with anything anyone has ever said on the Punch. 100% correct.

      If people think that we are being short-changed on commodities, talk to your State government (who are Constitutionally entitled to the benefits of the minerals) and ask them to increase royalties. Royalties are simple, elegant and fair.

      My interpretation of this from the long term perspective is that the MRRT is simply about consolidating more revenue collection in the Commonwealth at the expense of the States.  You just don’t get revenue back from the Commonwealth once it is gone. Personal income tax was collected by the States prior to WWII, but was taken over by the Commonwealth and was justified as a wartime effort. Is the war still going?

      Any Senator from WA or QLD who votes for this should be charged with treason. It will gut places like WA where we are already being taken for a ride. In a few short years, WA is projected to get just 33c in the dollar back from GST that is paid by Western Australians. 33c. Economic independence is rewarded with punitive distributions - of our own money, no less. Welcome to the new Socialism.

      As an aside, if this tax were to get in, I have a suggestion for any foreign owned mining enterprise. Sell your resources at a loss to your international vertically integrated enterprise. This means that the non-Australian manufacturing company (which you already wholly own) gets a greater profit because it pays less for raw materials, and because it is based in a lower taxing regime your whole conglomerate pays a lower rate of tax on that profit overall. Because the Royalties will be frozen, in time they will be a negligible cost and you will essentially get the for free (aside from the extraction cost, naturally). Excellent. Free resources! It just doesn’t get any better!

    • PTom says:

      03:46pm | 06/11/11

      Super D,

      “Royalties are a fixed percentage charge against revenue and ignore profitability.”

      Not correct. Royalties are a percentage cost per ton on a price set at the mine base. Nothing to do with a companies revenue, profit or losses or even export prices.

      MRRT would only be paid on 50M+ profitable companies that mine Iron or Coal.

      Federal nor States own the minerals the people do and they reperesnts the people’s interest ,as such we should get the most out of FINITE resource.
      Not beckering over which government gets what.

    • sandra says:

      09:09pm | 06/11/11

      one of the best post I have seen—facts and common sense. With the super fund increase in the private sector—the government will not conribute—the companies will take it out of salary increases. So once again the mining tax is to help the public servants only!!!! no wonder there are those here who are all for it.  Mr Oaks—hope you are reading this—

    • Borderer says:

      08:31am | 07/11/11

      Main argument against a mining tax - What is a management fee? If I were a foriegn miner I would just charge every thing imaginable to the Australian mining subsidiary to keep the the mining tax down. I just record the profit in France or the US or China and pay the lower taxes there. Royalties work far better, the problem the government have is that they don’t have control of the funds, the states do, Swanny didn’t like it when the WA Premier essentially told him to shove it recently when he increased royalties.

    • Mayday says:

      06:09am | 05/11/11

      Abbott is mirroring the absolute bastardry of Ms Gillard and her government.

      Laurie you use such emotive language such as “she laid into him for supporting the actions of Qantas management again” - he is the Opposition Leader and he took the side of the employer rather than back the attack dogs of the TWU?!

      The feral behaviour of some senators when speaking to Alan Joyce is something to be truly embarrassed about.

    • Aitch B says:

      10:42am | 05/11/11

      @Mayday

      Agreed. I watched the replay last night and Bob Brown and Doug Cameron were disgraceful with their insinuations. I thought Joyce could have exploded at a few stages but he handled himself well. Some senators had the good grace to allow Joyce to answer the question put to him but Cameron and Brown - especially Brown - wouldn’t give him that courtesy. Thankfully Xenophon had the guts to lambast Brown for butting in.

      Cameron is a perfect example of what happens when a feral union leader is given the powers of a senator. He is a disgrace!

      Eric Abetz was pretty pathetic too…. you could see the underlying political slant in his questions.

    • Martin says:

      03:50pm | 05/11/11

      Absolutely agree. Cameron was a disgrace as was Brown.

    • They're all toxic says:

      06:34am | 05/11/11

      “Abbott knew - or should have known - that Australia’s contribution to the IMF would be in the form of a loan”

      Why would Australia want to lend money to an indulgent Europe? The western world is broke. It needs to fall over, unlike the Asian crisis, the present situation is terminal. More debt will not fix anything.

      People need to start working again, assets need to be retained by countries to generate trade. We need to produce stuff, not just sell assets to maintain our luxurious lives.

      Australia is one massive mess waiting to implode, our politicians and Laurie think everything’s cool. It’s not. If you add our household debt to GDP debt, Australia is as bad as any country including the US and Greece.

      We should be petrified of what’s coming. Instead, we think a tinker here and there and “she’ll be right”. China owns the stuff we used to own, we now buy back that stuff with debt. We then let them continue buying our stuff that used to generate income…......Does this not scream doom?

      It really is time for politicians to recognize what’s going on and reverse the sale of Australian assets and subsequent jobs.

      There are really smart people that predicted the GFC, that copper and iron ore would triple. Those same people are now saying the world is a disaster waiting to happen, that Australia’s housing alone is a massive problem. Instead of listening to these people we blunder on making all the same mistakes the broke countries made. The lucky country? The dumb country.

    • Keith Hammersmith says:

      12:29pm | 05/11/11

      “Abbott knew - or should have known - that Australia’s contribution to the IMF would be in the form of a loan”

      whats funny about this, is we are running a deficit, so the loan we are giving to the IMF is from a loan itself,  WE are borrowing money,  and now we are borrowing money to lend other,  its like paying your mortgage with your credit card.  So yeah i can see why Abott would resist and question,

    • They're all toxic says:

      01:37pm | 05/11/11

      GREAT point Keith Hammersmith. I love it…

    • Labor is Toxic says:

      10:36pm | 07/11/11

      And if we pay a higher interest rate for the capital than the IMF is willing to pay ...... who gets the bill??? The poor Australian Taxpayer!!!

    • Rabid Leftist Hippy says:

      11:01pm | 07/11/11

      @Keith

      In relative and actual terms, our sovereign debt is tiny running at one fifth of of GDP instead of 120%. And many of these nations have strong ties to Australia and our economy’s stability is dependent on the international economy, Europe included. Combined with the fact that our economy is strong, as Gillard has been telling everyone, it’s expected that as one of the more prosperous nations that Australia will lend a helping hand.

      Furthermore, debt is not necessarily a bad thing. As long as Australia’s economy keeps growing, then debt will not be an issue. The reason why debt internationally is such a problem is that huge debt is combined with shrinking economies. As our economy grows, more tax revenue will be raised and the rate the government can pay back the money increases. And if the IMF doesn’t die then Australia will in fact make a return on the loan.

      So it’s more like paying your neighbour’s mortgage off with a little bit of your own mortgage so they can fix their house… which would otherwise take yours down (poor analogy :|)

      @They’re all toxic: I agree with the sentiment but letting Europe fall is not what I believe to be the answer… and internationally owned Australian assets is a consequence of international free market capitalism. Maybe we should return to a more regulated economy and increase regulation in our mixed economy?

    • Tedd says:

      06:39am | 05/11/11

      Good call, Laurie. Hockey and the rest of the Coalition have gone feral, too.

      Watching them is like watching cats being herded - feral ones at that.

    • They're all toxic says:

      08:38am | 05/11/11

      “gone feral, too.”

      Good. Australia needs a bit of passion in its’ politics. It might generate a bit of debate in the apathetic voters.

    • Tedd says:

      10:58am | 05/11/11

      Passion is fine, as long as it is constructive.  This lot are all about negativity & destruction.  A bunch of snotty schoolkids.

    • RyaN says:

      12:41pm | 06/11/11

      @Tedd: yes we have seen the destruction being leveled on Australia by Gillard the barefaced liar. “There will be no carbon tax under a government oi lead”.
      This article is nothing more than a Labor stooge trying to deflect attention from the absolute treachery that has been performed by Gillard against the Australian people.

    • They're all toxic says:

      06:46am | 05/11/11

      Why would we entrust the IMF to handle anything sensibly? They’re the ones that created this continuing disaster.

      “The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an organization of 187 countries, working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world.”

      In other words, we are socialist clowns that really have zero grasp on reality. We’ll continue to use the term “sustainable economic growth” without actually recognising that in environmental terms it was exceeded 60 years ago and that population growth is rapidly strangling the planet.

      How can you “reduce poverty around the world” without population control? These people have less idea than Australian politicians and we want to give them money to squander?

    • B4Bear says:

      09:26am | 05/11/11

      The IMF created this mess? What planet do you live on. Countries such as Greece got cheap loans from European banks. Now the banks want their money back and Greece is broke.

      Let Greece default and let the banks fail. Let the governments in Europe guarentee the depositers money, alot cheaper than ‘socialising the loss’.

      Instead the EU has gone for the half pregnant solution. 50% default and 50% repaid. No one is happy with that result.

      Regardless, the IMF did not create any of this. Stupid politicians and greedy bankers did.

    • They're all toxic says:

      10:03am | 05/11/11

      @B4Bear.

      “Stupid politicians and greedy bankers did.” Too true.

      If Greece didn’t sell all it’s assets and just carried on doing what ever it was they did for the past few hundred years there’d be no prob’s. If the IMF discouraged a broke country from getting a AAA rating the world would be better for it. The IMF have this ridiculous utopian idea of “sustainable growth”.

      They have supported and encouraged free trade. How can you have free trade when some people earn $10 a day while others earn $800? It’s not a free world and it never will be. There are imbalances everywhere.

      The problems of the world are about westerners thinking they’re going to fix the world with socialist policy. It hasn’t ever worked and never will.

      Read their blurb again…..........................“The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is an organization of 187 countries, working to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce poverty around the world.”

    • MattyC says:

      06:56am | 05/11/11

      Morning punchers… I am starting the think there is something wrong with me, reading this blog at 7.30 rather than sleeping or shock horror exercising!

      To the matter at hand, I agree whole heartedly that Abbott, Hockey, Pyne et al will oppose every piece of policy proposed by the ALP regardless of merit.

      But ..... And before the LNP fanboys and girls start digging at me. The ALP are no angels either, it annoys me that the muppetson the other side start most answers to their questions with Tony Abbott is wrecking, he says no etc.

