Survey shows voters’ loss of trust in Kevin Rudd

TrueOz says:

08:04am | 11/06/10

I’m certainly no fan of the things that the Whitlam government did during their reign of incompetence - but credit must be given where it is due - Whitlam was a GENUINE reformer whose legacy (for better or worse) lives on to this day.

Rudd and his government, on the other hand, have simply squandered the wealth created by Australia during better economic times and indebted our children and grandchildren for years (possibly decades) to come. The legacy of this government is one of trashed opportunity and ineptitude - almost one of economic vandalism.

History will judge Rudd and his government VERY harshly indeed - unlike Whitlam who has become an iconic figure of social reform. An unprincipled, gutless “leader” like Rudd barely deserves to be spoken of in the same breath as Whitlam.

persephone says:

08:15am | 11/06/10

To say he hasn’t brought about any reform is a bit much, when you consider the current hooha about the mining tax.

And the health reforms.

Of course, if by this you mean that there’s nothing up and running yet, then the same could be said of any government at this stage in the election cycle.

Proper reform requires ground work to be laid and that takes time.

Steve says:

08:21am | 11/06/10

The Liberal party has conducted a personal smear campaign against Rudd for at least three years and if you throw enough mud, some will stick. Why do we keep hearing about his hair dryer rage, his brief visit to a nightclub or his telling off of an emotionally unstable flight attendant. Big deal!
I am more concerned with Abbott trying to force young women to reveal their medical records to their parents (they supposed to remain virgins after all) .

Drewboy says:

08:44am | 11/06/10

How dare you Steve say that the “Flight Attendant” was emotionally unstable? The person in question was a member of the Air Force and deserved a little respect.

If the PM can’t respect the people who are there to serve and defend him, how in turn are we to respect him?

AdamC says:

08:49am | 11/06/10

Pers, you are the only person I have heard describing the RSPT and the health funding changes as ‘reforms’. While in a strict sense they are - they are changes, I suppose - they will have little real impact on society (aside from making mining elss attractive and the health ‘blame game’ even easier. Normally the term reform is used the describe, like, bigger stuff that will, you know, accomplish something.

In his defence, Rudd did have one of those, the ETS. The problem is that it became politically toxic after Cop(out)enhagen. His current policy (and, yes, it has changed) of implementing an ETS in conjunction with other world governments is actually eminently sensible. Unfortunately, it has left Rudd without a big ticket agenda item. That’s part of his current problems, actually.

MenarefromMars says:

08:52am | 11/06/10

@ persephone

“Proper reform requires ground work to be laid and that takes time”

Proper reform requires competence.

persephone says:

09:02am | 11/06/10

You’d better read a few newspaper articles, then, Adam, because both these intiatives - and others - are referred to as reforms by the media, with the health reforms consistently described as the biggest since the introduction of Medicare.

Type in ‘rudd health reforms’ to google and you get over 300,000 results.

‘Mining tax reforms’ get 240,000.

So I’m not the only person in the universe who see the two as reforms.

Dovif says:

09:18am | 11/06/10

pers

he has not done any health reform yet, again he started with big plans and then turn it into a disaster by wanted to take GST revenue from the state, he also had disagreement with state leader especially Victoria and WA

Now that Rudd has controll of Health (which he has not taken over yet) all he has done so far is put another lawyer of beuracracy in place on top of the state one. What evidence have you got, that it would not be a disaster like the home insulation, ETS, school building, grocery watch, fuel watch, mining tax etc.

dovif says:

09:21am | 11/06/10

Steve

it is easy to blame all of Rudd’s stuff up on an opponent, it does not make it factual.

For example, did Abbott have anything to do with Rudd calling the Chinese premier and his chinese delegation “those rat f**kers”

It is time the ALP and Rudd in particular take ownership of all their stuff ups and not blame it on others

Steve says:

09:23am | 11/06/10

@drewboy let’s hope the Air Force is made of sterner stuff if they ever get in a shooting war. She will get worse treatment in her new job at a fast food outlet.

TrueOz says:

09:24am | 11/06/10

persephone,

We can only hope that Santa Kev will be long gone before he and his team of economic vandals have the chance to implement the RSPT, or any of their dim-witted, ill-considered healthcare reforms.

You say (correctly) that proper reform requires groundwork to be laid and time. It also requires a degree of vision, imagination, determination and courage that Rudd and his ministers simply lack. Rudd is gutless and uninspired, not to mention bloody incompetent.

Your continued defence of the indefensible is laughable - I’m almost looking forward to your next rant!

Mr Tails Universe says:

09:30am | 11/06/10

I’d say it was “proposed” reform. It’s like me saying I’m an Adonis with bulging biceps and a rippling six pack because I’d put out a proposal that I intended to buy a gym membership.
Until I actually sign up, the gym gets my money and I start pumping iron, I’m still the same old same old.

MenarefromMars says:

09:44am | 11/06/10

@persephone

You said: “Type in ‘rudd health reforms’ to google and you get over 300,000 results.”

Well type in - persephone is wrong - you get: “About 148,000 results (0.08 seconds) “

does that make it true?

dovif says:

09:53am | 11/06/10

Pers

I went into Google and typed in Mining tax grabs and got 567,000 hits

Since Google is the umpire on these matter, Google believe it is more mining tax grab rather than reform

BG says:

11:29am | 11/06/10

Persephone. Whitlam with his disastrous ministers still managed to put in place Medicare and University for all within 3 years!  Unfortunately Whitlam couldnt manage the economy and was an egotistical maniac.
Rudd on the hand hasnt done a thing in three years and is also an egotistical maniac. At least Hawke and Keating could manage the money to some degree!

NT Woman says:

11:43am | 11/06/10

@persephone
Actually, Rudd+Health+Reforms returns 79 hits (with bing.) Hardly earth shattering

persephone says:

11:47am | 11/06/10

Some of you guys fail Comprehension 101.

Adam said ‘no one’ apart from myself saw Rudd’s health reforms as reforms. I pointed to google simply to show that there were quite a few ‘no ones’ around.

If you want to prove me wrong, you have to come up with no linkages between the words ‘rudd’ ‘health’ and ‘reform’.

Ditto for the mining tax.

Adam is clearly wrong, get over yourselves.

Secondly, my main point was that good reforms take time. No PM has been able to put in major reforms in their first term - at least not ones that lasted (Gough had to go to a DD to get Medicare up, the GST was in Howard’s second term).

What they did was laid the groundwork.

So, yes, Rudd’s is a reforming government, in that it has down the groundwork and set out a series of plans for reform. Yes, it’s difficult to see the changes, because the reforms aren’t yet in place.

If the ETS had been passed, that also would have been a major reform.

The NBN is obviously another reform which will bring major changes.

Hard to be a really reformist government when there’s no co operation in the Senate.

Chris says:

11:58am | 11/06/10

Persephone, 0 -v- Dovif & MenarefromMars, 8!

Nicole says:

12:32pm | 11/06/10

It’s ok pers, I’m not going to pick on you too. I just want to know how that knitting’s going?

