Has the campaign just turned against Julia?

Roja says:

12:02pm | 28/07/10

“Truth is that the motivation for denying pension increases….(and they WERE delayed by Labor for a very long time and only eventuated after extensive lobbying by the Coalition anyway )”

That is the funniest thing I have heard on here…Pray tell what exactly stopped the Liberal party implementing those pension increases during their 11 years in power that led up to that point? 

On this site the conservatives constantly tell us that the stimulus handouts were a waste of money, despite the fact that pensioners were the first recipients of the handouts - the Aged, Disabled and Carers.  Labor then delivered the largest increase in the actual age pension rate in over two decades, without having to increase the rate of superannuation for retired politicians & public servants (who have their payments linked to the rate of age pension).

Labor delivered a well targetted ‘supplement’ payment that meant those that needed it most got the rise.  So please don’t point to the liberals and be proud of their achievements, they failed pensioners massively.

Nice Try says:

12:11pm | 28/07/10

Scramble..scramble ...spin…spin…Oops did I forget to answer the actual allegations and questions again?  Just read WW and all will be well!.  Want to bet the pearls disappear on 22 Aug?

Tom says:

12:23pm | 28/07/10

Sorry did you just say that the coalitiion’s lobbying was behind the pension increase? Oh because I thought that they did NOTHING on this issue with11 years of record tax receipts…then a Labor governemnt comes in and actually lifts pension rates by $30 per week (despite the GFC) and you try to tell us that this is thanks to the Libs??

Sounds like spin to me…

Jane says:

12:53pm | 28/07/10

What selective and short memories you have. Labor knocked the pension increases (that the Coalition had promised previously) on the head and overlooked them in the budget of ‘08….and wouldn’t do anything until ‘the next budget’. (Said Swan )

The Coalition, Family First and the Greens lobbied and embarrassed Labor into doing so before that…

It’s well documented…but I see how you would want to dispute it..It was a disgrace for dragging it out for so long on Labor’s behalf…and on particularly Gillard’s behalf now we see.

...“The coalition says increasing the pension by $30 a week will cost around $1.35 billion a year. It says that should come out of the $21.7 billion surplus….”
“...The Federal Opposition’s push for an increase in the single-aged pension has been passed by the Senate, but it now faces defeat in the Lower House….”

http://currentaffairs.ninemsn.com.au/national/645696/coalition-urge-pension-increase
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/22/2371352.htm
http://news.theage.com.au/national/coalition-tries-to-boost-aged-pension-20080910-4dh8.html

Jane says:

01:03pm | 28/07/10

Here’s a bit more for you…oops.

“Federal Treasurer Wayne Swan is telling pensioners they will have to wait until next year’s May Budget to get any more money.

The Government has faced a week of pressure from the Opposition to immediately increase the single aged pension.

Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson plans to introduce a bill in parliament next week to boost the base rate by $30 a week.

But Mr Swan is still resisting and has foreshadowed action in next year’s Budget after a tax review is completed.

“It will report at the latest by February next year so we can take action in next year’s Budget,” he said.”

The government’s own discussion paper shows that increases did occur to the pension and other benefits under the Coalition (e.g. 2% real rises, over and above inflation, annually as a result of indexing to wages not just cpi). The Review is not systematic. Labor was not going to pay the budget bonuses, arguing it had increased utilities allowances (a copy of Howard policy). when they got caught out, they backflipped and then announced this Review in order to out off the decision - hardly planned.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/12/2362881.htm

http://www.lukehartsuyker.com.au/mediacentre/mediareleases/2008/47-coalition-announces-plan-to-increase-single-aged-pension-by-30-per-week.html

Steve Walters says:

01:18pm | 28/07/10

Jane, spin it however you like - only the extremely gullible would believe the Libs are for increases in pensions given they did not provide one once in 11 years! It’s very easy to be pro-increases in Opposition but anyone with half a brain knows they wouldn’t provide them when they’re in power as you only need history to show that - but pet, if it makes you happy, you just keep believing their propaganda. You’re probably a good churchie just like Tony so you obviously believe in fairytales.

Roja says:

01:35pm | 28/07/10

Ah Jane, despite the article the Liberals avoided raising the age pension rate for 11 years because they knew that to do so would see headlines of ‘pensioners get $30 a week, retired politicians get $300+ a week’.

Nelson’s cynical cowardly populist proposal that you so eloquently laid out would have delivered exactly that - pension groups saw straight through it and it gave Brendan no traction and no improvement in popularity.  That this was 2008, when they were in control of both houses not 12 months earlier, says it all about their sincerity in wanting to deliver this. 

Labor took less than 2 years to deliver the reformed pension fortnightly ‘supplement’ (way more than Howards crappy 4 utility payments a year) which gave pensioners the $30 without having to provide a ten fold increase to every retired politician, public servant and retired armed forces member receiving a Defined Benefit Scheme Payment linked to the rate of the Age Pension.  Liberal costings of $1.35 billion only included the Age Pension rate, not the extra super costs.  Claims of their ‘economic credentials’ are incredibly exaggerated.

This was, in short, one of the best things Labor did in their 3 short years in power.  Something the liberals comprehensively failed to think of in 11 years.

John Shailer says:

01:41pm | 28/07/10

2 highly respected journalists, quoting reliable Labor sources, have revealed Julia Gillard’s real feelings towards older Australians.  When seeking to cut the proposed 2009 pension increase, she reportedly stated: “Old people never vote for us”.  Her spin doctors quickly crafted an unconvincing denial for her.  However this remark ties in with Labor’s defeat in 2008 of a Coalition Bill for an immediate $30pw increase for pensioners; and no pension increase under Labor until September 2009.

Jane says:

01:46pm | 28/07/10

Sorry Steve…it must be unpalatable for you to admit…but it’s no ‘fairytail’....it’s fact. All there for you in black and white.

The Coalition gave them bonuses, ultility allowances and 2 per cent a year over and above inflation.
In 1996 the pension was about $9000 a year.  By 2008 it was $14000 a year. Roughly, that was 60 per cent nominal increase and a 20 per cent real increase.
Labor overlooked them in the ‘08 budget and attempted to overlook them till the next one…..but were eventually embarrassed into action by the Coalition bill.
Facts dude.

But you’re taking it off topic….as I suppose you would want to !!!
Gillard opposed pensioner increases…..she claimed ‘the elderly did not vote for Labor’. :o..
I think there is MUCH more to be said about that….and the fact you’re not says volumes right there.

Keith Hammersmith says:

01:57pm | 28/07/10

looking at this series of posts from an unbiased point of view,  I see,  Jane offering quotes and sources to back up her argument.  the labor supporters merely retorting by simply calling it ‘spin’... 

Steve Walters calls Jane ‘gullable’ for beliveing the libs would ever raise pensions, yet can we not simply refer back to the quotes and sources for accurate information that jane has supplied, as compared to… um   nothing on the counter argument.

People if you wish to counter someones point, (i learned this bit in high school) try using facts to support your own argument. It may even make your argument more compelling.

DC says:

02:13pm | 28/07/10

@Jane:  Yes, that’s right - with a looming GFC and being a first term Government, they had that option.

Tell me this - how much in annual increases did the Coalition give old age pensioners in their 11 years?

I look forward to your truthful answer (but won’t hold my breath).