      They behave like parents going through a very bitter divorce, more interested in taking each other down than working out a solution that best suits the family

    • Aussie Battler says:

      08:57am | 05/11/11

      @MattyC - They behave like parents going through a very bitter divorce, more interested in taking each other down than working out a solution that best suits the family -  Spot on!  Watching BOTH sides of Politics at Question Time is embarrassing at times.  Labor screeching at the Libs and the Libs screeching back.  Have seen better co-operation out of kids having a punch up at school.

    • Chris L says:

      09:02am | 05/11/11

      Agreed. I can name the policies I like from the current government and the ones I oppose. I could do the same with the previous Howard government. However I’m seeing more and more voices in politics and on the sidelines that just fire aimless shots, refusing to see the strengths of their opposing side and refusing to see the faults of their own. It has become less of a political debate, more a pissing contest.

    • mick says:

      04:19pm | 05/11/11

      Good that you see the form MattyC.  Having been involved in this community for a while now I am beginning to see that the Liberal Party has implants here to sway opinion.

      Quite apart from refusing to engage in meaningful debate these folk just sling abuse, just like their party leader.  Never a good idea, never a solution, never a policy.  Just abuse and put downs.  That is why it is so easy to distinguish who put them into this role

      Some of the blogs above have now thrown a whole pile of things together.  These are indeed a part of the overall picture but this has been done to confuse.

      The Labor Party is not without problems.  I personally do not agree with how it has implemented policies and would rather have seen a different approach to others.  Having said that though the Labor Party is not working to stuff bucket loads of money into the pockets of the very rich and all Australians of any merit need to take note.  The Abbott side of politics is the opposite.  It plans on giving absolute squillions to the big end of town and asking ordinary mums and dads to pay the bill.  It is obscene but the liberal propaganda machine is well oiled and average Australians have all but been sold this very bitter pill.

      Some bloggers above mention electricity prices.  Whilst I agree that the CPI outweighs wage increases I respectfully ask what will mums and dads do if Abbott wins the election and then brings in his defacto Work Choices?  Lets not kid ourselves.  Abbott intends to create a US style economy where the working class is plundered - half od US workers earn so little that they pay no tax; some work full time and get food coupons to survive.

      So lets put everything into perspective.  It would be nice if the Punch team put the liberal implants off the web as they only provide abusive attacks and offer no logical argument whatsoever.  Well what would you realistically expect from Tone Abbott clones.

    • John the Zombie says:

      05:17pm | 05/11/11

      @mick so there is no chance of labor implants as well. i guess only the liberals would do this right. Funny enough I am a liberal supporter and support the MRRT but the reason given for it is not true. The MRRT is only a cover by the Labor party to hide thier uncontrolled spending. Mick do you have a super fund? The reason I ask this is because alot of the investment by super funds are into international companies. Do you know what percentage of your super is invested in these companies. I wonder if anyone does?

    • jf says:

      05:27pm | 05/11/11

      mick says:05:19pm | 05/11/11

      “Good that you see the form MattyC.  Having been involved in this community for a while now I am beginning to see that the Liberal Party has implants here to sway opinion.”

      So what would you consider yourself Mick? A balanced opinon? You really didn’t start well with that own goal.

      “Quite apart from refusing to engage in meaningful debate these folk just sling abuse, just like their party leader.”

      Oh piss off Mick. There’s dicks on both sides.

      “Never a good idea”

      You are never going to consider an idea from the opposition a “good idea” so please stop being so transparently disingenuous and hypocritcal.

      Here you go mate, saved you the trouble.

      http://www.liberal.org.au/Policies.aspx

      It really is a sad indictment on the ALP supporters that they keep on screaming “no policies” when no opposition (that includes Kevin ‘07) had policies detailed and available for public scrutiny two years out from an election. This opposition has both.

      “The Labor Party is not without problems.”

      No! Really? It’s a disaster.

      “It plans on giving absolute squillions to the big end of town and asking ordinary mums and dads to pay the bill.”

      How did you arrive at that conclusion? I though it had no policies.

      “If Abbott wins the election and then brings in his defacto Work Choices?”

      Not only have the denied it, I though they had no policies.

      “Abbott intends to create a US style economy”

      Apart from the fact that there is zero evidence of this, you in particular couldn’t have any sort of basis for coming to this conclusion not being aware of their policies and all.

      However, even if that were the case, which economy should we seek to mirror? Greece? Cuba? North Korea?

      “So lets put everything into perspective.  It would be nice if the Punch team put the liberal implants off the web”

      Ah, the left’s favourite thing. Censorship. Plenty of that in Cuba, North Korea, China, well pretty much any command economy.

    • Anne71 says:

      12:32pm | 07/11/11

      MattyC - I could not agree more. Both sides of politics are an embarrassment these days, and if an election was held next weekend I would be flat out deciding which party to vote for, as neither deserve to run the country. The best thing that could happen is to give both current leaders the push and completely replace the front benches on both sides - bring in some new talent and new ideas.  Cannot see that happening though, sadly.

    • Nathan says:

      06:56am | 05/11/11

      I think this shows that their is not much in opposition. He and allot of the contributes on this site may call Gillard at a drop of the hat but he is certain to be found out to be a liar himself (as long as its a promise promise and not just a promise). Their is no way that he will repeal everything he says he will and to repeal a tax on mining companies that the companies agree to pay would be stupid and irresponsible

    • mick says:

      07:27pm | 05/11/11

      Sorry to disappoint you JF.  I have no ties with Labor but I do side with ordinary Australians.

      Giving money to wealthy people is not a policy.  It is the betrayal of those who have no power and no voice.

      You say that Work Choices is dead.  Funny that as both John Howard and Peter Reith have been in the headlines again spruiking for workplace reforms -  low wages for workers!!

      You say that there is no evidence for Abbott wanting to turn Australia into a US style economy.  Respectfully, once you can force people to work for nix then you are there.  That is what ‘labour reforms’ are all about.  You can’t seriously expect readers to believe that our economy which has had next to no strikes and less than CPI wage increases over the past decade should now accept being steam rolled whilst the rich end of town continues to rip double digit wage increases year in and year out.  This blows your credibility out of the water.

      You and some of your disciples persist in trying to link me to Labor but as I have said several times I vote Independent.  I do have some empathy with Labor.  Despite the fact that Labor is a poor administrator when in government it does not set out to impoverish the population…...despite the carbon tax question mark.  I wish I could be more positive with the Liberal side of politics but the scene has been set, the promises made and the writing is on the wall.

      I suggest that you tell your boss to stop the scare and misinformation campaign concentrate on developing real policies which are presented to the Australian public.  Feeding the mega rich is not a policy.

    • jf says:

      08:45am | 07/11/11

      mick says:08:27pm | 05/11/11

      “Sorry to disappoint you JF.  I have no ties with Labor but I do side with ordinary Australians.”

      Mick, I’m not sure what comment you are responding to but for the record, I have no ties to the coalition. However, just as you clearly lean away from conservative politics, I lean away from the left. In fact, whilst we are in a confessional mood, I also lean away from the far right.

      “Giving money to wealthy people is not a policy.”

      If you are referring to middle class welfare, I agree. It is one area that I find myself disagreeing with the coalition.

      “You say that Work Choices is dead.  Funny that as both John Howard and Peter Reith have been in the headlines again spruiking for workplace reforms -  low wages for workers!! “

      1. I don’t believe that either of these men are either members of parliament or even in position of influence in the Liberal Party (or any other political party 2. Link me to one source that supports your view that either of those men support “low wages for workers”. Just one.

      “You say that there is no evidence for Abbott wanting to turn Australia into a US style economy.  Respectfully, once you can force people to work for nix then you are there.”

      First, link me to just one source that suggests that Abbott wants “to turn Australia into a US style economy”. Just one.

      Secondly, workers do not work for “nix” in the US. I think that you may be thinking of any one of a number of authoritarion regimes around the world none of which are free market economies.

      “That is what ‘labour reforms’ are all about.  You can’t seriously expect readers to believe that our economy which has had next to no strikes and less than CPI wage increases over the past decade should now accept being steam rolled whilst the rich end of town continues to rip double digit wage increases year in and year out.  This blows your credibility out of the water.”

      Almost no industrial action under Workchoices (which I am not a supporter of by the way) and a new strike weekly under the Fair Work Act pretty much destroys your argument.

      Oh, and by the way, if you don’t mind, in the interests of your credibilty of course, can you link me to the source that supports your comment that only the wealthy have had wage increases over CPI. In fact, I’ll let you off lightly and ask that you link me to a source that wage increases have been at less than CPI.

      “You and some of your disciples persist in trying to link me to Labor”

      I am unaware of having any disciples let alone any on this site. As to me persisting in linking you to Labour, I don’t believe that I have ever even responded to you (as I don’t keep a running tally, I may be wrong).

      “as but as I have said several times I vote Independent”

      Good girl. But I don’t give a rat’s who you vote for. However, for the record, voting Labor is for people with no conviction and who are more interested in their image than in making a genuine contribution to governance of the country.

      “I do have some empathy with Labor.”

      Get. Out.

      “Labor is a poor administrator when in government it does not set out to impoverish the population”

      And yet it does impoverish. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions” should be the Labor Party’s motto. 

      “I suggest that you tell your boss”

      By whom I assume you mean Abbott. Now you don’t like it when someone links you to the ALP without any evidence. Now that is what is called hypocrisy mick. You will find it in your ALP manifesto

    • Cate says:

      01:00pm | 13/11/11

      What is an ordinary Australian?  Before Australia opened the floodgates there were many.  Now I can walk for hours around the city and see not one single ordinary Australian. (whom by the way are a most extraordinary people who are being bashed by growing self serving minorities)
      Cheers

    • John A Neve says:

      07:00am | 05/11/11

      They cannot deny the fact that they, the media, played a large part in the watering down of the proposed Super Profits Tax.
      I’d suggest with the passing of time, most of us now agree the federal government had the right idea.
      The natural wealth of Australia belongs to all Australians.

    • They're all toxic says:

      09:07am | 05/11/11

      John A Neve, if it was proposed by a government that had any credibility, we’d now have the tax.

    • The Galah from Hervey Bay says:

      09:43am | 05/11/11

      Sure John , quite right , ” the natural wealth of Australia belongs to all Australians. “

      So , mindful of the fact that it takes massive amounts of investment funds and risk for the investor - but stuff the investors , eh John ?

