Campaign countdown: it’s a confidence game

persephone says:

09:23am | 23/06/10

The ALP can’t help themselves, Justin.

Emerson meant to talk about a 1953 Corvette, but being the forward thinking ALP type he is, was unable to project his mind that far back into the past.

The ALP is always a couple of years ahead in their thinking.

julie says:

09:40am | 23/06/10

ALP are quite readily and repeatedly happy to rehash the past, whining about what the others did or didnt do.

Ben in Canberra says:

09:57am | 23/06/10

@persephone…... the gift that keeps on giving! Socialism was forward thinking in the fifties pers; welcome to half a century later.

persephone says:

10:09am | 23/06/10

Er, Ben, careful, egg on face…

The 1953 Corvette reference arose out of a Liberal MP’s statement.

He was the one back in the past, Emerson was pointing out how old fashioned his thinking was.

Ben in Canberra says:

10:27am | 23/06/10

Still giving Pers…. excellent! In all honesty though, and I’m genuinely serious; do you even consider the alternate views of the other side of the house? Surely you cannot hand on heart say that Rudd and his govt have been a success? And what of public opinion? Surely a clearly intelligent political watcher such as yourself must conceded that this govt is in a large part about style over substance. The multiple failures, the litany of govt mismanaged programs, the clearly political writ against Japan in the ICJ? As a Labor supporter surely you must look at Rudd sometimes and wonder, “Geez, where did all that drive and vision go?” I’m clearly on the conservative side of politics, however I concede that they don’t always get it right. But what I do know is that in 11 years of Howard’s coalition, this nation went ahead in leaps and abounds in its international standing as a middle power and as an economic leader in the region. Where do you think we are now if you were to compare Howard and Rudd?

brendan says:

02:37pm | 23/06/10

Pers,
So the car is old fashioned? Still classic that lots of people think is desirable. Many even pay large sums to collect this car!  Old need not be outdated and thrown away just for changes sake!

Luke says:

05:19pm | 23/06/10

If the ALP are such forward thinkers, why do they keep harping on about the Previous Government?

Doh says:

10:32am | 23/06/10

@nosthow

Some good points, although if I was Abbott, I would be holding my policy cards close to my chest, lest they be bastardised by the government (remember the me too campaign??)

nosthow says:

01:08pm | 23/06/10

@doh - Yes I do remeber that campaign doh - good advice for Abbott from you.

WayneT says:

04:41pm | 23/06/10

If memory serves, Rudd was a bit of hatchet man in the Queensland Government, just ask all the public servants he made jobless.  He still made PM.  Obviously being a hatchet man doesn’t preclude you from the top job!

Steve says:

08:39pm | 23/06/10

@Ben in Canberra How could the howard years be so good? Built nothing and deregulated everything pushed the nation debt out of reach for-ever. It is that time once more…. The party political machine at work and it applies to both sides. The local member may well not be a local member at all just flown in for the day as it were.. Your next up!! This is a safe seat there you go!!! Politics of fear are not new George W had it for breakfast there’s a sleeper cell here, there a sleeper cell their.. Weapons of mass confusion!! Seem to me to be very still these days. Political history will show us that ever time there is some big moves or ideas in Australia the party machines get thrown into action and no different this time either. Chifley big idea link 16 dams with seven power stations through 145km of tunnels Snowy Mountain scheme. Menzies said it would be the biggest expensive white elephant Australia would have!! The machine went to work and boycotted the schemes inauguration. Employed over 100,000 people then Menzies lived off it for years and years. Fear politics again! Whitlam committing to a universal health insurance scheme for those who needed it and those who didn’t, but understood what if offered for those worse off. Fraser and Howard set about dismantling it as soon has possible and to this day the machine still continues after all the platitudes of promise to keep it. The reforms of the Hawke/Keating years- floating the currency, overhauling tariffs, liberalising the financial system, managing industrial relations through the Accord and enterprise bargaining – were massive economic changes that transformed our economy. Medicare was safe once more for a while. Howard must have thanked them everyday for his good fortune and the machine that played one of the most racists slights of hand in Australian politics powered by Hanson. Claims by Howard and treasurer Peter Costello that their economic management skills were superior are misleading. Howard and Costello did a really good job of educating the Australian public; at a cost also about $3mil per week to think that the kinds of things they’ve pushed through had been responsible for the boom. They’ve argued that the surpluses they’ve presided over generated the boom. They’ve argued that paying down Australia’s public debt is very important for the boom. But the budget surplus is a consequence of a strong economy, not the cause of it- all the reforms of their predecessors. What we were left with due to deregulation was huge national debt; debt soared from a mere $700 billion in 1997 up to $3.2 trillion by the close of their term. An increase of 387%.  Interestingly Labor’s stimulus package comes in at about 1% of the total. Deregulation brought growth all right. They may well brag that it left office with zero debt - zero government debt that is - as the upshot of policy was to lump it onto the consumer. As for substance and policy from sound byte Tony I think they would be of no use there is little to show from his own record being it in political life or public that would indicate anything other. The party machine seems to govern, critical of any plan that will forward the benefits of all. Yet for the past decade in this climate of unabated wealth the captains of egonomic genius have very little to show if anything of substance at all. So again were at the same place in history… yes I’m listening to the machine and whoever they place up front but no substance yet.!! A record of filling the bath tub for ten years to only pull out the plug at the end and wonder where did it all go? No building no policy and still no substance!!!!! The 1953 Corvette picture was a reference to were the oppositions thinking is back in the 50’s