DC says:

02:15pm | 28/07/10

@Jane:  Did you pull those figures out of thin air, or do you have reliable sources to back them up?

I look forward to you posting them (but won’t hold my breath).

Roja says:

03:04pm | 28/07/10

Jane, that fails to take into account the bonus to compensate for GST which as a consumption tax directly affected pension spending power but was not entirely accounted for by CPI. 

Since you are into comparing records, lets look at the 11 years of liberals to labor.

Liberals - 1996 to 2007 - $9048 to $13800 - 52.5% increase against 35 to 40% CPI rise (plus GST impact)
Labor - 2007 to 2010 - $13800 to $18220 - 32% increase against 10-12% CPI rise

It seems labor has done more in terms of real spending power for age pensioners in 3 years than liberal did in 11.

Facts, dude.

Jane says:

03:52pm | 28/07/10

LOL
Hey DC…I think Roja there just plucked the same ‘air’ as me…..wanna ask him/her for links too?

Here’s mine..always happy to share.
http://www.albyschultz.com.au/pdfs/2007/Pensioners Guide March 2007.pdf

Roja…I was making no ‘comparison’....
You Labor stooges change the parameters when trumped ..and go on another desperate tangent.

- I provided evidence that it was indeed the Libs who lobbied Labor to provide the pension increase…when they left them out of the ‘08 budget.
If Labor provided increases…of any amounts…it was in direct response to being embarrased into doing so by the Coalition bill.
- Steve then stated there were never any increases under the Coalition…I provided evidence that was wrong too.
- Now you want to allude to ‘comparisons’....using amounts by Labor they wouldn’t have even given had the Coalition not shamed them into doing so….AND (here’s the real relevant bit)  - increases that La Gillard opposed. !!!

Because that’s the real issue here that you stooges are desperately avoiding.
Gillard opposed the increases…..on the basis that “old people don’t vote Labor’. shock horreur!!

Take your faux, self tagged, moral relativism and address that FACT…..avoiding it so far shows how hypocritical you all are.

Troy says:

04:15pm | 28/07/10

Sock it to-em Jane, Well done. The Laborites have suddenly gone quite after your last post.

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

04:50pm | 28/07/10

As a pensioner I can say that under the Howard government things were fine the cr@p hit the fan when little Kevvy & Red Julia started our nation down the road to perdition.

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

04:53pm | 28/07/10

Roja, as a pensioner I can tell you if Labor had followed Brendon Nelson’s advice in early 2008 & given pensioners $30s extra a week we would have been better off than a cash splash that the fools spent on imported rubbish

brenton says:

05:15pm | 28/07/10

I’m with Jane. 

Evan Findlay says:

05:41pm | 28/07/10

Jane,
The point here is that in eleven years of government the coaltion did not allocate an increase in the pension. They can lobby all they damn like but it’s actions that speak louder than lobbying.
The coaltion government raked in approximately $340 Billion dollars in tax revenue during the 2000/07 years. It found money for subsidise 16 year old’s to have babies and buy plasma’s, it allowed the tax payer to subsidise 30% of millionaires private health insurance. It handed over $7000 FHG that created a real estate bubble and subsequently a housing affordability crisis and all that policy bum Costello left was a 60 billion dollar future fund and 20 billion in the savings. My question to you is, if the so called economic conservatives of the Liberal party could blow $260 Billion dollars on unsustainable middle class welfare, one off cash splashes and irresponsible tax cuts, how come they couldn’t find any money for the pensioners. I notice today he can find money for big corporations, but nothing for the pensioner!
Your lack of heart is what propels you to vote for Tony Abbott.

wreckage says:

02:10am | 29/07/10

Evan, you will look smarter if you don’t try to make arguments that have already been refuted. The Coalition did, in fact, increase pensions whilst in power.

Now you are claiming AGAIN that they didn’t. Not too bright.

Roja says:

11:40am | 29/07/10

You’re obviously going to keep claiming that Brendan Nelson, in opposition where he could promise the moon, was the reason for the increases.  You have at no stage answered the question on why this benevolence appeared the year AFTER they lost power. 

The evidence shows that the liberals kept the pension rate above the cost of living increases at the rate of 1% per year - where many people campaigning for pensioners rights argued that this did not accurately reflect the real cost of living increases and that if anything, it went backwards thanks to the GST and cost of living factors that affected pensioners (eg Food & Utilities, most didn’t care that the cost of cars, TV’s and other goods became cheaper).

Judith Vinn says:

11:03am | 30/07/10

Jane every-thing should be looked at from all angles, good on her. How many rises did the pensioner’s get under John Howard? and how much? lucky to feed two dog’s.Where are your manner’s? her name is Julia, show a bit of respect.

darryl says:

11:37am | 28/07/10

Dear vote-her it is place and labor policy. I think you are looking for any reason fro Julia. It appears that no amount of information being leaked will deter you from voting for labor.
You really are a thinking voter.
Be comfortable in the fact my vote will cancel yours.

E says:

11:44am | 28/07/10

PPL is not about ‘bludging’ its about redressing the biological gender disparity in the reporductive system. Women need to take time off to give birth, and its preferable for them to be able to spend some time with their babies (makes happier adults when the babies grow up according to theory). Since our economy is now predicated on two incomes per nuclear consumption unit, it makes sense for the government to subsidise the production of tomorrows consumers out of the pay packets of todays consumption units.

SkepDad says:

11:45am | 28/07/10

This is such a tired old argument.  Parents spend a goodly proportion of their post-tax income to raise future taxpayers, who will be paying for your roads, hospitals and services long after you’ve stopped paying tax. 

You don’t want kids, fine.  People who look beyond themselves understand that without children, the country goes nowhere.  The myopic views of childless narcissists might make great soundbites, but they don’t make good strategic policy.

Tails says:

12:14pm | 28/07/10

Good for you vote-her. Good for you. Let’s hope you live in a seat where your renegade myopic idiocy has no effect on the outcome of the election.

Annie says:

12:15pm | 28/07/10

Vote her ....  you do realise that the Paid Parental scheme has passed into legislation don’t you.  It’s Tax Payer Funded for 18weeks leave starting on the 1st of January 2011 so from next January Tax Payers will be funding the Labor Parties Parental Leave scheme.  So your whole ” If people want children they should pay for themselves & not bludge from other taxpayers”  seems to be a MOOT Point eh!!

MarK says:

12:17pm | 28/07/10

Just a small problem with your logic here.

You say “If people want children then they should pay for them themselves and not be bludging from other taxpayers”

Ok that is your opinion. But to say because Julia opposed it makes her better for you is a bit of a stretch. You do realise the policy was passed and people are “bludging” as we speak. And Julia is proud of the policy now it seems.

So what you seem to want to vote for is a person not willing to change something she opposes in private but supports in public.

You certainly have picked the right pony then. Spineless cowardly lack of conviction politics is truly the Labor way.