      Right !!  -  well the alternative for Australians is leave the resourses in the ground .  After all - ” the natural wealth of Australia belongs to all Australians. ”

      Can’t argue with that logic Jonno - it will still belong to all Australians while it remains ” in the ground. ”

    • Max, of Rocky says:

      10:44am | 05/11/11

      The States have the right under the Constitution to levy royalties on the minerals etc mined from their ground.

      Not sure what other states are but Qld royalties on coal is $20 per ton, which the current Labor government (State) squanders on all sorts of pork barrel enterprises. (e.g.  Suncorp Stadium $500 million plus, Gold Coast football stadium $300 million plus)

      Our natural wealth is being frittered away.  Our grandchildren are really going to smile happily when they realise what was lost.(NOT)

      Half the minerals being projected to be mined in the next 30 years should be left in the ground for the future generations and not despoiled by the existing ones for no future gain.

      From the introduction of Fringe Benefits Tax mining companies have stopped building mining towns and infrastructure and now fly in crews to the detriment off the local communities.

      TIME FOR CHANGE - WA has one way, who’s going to fix this?

    • John A Neve says:

      11:13am | 05/11/11

      The Galah,
      You obviously have a fertile imagination, as at no time have I suggested
      we “stuff the investors”. What was proposed was a “Super Profits Tax”,
      “super” implying greater than normal.
      As to your “the alternative for Australain’s is leave the resources in the ground”, I can only say what a stupid idea, did you think that up yourself?
      The real alternative is the raise capital here, added to which if the minerals stayed in the ground a little longer their worth would only grow
      as the demand increased.

    • The Galah from Hervey Bay says:

      06:49pm | 05/11/11

      John Neve
      Well , you either missed the point i made or you pretended so.
      Your patriotic “the natural wealthof Australia belongs to all Australians. “
      ignores investment risk and that the profits of that risk belongs to the investor.
      State royalties are a sufficient level of taxation and allows the states to raise the royalty tonne rate when necessary.
      But as usual ,  you reflect Labor’s ” tax the arse off the investor ” mantra.
      Just as you remain a party hack in Hervey Bay for the Gaylord who has no choice but to back Labor’s disastrous policies.

    • John A Neve says:

      11:29am | 06/11/11

      The Galah (or is that Wayne?),
      I thought I’d addressed your first post quiet clearly, but there you go, I forgot about those party political glasses you wear.

      As to my political affilliation, you know that unlike you, I don’t have any.
      Still ghost writing for Ted are we?

    • The Galah from Hervey Bay says:

      02:16pm | 06/11/11

      John Neve….hmmm , still lack the intestinal fortitude to admit to being a Labor hack hobbled to the Hervey Bay A.L.P.
      As for answering my post - as usual , you side stepped the truth - Labor is a party dedicated to fouling up the economy then introducing more and more taxes in an attempt to refill empty coffers.

    • John A Neve says:

      07:55am | 07/11/11

      The Galah alias Wayne,
      What is it with your side of politics?
      Like AtM you make accusations without proof, what in fact you both do is lie!
      Surprised, no not really, after all “birds of a feather flock together”. Please tell what’s it like to be a cuckoo?

    • S.L says:

      07:02am | 05/11/11

      Laurie the one political commentator I take notice of is you. I couldn’t agree more with your contribution today.
      With what you’ve written today don’t expect an offer of a gig on 2GB/MTR anytime soon!

    • Liberal Lover says:

      07:05am | 05/11/11

      When Tony Abbott reintroduces WORKCHOICES everything will be fixed. Workers will be so poor they wont care about much. Mothers will be dragged away from their sick babies to go to work. WORKCHOICES , the genius of Tony Abbott. WORKCHOICES is coming to a job near you . Be afraid.

    • jf says:

      09:49am | 05/11/11

      “When Tony Abbott reintroduces WORKCHOICES everything will be fixed.”

      Maybe not, but it sure as hell won’t be as fncked as it is now.

      “Workers will be so poor they wont care about much. “

      And your evidence for this would be the fact that industrial action was almost zero under Workchoices and out of control under the Fair Work Act.

      “Mothers will be dragged away from their sick babies to go to work.”

      Really? Workchoices said that? Or are you basing this on Abbott’s paid parental leave plans?

      “WORKCHOICES is coming to a job near you”

      Really? You obviously know something that the whole Federal Opposition doesn’t.

    • Peter says:

      11:07am | 05/11/11

      Is that all youve got? Wow in big letters too .we are all shakin in our boots cause work choices is coming back .There is no doubt that this will be the mantra from the Union loving left but Australians have seen the unravelling of the IR laws to a pre Hawke era and they don’t like what they see.

    • A Dose of Reality says:

      07:07am | 05/11/11

      …. can’t wait for all the right-wing trolls to cast their lines!!!

      “stop the boats” - does that apply to this as well?

    • They're all toxic says:

      08:57am | 05/11/11

      right wing is looking at the world pragmatically.

      left wing is head in the clouds ideology.

      Which group do you expect to thrive when it hits the fan shortly?

      I would suggest it is the left that has destroyed the world.

    • Mattb says:

      10:05am | 05/11/11

      They’re all toxic says: 09:57am | 05/11/11

      “right wing is looking at the world pragmatically.

      left wing is head in the clouds ideology.’”

      Really??, so all those far right religious nut jobs are ‘pragmatic’ thinkers. Well, there you go, ya learn something new everyday. You and I must have ‘slight’
      differences in our definitions of pragmatism…

      “I would suggest it is the left that has destroyed the world”

      I would suggest that your either full of shit or enjoy bleating out hysterical exaggerations…

    • They're all toxic says:

      11:47am | 05/11/11

      Gee Mattb…Who’s full of it? I didn’t make any mention of “far right religious”

      I said “right” and I stand by what I wrote. Have you got anything sensible to say? The left are clouded by their ridiculous ideology…Save everyone mentality. It’s a croc and is playing out in every western country on the planet. Let’s see who can have “left” conviction when it’s every one for themselves.

      “socialism works until the socialists run out of other people’s money”...That’d be now.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      02:11pm | 05/11/11

      @ They’re all toxic:
      “socialism works until the socialists run out of other people’s money”

      “capitalism works until the capitalist west runs out of Chinese people’s money.” There, fixed for you.

    • persephone says:

      03:54pm | 05/11/11

      You know, I genuinely used to believe that the Right based their decision making on evidence and the Left were motivated by mushy ideas about human beings being important and were driven by emotion.

      I used to be a bit apologetic for being a lefty, for that reason.

      But of course, it turns out it’s one of those truisms, like ‘Liberals are better economic managers’ which doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

      The Right - well, at least that represented by Tony Abbott and his merry men and women - are emotionally driven, playing on people’s fears, appealing to their patriotism, and using catchphrases instead of arguments.

      The Left - as represented by Gillard and the Labor party - are driven by evidence based policy, regardless of whether it’s popular with the masses.

      A strange inverted world we live in!

    • John the Zombie says:

      10:02pm | 05/11/11

      persephone evidence based. Lets look at the carbon tax then. The evidence for the carbon tax is computer modeling not actual real data. So how about the pacific solution for Asylum seekers. That worked adn if you think it doesnt mayeb you should get data and see that when full policy was in swing there was only one boat. After been warned, yes persephone labor was warned that if the policy was cancelled then the boats would increase. Did they accept this advice? No they didnt and went about abolishing it.

      Can I point out the double standards of Labor. They are screaming to the roof that QANTAS is sending jobs overseas but here is the big one. Do you know where Australian Defence Force uniforms are made? Well persephone do you? Here is a hint they are not made here in Australia but overseas and why have they done this, same reason as everyone else and that is to save costs. I remember a while back when they even tried to send the Aussie digger Akubra hats to chna to be made. They quickly changed their mind when 99% of Australian complained about it.

      Another failure of Labor is during the GFC. The govt said that they needed to do the stimulus to save us from reccession. Well we were not in reccession and information that has come out now showed that we were never ever threatened with reccession and the reason for this is that China continued to grow in double digit numbers and that is were most of our wealth is coming from.

      Now Gillard wants to adopt Kyanaston policy. This is were Australia will borrow money to lend the IMF which in turn will lend Europe to prop it up to stop its failure. This has shown to be a incorrect and the policy does not work at all. It actually has been proven to be of negative effect and lead to greater failure.

      Can I also point out the blatant racism shown here by both the IMF and Labor. The reason why I say this is because during the Asian fiscal crisis back in the 80’s when labor was in power they never offered the IMF or the Asia economies money to help them out of the reccession they were in. Also the IMF itself has shown itself as been an unfair organisation as when the Asian nations asked why they could not have a member as president of the IMF they were told that it was a risk as they were unable to run good economies and look at it now. Why is it after the SRK saga another European was hired when the Europeans can not look after thier own economies and the Asian nations are rising above them all.

      One question I have for Laurie. We all know Gillard was part of the socialist alliance at uni and wrote some articles for them. Why are they articles not avaiable and can not be found.

    • P Tosh says:

      12:23am | 06/11/11

      Zombie
      “Why are they articles not avaiable and can not be found. “

      Perhaps you have poor research skills.

      You tend to reflect that in your posts, as they tend to be ill informed opinion.

    • Chris L says:

      03:02am | 06/11/11

      “Well we were not in reccession” - John the Zombie, I’d like to know where you get this information from. I’m not calling you a liar (that word is becoming almost as overused as “racist”) it’s just that I don’t think it’s fair to say that the GFC didn’t touch us after so many of our corporations used the GFC as a reason to offload their staff. After all, if CEOs can’t read the economic environment and resist the urge to panic over (what you consider) nothing, then what hope is there for Australian business?

    • John the Zombie says:

      06:26pm | 06/11/11

      P Tosh. If I am so poor in my research answer me this. What happened in Indo during the asian fiscal crisis.

    • mick says:

      07:10am | 05/11/11

      A well balanced argument Laurie.  It is a pity that the media in general have taken to attack the shortcomings of the the Labor side of politics without doing the same for the Liberal Party shortcomings.

      Perhaps you could have added that the mining industry exports 81% of its profits.  This is an extraordinary amount of Australian wealth going into the pockets of overseas investors and one has to wonder who Tony Abbott is serving.