Mark says:

12:34pm | 11/06/10

Pers, you are quite clearly blinded by your misguided and outdated ideology and are therefore incapable of accepting facts that are not aligned with your opinion. To argue this government is capable of reform is pure naivety. They have proven they would not be capable of organising a “piss up in a brewery” or should that be a “shake of a sauce bottle” in a sauce factory.

luke09 says:

01:11pm | 11/06/10

persephone, you should have written its, Hard to be a really reformist government when there’s no commonense, only limited consultations or discussions involved.

Rudd has lost trust because he is constantly found wanting on what he proposes and promised, mainly because of limited consultation within his own party. Rudd does not know what’s best as you would have us believe.

Gerry Harvey of Harvey Norman summed up Rudd perfectly by saying, ‘bloody amateurs’

Randal says:

03:29pm | 11/06/10

Pers, quoting the government message from media releases as evidence of reform is laughable and shows a real act of desperation on your part.

Put simply, fund shifting of revenue for the health system, whilst leaving the same duds who have mucked it up in charge is not reform in anyway shape or form, neither is cherry picking from 138 recommendations a tax on a single sector to pay for your debt creation tax reform.

This is the problem with the Rudd government, they make grandiose claims of reform and then implement what amounts to minimal change and this is why Rudd has lost all credibility.

The only real reform that Rudd planned to initiate was the ETS and he backed away from this in one of the greatest acts of political cowardice one can recall.

Implementation of real reform takes courage, it means that you need to withstand the flack and look to take the people with you, sometimes at the cost of your own political career and Rudd lacks this courage as he is obsessed with maintaining power and as a result his legacy is littered with failures and the ability to make the tough decisions.

Previous governments over the past 25 years have implemented real reforms of the taxation system, gun control, the labour market and the economy, and Rudd’s government pales by comparison.

Rudd talks big and delivers small, and that is why he is in the nose with the Australian people, and if the ALP are on the ball they will replace him now with Gillard, I for one hope they keep him as he will lose the next election and I mean lose it all by himself.

AdamC says:

03:49pm | 11/06/10

Sorry Persephone, I usually don’t include gullible journalists who embarrassingly repeat Kruddy’s spun-dry terminology (‘super profit’ anyone - cringe) in my definition of people. My bad; let’s rephrase - no sensible people describe Dudd’s health funding plan and RSPT as ‘reforms’.

However, if you want to fire up Google again and make a list of people who have said that these policies amount to ‘reforms’, I would be more than happy to let you know whether they qualify as sensible people. If you’re mad keen, I can even get you started with a list of people who aren’t ...

Christian Real says:

08:00pm | 11/06/10

Drewboy,
It appears that this “incident” of Rudd abusing a RAAF flight attendant, was a concocted lie and I would not be far wrong to suggest it was orchestrated by the Liberals.
A story in the Sydney Morning Herald, May 31,2010 @ 11.19PM
“Senator alleges PM of abuse of air crew”
Reading through this story here is some of the questions that Senator Brandis put to RAAF chief Air Marshall Mark Binskin:
“Senator Brandis asked RAAF chief Air Marshall Mark Binskin whether the alledged outburst over the lack of a special meal really occurred.”
“I put it to you than an incident of the kind…did in fact take place,“he said.
“Air Marshall Binskin responded “An incident of the severity you describe has never been reported to me”
This story also appeared in “NewsMail” which is the local Bundaburg newspaper on the 1st June, 2010

Christian Real says:

08:19pm | 11/06/10

Steve
I agree with you, that the Liberal party has orchestrated an on going smear campaign about the Prime Minister. The only thing that the Liberal party stands for is lies, and more lies, but what could you expect when their Leader Tony Abbott was caught out on ABC’s 7.30 Report for being ‘loose with the truth’
One bad apple contaminates the whole barrel of apples and that appears to be the case with the Liberal party.
“The mother of dirty, smear campaigns appears to have already started and has been orchestrated by the Liberal party opposition.

Max power says:

11:01pm | 11/06/10

Christian Real: I can assure you there is a real problem between Rudd and 34 SQN. They have had to change the crew structure of the aircraft to deal with Rudd. The senior officer of the SQN has had to spread his time between running the SQN and dealing with the demands of Rudd. Only senior crew are allowed to man the aircraft due to the rudeness of Rudd to the junior staff. So in other words, the squadron has had to crew the aircraft with people who should be used on runnning the squadron, not dealing with Rudd. All this has been brought about because of the complaints of the crew members through the chain of command.

Aitch B says:

07:46am | 12/06/10

And you don’t think that the government has taken every opportunity to smear Abbott, Christian?

Of course they have! Even to the point of Nicola Roxon getting stuck into him for taking part in a charity fund raising bike ride!

Get real, Christian!

Christian Real says:

11:28am | 12/06/10

Max power
You write: “I can assure you there is a problem between Rudd and 34 SQN.”
You finish your comment by saying: “All this has been brought about because of the complaints of the crew members through the chain of command.”
Well it looks like the chain of command must have being broken, doesn’t it, because Chief Air marshall Mark Binskin as responded to a question put to him by Senator George Brandis during an ‘Estimates Hearing’
“Senator Brandis asked Asked RAAF chief Air Marshal Mark Binskin whether the alledged outburst over the lack of a special meal really occurred.”
“I put it to you that an incident of the kind…did in fact take place.”
“Air Marshal Binskin responded: ‘An incident of the severity you describe has never been reported to me”
Max Power, this sure puts a hole in your comment of the ” complaints of the crew members through the chain of command”
The NewsMail and the Sydney Morning Herald were the source of my information.

BobM says:

09:59pm | 12/06/10

Give up persephone, face it, you’ve backed a loser.

Robert Smissen , rural SA says:

12:31am | 13/06/10

Steve if Little Kevvy abused a private employee like that he would be up before the tribunal & have a massive walk out by workers & if we were in a shooting war the young attendant would be armed & probably justified in using her weapon

Jim says:

09:27am | 14/06/10

@peresphone….reforms? What reforms? Both things you mention are simply ‘gonnas’ - one is heading towards the world’s biggest backflip after months of being chiselled in stone, the second is yet another fluffy promise that will never eventuate because your boy Kevvie has squandered every cent and then some by splashing it about in the heavily unionised industries that surprise surprise, bank-rolled his last campaign. If KRudd was in the corprate sector as incompetent and corrupt as he is now, he would be planting beans in Boggo Road.

Winkle1 says:

12:43pm | 11/06/10

Mmmm ... what else did Gerry Harvey say ??? That he agreed with the super tax… as has - John Hewson (past Federal Liberal Leader), Alan Fells, Bernie Fraser (much respected past Reserve Bank Chairman), Ken Henry and 60 well respected economists across Australia to name a few. This however doesn’t get much air time or paper space in comparrison to the Rudd bashing which has become a national sport. On the other side we have Twiggy, Gina Reinhart and big boy Pearce scare mongering and threatening to bring down the Government. Pearce could not wipe his supercilious grin off his face when being interviewed after the proposed Super Tax announcement ... its was just sport to him ... a game and as for the ‘rally’ in Perth yesterday it was more notable for the giggling going on than any serious political discontent. I guarantee you that they were all Mining company employees rounded up like a rent a party.

marley says:

04:03pm | 11/06/10

@Winkle - Well yes, but isn’t Rudd supposed to have, you know, “diplomatic” abilities?  The silky skills of persuasion?

