Julia Gillard today extracted herself from the sucking political quagmire of the past two months with a package of flood recovery money which appeals to the heart as well as the exchequer.
Gillard was bogged down in the response to the three-state inundation while just about every other public figure associated with it had their standings enhanced.
She was always seen by critics as a superfluous figure distracting from that nice Anna Bligh, or annoying flood victims with intrusions. Her clothing, hair-do and even her emotional commitment were savaged.
When a politician’s rating with the voters is collapsing, there are those keen to add even the most superficial rocks to the avalanche.
It’s now the Federal Government’s time to take the lead on the floods, and the Prime Minister did so with more confidence than might have been expected. She had to. Gillard had established herself as good as rescuing her Government and her job; now she had to show voters she could do good for them as well.
She invoked the most conservative of economic slogans when she released her flood funding package:“Pay as you go.”
It’s the antithesis of “do now, pay later,” the slogan of economists pining for the days of regular budget deficits. And of many leftists, of whom Gillard is supposed to be one.
She found some two-thirds of the money she wanted through an over-due spring cleaning of carbon reduction schemes which were more about creating the illusion of action on climate change than actually doing much.
The stalled $430 million cash-for-clunkers program, for example, was also related to helping local car makers, possibly more so than to reducing pollution levels.
Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd, who as Prime Minister pushed the creation of such programs as the Carbon Capture and Storage Flagships, and the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute, might not be happy.
Gillard argues essentially that these schemes were merely window dressing and were not much use without a price on carbon, which is now her uncluttered goal.
The Greens also might be less than thrilled, but the Opposition won’t be upset by the demise of these schemes.
Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s target is the 0.5 per cent levy on taxable incomes. He argues it is unnecessary while there are other areas of Government spending which could be cut.
However, there is a long and solid history of imposing levies for important one-off spending, many of them appearing under Coalition governments, one of them proposed by Mr Abbott.
During the election he argued for a special tax on big business over two or three years to pay for generous parental leave provisions. It will be difficult for him to argue against the effectiveness of a levy of a shorter duration for a more urgent economic and social issue.
Further, Abbott could have trouble convincing House of Representatives cross-benchers that on top of everything else the National Broadband Network has to be dumped immediately to get recovery money.
Facebook Recommendations
Read all about it
Punch live
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
RT @popculturechris: Meanwhile, Gotye holds no.1 for a sixth massive week in the US - "that" song has now sold over 4 million copies there.
I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf”
Recent posts
The latest and greatest
Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge
When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …
ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?
Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…
Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref
We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…
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
A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more
Most commented