      Labor does have problems.  This is unmistakeable but then the Liberal Party has abandoned average Australians and under Tony Abbott has no clear policies.  Just as you indicated .....  attack, attack, attack.  It is no way to run a country and one hopes that the mainstream media begins to report the news instead of taking sides and making it.

      Well done Punch team.

    • Tiger in town says:

      09:19am | 05/11/11

      “It is a pity that the media in general have taken to attack the shortcomings of the the Labor side of politics without doing the same for the Liberal Party shortcomings.”
      Not the media in general so much as Ltd News the company. Can’t wait till the rest of that trash company goes behind a paywall before it disappears up it’s own arse.
      The public want a fair and balanced account of government, not the outright lies and innuendo that Ltd. News spew for their corporate sponsors and self interest. Australia deserves better.
      Ethics in journalism? Not at Ltd. News.

    • Anne says:

      10:48am | 05/11/11

      attack attack attack it is no way to run a country?
      Last time I looked Abbott was the Leader of the Opposition, not running the country.
      Try blaming Gillard and her Government, not the media. Sorry but that really is a piss poor excuse.

    • Eric The Red says:

      07:15am | 05/11/11

      Thank God for Laurie Oakes, At least someone is prepared to tell it how it is in federal Politicsand not mislead the public as the likes of Alan Jones of talkback radio and his other shock jocks and the daily telegraph do. Laurie is a well respected man. Foney Tony , is this the bloke we want as our PM. God help us if he gets in.  We have short memories, remember when Abbott was in Workplace relations and health. Yep he is just what this country needs, like a hole in the head. “Run for your Lives”

    • jf says:

      09:35am | 05/11/11

      Yes, and “workplace relations” is in great shape now after four years of Labor.

      Oh, and why was Workchoices bad again (apart from the fact that, due to a misleading, deceptive and dishonest campaign by the ALP/Union Movement it lead to Howard’s defeat).

      I keep on asking this and get nothing.

    • Steve Putnam says:

      01:23pm | 05/11/11

      @ jf Workchoices was a disaster and not just for sneaky little Johnny who introduced it after the 2004 election without breathing a word about it beforehand. Productivity hit the wall when workers were were told that things like overtime and penalty rates were no longer a right and collective bargaining was basically outlawed. The Australian dream of owning one’s home was put under siege with banks and lending institutions unwilling to lend money to people on short term workplace contracts. Employers were given the whip hand in dealing with employees, forcing them to work anti-social shifts for no more money or face the sack with all that that portended for Australian family life.
      While the unfair dismissal laws which preceded Workchoices were weighted far too heavily against employers, Workchoices was the product of the pathological hatred of John Howard for organised labour.
      I believe the majority of Australian employers realise that their employees are their most valuable possessions and basically do the right thing by them, but the biggest trouble with Workchoices was that it gave no legal right of redress against those that didn’t. Examples of this were in evidence from day one. Remember the Cowra abattoir workers who tuned up for work the day after Workchoices was brought into law and were told that their weekly take home pay would be $180 lighter.

    • jf says:

      03:58pm | 05/11/11

      Steve Putnam says:
      02:23pm | 05/11/11

      “@ jf Workchoices was a disaster”

      Because…

      “sneaky little Johnny who introduced it after the 2004 election without breathing a word about it beforehand.”

      So in the pre-election campaigning John Howard said that he would not be making any changes to the IR system? Funny, I don’t recall that. That said, I’ll concede that it was handled rather badly.

      “Productivity hit the wall”

      The productivity slow-down during the last decade is correct. However, if Workchoices is to blame then surely it would start to improve immediately following its abolition by the Rudd Government. It hasn’t. Instead it has continued to decline. The only thing that has increased is industrial actions and union activity.

      “The Australian dream of owning one’s home was put under siege with banks and lending institutions unwilling to lend money to people on short term workplace contracts.”

      Again, utterly wrong. Home ownership affordability was impacted by, amongst other things (including Howard’s idiotic first home owner’s grants) by the bank’s being to free with their credit.

      So, please feel free to cite some specific issues with Workchoices rather than supposition, lies and anecdotal stories.

    • Steve Putnam says:

      09:38pm | 05/11/11

      @ jf I don’t know if you’ve ever employed anybody but I suspect not.  As someone who has both in this country and the UK let me assure you, you can’t take awards and conditions away from workers and expect that productivity won’t be affected. Not now not ever.
      Most of my information on the housing market of the time comes through my partners cousin who has had a mortgage brokerage these last twenty years. He is adamant about the very real fears lenders had about short term workplace contracts and their implications for long term loans.
      This view was very much echoed by my tennis partner, a financial planner, in the context of superannuation and the like. What ever short term boost the housing sector got from the first home buyers scheme was only that - short term ( and caused house prices to rise as I think you acknowledge). Anyway my point isn’t to be made about house prices per se, but the ability of young people to get loans and a start on the ladder to financial security, So please no more red herrings.
      As to the “specific issues” you request, I have many apart from the abattoir workers I already mentioned, but suffice to say the office of the employment advocate was overwhelmed with complaints.
      Lastly you de-construct my argument as follows:
      “....Workchoices was a disaster…(because)...‘sneaky little Johnny introduced it after the 2004 election without breathing a word about it beforehand.’
      Anyone reading my comments with even a half open mind can see that I am not arguing this way at all. I don’t know how you think a gross distortion like this serves your cause. It just makes you look dishonest.

    • jf says:

      05:36am | 06/11/11

      Steve Putnam says: 10:38pm | 05/11/11

      “I don’t know if you’ve ever employed anybody but I suspect not.”

      I have and I do.

      “you can’t take awards and conditions away from workers and expect that productivity won’t be affected”

      I tend to agree. Productivity is lower now than it was following Workchoices. Industrial action is greater now than following Workchoices.

      “mortgage brokerage these last twenty years. He is adamant about the very real fears lenders had about short term workplace contracts and their implications for long term loans”

      Again, maybe so. However (a) lending did not decrease across the board following Workchoices and (b) I wasn’t aware that Workchoices forced people to take short term contracts (may cousin’s third cousin’s wife thinks I’m right)

      “I don’t know how you think a gross distortion like this serves your cause”

      Which distortion was that? As I think you will find, Howard acknowledged that the introduction of Workchoices could have been more transparent. However, it is a very bar you set to expect a government to be bound to only introduce policy discussed during an election campaign. Let’s concentrate on holding them to do or not do what the campaign on as a start.

    • Steve Putnam says:

      09:44am | 07/11/11

      @ jf Gross distortions abound in all your postings. Why do you persist in claiming that my argument against Workchoices is based on the way it was introduced and that it was just a bit of tinkering with IR reform? All the conditions under which wages had been negotiated in this country for the last hundred years were cast aside; collective bargaining was affectively outlawed; unions banned.
      The Howard Government tried to argue that Wokchoices would standardise wages and conditions nationwide and foreign companies would be more likely to invest here as a result. The reality was that what foreign companies would have greatly preferred would have been a national workers compensation scheme, but Howard wouldn’t touch that with a barge pole.
      The whole direction of Workchoices was to force people off awards onto individual contracts of varying lengths sometimes as short as twelve months, do you or your cousin’s third cousin’s wife seriously dispute that? It is true that towards the final days of the Howard Government these contracts tended to get longer, but this was due to the writing being on the wall ; that the government was heading for a fall and Workchoices days were numbered.  Moreover people on such contracts had virtually no chance of getting home loans whatever the overall statistics for new loans were.
      You rail against “dishonest” union campaigns, but don’t breathe a word about the $120,000,000 spent on advertising Workchoices from our tax-payer dollars. A campaign which told us nothing about the “reforms” it advertised other than to say that in the opinion of the speaker they were “fairer”.
      In any event the voters had the final say on Workchoices; particularly the voters in the electorate of Benelong.

    • jf says:

      01:35pm | 07/11/11

      Steve Putnam says:10:44am | 07/11/11

      Steve, I don’t believe that Workchoices was perfect but nor is the Fair Work Act. In my opinion, Workchoices was closer to a workable act than what is currently in place.

      As the final say of the voters, I can only refer you to what the voters are currently saying.

    • jf says:

      01:53pm | 07/11/11

      Steve Putnam says:
      10:44am | 07/11/11

      “ Why do you persist in claiming that my argument against Workchoices is based on the way it was introduced and that it was just a bit of tinkering with IR reform?”

      Your comment at the start of this discussion was “Workchoices was a disaster and not just for sneaky little Johnny who introduced”.  So, “Workchoices was a disaster and not just for sneaky little Johnny who introduced”: ergo, whilst you were not suggesting it is the only reason, you certainly suggested it is a reason.

      Thus, I suggested that you were suggesting that the way it was introduced is the only reason that Workchoices, in your opinion, was a disaster but simply not allowing a pretty silly comment to go unchallenged.

      Part of my rebuttal was to address part of your argument. Hardly a distortion. If there is a “distortion” it is yours. You make a comment and get pouty when it is challenged. You defend the comment and then burst into tears when it is in turn justified.

      “You rail against “dishonest” union campaigns, but don’t breathe a word about the $120,000,000 spent on advertising”

      I have to say that I wasn’t aware of it. If that is the case then I would be highly critical of $120 million of tax payer dollars being spent on advertising.

    • Chris_D says:

      07:20am | 05/11/11

      I know this thread will quickly degenerate into partisan tripe, but the fact is Labor is a dogs breakfast of a Government and Tony Abbott is not fit to be Prime Minister.  This leaves the average voter in a quandary, and this is the reason the Greens received so many (protest) votes in the first place. 

      I honestly cannot understand why Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott are the best leaders either party can muster.  It is a sad blight on Australian politics.

    • Giddyup says:

      08:51am | 05/11/11

      Two words: Malcolm Turnbull. The problem with ferals is that they can never be domesticated later. Abbott has revealed himself to be nothing more than an attack dog, with no instinct other than to tear apart what’s in front of him. If they go to the polls with him, the Coalition will lose the unloseable election.

    • Chris L says:

      09:06am | 05/11/11

      I recommend having a look at the Liberal Democratic Party or perhaps (I you can ignore the misleading name) the sex party. I think anyone concerned with the sandpit our parliament has become should start shopping around and voting with their feet. We might scare the two majors into listening and thinking.

    • They're all toxic says:

      09:15am | 05/11/11

      It’s not about the leaders Chris_D, it’s the parties; they’re all toxic.