What kind of a diplomat king-hits his opposite number before sitting down to consult and negotiate?  The tax may be (with modification) a good thing, but the handling has had the delicate touch of Alaric the Ostrogoth sacking Rome.  No wonder the Romans are annoyed.

persephone says:

08:26am | 11/06/10

Except Rudd hasn’t decided to do nothing.

The policy is exactly the same as it always was, and all that’s happening is that it’s being delayed until there’s a more reasonable Senate.

Unfortunately for the anti ETS crowd, this Senate is likely to be controlled by the Greens, resulting in a worse deal for the people the Libs claim to represent (but a better deal for the environment).

In the meantime, he’s ramped up the spending on renewable energy, because regardless of when the ETS is passed, the targets remain the same.

And to try and absolve the Libs of blame of this is cowardly. The Libs saw it as a triumph at the time - what has changed? Have you all become climate change converts?

You can’t have it both ways - either is was good that the Libs opposed the ETS, in which case they wouldn’t want to be absolved of blame, or it was a mistake on their part, in which case they’d want to shift the blame to someone else.

From my point of view, it was a bad decision by the Liberals. They trashed one of their election promises and broke their word to the Parliament on a piece of legislation THEY had negotiated. In the long run, they’ve achieved nothing.

The constituency they were trying to protect would have been better served by a Lib/Labor ETS than a Labor/Green one.

There is a possibility that, even if the Greens do hold the bop, they will make such absurd demands that a Lab/Lib bill is negotiated, but if so, it’s still going to be greener than what’s offered at present.

Either way (bar a TA win, which isn’t going to happen) the Liberals posturing on this issue will lead to tougher action on climate change, which I for one will welcome.

So I’d be gloating about the Libs’ short term victory, not pretending they had nothing to do with it - because these few months of sunshine are all you guys have got.

MenarefromMars says:

08:49am | 11/06/10

@persephone

Rudd in fact has decided to do nothing on the ETS for a long time.
Truth is he could have formed a majority with the Greens.
At least Howard bargained his GST with the democrats to get it through when Labour were opposing it.
Rudd has shown that its “his way or the highway”, and that will be his downfall.

Sherlock says:

09:48am | 11/06/10

Good ol persephone always good for a laugh. I may currently be a coalition supporter but the strength of my political preferences pale into oblivion when compared to persephone’s. The support for the ALP no matter how bad they are absolutely destroys any shred of credibility persephone may claim to have.

You may think I’m a coalition fanboy but here’s a few facts about me.

1. My voting record in federal elections would be around 50% coalition and 50% Labor.

2. Add in state elections and I think my support for Labor in elections would be greater than 50%

3. I voted Labor in the senate in the 2007 federal election.

4. I am not currently employed or have I ever worked for any political party.

5. I am not currently or have I ever been a member of any political party.

6. The only party political meeting I have ever attended was during my university days and it was a meeting for a left wing party.

7. I have never donated anything (even my time) to any political party.

8. I have never even indirectly donated to a political party via an intermediately such as get-up.

9. I have never attended any function in aid of or organised by any political organisation.

10. I do know a number of politicians however I’m on a first name basis with far more Labor politicians than Coalition ones.

I can’t help wondering just how many of these persephone could state truthfully (of course with political allegiances reversed).

Frankly persephone, I can’t take a word of what you say seriously. You say that the ETS has been delayed until we have a more reasonable senate yet in the next breath you state that there is unlikely to be one. Well to most reasonable people that says there will never been an ETS and if I remember correctly the PM did say the introduction of the ETS would be dependent on what other countries are doing.

I said over a year ago that Kevin Rudd was Australia’s number one climate sceptic and I stand by that assertion. He’s the one man in a position to do something worthwhile and he elected to do nothing.

persephone says:

11:55am | 11/06/10

Sherlock

don’t think I’ve ever made any comments about your voting intentions, so it’s interesting that you feel the need to justify yourself. I’ve made it clear on several occasions that I’m an ALP member and have done extensive voluntary work for the party (to the point where I’ve suggested punch give me a bio to stop me having to repeat myself) so to insinuate that I’m in someway hiding my allegiances is a bit silly.

What I am saying is that a Senate with the Greens holding the bop will see an ETS passed, and a greener ETS than the one proposed at present. All I’m pointing out is that it doesn’t necessarily have to be with the co operation of the Greens.

To repeat: the next Senate will pass the ETS. It will either do so because of a Greens/Labor alliance - and therefore be a tougher ETS than we have at present - or it will do so because of a Lab/Lib alliance, which will also mean it’s a greener one at present.

With the ‘unreasonable’ part of the Senate removed from having the bop, as they do at present, Labor will be able to more easily play off the two major voting blocks in the Senate against each other.

Please feel free to dispute my logic on this, rather than playing pedantic games.

GB says:

12:52pm | 11/06/10

“However, you have to admire a man that sticks to his guns no matter how politically dangerous it may be. “
Sorry Sherlock but Rudd “sticking to his guns” is deserving of zero admiration in my eyes. He has no choice. He painted himself into a corner when the tax grab was announced by saying there would be no consultation and to do so now would be just another in a long line of backflips. We all know that he is going to cave in despite the rhetoric and I for one can’t wait to see him try and squirm his way out of this one. His party will sell him down the river at the drop of a hat. Crean started the ball rolling and there’ll be plenty more to come.

Macon Paine says:

01:01pm | 11/06/10

@ Sherlock
Spot on Sherlock. With all due respect to persephone she appears to be in the midst of some strange delusion over this issue. Rudd (in sporting parlance) choked big time over the ETS, he fell right into the trap (of exposing his yellow belly, and is now paying dearly at the polls) set by the libs. It really is amusing to see the feverish defence persephone mounts for Rudd over this issue. It’s almost like Labor’s ETS is god, with Rudd the messiah come to save us and persephone the devoted apostle trying to spread the word and convert all.

Randal says:

03:45pm | 11/06/10

Don’t worry Pers, the failure of the ETS to pass the parliament was an enormous victory for the Liberal party, but more importantly the Australian people.

What you fail to understand is the criticism of Rudd was not that the Senate blocked the ETS, it is that despite his political posturing and claims of “the greatest moral challenge” and heavy criticism of the Liberals for calling for the legislation to be delayed he then walked away from it as fast as a politician can run for the exact same reasoning.

Now if he was a man of conviction, which he is not, then he would have called a DD, he had the trigger and brought the “greatest moral challenge” of our time front and centre of an election campaign.

Instead he smelt the winds of a popularity shift in the community, shelved it and now does not even want to have this as a key plank of the 2010 campaign by burying it until 2013 leaving this as an issue until the next election cycle.

As for hostile Senate’s, well that’s not going to be Rudd’s problem after August, and we can all rest assured that an ETS under Tony will never see the light of day - yet another victory for the Libs and the Australian people.

In fact the Really Stupid Profits Tax won’t either, and we will be rid of the most inept administration this nation has seen, by the end of August the Australian people will indeed have a lot to be thankful for.

And the man to thank is KRudd, the man who lost the unlosable election through sheer incompetence and political cowardice!

persephone says:

02:51pm | 13/06/10

If the aim is to get an ETS up as soon as possible, a DD is not necessarily the way to go.

It’s not a case of ‘have a DD election in August, pass the legislation at a joint sitting in September’.