Andrew says:

11:23am | 23/06/10

You know what Richo says, “If your leadership depends on the support of your nearest rival, watch out!”

Truth is I don’t think Gillard wants to be leader. At least not yet. She will either roll Rudd very close to the election (say 6-8 weeks) and run on a new broom and look I’m a woman campaign or she will wait till after the election, if they scrape through, she rolls him within 6 months if not he resigns immediately anyway. The risk in waiting is that a few marginal MP’s might see rolling rudd as the only way to save their skin.

Oh what fun this will be to watch.

BTW, I wonder what the government will do when the $38million for mining ads runs out. Top up?

Greg says:

02:07pm | 23/06/10

And just look at Julia with that beguiling look of if you have one of those Tony, I’ll be on your lap quicker than we can say Kevohlemon!

Roja says:

10:59pm | 23/06/10

Ah Andrew, you really have your finger on the pulse again.

the phones tapped says:

11:11am | 23/06/10

They are so well rehearsed,coached on a few dull points,Emerson is garden variety in drone and verse they all say the same thing without answering question if you want a daily dose of kevs speech and script writers just read pererphones posts,this dribble is pr and spin that comes straight from rudds media and spin department,these are paid comments from the machine,so obvious it reeks,a filthy breed labor

Doh says:

11:13am | 23/06/10

@Anjuli - I agree wholeheartedly.  His arrogant treatment of Jessica Brown was a clear insight to his lack of character.

Frank Zumbo’s article today gives a little more insight to this little man.

Bruce says:

12:39pm | 23/06/10

The moment I see “rabbit on” craig emerson, I turn off the TV / radio station. He just does not overtalk the opposition with his repetitious mantra’s he even overtalks his own supporters. Boring little man !!

Andrew says:

12:19pm | 23/06/10

Rudd took a $20+ billion dollar surplus and turned it into a deficit which costs us $110 milion PER DAY in interest. Oh, that’s fine economic management!

BTW try to remember Howard not only repaid $96b worth of Keating debt he also saw interest rates lowered, rode the dot com crash and the Asian economic crisis. All without try to rape our most competitive industry in the hope of balancing his budget.

Rudd is a hoax. History has already started to judge him very poorly.

Luke says:

12:36pm | 23/06/10

A post that’s not worthy of a response, but .... sigh…

The Coalition government led by Howard/Costello presided over an economy that was good compared with other countries, and part of it was through an innate conservative streak to build up surpluses for future governments to ransack.  Howard/Costello did not produce mediocrity at all under any measure of economic management apart from possibly productivity, where they have the ALP government beaten.

Low interest rates are because of the surplus budgets in part.  It means that there is more monetary supply as the Government is not lending from banks.  Future budgets because of the ALP splurge will have to repay interest.

ALP policy on productivity - a laudable one before the last election - was thrown out the window when a chance came to shovel money (saved by a prudent previous government for just such a time) at the electorate.  Free money in the mail!  What a great PM!  And duly wasted by the electorate on big screen imported televisions.  Kept retailers in business for a short term, but won’t help us long term unless we have to replace those 3d glasses.