      If you want to help the environment vote “Anti-population party”

      If you think your kids will need food in 20 years vote “Anti-population party”

      If you want your kids to have a life vote “Anti-population party”

      If you can see Australia’s lifestyle going backwards rapidly vote “Anti-population party”

      If you think neither of these major parties have a clue vote “Anti-population party”

      if you don’t like the idea of more congestion “Anti-population party”

      In the long term population growth is good for no one.

    • Against the Man says:

      09:17am | 05/11/11

      Chris, I’ll tell you how to get governments of any party to do a good job for this country. Change the rules. Yup, if you are the ruling party and your PM and Ministers can get elected for 3 terms in a row, that is when you get to have a nice hefty pension with perks. If you can’t last 3 terms, you get the bare minimum. So I’m guessing whoever is in power Labor or LNP, is going to do their very best to please the people. We wouldn’t have Gillard making screw over deals with the Greens. Sadly if you think TA isn’t fit to be PM then what do you think JG is fit for? Gillard is as hopeless as they come. And since she is the current fake PM making all the official mistakes, the pressure should be on her. When Tony becomes the PM then we’ll focus on him. And if anyone is actually impressed by Gillard then could they send a memo to her party who is encouraging Rudd to take over.

    • mick says:

      09:33am | 05/11/11

      Agree Chris D.  I suggest you look at the issues and go past the rhetoric from both sides.  The real questions are is it good for ordinary Australian taxpayers and whose interests are being served.

      It has been clear to me for some time that the Abbott side of politics is a mouthpiece for the big end of town and that average Australians will suffer badly under a (current) liberal government. 

      I will be voting Independent at the next election and will be directing preferences to Labor as both sides need a clear message being sent.  It is a shame that Labor loses sight of the goal posts when it gets in, but the alternative is not worth considering unless your wage packet is more than half a million a year.  I wish!!

    • They're all toxic says:

      09:50am | 05/11/11

      “Chris L ............I think anyone concerned with the sandpit our parliament has become should start shopping around and voting with their feet.”

      Absolutely. BUT, it’s hard to know what the grubs will do once they get in there. I remember voting for “Family First” and they voted with LNP’s WORKCHOICES”....

      I was gobsmacked.

    • Max, of Rocky says:

      10:28am | 05/11/11

      You beaut

      Bob Katter for PM

      He could not be worse than what we have and possibly more citizen friendly than Abbott.

    • They're all toxic says:

      11:50am | 05/11/11

      I’d go with Bob Katter except he’s pro big Australia.

    • jf says:

      08:25am | 05/11/11

      “The mining tax is a case in point. It is now glaringly obvious that the benefits of the mining boom should be shared around so that the overall economy benefits rather than just a small and privileged section.”

      As they are now, via state royalties. As to a “small and privileged section” are you referring to all those skilled and semi-skilled workers enjoying regular work and high wages? Or perhaps the shareholders (including most Australians via their super funds) who have put their own money at risk for decades and who are finally getting a return. Or are you referring to all of those Australians who weren’t prepared to put more or any of their capital at risk but now want a slice of the action? Oh yes, and we all get a share via state royalties – as we ought.

      “That means he will repeal tax cuts for business, big and small. He will slash proposed infrastructure spending. And he will take back superannuation increases for workers.”

      I don’t believe that he has said any of that. In any case, re. superannuation, don’t go taking money from us in the form of increased tax on our investments and then give it back to use in the form of tax concessions (after the bureaucracy wastes a huge chunk of it) and tell us you’re doing us any favours. Don’t piss on our back and tell us it’s raining.

      “And why? Because he claims the mining companies exploiting Australia’s mineral wealth cannot afford to pay more tax.”

      That’s not what he, or anyone is saying. They are saying that for an investor to risk their capital they expect a return in line with that risk. In a relatively high-risk industry like mining the return must be higher than in, say, banking. Thus, if the returns fall, capital dries up and we all pay as projects shrink reducing jobs and other associated benefits: not to mention royalties and company taxes receipts.

      “Between 2004 and 2010, gross operating profits for Australian mining companies increased by 246%, from $25.4 billion a year to $87.7 billion.”

      Perhaps. But what about the ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty and more years before that. The years when investors risk their money to build to this point.

      “The three mining companies that would pay the bulk of the tax - BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Xstrata - accept it.”

      Because they have cut a deal to their advantage and to the disadvantage of the juniors and smaller mining companies.

      “Feral might be fine in opposition, but the advantages are short-term.”

      Just because Abbott is opposing a tax that you like doesn’t mean he is feral. Surely political journalism in this country hasn’t degenerated to cheap name calling.

      “Abbott knew - or should have known - that Australia’s contribution to the IMF would be in the form of a loan, with no impact on the Budget bottom line. In fact, it will earn interest.”

      Ah, but what will the interest by? Will it be in line with the interest that any sensible investor would expect for such a risky investment or would it be at a lower rate and thus essentially charity.

      “Within hours of Abbott and Hockey advocating their feral version of economic isolationism”

      Once again, I may or may not agree with Abbott on this one – I don’t know the detail yet and, all things being equal, agree that it is something that should be considered. But feral? How so?

    • Zif says:

      12:11pm | 05/11/11

      “As they are now, via state royalties.”
      Sorry, tell me again how this benefits ALL Australians if it is all sucked up by state government? In WA the (liberal) state government gave a billion dollars of those royalties to the Nationals as a bribe to gains office. The Nationals proceeded to spend 250,000 dollars per toilet for singing dunnies in the bush.
      Sorry, tell me again how this benefits ALL Australians?

      Spread the benefits across the entire nation.

      FFS couldn’t the West Australian government have reduced electricity rates for home owners? At least this would have benefited ALL West Australians. 18 million dollars worth of singing toilets indeed.

    • jf says:

      01:46pm | 05/11/11

      Zif says:01:11pm | 05/11/11

      Fair point Zif. And I could accept a change to the current method of collecting revenue however that would require a completed review of the tax system. I expect that citizens of those states would say that the resources belong to the states.

      The mining companies should and do pay for the resources that they mine.

      However, they shouldn’t be penalised for investing capital and building an industry. Particularly when they have had comparatively low returns for many, many years and are now getting rewarded which is what the ALP are proposing.

      As to the singing dunnies, no amount of tax is going to fix government waste. In fact, it may excerbate it. Just imagine the new and creative ways Wayne Swann could come up with to waste money.

    • persephone says:

      04:04pm | 05/11/11

      jf

      far from being penalised for their investments, the proposed mining tax encourages new investment.

      At present, if you start up from scratch, you pay royalties from the second you start digging the stuff out of the ground, even though it might be many, many years of digging stuff out of the ground before you begin to see a return on your investment.

      Under the proposed mining tax, those royalties are refunded, and you don’t start paying anything until not only have you written off your original investment but are making a ‘super’ profit.

      In some cases, this means that mining companies will pay less ‘tax’ then they are at present. And many of them will never pay the ‘super’ tax, whilst having their royalties refunded.

      Which is, of course, why the big mining companies are now supporting the idea.

    • jf says:

      05:15pm | 05/11/11

      persephone says:05:04pm | 05/11/11

      jf

      “In some cases, this means that mining companies will pay less ‘tax’ then they are at present. And many of them will never pay the ‘super’ tax, whilst having their royalties refunded.”

      So under this mining tax the mining companies will pay less tax and yet somehow this less tax means that Australians are sharing more in the mining boom? I’m sorry, can you explain how, if the governments are taking less government revenue from the mining companies that Australians are somehow getting a greater share of the revenues.

      “Which is, of course, why the big mining companies are now supporting the idea.”

      What I think you meant to say is “Which is, of course, why only the big mining companies are now supporting the idea.”

    • Steve Putnam says:

      06:13am | 06/11/11

      When “Twiggy” Forrest started his fine and successful company iron ore was $20 a tonne; it is now $180 a tonne. You can only dig this stuff out of the ground once and all steps should be taken to ensure all Australians get a fair return on their resources.

    • persephone says:

      11:04am | 06/11/11

      jf

      I said ‘in some cases’.

      Your argument was that the mining tax would cut the incentive for investment.

      I’m pointing out that those companies will, in fact, benefit by paying less tax.

      Companies which are well and truly up and running and making ‘super’ profits on their initial investments, will obviously be paying a lot more than they are at present (see Oakes’ article).

    • jf says:

      06:03pm | 06/11/11

      Steve Putnam says: 07:13am | 06/11/11

      “all steps should be taken to ensure all Australians get a fair return on their resources.”

      I agree.

      persephone says: 12:04pm | 06/11/11

      “Your argument was that the mining tax would cut the incentive for investment.”

      Anything that reduces profits will act as in incentive Perse.

      “I’m pointing out that those companies will, in fact, benefit by paying less tax.”

      As per my response above, I’m not suggesting that they should pay less tax. I believe that they should pay for the resource. I don’t believe any company should pay more tax for being successful.

      “Companies which are well and truly up and running and making ‘super’ profits on their initial investments, will obviously be paying a lot more than they are at present (see Oakes’ article).”

      So why are the companies that make the biggest profits supporting this and those that don’t not?

      Furthermore, can you tell me how a “super profit” will be defined?

    • jf says:

      08:24am | 07/11/11

      persephone says:05:04pm | 05/11/11

      “Which is, of course, why the big mining companies are now supporting the idea.”

      Perse, it appears that your comments above may have been gilding the lilly a touch.

      Referring to the Government’s proposed carbon tax and mining super tax, RIO Chairman Jan du Plessis said:

      “There is no doubt that parts of the world look at Australia differently. It saddens me that a country like Australia has found its attractiveness as an investment destination has been negatively (affected) by some of these events.”

    • Fred says:

      08:29am | 05/11/11

      I had you picked for a rusted on Liberal guy Laurie. Good stuff.

      As Bill Shorten said the other day “If the Liberal party were watching Robin Hood they’d be cheering on the Sheriff of Nottingham”.

    • VVS says:

      11:41pm | 05/11/11

      Alan Rickman owns Kevin Costner… nuff said.

    • They're all toxic says:

      08:36am | 05/11/11

      Now that we’ve sold 85% of mining to overseas, there is absolutely no option but to tax the hell out of them. In other words, a desperate action to cover the desperate and dumb previous ones.