Before a joint sitting can happen, the legislation has to go through both Houses of Parliament and been rejected again - a process which, if the Senate throws a few committees into the ring, as they have every time so far, can take several months.

Besides, a DD only allows a joint sitting for the bill that was rejected. The present bill is now out of date for a number of reasons and would need rejigging anyway.

Furthermore, it was always a compromise bill, designed to get the Liberals on board.

I’m sure that the legislation that comes to Parliament after the next election will be far ‘greener’ in complexion, because the Senate will encourage that.

If he is a climate change believer, Rudd will be happy to have the opportunity to put up a tougher bill.

He can’t do that with a DD.

Finally, for a DD to happen, it needs to be held after July 1 (for a whole host of reasons, both practical and political). Rudd would be crazy as a cut snake to say now “Yes, I’m going to call a DD” - it would create massive disruption in all sorts of areas (stock markets are notoriously volatile nearing and during election campaigns, investments are put on hold in case of policy changes, and so on) and be politically silly.

The Liberals have done their constituency no favours on this one. All the indications are that, whatever happens in the Lower House, the Upper House will be Labor/Greens dominated, especially in the light of current polling.

You can gloat all you want - enjoy it while you can; the next Senate (regardless of who is in government) will be pushing for a carbon emissions scheme which is far harsher than the one currently on offer.

Polywatcher says:

09:26am | 11/06/10

Can someone confirm that persephone’s address is Sussex Street?

persephone says:

11:59am | 11/06/10

No, cause it isn’t.

I have no interest in or knowledge of NSW politics, which is why I rarely comment on those articles.

TrueOz says:

09:29am | 11/06/10

“...Rudd’s a good politician - he’s intelligent, he likes people, he’s policy driven and forward thinking”

persephone - check your glasses again - they’re definatly of the rose coloured variety!

Fots says:

09:31am | 11/06/10

“I certainly don’t believe that they’ll go to Abbott on the rebound. “

Ofcourse we’re all hoping this… I mean, no sane person would re-elect Rudd, right?

Whipping The Dead Analogy Tails says:

09:38am | 11/06/10

I’m not sure it’s a case of the honeymoon being over. I think for most people it’s more like the lawyers have been called, the kids are in the car and we’re moving to our brother’s place.
Sure, there are still people who’ll stand by their man, claiming they walked into a door because they feel like there’s no alternative than to stay in this abusive relationship.
I just wish they’d seek some help.
Or, now you mention it, that red headed bird from down the road is starting to look really attractive. Maybe you could dump him for her?

darryl says:

11:51am | 11/06/10

You must be the most rusted on labor hack that is still out there. As vacancies open up daily in the PM’s department there must be a job for you there. No amount of your re-spun spin is convincing anyone that rudd/labor is either capable or doing a good job. At some stage you either stop pushing this line or someone stops paying you to do it.

AdamC says:

12:06pm | 11/06/10

There is some truth to your assessment, Persephone - Kruddy has come out of his purple patch. The problem for Labor is not so much the level of his current approval but the rapid rate at which it has deteriorated. That, and the fact that Rudd’s political antenna and spin machine both seem to have broken down.

Rudd still has more than an even chance to win the next election. He just has to shut up until polling day. At the moment, everytime he opens his mouth he just digs a bigger hole.

d'oh says:

12:12pm | 11/06/10

I guess your loyalty is to be admired Persephone but that is where the admiration stops.

There are several easy answers to Mr Rudd’s unusually high satisfaction ratings (as well as the unusual time frame).  The obvious one is spin, spin never lasts forever and eventually needs to run out.  The other is the total lack of media scrutiny until his shelving of the ETS.

“I think Rudd’s a good politician - he’s intelligent, he likes people, he’s policy driven and forward thinking”

His “like” of people obviously excludes flight attendants, home insulation installers & recipients, business leaders and neo-cons.  As for being policy driven - this is a remarkable statement given his backflips over the last 2 years.  He might be all excited about starting policies but he obviously has some trouble finishing them. 

As for the RSPT, that little gem looks more ideology driven than policy driven. 

I will give you future driven though, just look at 2020 and vision for 2050.  Conversely, how quickly did he drop his Big Australia vision?  While vision is important, Mr Rudd has been using it as an distract to draw attention away from his present screw ups.

As for the ETS, he could have got it through.  There were several options open to him and you know it.  Everyone knew he could and we watched with baited breathe if he had the spine to carry through with what he said he thought was the greatest moral challenge of our time.  Unfortunately he succumed to the political cowardice he has so venomously accused in others.

Jack McCain says:

12:20pm | 11/06/10

Pers believes Rudd likes people. What a joke. He thinks everyone else is beneath him. Ask the RAAF girl he abused, Ask the people he abused in the hair drier incident, or the many staff who could no longer tolerate his pathetic tantrums.

Jezza says:

12:27pm | 11/06/10

Persephone, Rudd is political poison. He’s NOT going to regain his status as a good politician. I’m a swinging voter, as is my extended family. Last night my sister decribed Rudd as a nut-case, & this is a family that usually doesn’t give a shit about politics. What I don’t understand is why haven’t the Labor caucus moved to get rid of him, or are they as blinkered as you are?

Darryl Price says:

09:29pm | 11/06/10

I’m almost certain you declared your support for Gillard for PM over Rudd only a couple or three weeks ago. Is that the case or not? With your continuing defense of all things Rudd, I’m beginning to doubt my own mind. Pray tell, consort of Hades.

Kei says:

11:07am | 12/06/10

Kevin surely likes people when it comes to charading it in public. Remember all the sucking up he did to the Chinese? Then the other day he call them “rat f***s” behind their backs.

You can never judge a book by its covers. Some people are fake out there that everything may look rosy and chirpy when in fact it’s the opposite.

If you look at the things Rudd has done, there are reasons why we shouldn’t trust him.

1. Before the 40% mining tax was released, he re-assured that the mining companies will be fine. Then happened the tax.
2. After given a report that the home insulations carry potential dangers, he still gave it the go-ahead that led to the deaths Australian works.
3. Saying that we must immediately act on climate change and that the cost of inaction will be much larger. Then guess what? Inaction. Lets delay the ETS.
4. I won’t go into “the greatest moral challenge” as most of you know about it already.
5. He said he’d pull our troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan when he made his election promises. Tell me, how many of our soldiers are still there and how many of our brave soldiers have died?
6. He said he won’t spend taxpayers money on government advertising. Where did $38million suddenly go to?

The list can continue running. There are lots of things to like about Kevin’s intentions. If there is no action and only excuses, it doesn’t make him a good leader. We need a leader who will act and lead, not make excuses and take steps back.

persephone says:

03:06pm | 13/06/10

Daryl

I’d check your memory, if I were you. I’ve never said I preferred Gillard.

I’m really not that fussed about leaders.

Of course, a really disastrous one is bad for the Party, but there isn’t any objective evidence that this is a fair description of Rudd.

His polling compares very well with former PMs in the run up to an election, as does the party’s.

Kei

1. evidence? There’s plenty that the miners knew a 40% tax was coming (Clive Palmer said the figure was acceptable back in February).
That Rudd patted miners on the head and told them not to worry their pretty little heads about anything is news to me, so please provide a link.