If the ALP had gone with job ready but tested and analysed productive measures to stimulate the economy there would have been less wastage, brilliant future economic benefit for all, and an immediate upgrade in critical infrastructure.  My $900 cheque (plus the others) could have gone to fixing the rail signalling in my area, or duplicating a disaster prone one way track.  Or fixing railway crossings to make them underground, or building a freeway tunnel.  These would have produced economic benefits for generations to come.

Plenty of good measures could have been taken, but the BER was of questionable long term benefit (decision made on high in cookie cutter fashion not by school communities that are by nature great at making scarce funds stretch), and the insulation debacle was botched so badly it claimed lives.  But I guess it’s OK to sacrifice a few lives so unemployment keeps around the 5 mark.

Our economy is globally strong because the mining sector is going gangbusters, and the shovelling of money was able to be done without putting ourselves too much on overdraft requiring copious future interest payments.  And thanks to good regulation on banks.  Thanks to Howard/Costello.

For the ALP to gain the confidence of the economics going forward they need to prepare us for future bad times.  Europe is not out of the woods yet.  This means saying NO on occasions to special interest groups, and getting back to a budget that allows the nation to live within its means.  Not within a few years by smugly ditching the ETS that would be brought back if they got in.

Liberal has some hard work isolating cuts, and they won’t be popular, but sometimes good policy isn’t.  Sometimes good policy is just about living within your means.

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

12:46pm | 23/06/10

glorfindel :  On Howard/Costello’s watch the economy was in excellent shape which they maintained with appropriate policy .  The $96 Billlion Keating Labor debt was paid off and the budgets produced a surplus from then on.  As a result , the Australian economy remained strong and functioned well under the stewardship of then Treasurer , Peter Costello , who warned Labor of ” the Coming Global Financial Tsunami ” .  His warning was sounded as early as October 2006 , prior to the 2007 election , and derided by the then Labor Opposition led by Rudd .  When Labor took office , they inherited a strong healthy economy and a budget with a sizeable surplus. Those are the vital factors which saved Australia from any effects of the G.F.C. .
Contrary to your questionable claim , John Howard maintained a booming economy and handed it to Labor in that condition.
To say that Rudd produced excellence is a joke , so is the claim of a downturn in Australia because John Howard gave it to Rudd in first class running order.
The only thing produced by this Rudd Labor excuse for a govt. is broken promises , backflips , bungled programs , one of which resulted in lossof life . Currently we have the R.S.P.T. fiasco which has the potential to halt investment , exploration , expansion and destroy potential jobs.  The N.S.W. by-election result contains a message for Labor federally , -  don’t mess with the people.

Greg says:

02:17pm | 23/06/10

And there’ll be no glory in finding el plenty of debt has been accrued in supposedly well managing the economy and all the other matters that have gone nowhere or backwards.
Some leadership we have seen from the Gang led by the headmaster.

He is just spruiking on how part of the fundamental health reform will see people get free treatment in a private hospital if they have not been treated by a certain time at a public hospital!
Does he have any idea of the logistics in that?
What a joke!

Randal says:

04:53pm | 23/06/10

@glorfindel if you class the disastrous, wasteful and deadly stimulus spending on insulation, overpriced school buildings, failed green loans etc.. etc… as an example of excellence in your Labour, then I will take Howard’s stable and measured “mediocrity” as you call it any day…

BER says:

02:35pm | 23/06/10

Not gunna happen Daniel,Rudd would not like her for doing that and would destroy her by selling her out in media tabloids and leaks,beware the wounded Rudd,we all know his temper and ego combined of course with that underlying rage,No she will not get the job because she doesn’t deserve it and is more incompetent than Ruddster

Nigel Catchlove says:

02:05pm | 23/06/10

How apt that you should refer to a British political party - the Tories and an American car - the Corvette when economic stimulus to the same per capita level as Australia was used in those countries to little effect.  The major difference of course was the level of debt that those two countries already carried compared to Australia where the debt from Labor’s profligacy had already been extinguished by sound fiscal management by the Liberals.

Freeman says:

04:48pm | 23/06/10

True blue,
congrats on making a sensible argument in favour of Labor’s wild expenditure. you do make some valid points but your assumption that bloggers who critcise labors actions know nothing is wrong. the other side to your argument would be that, it’s very easy to keep your economy running for the short term on borrowed money. but now, from where we are it could be decades before that debts paid off. returning to budget surplus only means that we can start to pay that debt back. it is highly probable that we will encounter another recession or a double dip of the current recession while we are still well in debt. what does that mean? it means there can be no finacial stimulus second time round. it also means that there will be minimal expenditure on infrastructure during our many years getting back into the black. Yes, it’s easy to be critical in hindsight & everyone was panicking at the time.
but there was little finacial control over the stimulus. the money was largely wasted and could have been more directly delivered to the industries that needed it instead of handing cash out in every direction. perhaps if it were controlled more responsibly we could have achieved a similar result with much less expenditure. you also fail to credit the mining sector for continuing to deliver heaps of cash to goverment during the downturn. apart from minerals we don’t export very much and without the mining industry we’d have been in massive trouble.

Randal says:

05:07pm | 23/06/10

Absolute rubbish True Blue, the stimulus spending equated to a total affect on GDP of 0.8% and most of this effect was felt in the retail sector with little or no benefit being derived from the disastrous insulation program, and due to construction delays very small economic impact in the BER program.

In fact had the government done nothing, Australia would not have hit recession and unemployment would have been moderately affected, primarily in the land of part time and casual work places in the retail sector, and even that is a debatable point.

To suggest double digit unemployment, to quote a great man, is “absolute crap” and shows your complete lack of understanding of the push and pull factors in relation to Australia’s economy and the influence that external factors such as China has upon our economy.

Of course Australia had to act in regards to the GFC, but unfortunately our response was not measured, planned nor calculated and money has been wasted by some estimates in the region of $9 billion dollars and rising and to quote an ordinary man, Lindsay Tanner, this is because they failed to “dot the I’s and cross the T’s” and that is the criticism, they panicked, spent too much in areas where there has been little effect and now they want to tax the very sector that kept Australia ahead of the world fiscally to hell to pay for their mistakes.

paddywhile says:

03:47pm | 23/06/10

PM, these deals were/are MOU’s to investigate further, they are not commitments to build or buy, a Deptuy PM cannot and is not authorised to commit money to spend. I say this because CHALCO here in Queensland signed a “Deal” to develop a Alumina mine and refinery 4 years ago, State Labor said it is a “done” deal and yet nothing has happened, not one piece of soil turned. This is spin from Labor. Re the RSPT, If you were to read the information from mining companies, they are not adverse to the tax, they just dont believe it should be retrospective. If it can be set at a reasonable level and built into business cases then all good, if Government keep changing the rules or not commiting to anything then it represents Soverign Risk and this makes everyone nervous. Ask yourself the question, if you have already invested your money in a fixed term, with fixed returns and half way through they change the rules, I am sure you would be first to your lawyer to protect your interest and money.

persephone says:

07:19pm | 23/06/10

paddywhile

alas, your misuse of the terms ‘retrospective’ and ‘sovereign risk’ shows that you’re spouting talking points without understanding them.

China would not even be signing MOUs if it had the slightest doubt that it wasn’t worth their while to invest in Australia. Why should they? They could wait six months and see how it all pans out if they wished.

Oh, and the IMF have also endorsed the tax today, adding to the growing number of economists and financial experts who think it’s a good idea.

Now, to your terminology:

‘retrospective’ in taxation terms means a tax applied to past earnings. As the tax won’t come into force for a couple of years and will then be applied to the current income of mining companies when they submit their tax return in the normal way, this tax is not retrospective.

The mining industry would have people believe that a tax is retrospective if it changes the current rate of tax on an existing project. In other words, a project which might run for thirty years should (according to this ‘logic’) be taxed at exactly the same rate in Year 20 as it was at Year 1.

Given that company rates have fallen over the decades rather than risen, perhaps we should apply this rule and tax existing projects at the tax rates which were in place when they started. I’d bet that would make them squeal.

It also ignores the fact that tax rates and royalties fluctuate all the time. WA, for example, has recently put up royalties, and this rise will apply to existing projects. By your definition, this is a retrospective tax.

It’s a silly and desperate argument.

As for ‘sovereign risk’. This is usually taken to mean the likelihood of a country not being able to pay back its borrowings or meet its commitments. In a company sense, it might be stretched to mean the likelihood that they will develop a venture only to have it taken from them - as sometimes happens at the point of a gun in some of the poorer countries of the world.

Apart from sounding nice and ominous, I can’t even begin to see how it can apply to this tax.

It seems that all the mining industry has to do is throw around a few phrases without explanation and people will leap on them and use them without even a skerrick of understanding about what they’re talking about.