      BUT…...Would we trust these clowns with the money generated?

    • thatmosis says:

      08:48am | 05/11/11

      I tried to do a Laurie on Laurie and was censored by the Acting Editor. It now seems that any comment that attacks the person who wrote the article is off limits but its okay for that person to attack who ever they like with impunity. Opinions are a two edged sword and its should be the right of people responding to the article to express their opinion of the writer, without resorting to crude and vulgar language of course and not be censored off the page. Free speech is becoming a thing of the past and this is another example of that taking place. Do what you like Tory but remember we are still out here and we still have an opinion and will get it across one way or the other.

    • Tory Shepherd

      Tory Shepherd says:

      09:37am | 05/11/11

      Yeah yeah, you’ve been censored and democracy is dead.

      Note to all: Please attack the argument, not the author, try to be constructive not vindictive, keep it civil. Thank you!

    • Chris L says:

      02:22pm | 05/11/11

      Bad boy, Thatmosis!

    • Keith Hammersmith says:

      03:59pm | 05/11/11

      I got censored as well, probably because i confused Mal and Lauries name, and referred back to how respected Laurie is/was when it comes to political journalism, and then you read stuff like this from him..

    • Unionist says:

      04:36am | 06/11/11

      thatmosis says:09:48am says “Free speech is becoming a thing of the past”

      Not if you own a news agency… besides you should know by now online forums are not democracies but rather ditatorships

    • Poa says:

      12:23pm | 06/11/11

      Bagging Coalition good…Bagging ALP mates very bad.”.”...check out what Tory allows in abuse against Sophie Mirrabella or conservative posters

    • Martin says:

      01:48pm | 06/11/11

      Yeah, I’ve had quite a few pulled this weekend, must have been a bit too savage on the poor old Labor goons. As you say Poa, left wing vindictiveness is however encouraged.

    • sandra says:

      09:24pm | 06/11/11

      Why is the Author off limits when he is perfectly free to abuse Abbott—what is this blog site now?? We must write what only you think is Ok Tory???/ but Oaks can write anything??? How extraordinary

    • Cec Poole says:

      10:24am | 05/11/11

      The only reason Abbott is Opposition Leader is that there is no-one else who would last 5 minutes in the job. Apart from Turnbull that is, but Malcolm remains persona non grata among his the colleagues. 

      Abbott is fiscally and technically illiterate. Problem is Bishop, Hockey, Robb and Cormann are clueless as well. They are puppets of vested interests like the tobacco and gambling industries…. and cower to the patronage of ‘Aussie battlers’ like Twiggy, Gina, Clive and Jonesy. Heaven help the rest of us!

    • Martin says:

      10:28am | 05/11/11

      The basic assertion of this article is that Abbott shouldn’t do his job and outline the many failings of this government. That is a preposterous suggestion. The other thing that stinks about this article is the use of a specific to generalise. Oaks describes Abbott as feral as a generalisation, and then uses his opposition to the mining tax (a specific) as a justification for this generalisation.

      Abbott’s position is much broader than that, and is highly justified. The government is a completely disorganised rabble. Rumblings within the Labor party of a move on Gillard are both loud and frequent, confirming that Labor knows it is in big trouble and has to get it’s house in order.  Hence, why shouldn’t Abbott be at them day and night, it his job to oppose any government policy that is not good for the country, and it is his job to win government for his party.

      It continues to annoy Labor stooges that Abbott has been so successful. They underestimated him from the start, and now I think it is just envy that drives them to critisise him. Abbott this, Abbott that, whinge, critisise all to no avail. He’s just about to see off another Labor PM, only to be replaced with one that he already cleaned up.

      It is Labor that is feral, from their union cohorts at Qantas, to the factional bullies that keep on knifing 1st term Prime ministers.  Decency has no place in the Labor party, just ask Gillard and Rudd.

    • palone says:

      11:57am | 05/11/11

      Martin, you must never make an erroneous claim and then use that falsehood to assert an opinion.
      I’m not a Labor “stooge”, but when someone has no real argument I suppose something must, in their mind, be manufactured. Fabricated.
      You say that the ‘factional bullies’ knifed Rudd? It’s hard to follow you at times, but I suppose that means that Abbott “knifed” Turnbull, or am I being unfair?
      How you could possibly think that anyone, labor or lib, would ever “envy” the Mad Monk? Are you mad too?
      Nobody who follows politics in this Country would ever underestimate Abbott. His foul mouth, his complete lack of policy, his arrogant bullying of all and sundry, (all bullies are cowards), and his self-serving lies all are well known. No-one underestimates Abbott.
      And Gillard is doing him like a dinner. Slowly.

    • Martin says:

      01:39pm | 05/11/11

      @Palone

      There’s no “erroeous” claim. Palone, I’m quite happy with my argument.

      As for your assertions, correct me if I am wrong , Abbott won a vote in the party room didn’t he?

      What party room vote did Gillard win when assuming the Prime Ministership from Rudd? Are you honestly suggesting the factional bullies didn’t do Rudd over? Come on

      You see this is the problem with Labor people, no straight talk, all spin and BS. “and Gillard is doing him like a dinner, slowly” LMFAO Gillard won’t be there to open the oven door you nong!

      What deluded nonsense Palone, what deluded nonsense.

    • nossy says:

      03:32pm | 05/11/11

      @Martin how did you go with your job hunting this week Marty? Say theres a position at Mascot Airport - “Baggage Handler” formerly $16 and hour now reduced to $8 an hour - think you can handle that fella?  hahaahahah

    • Nick says:

      03:42pm | 05/11/11

      Gillard is doing him like a dinner? You are delusional.!

    • jf says:

      05:52pm | 05/11/11

      nossy says:04:32pm | 05/11/11

      “Baggage Handler” formerly $16 and hour now reduced to $8 an hour - think you can handle that fella?

      Got even a skerrick of evidence that this is going to happen at any Australian airline, Qantas or otherwhise. It’s been a well publicised dispute so it should be easy to provide.

      I’m betting that we won’t be hearing any more from Nossy on this particular topic.

    • nossy says:

      08:09pm | 05/11/11

      @jf you go on these blogs jf day after day sadly defending Abbott but never once have you had anything new to tell us fella - you are an information desert my dear chap - even worse than poor unemployed Martin - if thats possible!  hahah

    • Chris L says:

      03:25am | 06/11/11

      Don’t feel strange, JF. I lean to the left of politics and I find most of Nossy’s posts less imformative, more confrontational, myself. I don’t think much is acheived by “point scoring”. Real debate is hard to find.

    • jf says:

      05:18am | 06/11/11

      nossy says: 09:09pm | 05/11/11

      If ever a comment was made by someone looking in the mirror nossy, this is it.

      Indeed, the irony of this comment in response to my challenge to you is particularly delicious.

    • onlooker says:

      11:10am | 05/11/11

      Laurie I am for the mining tax, I think its good to get a little back, when the mining is finished, and it will end eventually, all we will be left is big holes in the ground.
      Chris_D I agree with you on the leaders of both parties, it really is a shame we don’t have good choices.
      ps I was glad to read Bob Katter never killed that Giraffe, so thank you for that.  Now I can go on listening to the man with the big hat, he makes me smile, and smiles and laughter are something rarely seen in today’s politics

    • Katie says:

      11:22am | 05/11/11

      Can anyone tell me how the government is getting around the constitution in regards to the mining tax?  This will end up in the courts like the Malaysia solution if Twiggy Forrest and Colin Barnett do what they say they are going to do…
      I’m totally confused has the government found the loophole?  What is the governments legal argument that they have the ability to tax the resources Anyone?

      I also agree a ‘modest’ mining tax would be good - if was done with the assistance of the states.

    • persephone says:

      03:59pm | 05/11/11

      Katie

      it doesn’t need to ‘get around the constitution’. It isn’t taxing the minerals, which is the state’s perogative - it is taxing income.

      At present, you might have noticed, the federal government collects income taxes from businesses and individuals, and has done for decades.

      So there’s no need to find a loophole.

    • Katie says:

      04:51pm | 06/11/11

      In which case ‘pers’ I was wrong in calling it a ‘loophole’ but rather it becomes a legal argument in common law. 

      Is the intent of the MRRT to tax the profits, as the government will argue.  Or is the underlying truth of the legislation to seek control over resources, and receive ‘direct’ financial benefit from them.  (ie. a rent or royalty concealed as a tax) as the states may argue.

      I think Barnett flagged another section of the constitution for examination - if the effect of the tax is discrimminatory of one or more states in favor of others, that also would be a breach.

      I wonder if it will go to court.

    • Freeman says:

      11:42am | 05/11/11

      So this money we’re lending to the IMF, do we have it in the bank or are we borrowing it from someone else? is there or is there not risk we will never be repaid?  if it has no impact on the budget I guess it’s a short term loan? (as in less than one year?) am i looking at it all too simplistically?

    • Freeman says:

      12:02pm | 05/11/11

      “oooohhhhh arn’t the opposition so negative!” Coz tony abbott is the very first opposition leader to oppose anything? when in opposition, Labor opposed EVERYTHING just the same. It was Gillard that gloated about her saying to Abbott “bring it on, and oi mean it!”  Now she is on the wrong side of an A$$ Kicking and she wants to whinge about Abbott playing to rough. Suck it up princess.

    • Chris L says:

      02:28pm | 05/11/11

      I couldn’t vote for Beazley either when all he could say was no. You’re right that Abbott isn’t the first. He should have learned from the mistakes of others.

    • Nick says:

      12:16pm | 05/11/11

      The Super profit tax was opposed not because it is a bad idea that Australians should benefit from the resources boom but because of the way it is being handled.The government tried to make themselves out to be anti business and like Robin Hood were going to take from the rich to give to the poor.That agenda has past its used by date as more and more Australians aspire to accumulating wealth for themselves.What was really threatening was the singling out of one industry by the government which is keeping this country afloat .That made them look more like a dictatorship than a n elected government and if raising revenue through a Super Tax is what they wanted then it should of applied to all businesses across the board .

    • Katie says:

      01:35pm | 05/11/11

      I agree with Nick.
      Totally reflects my thoughts on this.  Australians are very skeptical of ‘traditionally socialist’ labor govt policy of wealth redistribution and any increase in taxation.  It just isn’t the majorities values anymore.  Also the unions are totally past thier use-by date, their popularity in the majority has passed.  So why does one of the two major parties in Australia still have it leaders with strong union ties?