2. He gave the go ahead to an industry with tougher regulations than it had faced before. It appears to be that irresponsible employers (some from well established companies, not fly by nighters) ignored these.

3. A delay to the ETS is not inaction on climate change. The government is investing in a number of iniatives in this area, which are however more expensive and less efficient than a carbon trading scheme will be.

The 5% cut is emissions is still on track, exactly as it would be if an ETS was introduced.

It’s just not being done in the best way possible.

4. And you’re repeating yourself, so 4 shouldn’t be here.

5. He’s never said he’d pull troops out of Afghanistan, quite the opposite.

6. Again, no he didn’t, because that would be silly. Governments have to advertise, all the time. He was specifically talking about advertising to do with policy issues and the rules he set in place has made the whole thing more transparent.

Certainly if you just make things up, as you seem to be doing, you can come up with an infinite list. If you stick to the facts, it’s just that little bit harder.

Harriet says:

09:39am | 11/06/10

Gee Andrew do you mean a happier country as witnessed with the Cronulla race riots. I dont miss that type of strong politician.

Joan says:

09:56am | 11/06/10

`the Bush-Blair and Howard show` replaced by Brown, Rudd, Obama show-  all on the nose in first term- one down two to go.

dovif says:

11:02am | 11/06/10

Gee Harriet do you mean a happier country as witnessed by the death and bashing of students of Indian heritage and remarks like the Chinese premier and his deligation are Rat F**kers. Yeah we do not need that type of strong politicians

Howard had 12 years, Rudd did all that in 2.5

tom says:

03:52pm | 11/06/10

Maybe the lesson to be learnt here is not to vote for politicians who campaign on programs like ROVE and Sunrise ?

MenarefromMars says:

10:25am | 11/06/10

@Holly

First you say I need to learn to count then you say
” If the Greens had supported his second attempt to have the legislation pass the Senate it would have gone through with the support of the two Coalition members who crossed the floor.” I know Turnbull was prepared to cross the floor and there would have been others.

If the Greens were opposing the ETS, clearly there was something wrong with the bill, or something wrong with the leader who could not convince the Greens that it was the “first step”.

I voted Greens at the last election, because I wanted my vote to count as far as giving more power to those who hold the balance of power. I am critical of Rudd because he has failed to communicate, and failed to deliver.

Abbott is known for stating “Global Warming is crap” - he came to power with that frame of mind, and his point of view is gathering momentum.

Jane says:

10:40am | 11/06/10

It could have gone through with support of Greens and Coalition who were prepared to cross the floor..The GREENS chose to not support it…...not harsh enough.

Rudd/Labor boldly threatened a DD at many junctures throughout the process….yet he didn’t call one.
A DD could have been called if they were serious….after Copenhagen, they weren’t.

JR says:

11:18am | 11/06/10

Didnt even need the Liberals to cross the floor. It only required Nick Xenaphon and Fielding (ok so pretty much no chance there, but that is democracy) and the greens.

persephone says:

12:04pm | 11/06/10

Men are from Mars -

more ignorance. Turnbull is in the Lower House, not the Senate. The legislation passed the Lower House without him needing to cross the floor (they didn’t call for a division).

Turnbull could have crossed the floor till the cows came home, it would make no difference to the vote in the Senate.

The alternate to your ‘clearly there was something wrong with the bill’ is that there was something wrong with the Greens.

There was certainly something wrong with the Opposition, who could not keep a promise they made in the lead up to the last election or one they made to the government only days before.

MenarefromMars says:

01:45pm | 11/06/10

@persephone

You got me on the Senate ignorance. That said I don’t think Abbott would have been the main influence - but Nick Minchin - no one blames him.

You said “The alternate to your ‘clearly there was something wrong with the bill’ is that there was something wrong with the Greens.” No, its clear there’s something wrong with Kevin, he doesn’t communicate well - not with the miners not with the Greens, not with the electorate.

Personally, I think there may have been some underhanded tactics from the opposition to make enough amendments to ETS to make it unpalatable to everyone - I wouldn’t put it beyond them. It worked for the Republic debate.

Randal says:

04:05pm | 11/06/10

Holly, that is why the constitution provides for the government of the day to dissolve both houses of parliament and then if successful at the election have their legislation passed in a joint sitting, no need to worry about those pesky Libs, independents and Greens then.

That is what you would expect a Prime Minister who lectured the nation on the importance of an ETS being passed, even before a meeting had been held in Copenhagen, a Prime Minister who told us that the ETS was his answer to “greatest moral challenge of our time”, a Prime Minister who said we had to lead the world and take a stand on climate change, regardless of whether the world acted.

Yet instead of taking this brave political step to get this most “critical and important legislation through the parliament”, he decided to shelve it, put it on the back burner until 2013.

Do you not see, even as the obvious ALP supporter that you are, see this as a little odd that the Prime Minister of this nation would back away from what he led us to believe was the most critical action we needed to take as a nation??

Can you not see why the wider populous, having heard this rhetoric for months and then seeing no action, no act of leadership or courage to support the rhetoric might now be questioning whether this man can be trusted??

Can you not see that Abbot’s credibility has reason, in part, because the Prime Ministers has fallen, because Holly if you cannot trust him to back what he so fiercely claimed to believe, how on earth could you trust him with anything else he says.

Surely this is clear as day to even regardless of your bias.

Sirro says:

11:16pm | 11/06/10

Why bother with an ETS.

If Rudd had any nuts at all he would simply place a single flat government tax on all emitters of Carbon (pretty much every business other than surfboard riding teachers). It could be small and symbolic but it would be a clear un-spun signal of his intentions.

That inital step of placing a base rate on pollution would be signal enough to business that it was time to get clean.

The whole concept of creating/granting credits and allowing them to be traded is bogus. In fact it will just mean that polluting businesses will work out whether the marginal cost of polluting (the cost of 1 carbon credit) is higher or lower than the marginal return of production. They will pollute till one reaches the other. Where costs can be easily passed on to the end user (monopolies etc) they will do it till the consumer stops breathing.

In the middle the carbon traders (see banks) will happily skim a margin and likely learn how best to manipulate the market to make a profit for themselves (thats what they are they’re for as liquidity providers and the government wants this in an ETS system)

In actual fact the whole scheme will probably lead to more pollution as businesses who comply with the ETS will argue that they are working within the rules and are therefore “green”. Their behaviour will be seen as socially responsible when in fact its not in the interests of reducing carbon emissions.

Simple straightforward solution.

Straight Tax on Carbon emissions, the same rate for all. No mates rates etc etc.

Implement with a specific reduction goal and the threat that the rate will increase if the goal isnt me.

Rudd wont do it cause its simple and he wants to look like a complex visionary.

darryl says:

12:22pm | 11/06/10

Really Dude what was this reform agenda? Sorry to tell you but the Senate has the right to stop stupidity and they did.
It is simple matter for you to claim that rudd has a reform agenda but just what is it?.
His health reform is based on billions of Chinese dollars, with no real reform Education reform is based upon over priced buildings.
Why is it the left always believe they own the self called ‘reform agenda’ and the right have to pay for it later.

Keith says:

11:15am | 12/06/10

Dude, there is a reason for a senate. A senate exists to ensure the correct reforms are put through. The senate has to judge the merits of the reforms and make sure that provides good for Australia’s interests before submitting their vote of approval.