WayneT says:

12:41pm | 28/07/10

Your voting Labor yet they will pay for maternity leave out of the tax payers pocket, where as the coalition are getting business to pay for it.  Your voting Labor because Julia was against it, even though in the end she voted for it.  Your argument for the Labor vote doesn’t stack up.  As for the Mining companies voting for the tax - excuse me?  They didn’t vote for the tax, they took the best deal they could get before the greens gain control of the senate this election and they end up with a far worse deal.  If they actually had a choice they wouldn’t have it.  They were technically blackmailed into it.  Hopefully your illogical approach is not the norm amongst the voting public, although I suspect it is given the results from the last election.

shabangabang says:

01:46pm | 28/07/10

“Your voting Labor yet they will pay for maternity leave out of the tax payers pocket, where as the coalition are getting business to pay for it.”
Hands up if you actually think business will wear the costs. No. Me neither. There will be across the board price rises for all companies slugged by the tax/levy/whatever-you-want-to-call-it. This is not all businesses, just those earning more than a figure that Abbott has yet to finalise.
It will include however Phone companies, water companies, electricity companies, department stores, supermarkets, engineering consultancies, home builders, private transport companies, etc. So WayneT, either you are a very generous business owner, or an individual with as little understanding as Abbott himself as to how this will increase the cost of living. May even be the biggest cost of living since the largest spike in cost of living ever; the GST, and we know who did that.

MarK says:

02:14pm | 28/07/10

Shab who do you think will pay for Gillards 3% rise in superanuation guarantee?

I will tell you “Phone companies, water companies, electricity companies, department stores, supermarkets, engineering consultancies, home builders, private transport companies, etc.”

This will be passed on as a direct cost by the aforementioned companies. A huuuuuge (go big Dazza) cost of living increase to us all on top of more increases brought to us by the mining tax.

DC says:

02:21pm | 28/07/10

@WayneT:  Do you really believe that business won’t pass on those extra costs to the consumer?

As for Abbott’s announcement of the cut in company tax, that will blow out Abbott’s PPL tax of 1.7%.

Tax payers will end up having to foot the bill on that one.

I’m all for a cut in company tax, however, the tax payer ends up having to foot the bill for it.

Abbott claims he’ll save the money by freezing employment in the public service - pure BS.

Howard promised this when he took office - only to find out that he actually needed public servants.

He compensated by bringing in “consultants” to do their work - which cost the tax payer more.

Eventually, the Public Service levels increased and he ended up with more than he started with.

vote-her says:

04:19pm | 28/07/10

If taxpayers have to foot the bill for the PPL then where is the benefit for future taxpayers who are also footing the bill for the PPL. There is no benefit. They both cancel the other out.

The PPL is a waste of time and resources. There is no gender disparity. This is nothing more than pork barrelling.

Hopefully, it will be changed by a leader that doesn’t like it.

Nathan says:

04:24pm | 28/07/10

SkepDad says:
‘Parents spend a goodly proportion of their post-tax income to raise future taxpayers’

So what? Do you want a medal for using a portion of your own income to raise your own kids?! You mafe a choice (presumably) to have children, SO PAY FOR THEM YOURSELVES! I am so sick of knowing that a large amount of my taxes is going to subsidise the lifestyle choices of others.

As for ‘raising future taxpayers’ ... are you? A lot of parents are raising future criminals and dole bludgers, again, why should I pay for that?!

And why label the childless people as narcissists? It’s parents who think childless people should work just so the parents can have everything on a platter, the childless just want a fair go. Pretty easy to see who the real narcissist is.

Dullardsville says:

04:31pm | 28/07/10

Geez the anti-children sentiment is alive and well in Australia isn’t it! It surprises me just how much some of you are against kids in general. I guess you were born as adults?!

You are right, us bludging, over-educated, too high tax paying, overworked and underpaid women are actually much better off at home looking after the children that will fund your retirement.  Paid parental leave is so miniscule anyway, and most of us ‘working’ mums wouldn’t be entitled as it is, so get your facts straight and stop YOUR whining.

You get what you deserve - so yeah, just go and vote Labour!!!

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

05:04pm | 28/07/10

Good idea vote her when you are old & infirm lets hope that there will be enough young people to provide services for miserable old b@stards as well as nice people

Shane From Melbourne says:

08:25pm | 28/07/10

@Skepdad- You must be tired of using the same old faulty logic. Why should we subsidize a future tax payer (children) for a non productive period of 18 years when we can import a ready to go future tax payer in the form of an immigrant? Logic Fail - Strategic Policy Nil. Thank you for playing.

Stephen says:

11:51pm | 28/07/10

Actually, those that don’t have children should be paying more tax.  Who is going to fund their retirement?  At least my kids will be paying tax when I retire.

So those that have kids are more or less self funding their retirement.  Those that don’t are bludging from everyone elses kids!

SkepDad says:

08:52am | 29/07/10

@Shane From Melbourne:

I didn’t realise that PPL was for a period of 18 years.  Goodness, the policy is much more generous than I thought.  I’ll be right back, off to get the missus pregnant with triplets!

Joan says:

03:00pm | 28/07/10

Yes, her whitewashed policies and what she really thinks are as different, as the Womens Weekly pics and the Julia the public sees and hears daily on the TV screen. The story that goes with the cutesy pics doesn’t make her exactly lovable. Only hard core feminists would vote for Julia, just cos she is a woman, based on current revelations. Labor since 23 June turned into a totally dysfunctional government….. not just lost its way but well and truly lost in the mulga without a compass or GPS.

Front Bar says:

07:33pm | 28/07/10

I cannot believe that nobody noticed the shot that set all this off again.

Read Barry Cohen in yesterday’s Oz and ask yourself who might have been behind the internal attack. Is anybody actually joining the dots in Journo-Land?

How much are media shareholders and taxpayers forking out for these so-called reporters, commentators, pundits and lunches for them to miss the obvious connection on this kind of stuff?  What the hell’s happening here?

Read Cohen and work it out for yourselves who might have had:

A) The info.
B) The motive.

And I believe Kevin Rudd, it wasn’t him.

kp says:

09:22pm | 28/07/10

Nicole, you couldn’t have said it better. I agree with everything you stand by.  Let us pleeeeeeeese hope that Australia will WAKE UP and vote the Liberals back in !!!!!

Troy says:

04:08pm | 28/07/10

Tex, I am with you on that one. When this whole pensioner debate came up before Labor finally came to the party, I was amazed what pensioners had to actually live on. I know myself how much things have skyrocketed in price since there $30 payrise, so I can only imagine how tuff they are doing it now. I am a Liberal voter anyway, but I find it disgraceful how much money this Government throws at refugees and these bloody boat people, yet our elderly can even buy a good meal or turn there heaters on. They have paid taxes to this country for god knows how many years, and what have thsese boat people done for this country? Nothing except get on our gravy train. Then they have to put up with Gillards terrible comments on how they dont deserve a pay rise because they dont vote Labor, (like the fact they have paid taxes all there lives doesnt mean anything). I wouldnt vote for anyway, but I hope now there isnt a pensioner in the country that votes Labor on the 21st of August.

brenton says:

05:21pm | 28/07/10

100% agree… you have hit the nail on the head.  It demonstrates her inability to lead for everyone.

Christian Real says:

07:40am | 29/07/10

Lap dancer
Perhaps it is time Laurie Oakes backed up his accusation with proof, personally I don’t think that he has any, and he has allowed himself to become a stooge for the Liberal party.
If Laurie Oakes had even an ounce of integrity left, he would back up his claims by producing facts and evidence and also reveal the ‘Alledged leak” who probably doesn’t even exist,and is a figment of the Liberal party masterminds minds who appear to be orchestrating this dirty smear campaign against Julia Gillard.
Tony Abbott’s company tax cuts from 30% to 28.5% is as phoney as Abbott is, once the 1.7 levy is added on business, to pay for Abbott’s parental leave, the company tax will then become 30.2%,  0.2% more than companies are already paying now.