      The Labor policy platform is being seen as effecting antiquated socialist-esque philosophy in the eyes of an ever cynical public. 

      KRudd made a monumental mistake in the original selling of the Mining Tax, unveiling a major wealth redistribution policy, as the cornerstone response to a lengthy Henry Review that had many other recommendations - has since made people very aware of the socialist underpinnings of Labor.  The second error for Labor, has been the exposing of the depths of union influence, and connections within the party through the media.  The general public are now acutely aware of union connections and on the whole are suspicious and disgusted.

      In response to Laurie Oakes.  I’m not sure if describing the current Labor as ‘feral’ really cuts it.  I would say the description of ‘unrepresentative’ is far more fitting.  And in the scope of democracy that is a far more damning criticism.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      07:17pm | 05/11/11

      @Katie-“Australians are very skeptical of ‘traditionally socialist’ labor govt policy of wealth redistribution and any increase in taxation.”

      The middle class family welfare recipients seem okay with taking the baby bonus, paid parental leave, first home buyers grants, child care rebates etc etc. Oh sorry I forgot, it’s only Labor middle class wealth redistribution that they have a problem with and not John Howard’s building of the socialist middle class family welfare state…...

    • Katie says:

      05:42pm | 06/11/11

      @ Shane
      Is the Family Benefits, First Home Buyers etc socialist?  Hmm in the way that it is a redistribution of wealth maybe, however it does not have the ‘odour’ of socialism, because it did not have the appearance of trying to equalise society through pulling down the successful to prop up the unsuccessful.

    • Richard says:

      01:09pm | 05/11/11

      Oh, I see now. So when the Greens publicly vilify the “foreign owners” of some mining companies in Australia, and when the TWU casts naked aspersions against the skills of foreign aircraft maintenance workers, that’s not xenophobia, but when Abbott and Hockey warn against the patently absurd policy of throwing more good money after bad in a futile attempt to save Greece from its impending bankruptcy, that is xenophobic. Ah its all so clear to me now.

      Laurie, Greece is insolvent. If the EU and the IMF were able to solve this problem, they would have done so over 18 months ago! Time after time we hear that they’ve had a meeting and they’ve sorted out the sovereign debt crisis and its all roses now. But then we find out a few months later, all they’ve done is kick the can down the road, and now the problem is even worse! Where is your evidence that its different this time? I put it to you that nothing has been solved, and that the only solution to Greece’s sovereign debt crisis is complete default.

      You know its so disingenuous for you to say “Abbott knew - or should have known - that Australia’s contribution to the IMF would be in the form of a loan, with no impact on the Budget bottom line. In fact, it will earn interest”. The last people to loan the Greek government money ALSO thought they were going to get it all back, plus interest, with no impact on the bottom line. Now they find out that they’ll only be getting 50% back at best (but I bet in the end they’ll wind up receiving nothing).

      You are also foolish to think the IMF won’t be using our money to try and prop up the teetering finances of Europe’s stricken debt profligates club. Of course that’s what they’re using it for, why else would they be asking for it at a summit in Cannes about how to deal with the European debt crisis?

      Its just so clear to me what the actual situation is here Laurie, and I’m astounded that you would so wilfully ignore plain reality in favour of convenient ideology in writing this piece. Just for once Laurie, I would like to read an article by you on any other topic other than how Tony Abbott is the root of all evil. After the last half dozen or so in a row, its really getting quite tiresome.

    • mick says:

      07:41pm | 05/11/11

      A bit tough Richard.  Give Laurie Oaks a go.  I mean no other journalist in the country says anything about Abbott.

      I’m not sure that I agree that ‘loaning’ the IMF money is too bright.  I would prefer Australia to buy the Parthenon or something similar to take equity.  This is a sound banking principle and a way of ensuring that you don’t do you dough.

      And by the way Bob Brown was not objecting to “foreign ownership”.  He was objecting to these offshore owners who rip 81% of profits out of the nation and then run an expensive advertising campaign when the government wants a bit more money left on the table for Australians. 

      Lets not bend the truth too much.

    • Peter says:

      10:20pm | 05/11/11

      Anyone who knows anything about Laurie Oakes’ journalism over the past four decades knows that he’s not driven by “convenient ideology” in any sense. Those cheap pot shots tarnish the arguments you’re bringing to the table.

    • Richard says:

      10:25am | 06/11/11

      Utter rubbish mick and Peter. Laurie Oakes is a Labor man through and through, even right from the early days when he employed young Kevin Rudd as his house cleaner. And you can’t be serious about Abbott not receiving negative coverage: I’ve never seen an article praising Abbott written by a journalist! He is subjected to negativity around the clock by the press pack.

      By the way, mick, you’re wrong about Bob Brown. Objecting to the fact that some multi-national mining companies mining mining operations all around the world also have shareholders from multiple nations all around the world is highly xenophobic. Profits aren’t “ripped out of the nation”, they are created, with hard work, organisation, intelligence, imagination, co-operation, equipment, capital, and patience.

      It is highly immoral for ANYONE, even a government, to try and steal away the fruits of honest people’s labour and investments (whether they be Australian or foreign) over and above the agreed rate of tax that everyone has to pay. To single out the mining industry for extra taxation above the rate that everyone pays is a dog act based on loony ideology and naked statist greed.

      And I might add, a stupid act as well, seeing as, in my opinion, the great resource boom has now peaked out, and is starting to decline. Iron ore prices are already slumped by 30% since August, China is coming off the boil, and there aren’t going to be any “super profits” for the government to pilfer any more after all. so HA.

    • the humble bloke says:

      02:11pm | 05/11/11

      Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey are performing well and well beyond expectations.
      They are doing their bits to help Labor win the next federal election in Sept/Oct 2013. Australia thanks them for their humble contributions!

    • iansand says:

      06:28pm | 05/11/11

      Your expectations must have been low.

    • the.humble.bloke@gmail.com says:

      02:22pm | 05/11/11

      Following the successes of 2011,  the future of cats,catteries and feral life looks bright, positive and optimistic.
      One is sick of being attacked by magpies in this time period.

    • dobbo says:

      03:43pm | 05/11/11

      Makes a nice change for someone to attack Abbott. Good to see him getting a bit of his own medicine elsewhere from the PM & Co. Just remember he who lives by the sword dies by the sword. Wonder when the Libs are going to put this feral Mr Abbitt down as his popularity continues to head south.

      Anyway maybe he’ll disappear up the bum hole of his own negativity. He’s certainly looking increasingly burnt out as he drowns in his own bile on a daily basis without offering a single creative thought about Australia’s future…looking more like an undertaker than one hoping to embark on the great undertaking of running a country.

    • splash the cash says:

      08:48pm | 05/11/11

      Hey dobbo,
      You Talk about drowning in your own bile.
                  How do you like this one then For Top of the List.
                  There will be no carbon tax under any govt. i lead
        Sound familiar buddy, because when the time comes it sure wont be forgotten.
                  Try and make that one dissappear up a bum hole.

    • splash the cash says:

      03:53pm | 06/11/11

      Hey davi ,
      Tottally Irrelevent.
      so what is your point.
      Abbott did not lntroduce anything to the electorate, prior to an election and then lie about it.
                              im afraid the no.1 hit is still.
                  There will be no carbon tax under the govt. i lead.
                            P.S there is also another one.
      I will not send refugees to any country that is not a sIgnatry to the U.N.
      There is alot more , if you want i can trickle feed them to ya.buddy

    • St. Michael says:

      03:44pm | 05/11/11

      “Abbott knew - or should have known - that Australia’s contribution to the IMF would be in the form of a loan, with no impact on the Budget bottom line. In fact, it will earn interest.”

      *Giggle* And in the present day of entire nations defaulting on their national debt, i.e. their loans, how would Australia propose to conduct a credit reference or get the Australian people’s money back if, as with Greece, it winds up in a big old hole somewhere north of the Mediterranean?

    • jg says:

      08:34pm | 05/11/11

      Rudd , complete failure.

      Gillard, even worse.

      And Laurie writes about what?

      Only one way to settle this obviously, take it to an election.

    • Davi says:

      01:56am | 06/11/11

      You have no respect for democracy jg, by constantly calling for an early election cause you don’t like the result

    • Against the Man says:

      05:50am | 06/11/11

      As someone said to me yesterday, it would be interesting if he could tell us what Gillard is doing right rather than what Abbott is doing wrong. But that would not sit well withe the ALP minority would it?

    • Democracy, you're in it says:

      06:42am | 06/11/11

      Yep. On its due date. In 2013.

    • jg says:

      08:52pm | 06/11/11

      Oh I can wait until 2013, like Keating doing Hewson slowly the ALP will be destroyed and will undoubtedly wiped out at the next election.  This I believe is democracy.

      In fact, the ALP could be reduced to just a bit more than a minor party, as even the true believers are desrting and either going to the Greens or, even worse, the tories. Ah, democracy, a funny beast hey?

      Old stagers with vision and intent like hawke and Keating must be embarrassed and frankly, rightly enraged to be associated with the latest offering of Rudd and Gillard.

      Suck it up boys. The ALP is toast. They are gone. Doesn’t matter when. Now, a month, a year. And it will be another ten years in the wilderness. Guess this is democracy hey?

    • TimB says:

      10:20am | 06/11/11

      Perfect example of anti-Abbott stupidity.

      If you want to put a price on Carbon. IF. Nowhere in that sentence does he actually say he supports a carbon tax in and of itself.


      Of course if you DON’T want to put a price on carbon, then opposing the carbon tax is entirely consistent. But that’s lost on you isn’t it?

    • Andrew says:

      05:19am | 06/11/11

      Hypocrisy is a funny thing….
      Why is there no talk of a super loss rebate for the mining industry?
      That is where the miners are losing money and staff don’t get paid and all tax payers pay for their losses over and above the norm???

      Or do you just want to share in the good times????

      Hypocrites!

    • persephone says:

      11:07am | 06/11/11

      Which is why the proposal sees the Federal government refunding royalties.

      At present, mines pay these whether they’re making a profit or not.

      The proposed tax only kicks in when a mining company is not only making a return on its investment, but is doing even better than that.

      So the tax will help struggling miners.