If the senate has rejected Rudd’s reform, it means Rudd didn’t do a good job at it. If he was committed to it, he would improve the reform and try to sell it better.

There are lots of reforms which have the right intentions, but if you can’t sell it right or if you don’t have a properly written reform, then it will be rejected. A badly made reform will have negative impacts on the country.

Elphaba says:

10:52am | 11/06/10

I’m glad they blocked the ETS.  It’s completely flawed legislation, I think it’s fantastic they stood their ground.

I’m all for solutions to climate change, but an ETS is not one of them.  Sooner or later, the govt of the day will have to properly investigate nuclear power - it might as well be sooner.

I’ll be voting Liberal this year - again.  I didn’t like Rudd in ‘07, and I still don’t like him now.  Have you seen the Liberal ads against Rudd?  Hilarious!  I hope Labor mount something equally as dirty.  This election is going to be very interesting…

Jane says:

11:17am | 11/06/10

Elphaba….too true…but you won’t ever find Labor supporting Nuclear…after the ‘mother of all’ scare campaigns on it over the last few decades..and just recently before the last election when the Coalition considered discussion on it.

If they were serious about the environment and emissions beyond the criteria of ‘popularity’ only, they would debate or even consider discussions on it…they have proven to be dogmatic on it and not open to consideration in any way - ergo not serious about exploring all options….and not serious about the environment or emissions as they claim.

Labor have painted themselves into a tight corner on Nuclear….so that any reversal will be the ‘mother of all’ hypocritical backflips.

The only Party to even consider Nuclear to be part of the potential mix like the rest of the world is the Liberal Party.

dovif says:

11:35am | 11/06/10

What

Labor’s election campaign is going to be

Be afraid Australia, be very afraid,  the other party might be more incompetant than us.

persephone says:

12:07pm | 11/06/10

Max, you should have a talk to Adam - he doesn’t believe there were any reforms.

Elphaba

as I said, you’re going to get an ETS you like even less when the Senate changes.

I’ll like it, though.

Who says:

02:23pm | 11/06/10

Elphaba – do a little bit of research into nuclear power and you will soon see it is very far from the magic bullet solution that pro-nuclear lobby would have you believe.  Even ignoring the environmental considerations (how many cm of sea level rise is worth one nuclear disaster?) the capital cost of these generators is huge (about $3500/kw) and the decommissioning cost are equally large.

JR says:

03:50pm | 11/06/10

In terms of Nuclear Power, lets keep one thing in mind. Not one Nuclear Plant which meets the quality standards which are required today has ever had a serious incident. Neither Chenobyl or Three Mile Island would have met todays standards before their accidents and therefore would not have been running.

Christian Real says:

06:38pm | 11/06/10

Max power,

You are wrong Max, The Liberals/Nationals, mining companies and the Liberal aligned newspapers and Radio Talk back shows on 2gb are already running “the mother of all dirty,scare campaign” leading up the to next federal election.
As for the BER project, this is a story from “The Daily Telegraph”
“BER bungle saved Australian Economy”, written by Andrew Carswell and Alison Rehn, June 03,2010 @ 12.00AM
“IT HAS been condemned as failure but the Rudd Government’s Building the Education Revolution may have saved the Australian economy from posting a negative quarter of growth.”
Official figures released yesterday showed the Australian economy grew by a mere 0.5 per cent in the first three months of 2010, helped substantially by an 11.6 per cent increase in Federal government investment.”
Further through the story reads:
“Federal government stimulus was widely regarded as having saved Australia from following the world into reccession last year,with its $900 handouts and boost to the First Home Buyers Grant preventing the nation from chalking up two consecutive quarters of negative growth.”

darryl says:

12:03pm | 11/06/10

100% correct and that persephone person will have to change his tune. History tells us that people of the left can change there political allegiances very quickly. I expect nothing more or less from him/her. I along with others dream of the day rudd drifts off to Queensland and spends his wife’s millions.

persephone says:

12:12pm | 11/06/10

I’m quite amused that defence of Labor policies has always been translated by posters here as love of Rudd. I’ve said on quite a few occasions that I’m not ‘wedded’ to Kevin - I think he’s a good politician, I like a lot of what he does, but I’ve never been someone who thinks the leader is all important.

I highly doubt that the party will dump Rudd, but if they did it wouldn’t worry me particularly.

As I have nothing to do with NSW Labor, their style of politics has little effect on my own.

And I think there’s far more similarities between Abbott and Latham - who were often compared in the past, with even a book entirely devoted to drawing paralells between them - than between Latham and Rudd.

Andrew says:

01:20pm | 11/06/10

And so it begins “I’m not wedded to Rudd” hehehe.. or “if the party dumped him it wouldn’t worry me particularly”.... oh what fun it is to read comments like that on one hand and then see your worshiping love for Kevin comments in the rest of the posts you write. It merely reinforces my view that the only loyalty labor has is to the quest for power for powers sake.

As for NSW Labor politics I am merely pointing out that the standard operating procedure for a labor government in trouble is to dump the leader put in a “fresh” face and hope the electorate buy it.

As for similarities between Abbott and Latham, hahahaha. You guys have been running that line for a while now and no-one is biting. It just goes to show how Labor hates losing and disowns their own as soon as they can if they lose. Did you read what Latham wrote about Rudd (Ouch!!).

Already we’ve seen the new comments by Iemma and Costa, its only a matter of time before it all comes crashing down around Kevin R. My only hope is that the rest of labor is not let off the hook.

Oh, and the similarities I am suggesting will occur between Rudd and Latham are not similiarities of style but rather of circumstance when Rudd finds he to is dumped by the party and given pariah status.

Tic Tock time’s a runnin out for Labor….tick tock

Randal says:

04:08pm | 11/06/10

I think that statement from Pers can be seen as Pers distancing herself from the Dudd…

Seems to me the death blow cannot be far away for poor old Kev!

persephone says:

03:15pm | 13/06/10

Guys, on numerous past posts I have made exactly the same comment.

I have no doubt Rudd will stay as the leader, I will be happy to see him there, I personally campaigned to have him made leader.

But that doesn’t equal ‘loving’ him; I made an objective assessment at the time that he was our best chance of knocking off Howard.

He proved me right.

For that I am very grateful, but appreciating someone’s strengths and achievements does not equal ‘loving’ them and does not mean I think the party would fall in a heap without him.

Are you guys ‘in love’ with Abbott? Or do you simply think he’s the best leader for your party at this time?

Really, do stop being silly.

darryl says:

12:31pm | 11/06/10

BG so correct. If there ever was an academic construct to fund research this was it. Gore and others have made billions out of pushing this line of fear.  Abbott saved us from being a world leader in madness in stopping the ETS.  Imagine if Rudd would have been given the rights to ‘climate change’  legislation in Australia, thanks again Tony

Doug says:

12:40pm | 11/06/10

Andrew Bolt!! followed by truth, You’re a joke BG

Joe says:

01:44pm | 11/06/10

So Doug, did you actually read the thread BG alluded to? Perhaps you could do so and tell us where Bolt lied?

Anthony Taylor says:

03:56pm | 11/06/10

Bg don’t forget that our seas are becoming more acidic as a result of excess co2 c ombining with water to form acidic compounds. If we had acidic seas in the past there would be no shell fish. Also corals are very sensitive to temperature change particularly warming acidic seas.’ The corals took millions of years to the state they in today. This would suggest that temperatures have been stable for millions of years

JR says:

04:07pm | 11/06/10

Well speaking of Bolt it looks like Rudd is scared of him.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/06/10/2923180.htm?site=thedrum

Lest couple of paragraphs in an interesting article.

Doug says:

04:19pm | 11/06/10

Don’t have to, Bolt is constantly talking shit, it’s a given

Richard says:

01:27pm | 11/06/10

People didn’t want the ETS, especially the flawed and inefficient Labor version. As a general rule, I think we should elect Labor governments to take care of social reforms and Liberal governments to execute economic reforms. I think this path will lead to a strong, progessive Australia with benefits flowing to all.

Dude says:

04:33pm | 11/06/10

Richard, you need to do some study on the history of economic and social reform in this country before you make a total ass of ourself.

Christian Real says:

11:48pm | 11/06/10

Flipper
Smokers cost more when they become a burden on society because of their self inflicted diseases and illnesses that smoking causes.
It is only fair that smokers pay for their rehabilitation in later life, and in that way they won’t be a costly burden for the taxpayers that don’t smoke.
Money spent on Health is not a bad thing, money spent on schools is not a bad thing either(even though some builders took advantage and ripped off the government) , the former Liberal party allowed these two areas to run down under their 12 years of government, but that was all right according to their supporters, the Liberals made big surpluses instead of putting more money into Health, Schools, infastructure and other important things.
Most of the miners are multi national, and most of their profits go overseas,the minerals and the ore that the miners are mining are Australian and they come out of Australian soil, and yes these mining companies should pay more tax than they are doing at the present moment, and yes Australian people should have a share in the profits with some of the tax money going into super.
The miners can afford to mount these huge costly protests, advertisements and give generous donations to the Liberal/National party and yet they claim that this 40% tax is going to ruin them, who are they kidding?
Even mining magnate Clive Palmer admitted in a News.Com.Au story on June 7th 2010, that he exaggerated the possible consequences of the Government’s proposed resources super profits tax.

Aitch B says:

08:06pm | 12/06/10

Christian:

It’s obviously slipped your mind but health and schools are the domain of state government. Sure the federal government gives them funds to deal with those two areas but the state Labor governments haven’t put those funds to their intended use.

Even the BER (rorts?) had to be adminstered by the state governments.

persephone says:

03:24pm | 13/06/10

casba

I said what??

None of your post matches anything I’ve ever said.

I know you guys are getting desperate, but why make things up?

Jane says:

02:25pm | 11/06/10

LOL George…unfortunately the GG will not dismiss Rudd…as Labor apologist stooge and good maaaaaaate she was installed BY Labor as ‘Kerr Insurance’....you see, even they realised back then they were not up to the job and a ‘sacking’ may be on the cards!!

Only the voters can sack this incompetent sham government in it’s entirety….Rudd and all.

dovif says:

02:07pm | 11/06/10

Actually after Rudd start the tax, he wondered “how do I make an increase in tax popular with everyone else”

ok I will buy off the other business leaders with a 2% cut to their tax rate, If they have a profit of $10 million, they get an additional 200,000 profit, who would not want to have that

as for the public, if I make the employer give them more super, it won’t cost me anything and I will be even more popular

while the miner would be unhappy, everyone else will be happy and think I am such a great guy

JR says:

03:58pm | 11/06/10

Lets not forget the 250 Million dollar tax cut the commercial networks received. I guess Kerry Stokes was paying too much tax, but Twiggy Forrest wasn’t paying enough.

P Kruger says:

02:38pm | 11/06/10

Spot on!  Well written.  Rudd is the ultimate ‘hollow man’.  I hope we never ever see his ilk in such a position of power in Australia again.

Just goes to show the damage a populist sociopath can wreak in a minimum time.

Not in my name!

Press says:

04:43pm | 11/06/10

I’m just a plain speaking bloke who reads a lot of papers, on all sides. All this stuff is out there, as others have said before. All you need to do is open your eyes.

ETS & Libs: 
Cute twisting by AntiP can’t hide the fact the Libs negotiated & agreed a set of ETS amendments. Just before they could be put to the Senate, Minchin & others orchestrated an overthrow of Turnbull before it could take place. Backflip. Devious.

ETS and “no other countries”
Where do you folks get this drivel? The EU ETS covers 24 EU and non-EU countries - incl all the biggies.  NZ has an ETS. The US ETS has been passed by their Reps and is now before their Senate - many US States already have ETS schemes.

“No-one is blaming carbon anymore.”
Grand, sweeping, and total balderdash. God knows where AntiP got this from.

Mining tax
Billionaires losing their rag on-camera and raving about Commies may be entertaining TV, but its hardly adult.  Besides, Palmer’s since backed down, Forrest has since pulled his head in, and Xstrata has now increased its buy-up of Qld coal country.  Fancy that. The smart money is on the mining tax, pretty much as put up.  Rebate for royalties; 40% credit for losses -  rolled fwd against tax due;  40% tax on minerals profits over the line; company tax cut. From 2012.

If there was a lucky door prize for Most Misleading Poster, AntiP would win in a canter.

Fog Badger says:

08:25pm | 11/06/10

Thanks, JRM. A welcome relief.

Christian Real says:

10:38am | 12/06/10

Antiperspirent.
It appears that you liberal mob do not like to hear the truth and that is why you all attempt to dumb down and ridicle others that have a different opinion of you.
I have nothing to retract or prove to Liberal clones like you, when you can take the time and do your own research as I have.
As for paper thin lies that can only be attributed to Tony Abbott and his Liberal cheersquad of followers.
Oh, I forgot Antiperspirant, that liberals suffer from tunnel vision and are narrow minded and are therefore unable to look outside their circle of ‘perfection’ that they have surrounded themselves with
Even former liberal Prime Minister Malcom Fraser suggested in “Canberra Times” on Wednesday 2nd November 2003, that parts of the Howard government’s anti-terrorism package resembled measures taken by Adolf Hitler
“He added preventative detention, under which suspects could not contact their families nor their employers.“seems effectively to be a law to make somebody disappear”. “I think that’s an odd law for a country like Australia,” Mr Fraser said.

Doug says:

04:05pm | 11/06/10

Max, time to take your pills, sounds like missed your lunch time meds

Christian real says:

06:01pm | 11/06/10

Max Power
Strange you should mention Nazi Germany, when it appears that some of the laws in Howard’s “WorkChoices’ and Anti-Terrorism laws were akin to some of the laws in Hitlers’s “Enabling act, of March 23rd, 1933.
Browse the internet a little more Max, you might actually learn something

Max Power says:

06:15pm | 11/06/10

Doug: This doesn’t concern you. You are happy for the Govt to read and store your private emails and browser history without a warrant, to consider you guilty until proven innocent, to be treated like a criminal. It doesn’t bother you that that Govt wants to control what you can and can’t read and store the history of the websites you do. It doesn’t bother you that this is being planned without public discussion. It doesn’t bother you that this Govt doesn’t represent the people but dictactes to the people and is trying to control the people.
This isn’t something I am making up, look at the News.com.au homepage.

Max Power says:

07:10pm | 11/06/10

Didn’t realise Howard was still in Govt, but he must be the way the Labor stooges keep talking about him. Ah the good old workchoices claim, it is dead and buried to everyone but the Labor Party. So because the govt before did something, that gives the current govt the right to go further.
So basically, according to ALP hacks, this govt is no better than the previous govt because everything they do is defended by referring back to Howard and saying he did it to.
I no longer care what the previous govt did, because they are no longer in power, I only care what this govt does, because it is their incompetence destroying this country. After nearly 3 years the ALP is still trying to blame Howard, sorry, that boat has sailed, the ALP are responsible for everything now, good and bad. So much for Rudd’s promise of accountability and transparency.
As for your comment “it appears that some of the laws in Howard’s “WorkChoices’ and Anti-Terrorism laws were akin to some of the laws in Hitlers’s “Enabling act, of March 23rd, 1933.”
“It appears” means diddly squat, it appears is a way of saying something without actually having anything to back it up.

marley says:

08:18pm | 11/06/10

@Christian Real - so it’s wrong if the Coalition does it, but fine with you if the ALP does it?  Mmm. Not much of a libertarian are you? The word “apparatchik” comes to mind.

Press says:

10:55pm | 11/06/10

Yeah, Yeah.  A single, airy fairy piece, short on detail, on News.Com
http://www.news.com.au/technology/internet-companies-could-be-forced-to-track-you/story-e6frfro0-1225878467822

Still, it mentions Attorney Generals. Musta come from somewhere there, then. So what have they got to say?

In the last two days, two events.
The Dept yetserday released a paper on its “Australian Government Protective Security Policy Framework” - how Departments should look after their cyberstuff - which incudes our info. It’s for discussion, and its here
http://www.ag.gov.au/pspf

And Attorney General McClelland made two speeches, yesterday and today, about Cyber Security and Information Exchange - how the private sector looks after its and our stuff online, against eg cybercrime. Those speeches are here http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/www/ministers/mcclelland.nsf/page/Home_Home(Speeches)

Apart from being rather dry to plough through, the aim of the game looks to be rather different than News has portrayed. The focus is pretty plain, its on protection, of Gov systems and data, and private systems and data.

So before you all start raving at me, if you want to knwo more, go to the source.
Ask AGs http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/About_the_DepartmentContact_us

Or ask the AG himself
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/www/ministers/mcclelland.nsf/Page/Contacts
Jeepers. Talk about a beat-up.You lot need to get a grip.

antiperspirant says:

01:40am | 12/06/10

Christian

“Strange you should mention Nazi Germany, when it appears that some of the laws in Howard’s “WorkChoices’ and Anti-Terrorism laws were akin to some of the laws in Hitlers’s “Enabling act, of March 23rd, 1933.”

Ok show us. Really. Show us.

Prove it or retract your statements. Your lies are paper thin.

Flipper says:

09:30am | 12/06/10

The whole net filter is a farce, waste of money and terribly dictatorial. Conroy follows in the foot step of his master at throwing insults around about those in private enterprise willy nilly like a schoolyard bully. This government neede to grow up. So immature and treating the citizens of this country like they are a bunch of uneducated buffoons. Liberal aprty over run with relgisoue extremist is not much better on this isue. We are headed for fascism quicker than a speeding bullet. It maybe an very minor exaggeration but need to say it while we still can.

Press says:

11:47pm | 11/06/10

The good news? I agree about your stupidity. The bad news - its not worth a cracker. Nor is your post.

Max power says:

09:24am | 12/06/10

I have read the enabling act you refer to. The U.S, THE U.K plus a host of other countries have had something similar to it. After reading it, I would say Rudd is far closer to acting in accordance to Hitlers enabling act of 1933 then Howard ever did.
So after reading it, I say once again, Rudd is taking Australia down a path similar to Nazi Germany, China, Iran and North korea.

antiperspirant says:

12:47pm | 12/06/10

And Keating mentioned L.A.W law tax cuts.

So what?

John Howard is retired remember. Or didn’t you get the memo?

Still waiting on you showing us the direct correlation between WorkChoice and The enabling Act.

Anytime soon is good.

Keith says:

11:55am | 12/06/10

TImmo, there would be a large number of competent people who would like to start their own parties. However, there is a constraint. Work.

The best people to lead this nation are Doctors, Engineers, Lawyers, CEO’s and successful entrepreneurs. Unfortunately, these professions are highly paid and are more interesting than pursuing politics who argue irrational and ramble about nonsense.

China’s system is good because they are led by Engineers and those who have had at least 10 years of industry experience. That’s how they can decide what is best for their country growth wise and economically wise. Do you don’t see them arguing much over political reasons, why? Engineers are best at working in teams because they learn to co-operate and find reasonable grounds of justification. They actually work together on one issue at a time and think it through together to create solutions.

The problem with Australian politics, is any arts degree, labouring grease monkey or fish ‘n chips owner has the potential to become a politician. It is a problem as they become ignorant of what they actually know. So they would argue against anything even if the solution is correct. If our politicians can actually be properly educated and learn about “team work”, “finding common ground”, and not “arguing for the sake of it”, then perhaps our country could operate more efficiently.

Unfortunately, I don’t think the average Australian would like intellectuals running the country because of our far too common curse. Tall poppy syndrome…

marley says:

01:57pm | 13/06/10

Golly gosh. Not much of a believer in freedom of speech, are you? Unless of course the opinions expressed coincide with your own.

Freeman says:

10:07am | 14/06/10

welcome to democracy tiny timmo. criticism ( fair and unfair) is a big part of it and Rudd is only suffering because HE promised so much.
The libs endured 10 years of howling from labor lovers and they just got on with the job. but somehow you think that what’s good for the goose is not for the gander? you want everyone to stop criticizing Ruddy while you throw in a few cheap shots at Howard? that’s hilarious dude.

marley says:

03:46pm | 13/06/10

The Labor Government is standing tall?  Tell that to Afghan and Sri Lankan refugees stuck in limbo.  Tell that to remote communities in the NT, still waiting for their promised housing.  Tell that to those who believed KR meant it when he talked about the ETS being a moral imperative.  And at a local level, tell that to the (very) long suffering taxpayers of NSW, with a failing transport system, a failing hospital system, a revolving door of cabinet ministers and a backlog of ICAC investigations.

I’m no fan of or apologist for the Coalition, but I find it very hard to describe the current government as “standing tall” or indeed, standing anywhere at all.

And not every state is a Labor government (unless WA has seceded).

Freeman says:

10:23am | 14/06/10

*“Mr Rudd is in for the long hall and with Julia beside him looks unstoppable” wow, that’s a serious case of denial.

*liberal friendly polls? what are you on about? the polls are biased are they?

* no one mentions how well the gvmt has done for the state of the economy becasue it’s highly debatable how much credit they can take for it.

The Libs endured 10 years of ridiculous opposition to their every move and relentless fear and smear campaigns. unfortunatley that’s how democracy works.

Christian Real says:

01:13pm | 14/06/10

Robert Smissen Rural SA
Robert,  Former Prime Minister John Howard’s attack dog is already standing for parliament