TimB says:

08:20am | 29/07/10

@ Christian Real- Perhaps you haven’t been paying attention. Julia has admitted the Laurie’s sources are correct. Then she tried to spin her way out, as usual. And I love how the second Laurie starts bagging out the Labor party he’s branded “a Liberal stooge”. Were you calling him a Labor stooge when he was bagging the Liberals? Bet you wern’t.

And how much do you think companies will be paying once an Labor backed ETS comes in? How much extra are they going to have to pay in order to cover the 3% super rise?
The Labor “cuts” will be wiped out and then some by these extra levies.

Try again Christian.

Mark Gibson says:

11:38am | 28/07/10

You start by not wasting every second dollar you come across.

Nigel Catchlove says:

11:57am | 28/07/10

No.  By cutting expenditure on the wasteful programs the ALP has sold us down the river on.  NBN - $43 billion, BER - countless millions wasted, asylum seekers - wasted millions supporting a failed policy.  Compulsory internet filtering at the ISP level etc.

It’s not magic, it’s just sensible fiscal policies.

JT says:

12:02pm | 28/07/10

Simple, stop the wasted spending.

Macca says:

12:20pm | 28/07/10

oh, Bella, don’t worry your little head about it. Scrapping the NBN and Million Dollar BBQ sheds would be a start. Generally, the Coalition don’t fund billion dollar rorts and are by far the more economically credible party over the past 15 years.

Andrejs says:

12:30pm | 28/07/10

No, not by selling kidneys.  By stopping waste.

No more hopelessly rorted programs like BER and Pink Batts.
It’s not rocket science.

Peter says:

12:49pm | 28/07/10

@Nigel and Macca:  By all means claim that the NBN could be done with less money, but to claim that it’s all a waste of money is to display complete ignorance of its neccessity.  This is 2010.  Copper infrastructure came in with with telegraphy: the 19th century.  Wireless you claim?  Please explain to me the mechnism by which you will use wireless to backhaul all that data between cities.  Spectrum is finite and is difficult to manage.  Wireless is good in some instances, but it does not solve all, except maybe for Telstra shareholders who bought without any analysis of the market or evolving technologies.

Nigel Catchlove says:

01:43pm | 28/07/10

You’re right Peter and I’ve never claimed that the NBN is not needed but committing $43 billion of taxpayers money without a business case is nothing short of economic vandalism.

Steve says:

02:27pm | 28/07/10

@Nigel Catchlove says: We had ten years plus of this very orchestrated cynical programme by the previous government that would be closer to the mark. First step day one sack all the heads of departments within government, replace with own people. (hence the Gordon Greech affair) The spin kings, gee you are surly not for real here!! Buzzword central just keep saying it and it will take hold in some sectors, which was the previous governments mantra. We had the greatest education programme perpetrated on the Australian public ever known, The Dumbing Down Of A Nation. Cost to us about 3mil a week!!

So the next faze of the programme will be press the so-called Pavlov dog button for the Howard battlers with the choice words we know they react too!! Dig out some of those really nice emotive words from the buzzword party book… they will salivate on those… after all we spent all that money training them!!!

Then we will have a Tony Abbott team that bought in the 1st home buyers grant which artificially inflated house prices out of everyone’s reach sold every profitable publicly owned enterprise to get a very short sighted budget surplus. Then sysimaticly set about destroying workers rights, believe that the environment is crap, cut education, health, law and order whilst setting up middle class welfare systems. Manipulated employment figures by classing people who worked for the dole as being employed, and who forced people who wanted to look for work onto pensions… then called it good economics!!  More like EGOnomics really which worked well for someone who lived in Kirribilli then spent over one million dollars per year of our money to travel to work. And on top of all that Abbott might happily forget that while he and his former government colleagues were steering the good ship Australia, the nation’s total debt soared from a mere $700 billion in 1997 up to $3.2 trillion by the close of their term. An increase of 387%’‘. Deregulation brought growth all right. But there is a yin for every yang. The Opposition 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.

Well, we will have to be very naïve and gullible beyond our wildest dreams if we have a leader who believes women are for housework and breeding, everyone should go to church on Sunday, acts like a spoilt brat when things don’t go his way and becomes the bully he perpetrates. All sounds good for our school system to say the least… need we mention health…. I think not!!!

For the Gen Y followers if you come under that banner.
http://my.opera.com/bobdown/blog/gen-y-helpers

DC says:

02:42pm | 28/07/10

@Nigel Catchlove:

The NBN is supported by a great number of Coalition MP’s and is infrastructure that needs to be put in place.

I’ve worked in IT for over 10 years, and have spent considerable time in regional areas where Broadband doesn’t exist except in the dreams of people and business.

The NBN is great for consumers and business alike.

Troy says:

04:12pm | 28/07/10

Bella, I think you underestimate the abilty of the Liberals to manage money and the economy. There track record speaks for itself. Labor on the other hand can only go by there track record, and all I can say is that there track record speaks for itself.

Steve says:

07:04pm | 28/07/10

@Troy Says: Whenever there is political debate on here there are always plenty of Liberal supporters keen to champion how great they were at eliminating debt. I don’t consider many of these people to be well informed. Here is an extract from an article about deficit. Does anyone still think Costello and friends were the great debt busters after reading the following? Interestingly Labor’s stimulus package comes in at about 1% of the total, enjoy: Tony might happily forget that while his former government colleagues were steering the good ship Australia, the nation’s total debt soared from a mere $700 billion in 1997 up to $3.2 trillion by the close of their term. An increase of 387%’‘. Deregulation brought growth all right. But there is a yin for every yang. The Opposition 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.

For the Gen Y followers if you come under that banner.
http://my.opera.com/bobdown/blog/gen-y-helpers

Northern Steve says:

01:14am | 29/07/10

To DC,
I live in a regional area, and I know that I won’t be getting access to the NBN, because I live a whole 10km out of town.  Yet I’ll still be expected to cough up the tax to pay for it.  Is this Julia the same person who had trouble justifying pensioner increases without huge amounts of doubt and thought about the costing the same one who thought teh NBN was a great idea without a business case?

And to Peter - for Heaven’s sake, there is a massive difference between inter-city network and consumer network.  We’d had fiber between cities for years when I worked at Telstra in the early 90s.  You either don’t have a clue, or are being deliberately misleading.

Christian Real says:

08:13am | 29/07/10

Bella Starkey
Tony Abbott did say during his 7.30 report interview, “Don’t believe everything I say”, and that only scripted statements and remarks are “Gospel Truth”, the unscripted, unwritten statements and remarks therefore must be out right lies.

James A says:

12:07pm | 28/07/10

Spot on E.

Gillard is a cunning political animal with that vile ‘whatever it takes’ philosophy as spouted by that sly wrecker of the ALP, Graham Richardson.

Stand for nothing, PC poll driven hacks with no experience of the real world.  Career public servants, and Union Officials.  Parasites on the rest of us.

We thought Rudd was bad and he was, but this creature is the slyest of the sly.

Troy says:

04:26pm | 28/07/10

Thats a very good point. Go one further and ask if she was so involved with the cabinet meetings and she was so concerned about government spending, then how much imput did she have in the pink batts, BER, Solar Hot Water Units, and all of Labors other stuffups? So much for MOVING FORWARD then, and her argument that KRudd controled everything is now a bit weak. Somehow I think Gillard is 2 face liar.

Tom says:

02:56pm | 28/07/10

Agree, Abbott is carving her up. Let’s hope others are finally seeing past the Labor “whatever it takes” spin machine.

Brad Price says:

09:04pm | 28/07/10

@Muuske

Jooolya used a good one yesterday. “Supportative”

BobM says:

04:43pm | 28/07/10

Yes, Saskia, my wife said “Julia looks stuffed” the other day when she was doing a news conference. The early mornings and hectic schedule look like they’re taking it’s toll. Tony, on the other hand, looks in fine form - all those eary morning starts on the bike bulids great stamina. Jools may well have a breakdown before election day.

Troy says:

04:47pm | 28/07/10

Tony is really looking good at the moment and improving every day. Gillard is starting to fall over, and if kRudd keeps letting the cat out of the bag she will really be in knee deep in it. KRudd has suddenly become Tonys biggest asset. Go Figure

Nicole says:

05:20pm | 28/07/10

@Troy, it’s funny you say that because after watching Jooolya walk today, she had her head down, ass out and seriously looked like she was going to face plant the ground. She looks exhausted, sounds even more unconvincing and I think she’s going to break very soon. So much for a boring election. Each day just gets better.

Evan Findlay says:

06:38pm | 28/07/10

BobM’
Well that’s it then, if your wife says she looks stuffed then it must be all over. I love reading the comments of the intellectual conservatives!!!!

Ed says:

09:24pm | 28/07/10

Saskia you’re close to the mark.  Julia Gillard is out of her depth. Bitten off more than she can chew, including Rudd who she ruthlessly decapitated. I ‘d bet (from the look on Swan’s face) that the whole lot of them have realised their scheming, humiliating assassination of comrade Rudd has backfired - big time.  His worst crime obviously not to obey union thugs - and given Gillard’s past declaration she wouldn’t hesitate to participate in factional moves again to get what she wanted, she certainly lived up to her promise. Scary.

While Abbott calmly goes around doing what we are paying him to do, Gillard and her infighting, enraged mates are frantically scrambling, covering their tracks.  Looking backwards, so to speak. 

Yes Saskia, Abbott is a family man thriving on hard work. 

There was a group of women flicking through those Women’s mag pictures on the supermarket shelf today - I’m amused and curious by their laughter.  The caustic remarks about Gillard’s affair with Emerson made my ears go the colour of her hair, and my hair curl. They were not impressed, left no doubt of their scorn. Labor did a wrong thing for their party.  In Gillard they have bought more trouble than we taxpayers can ever be refunded.

Macca says:

12:21pm | 28/07/10

@Acker, and just like NSW Labor, they’ll probably get re-elected

Andrew says:

04:45pm | 28/07/10

Interesting though, don’t you think, that so far Julia has not really done anything to help good old NSW. We’ve seen $1.15B for a rail link up here in QLD, that “happens” to run through 3 Labor electorates, but still nothing for NSW…has the NSW Labor government so damaged NSW that Federal Labor are scared to be associated with them? Quite possibly. Julia on her own is bad enough, Julia with Anna is scary, but Julia, Anna and Kristina together, is downright frightening.

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

05:10pm | 28/07/10

Macca, wash your mouth out with soap & water! !

Stephen says:

12:02am | 29/07/10

Quote from Paul Keating:
Where NSW goes, so goes federal labor.

Look out Australia.  Look at NSW and see what voting labor will give you.  They have even started trading leaders in like NSW labor

Ruxxy says:

04:32am | 29/07/10

Thats cos they are a trainwreck.

Grim says:

09:36am | 29/07/10

@ Andrew

Julia and Anna Bligh = RIP reasonable cost of living LOL

Troy says:

04:50pm | 28/07/10

Its a bit hard for the Liberals to leak something that came out of the Labor Cabinet meeting where there were only Labor ministers. Gillard is really grasping at straws on that one.

Daryl says:

01:10pm | 28/07/10

Nah saved by the Woman’s Weekly I reckon Nicole. Btw, as a woman, shouldn’t you be throwing all your girlie bits behind Joolia? Girl power, down with men etc? Marriage, commitment and families are so yesterday right? Or didn’t you get the worm’s message?

Nicole says:

02:11pm | 28/07/10

I will be looking the other way if I come across a copy of WW. Jooolya makes my eyes water. And you’re right about the worm, I sure didn’t get it’s message.

Joan says:

03:05pm | 28/07/10

Daryl,,, Revelations in WW re Emmerson affair will probably see many women dump Julia. One thing women rally against and that is the other woman .... ask Blanche

Doh says:

03:36pm | 28/07/10

@joan:

If they read that far, it is on the second last page of the advertorial.

Dash says:

01:48pm | 28/07/10

Yeah but if you don’t vote, you really can’t complain about what you end up getting Stephen!

Julie Coker-Godson says:

03:18pm | 28/07/10

@WayneT:  Hadn’t thought of that one:  well spotted and Laurie is well known for his ability to do just that - present further information.  I guess we should *watch this space* as they say in the classics.

Doh says:

03:38pm | 28/07/10

She must still be very much a novice.  She still shrugs too much, especially when mentioning how “proud” she was of the PPL and increase to the pension….

Watch the video closely

Yvonne says:

04:22pm | 28/07/10

Please don’t lump all women into the same category, just as all women apparently won’t vote for Tony Abbott. Absolute rubbish by all areas of the media that one!!!! Less a fan of womens weekly than ever now. Please please….we need the Liberals in Government…..money management the main reason..arghhhh

Troy says:

04:54pm | 28/07/10

Well said Sirro, I just hope the Australian voters have a IQ over 20, and realise what a terrible government Labor is.

Fog Badger says:

09:26pm | 28/07/10

Couldn’t agree more re Bruce Hawker. I think he’s primarily responsible for the pitiful state of political debate in this banal campaign.

James A says:

01:58pm | 28/07/10

Steve - name two current ALP Ministers with private enterprise (non-living off the taxpayer) experience?

Abbott is a Rhodes Scholar, professional journalist, with experience in the finance industry.

Gillard is a former student Socialist with experience as a Union Lawyer.  So Gillard is counted out already.

Take a look into the backgrounds and qualifications of the ALP MP’s and you will be horrified.

S says:

03:02pm | 28/07/10

James A,

Beat me to it.  I would much rather have a Rhodes Scholar running our country, then communist party Julia.

Daniel says:

03:56pm | 28/07/10

Nice try Steve. Fact is it was K Rudd who first said “we will stop the boats” before adding “and we will turn them around!”  As for the ex priest thing- get real- that was over thirty years ago he has been a very successful minister in a very successful Govt for over 11 years since then. Yea- rest your case mate- and leave it closed. It’s full of BS.  As for being seriously concerned for people’s intelligence for voting for him- are you saying the people voting for a proven train wreck of a govt that has wasted billions are more intelligent?

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

05:17pm | 28/07/10

1977 “we get to decide who comes to this country” Bob Hawke Australia’s 3 worst PM

N says:

02:07pm | 28/07/10

DOBBO; 100 years after this was first announced, Labor comes through to actually start implementation, long time in the planning but better late than never I suppose?
Don’t let the fact that key marginal seats surrounding this area helped seal the deal. It’d be a shame to let circumstance get in the way of a pseudo Labor triumph story.

Doh says:

03:46pm | 28/07/10

Blatant pork barrelling DOBBO.

Brisbane City Council has several infrastructure project that are desperately needed.  Alas they are in the safe seat of Brisbane (Arch Bevis has been there for years).

bf says:

05:47pm | 28/07/10

This only highlights her trying to buy votes, which is so 2007.  In other words, do anything to get the result.  This doesn’t demonstrate good politics to me, and think most people will see thorugh it… especially in other states!

MarK says:

02:21pm | 28/07/10

“It’s clear the media (including the ABC) are determined to get their “dear Liberals” in at any cost.”

Including the ABC hahahahaha.

Graham pure gold mate. Here have an internetz that is the funniest comment yet.

Ben81 says:

02:41pm | 28/07/10

Yeah, how dare the media criticise the PM during an election campaign for pointing out that she was actually against things that she’s now claiming credit for to get elected, information that was leaked from the Labor party itself, and Gillard actually tried to imply the Liberals were behind!

“So far I haven’t seen a single answer as to what the Liberals are goiung to do when they get in power.  No journalist appears to be interested in asking. “
Absolute crap, nothing more needs to be said.

Julie Coker-Godson says:

03:29pm | 28/07/10

@graham:  Eh?  What?  I thought it was the other way around i.e. the media (including the ABC) trying to get their “dear Labor” in at any cost.

Doh says:

03:49pm | 28/07/10

Graham clearly has not watched Q&A for a while, nor read Deveny, listened to Kelly & Grattan.

Graham must also not regularly watch the 730 report or Lateline Tony Jones style.

Carl Palmer says:

06:04pm | 28/07/10

Graham, you wouldn’t be watching ABC reruns on one of the foxtel channels by any chance. Maybe you are in an area where comms coverage is poor and books / newspapers are in short supply. 
Sorry can’t help ya mate.

BobM says:

06:25pm | 28/07/10

‘It’s clear the media (including the ABC) are determined to get their “dear Liberals” in at any cost.’

None so blind as thse who will not see, eh?

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/abc-picks-sides-while-the-editor-in-chief-watches-on/story-fn59niix-1225896320487

Danni says:

05:09pm | 28/07/10

Actually you are wrong. A university student did his thesis on whether the ABC was biased towards labor and funnily enough it came out that the ABC were slightly more biased towards the liberals.

Andrew says:

08:01pm | 28/07/10

Yeah Danni right. Im guessing the uni student was completely unbias along with the teacher that passed the thesis. Watch the programs again why dont you. Its always one conversative vs the rest. Even some of the high up executive sin the ABC have admitted the bias.

jamie says:

08:55pm | 28/07/10

Source Danni?

Just one little link will do.

Coem on, surely you can back up your statement

WednesdayPunch says:

02:36pm | 28/07/10

No, that’s not the point. The point is that Gillard is claiming credit for something that she ostensibly resisted for purely political purposes. She is running for PM and we deserve to understand the way she thinks - if she didn’t think there were any votes in older Australians, then that is a very salient view of hers that we ought to consider. Likewise, if she did oppose the measures but is now claiming credit, that too is something we deserve to consider in forming our opinion of her. We know politicians can be duplicitous, but it is disingenuous to try and hide your duplicity, and that is a trait that should not be present in a PM.

Ben81 says:

02:50pm | 28/07/10

Actually is has absolutely nothing at all to do with what you’re talking about, and everything to do with Gillard being caught out saying anything to win the election.  In public she’s so passionate about the issue that it’s part of her election campaign, in private she’s not and actually was against it in cabinet. 
Someone from within the Labor party was so annoyed at this they leaked information about it to Laurie Oakes.  So there’s your “true hypocrite”, DC.

MarK says:

03:07pm | 28/07/10

Oh I am slamming Hawke and Keating too.

Where was the increase when they were in power. And Whitlam. Goddam they were tardy.

I don’t think Holt or Fraser gave them an increase either.

Menazies? Dunno but his whole career will be looked at in new light if he didn’t.

Barton, Deakin and Watson - I say slam them too the tightwads. Fadden and Scullin what did those layabouts ever do.

I am disgusted at the rhetoric too DC.

It is shameful people on these boards make comment without really looking at what happened in the past, with different teams, in different years without comparing them to the now.

It is terrible they don’t point out the hypocrisy in opposing something in private and publicly claiming credit for when useful. I hear you mate.

Jason CR says:

04:51pm | 28/07/10

Missed the point again DC.

This argument is not over who gave increases when in power.  It’s about the prime minister arguing against a full increase to pensioners because they don’t vote Labor.  Great way to run the country DC, fabulous.  Lets discriminate against all non-Labor voters as a PM.  I tend to think that pensioners can see through Labor’s spin and deceit, that’s why they don’t vote Labor.   

At least you’re here having a say DC. 

Evan Findlay, T Chong, Rob Charteris etc etc have gone missing again.  I’m sure we’ll soon have another Newspoll showing Labor 52-48 and they’ll be back.

Stephen says:

05:49pm | 28/07/10

The Liberals, provided a stable economy that mean pensioners didn’t need extra handouts over and over. Labor have provided an unstable economy where every extra cent handed out by the govt, on pension, tax relief whatever is eaten up before you actually get it.

BobM says:

06:21pm | 28/07/10

As one Puncher said earlier:

Jane says:12:53pm | 28/07/10

What selective and short memories you have. Labor knocked the pension increases (that the Coalition had promised previously) on the head and overlooked them in the budget of ‘08….and wouldn’t do anything until ‘the next budget’. (Said Swan )

The Coalition, Family First and the Greens lobbied and embarrassed Labor into doing so before that…

It’s well documented…but I see how you would want to dispute it..It was a disgrace for dragging it out for so long on Labor’s behalf…and on particularly Gillard’s behalf now we see.

...“The coalition says increasing the pension by $30 a week will cost around $1.35 billion a year. It says that should come out of the $21.7 billion surplus….”
“...The Federal Opposition’s push for an increase in the single-aged pension has been passed by the Senate, but it now faces defeat in the Lower House….”

http://currentaffairs.ninemsn.com.au/national/645696/coalition-urge-pension-increase
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/22/2371352.htm
http://news.theage.com.au/national/coalition-tries-to-boost-aged-pension-20080910-4dh8.html

MarK says:

05:05pm | 28/07/10

“highly disciplined team”

err

“(mystery leakers aside). “

What?

The Labor party is leaking like a sieve during an election campaign. It doesn’t get any less disciplined than that. This is the type of stuff you normally get just before they chop off the leaders head.

Craig says:

04:52pm | 28/07/10

So what, did he say that because they always vote Liberal?, or did he say that because he thought we could not afford it?

DC says:

07:06pm | 28/07/10

@Craig:  And how do you know Gillard actually said it?

Were you there?  She’s denied it - do you know who the leak is?  Have you spoken to them?

Regardless - what Julia said or didn’t say is all just heresay - and if we think we know who the leak is, then how can he be trusted when he’s got his own point to prove?

What I can tell you is that Tony Abbott also didn’t support any increase in the pension - he went on record stating that.

If we are to believe Gillard actually said that, then we should also believe that Work Choices Ver 2.0 will be bought in by Tony Abbott, that under 30 year olds who are unemployed will be sent off to work in mines.

Macon Paine says:

01:38pm | 29/07/10

@ DC

“And how do you know Gillard actually said it?”
Isn’t that what the leaker claims?

“Were you there?  She’s denied it - do you know who the leak is?  Have you spoken to them?”

Dont have to be. Not yet thats why it’s a scandal and dont have to, your questions are odd. Perhaps ask Laurie Oaks? The leak is coming from within the Labor party, this is not some Liberal or journalist making stuff up. As Wayne Swan admitted here: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-election/we-cant-stop-the-leaks-says-swan-20100728-10w5p.html
the leaks are coming from within the Labor party.

“Regardless - what Julia said or didn’t say is all just heresay - and if we think we know who the leak is, then how can he be trusted when he’s got his own point to prove?”
I can see your point but It is interesting that someone within the Labor party would put their career and reputation on the line over these leaks.  As to the leaker “his own point to prove” might be that perhaps that Julia is two faced and untrust worthy. If the leaker is telling the truth she is both these things.

“What I can tell you is that Tony Abbott also didn’t support any increase in the pension - he went on record stating that.”
As Craig has stated to you already, it is not because of who they vote for (which FYI is called political bastardry of which Julia may now be guilty), he questioned it in a purely economic sense.

“If we are to believe Gillard actually said that, then we should also believe that Work Choices Ver 2.0 will be bought in by Tony Abbott, that under 30 year olds who are unemployed will be sent off to work in mines.”
They would not be forced I thought the idea was simply to entice them to work (especially in high paying mining jobs)

James A says:

03:12pm | 28/07/10

Since when has record popular PM been knifed by his own party within one term?  You have to be joking!!  There should be more journo’s finding out how an elected leader was stabbed and why??  The public want to know!!  We have a right to know.

And the ALP isn’t democratic!  They don’t allow conscience votes unlike the Libs and crossing the floor gets you thrown out of the party.

Do some research next time before talking cobblers.

Tails says:

03:20pm | 28/07/10

I’d rather have a minister for climate change who was focussing all of their energies of coming up with policies to tackle climate change, rather than being distracted trying to push through a personal barrow. I’m all for gay marriage rights and I believe you should stand by your convictions, just not to the detriment to the planet.

Bobster says:

03:38pm | 28/07/10

@ James,

We do know how it happened.
The ABC was all over it from the start but you’re not interested in the actual nuts and bolts. You want drama, you want heros and villains. It’s not the reality.
We know Rudd’s dictatorial style irked the rest of the party. We know his refusal to call the double dissolution upset the rest of the party. We know his inability to sell the Government’s key messages scared the hell out of them.

You won’t be happy until you read a headline that says “Rudd ousted, Bolsheviks at the border, revolution begins.”

The ALP is a democratic institution, but no, it doesn’t allow conscience votes because its constitution (democratically adopted by the will of a majority) places greater emphasis on solidarity.

Their theory is solidarity helps them to push their causes and of course they do, because that’s what a political party is for. What did you think it was about?

You can feel what you want on that and vote accordingly but my point remains, this is just a statement of the obvious and Oakes’ recent newsbreaks have been nothing more than that.

If you don’t already know this is how things work then you clearly aren’t as engaged as you’d like to think.

The political parties are not nebulous entitites.

They exist on constitutions the same as every other committee, working party or progress association in the country, and their policies are adopted democratically.

They have parliamentary leaders, they have a party president, they have state presidents and they have branch presidents, they have Cabinet, they have caucus, they have state and national conferences - all of these people are members of the ALP and have a right to have their opinions reflected by the parliamentary party that they have backed and worked for.

The same is true of the Liberal Party, albeit with a slightly different structure, but they’re basically the same kind of animal.

I feel like I’m just repeating myself here.

You insist parties show solidarity or you cry, “Disunity! Rabble! Unco-ordinated!”
You insist parties are democratic and don’t have leaders making unilateral decisions or you cry, “Megalomaniac! Dictator! Facism!”
If the leader shows any inclination to listen to the will of the people you call them weak and grumble about leadership.

These are the realities, James. Think of it what you will and vote how you will, but at least take some time to think about how this system works.

It does not begin or end at the doors to parliament house. The Labor and Liberal movements are much, much bigger than the newspapers reflect.

DC says:

03:42pm | 28/07/10

@James A:  Perhaps they should look back through Liberal Party history then - Billy McMahon knifing John Gorton would be a good start.

And yes, the ALP is democratic - they do get to vote and there have been times when they’ve all been allowed conscience votes.

Tails says:

03:56pm | 28/07/10

So DC, you’re saying McMahon knifing Gorton was acceptable?

Doh says:

03:57pm | 28/07/10

Bobster has obviously missed Oakes recent announcement that he has multiple sources for this story.

Your belief in solidarity smacks of the communist attitude prevalent in the ALP, forget about your own conscience, forget about the worth of the individual, there is only the collective.

“We do know how it happened.
The ABC was all over it from the start”

And there was Howes in all his un-elected glory throwing the support of his union behind Julia Gillard.

Bobster says:

04:36pm | 28/07/10

@ Doh,

I didn’t say I agreed with their belief in solidarity, I just said it was the case. And it is.

I’m not making comments about my own beliefs here, I am simply pointing out that there are core beliefs in our major parties and that is one of Labor’s.

If you don’t agree with it, fine. That’s your right and you can vote accordingly.

And, by the way, the Liberal Party does the same thing for the most part - it’s how our system works.

As for your comment on Paul Howes, he is a member of the Labor Party and has every right to push his Union’s (also a part of the Labor Party) point of view.

I suggest, as respectfully as possible, that you look a little deeper at how our parties work because your comment suggests to me you don’t understand.

Vitriol isn’t needed in this discussion, it’s obvious how you vote and good on you, but Oakes’ story is still a statement of the bleeding obvious, no matter how many sources he has.

DC says:

03:21pm | 28/07/10

Do you think Malcolm Turnbull’s appearance back on the scene was by accident?

The Liberals will be looking to blame someone if and when they get the flick - Turnbull will have his knife sharpened and so will Hockey.

It’s politics - there’s always someone standing behind you with a sharpened knife.

As for the Labor leak, does anyone doubt who it actually is?

jb says:

03:36pm | 28/07/10

I will put my money with Swan… He has the most to lose with Gillard as PM, unless he knifes her he’s never going to get the top job and we all know he was instrumental in the removal of Rudd, may have even been the architect.
If he is so trustworthy, why all of a sudden is he not by her side every minute of the day like he was at the beginning of this?
Who was it that admitted to borrowing 100m a day?
Seems a bit of a coincidence to me, he had no need to announce that and did anyway…

Timbo says:

04:22pm | 28/07/10

Sorry JB that’s a yellow card for flagrant misuse of OMG.

jb says:

05:59pm | 28/07/10

Sorry Timbo, hows about,
‘OMFG… they must HATE her’

Timbo says:

09:49am | 29/07/10

Straight red.      :0)

DC says:

07:08pm | 28/07/10

Yes, but the Liberals don’t want to believe the truth - it’s never had much relevance to them.

elhombre says:

11:14pm | 28/07/10

God it’s so sweet to watch you labor sycophants tie yourselves in knots. Your barren, lying, backstabbing ranga hero is coming apart rapidly and has already made it obvious that kruddy actually was the brains of the outfit !

Bobster says:

04:47pm | 28/07/10

Just like every other leader of a political party in Australia - if it’s not your own party, it’ll be the people and if it’s not the people or your party it’ll be the GG (just ask Gough).

It’s how our system works and it comes to all in time - no set up about it. 

Gillard will go. It’s a fact. Abbott will go. Gillard’s successor will be deposed, as will Abbotts and their successor’s will suffer the same fate.

About the only figurehead in our political system who can be (relatively) confident of ongoing employment is Queen Elizabeth II.

Doh says:

04:13pm | 28/07/10

And yet they have more chance of actually pulling it off than Labor does.

Perhaps you could enlighten punchers when Labor last produced a surplus

Evan Findlay says:

06:48pm | 28/07/10

Doh,
1988. The first surplus ever delivered by an Australian government. And all of Howard’s/Costello’s surplus’s were delivered by the economic reforms of Keating in the late eighties/ early nineties.

Sirro says:

12:48am | 29/07/10

Here we go again ..Labor’s rose coloured glasses are out again.

Hawke and Keating were the best, Howard and Costello were the worst and only got a good economy going because of H and K’s reforms and the mining boom. You guys are seriously deluded.

Why not just explain to us how Rudd and Gillard and Dullard (Swan) have completly ballsed this all up in 2.5 years flat. Its absolutley amazing how simply hopeless managers of people and resources can stuff up so much so quickly. Blather blather GFC my arse.

What a bunch of drongos ...anyone who votes for a dope like Swan to be Treasurer gets what they deserve.

jb says:

04:24pm | 28/07/10

No he will do it.
Big drop for small business and a levy/tax for big business to cover the parental leave.
Fantastic policy and fair unlike that mathematically challenged Swans proposal.
Hike Super, so who will pay for that?
It will either end up as part of your deal (3% less take home pay) or a 3% increase in the cost of living as opposed to Abbotts 1.7%
I can’t believe he doesn’t believe his own figures, not too bright that old dysfunctional Gillard family…

Yvonne says:

04:32pm | 28/07/10

I actually thought Labor won the last election on the workchoices issue. Interesting how that one rears its head, like playing a golden oldie. Move on I reckon. Also interesting how Labor expect us to live in a world where everyone is highly paid, but businesses arent allowed to make enough money to pay them!!!! Nothing ever changes….

James A says:

05:23pm | 28/07/10

Hey S.L…. 2007 called - it want’s it scare campaign back!

Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

05:19pm | 28/07/10

That must be stong stuff you’re smoking

PHFM says:

09:27pm | 28/07/10

Are you sure that you arent Laurie Oakes in disguise

JJ says:

09:28pm | 28/07/10

I think you’ll find there’s a suit of announcements coming up that will benefit people that are having a go.

Anytime a leader backflips to cut tax further, is fine by me!

kp says:

10:11pm | 28/07/10

Holly sweetie, how old are you ?? Old enough to vote yet?  Very silly comments at this stage of your life !!

Izzie says:

11:16pm | 28/07/10

MATT PRICE, ‘THE AUSTRALIAN’: ” Internally Julia’s an incredibly divisive person. So far she’s stood for Simon Crean, Mark Latham and Medicare Gold, and I just think that’s going to taint her for a long time. There are consequences of that, and that has caused her enormous damage in the Labor Party”.

Less than two months since Gillard got her wish, the public has witnessed the insight reported above, and the “consequences” so astutely observed by Price are chickens going home to roost.

DD Ball says:

04:31am | 29/07/10

Um, that sound you *hear ..

Joe Blow says:

11:19pm | 28/07/10

“Sorry if I’m starting to sound too pro-labor. They win hands down right now on the simple basis of having policies I don’t mind” -

I suppose you are hoping to be one of the 150 randoms that set their Climate Change Policy? Or is it the East Timor Solution that East Timor isn’t even contemplating that captures your imagination?

Labor supporters ....hahahaha

Jason CR says:

11:53pm | 28/07/10

Labor 0
Liberals 0
Rudd/Oakes 2

Yvonne says:

07:39pm | 29/07/10

Kp you’re right, a recession we had to have, nearly sent us all to the wall. High interest rates, gee you actually dont have to be an old Liberal voter to remember that, mid foties is enough. Imagine people freaking at 20% interest rates going around at the time!!!!!! No wonder Howard was in for so long, trouble is now there is a raft of new people voting that wouldnt believe what happened under K and H if you told them!!! I was sufferring with you KP. Good comment

Stewart Henstock says:

07:31am | 29/07/10

Actually K-Rudd was one of a few who stuck to their principles and didn’t sell out to the factions whose sole purpose is to remain in power.

Philip Crowley says:

11:32pm | 28/07/10

Chris you insult the intelligence of every ‘normal joe blow’ voter. If you think I will vote for Gillard JUST because she is a woman, or against Abbott JUST because he is Abbott, you have another think coming Sir/Madam! My criteria cover policies, credibility and competence and I have plenty of time to make up my mind. Your stupidity is mind-blowing!!

James A says:

10:42am | 29/07/10

Agree.

Gillard looks very ill.

She knows she is not up to it and the weight of keeping secrets is obviously telling on her.

Keep the leaks up Rudd and your minions.  A backstabber like Gillard deserves to be taken down in the most public and humiliation manner possible.

ALP - never again.

Christian Real says:

07:47am | 29/07/10

KZ
On one hand Tony abbott is cutting 1.5% from business tax and then with the other hand he is imposing a 1.7% levey (Tax) on businesses to pay for his parental leave policy.
This means that where businesses were paying 30% tax before, under Tony abbott’s grand plans and policies, they will be paying 30.2%, a tax increase of 0.2%

Stewart Henstock says:

02:00pm | 29/07/10

You sure you’re not talking about Julia Gillard????

craig says:

09:15pm | 29/07/10

rubbish , Abbott is reducing tax for all companies and increasing taxes for big big business , I am a small business owner and considor both policies winners , a tax reduction and the partenal leave balances the employee playing field for me. Abbotto pl plocicy is great and will help me compete against big business by helping me keep staff.

Yvonne says:

07:43pm | 29/07/10

you’re right….sad. Election by media

Shane says:

09:25pm | 31/07/10

Its like she is the reincarnate of Princess Diana in the ABC pro Labor media spin only she is in a real world metamorphis period and is sure to emerge as the Bogan Queen Jools.
Seriously with that horrible turd on ABC last night called Howles or some such defending his Bogan Queen to the last breath, it is hard to tell where the cartoon ends and the real people come back because his allie on the night Leigh Sales was pretty far from real also.
I live in Fairfield West, I pay 25% of my wages in tolls and fuel, I want the Liberals back ASAP, this is some sort of weird ideologue horror fantasy charade with the Bogan Queen desperate for a full year in PM office so she scores the gold pass benefits.

Mal says:

04:14pm | 01/08/10

Agree.  Her record is so good she deserves 3 years or until she gets knifed.  You need a stiff drink and a lie down

Shane says:

12:14am | 03/08/10

I went into Parramatta KFC tonight and asked for some small breasts some big thighs and a red box. They gave me Julia Gillard who was hanging around after being there all day…....