    • TimB says:

      12:29pm | 06/11/11

      “The proposed tax only kicks in when a mining company is not only making a return on its investment, but is doing even better than that.

      So the tax will help struggling miners. “

      You mean it will be subsidising inefficiency at the expense of better run mining operations Perse.

      Genius.

      Leave it to the ALP to come up with an ass-backwards policy to punish the productive and protect those who aren’t.

    • persephone says:

      01:50pm | 06/11/11

      TimB

      it’s not ‘inefficient’ to invest money to make a long term return; it’s a basic element of our system.

    • Richard says:

      05:20pm | 06/11/11

      TimB’s got a good point. The ALP policy in effect inhibits the most efficient and profitable mining enterprises more than their inefficient competitors. What will ultimately happen is: Chinese GSE’s will buy out all the mines in Australia at depressed prices, and then intentionally run the mines at a loss so they don’t have to pay the stupid profits tax, and they will be able to supply their manufacturing operations in China with cheap resources. Our resources. Its win-win for them.

      But the real losers, ultimately, under the ALP’s stupid profits tax will be US, the Australian people. I just wish all these blithe left-wing ideologues like persephone actually had the capacity for a bit of deep thought, then they’d be able to see how retarded the policies they support really are.

    • rockoyster says:

      06:05am | 06/11/11

      Can’t wait for Abbott to announce he will rescind the plans to hold the G20 summit in Australia in 2014.

    • Poa says:

      08:40am | 06/11/11

      More ALP lies. How many times has the opposition voted with the government.
      Heaps.
      Perhaps you should find out before repeating Hawker Britten line about Tony Abbot opposing everything.
      Just not the stupid policies.  You were behind pink batts, ber, computers in schools and the Gillard/Rudd boat people policies werent you Laurie?

    • mick says:

      10:28am | 06/11/11

      It is plain to see in the parliament.  Tony Abbott does oppose everything unless he puts a proposal forward.  Come on liberal party stooges, stop playing with the facts.

      Mining tax - opposed.  Will be given back and Australians asked to pay.

      Pokies protections for addicts - canned.  Do not want to take any money out of the pockets of ‘poor’ pubs and clubs….which can run a prime time TV campaign.

      NBN - canned.  Lets leave Australia in the third world.  Even Fiji has fast broadband.

      Carbon Tax - repealed.  Ok, so there is some merit in how this is being introduced.  No argument there.  But then lets pollute the atmosphere and then turn around in 100 years time and look to blame dead politicians for not having made a start.

      Never an intelligent debate from the liberal party plants.  Just Abbott clones .... attack, attack, attack.  The sort of intelligent government which sent Greece broke.  Pity the Punch does not weed out the bloggers who have been let loose on this site to close down discussion and attack anyone who points out the Abbott led party for who it really represents…..not ordinary, honest hard working Australians.

    • TimB says:

      12:54pm | 06/11/11

      ALlight Mick, so in your world “Everything” = Mining Tax, Pokies , NBN and Carbon tax.

      Mining Tax isn’t even in the HoR yet. Neither is the pokie legislation. Carbon Tax is still to be passed by senate. NBN is about the only thing there has been movement on.

      So if this is “everything” in the world according to Mick, then what the hell has the ALP been doing for the last year or so? Testing the NBN in a few spots? Is that it?

      Surely even Mick would agree that this simply isn’t good enough. The government should have done a lot more in the given time. Right Mick?

      Or maybe, just maybe, there has been a ton of other stuff that has gone through parliament that Mick hasn’t listed. Stuff that wasn’t opposed by the LNP. But that would require ALP stooge Mick to stop playing with facts himself and engage in an intelligent debate. Something that seems beyond him at the moment.

    • splash the cash says:

      04:05pm | 06/11/11

      Hey mick,
      why should anyone agree on Shit policies and also say to the People prior to an election,        that there will be no carbon tax under the govt i lead.
                  Credibility is Started and Finished from there buddy.

    • X Labor Voter says:

      08:51am | 06/11/11

      Mr. Rabbit should stay in his burrow for one day soon he will trip over his vile tongue - and watch for his nose to get a lot longer.  Can’t wait!

    • splash the cash says:

      04:11pm | 06/11/11

      Hey labor x,
      i think you made a mistake, 
      your comment sums up perfectly the present govt.

    • palone says:

      11:24am | 06/11/11

      It seems that many here, and I must say predominately the Lib brigade, have the sensible idea of attacking the problem of global over-population. I pondered the possible solutions and honestly believe I may just have found the solution. Try this….
      We send the Mad Monk to Rome to grovel to his real boss, the Earthly incarnation of St. Peter, the patron saint of liars, to issue a Papal decree saying, “Cease and desist!”
      In the space of twenty holy minutes the world’s population would start to decrease. Intending fathers everywhere would make appointments to have their you-know-whats you-know-whatted. Jubilation in the streets of Rome, St. Peter overlooking it all, the pill sold out in a month, and child-care centres world-wide taking legal action against El Poppa, who can’t be a Poppa, or so we’re told.
      Abbott becomes a Papal Knight, and retires to become the Finance Adviser to Greece, and St Peter who supposedly said, “I’ve never met a bloke called Jesus”, (as in), “If you want to put a price on Carbon, why not do it with a simple tax?”, rings the Pope and tells him to parry the kiddy-care mob with, “Tell ‘em it was an Act of God. That works!”
      Over to you, guys.
      Oh, one other thing. I dreamed of Bobby Darin singing “Multiplication!’ last night, and the line, ..“pretty soon you’ve got a room full of Rabbits..” kept repeating. Scary, Eh?

    • TimB says:

      12:45pm | 06/11/11

      You know Palone, I confess that nowhere in your babbling fantasy could I identify anything resembling a coherent point. I would suggest cutting back on your medication.

      On that topic, I assume said medication was also responsible for your declaration of a couple of weeks ago that there was going to be a ‘big announcement’ that was going to adversely affect Howard, Abbott, and generally cause the LNP to have a really bad day. What ever happened to that? Were you full of hot air?

      Just in case your memory needs refreshing:

      palone says:11:58pm | 21/10/11

      “Next week there is to be an announcement that will knock your Conservative socks off. It is to be the undoing of the Liberal Party, and the much lower level criticism of the ALP. Oh yes, the Nats don’t get off scot free, either.
      Abbott, gone. Howard’s rep, gone. Gosh, I love this. “

      Any light you want to shed on your fantasies?

    • palone says:

      07:12pm | 06/11/11

      Tim B. Sorry, I was a bit premature with my statement, but stay tuned, it is coming.
      If you couldn’t identify the laugh I had from you Abbotteers shouting for population control whilst the failed priest you bow to screams, “Shut up about birth control, my real boss will have a fit”, just shows how dense you are and how little you understand about your Rabid Rabbit. It was the same with the Feral Ferret who got turfed out by his own Party locally and nationally. You don’t know the first thing about those to whom you kneel.
      But Hey, whatever floats your boat.
      Your stupid line in the original post said that heaps of stuff had gone through with LNP agreement, but you continually state that the ALP are wrong, wrong. Surely the Rabbit wouldn’t agree to bad legislation going through, would he.
      I don’t take medication. I vote Labor.

      Rabbit

    • Andrew says:

      09:28pm | 06/11/11

      FFS rabbit go see a doctor and start taking the medication will you, before you do something even stupider then voting labor.

    • cynic says:

      06:38pm | 07/11/11

      Lozza clealry wants to be seen as having some balance by attacking abbott. Fails to deal with that inconvient fact that the states control minerals under the national constitution NOT a federal government. They get the gas & oil off shore in return. Also forgets to mention this tax kills small asipring junior miners & kills competition in favour of 3 BIG miners who framed the tax. Lozza, if this tax applies to miners for their major profits, what about banks for their massive profits. Last time i recalled, banks do not build mega resource projects that generate income for year after year and thousands of jobs, they just gouge money out us poor punters. Your argument is unusually for you, and quite flawed? As for more money, just increase ocmpany tax for miners and you get the cash. What a joke this new tax is and those that defend it are really out of their depth.

    • Jay says:

      12:46pm | 08/11/11

      I am a conservative voter and I agree with mining tax. I oppose what this num nut Govt intends to do with it. Paying for the 15% tax on income earners who earn less than 37K has to be one of the most ridiculous ideas I have heard. The $500.00 is just a gift to the Super funds. Why not use the funds to eliminate the taxes that the GST was meant to eliminate? We are paying a tax on a tax on tax. Typical Labor. Either way enjoy it because when the next election comes around Labor will be decimated and Abbott will spend the next six years trying to unravel the damage Labor and the Socialist Greens will have done to the Australian economy. Whether all the lost jobs can be returned is another issue.

    • John Adams says:

      01:55pm | 09/11/11

      I hold shares in BHP, Rio and Fortescue. I get very good dividends from the first 2 and I support a tax on mining expressed as a sovereign wealth fund a la Norway.

      However, given the current economic climate and its impact on spending, I also support a mining tax if it means simply tipping cash onto the heads of families trying to survive on sub-40k a year and some alleviation of small business tax .

      Anyone who is not a shareholder in these hugely profitable mining companies should stay out of this debate or put their money where their mouths are. If you hold no shares you have nothing to lose and your poorer fellow citizens have something to gain.  Why complain?

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

tory_maguire

"If there was no Schapelle Corby there, in a Balinese prison, we'd still be doing it."...

tory_maguire

Bob Carr says releasing Indo kids convicted of people smuggling has nothing to do with Corby...

Anthony Sharwood

Off to @SkyNewsAust to explain on #sportsline why NSW will beat Qld. One reason is we're much less sooky about life. The other is...

ToryShepherd

RT @AustProtParty: Depressed Leftie @ToryShepherd laments Aussie anti-immigration sentiment, says we're haters & intolerant redneck... http://t.co/DLssoRYP

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Who murdered the Arts degree?

Who murdered the Arts degree?

Have we murdered the liberal arts education? That was the final question on Monday night’s Q&A…

Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself

Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself

Hansonism’s back – and we’re not just talking about Pauline appearing as a sometime…

Wilkie is poking around on the wrong gambling issue

Wilkie is poking around on the wrong gambling issue

Andrew Wilkie has okayed a lame version of the government’s pokies legislation, which he yesterday…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

242 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter