Prev
Next

The deliverance of cash to those who squeal loudest

David Penberthy

by David Penberthy

09 Sep 05:43am

Must Reads

Facebook’s being a boob over breastfeeding pics - this is a caption

Facebook’s being a boob over breastfeeding pics

100

Don’t blame the beautiful game for riot shame - this is a caption

Don’t blame the beautiful game for riot shame

35

Can you be a “different kind of girl” when you’re 53? - this is a caption

Can you be a “different kind of girl” when you’re 53?

22

Filed under: Gillard Government, Independents, Rural Australia

130 comments

It was an election campaign filled with memorable images. Tony Abbott, like some cabaret crooner with a cordless microphone, hitting the swirly carpet to schmooze the crowd at the Rooty Hill RSL.  Mark Latham busting out of his enclosure to go on the rampage at the Brisbane Show. Discharged patient Kevin Rudd, his senses deadened by pethidine, poring over an electoral map of Queensland at a staged summit with the woman who pinched his job.

A sneak preview of next week's swearing-in of Cabinet

Given the result of the election, there’s another lesser image which might not be emblematic of the campaign, but speaks volumes about the utterly bizarre policy outcomes it has delivered.

The image was of Independent MP and gentleman farmer Tony Windsor, in moleskins and a leather-shouldered knitted jumper, riding a tractor mower which probably cost as much as a Holden Barina, tending the lawns at his country manor as he finalised his extortionate crusade to turn our national government into the vassal of the laughably persecuted rural class.

That image represents a continuation of the warning sounded in this column last week - about how the myth that rural Australia has a monopoly on hardship and deprivation is now being taken as absolute gospel, and incorporated into policy on an unsuspecting populace, out of sheer, base desperation by the major parties to stay in power.

The past two weeks have challenged perceptions about life in rural Australia. I thought people chose to live in the country because of the fresh air, the safety, the sense of community, the fact that it was full of viable industries, both on the land and in support services in the towns, and you could not only find work but drive to and from it without any traffic, tolls, parking fees, and be home at 5pm to have dinner with your family in your extremely cheap house.

It turns out that hundreds of thousands of Australians are choosing to live in the country because of the impossibility of finding work, the death of every known primary industry, the crushing levels of mental illness, the fact that there’s no good schools, no hospitals, and every time you leave the house a road train or kangaroo comes flying through your windscreen.

Because Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott were so desperate to cobble together a government from this mess, everything which Tony Windsor and his fellow rural independents have said and sought this past fortnight has been treated with a deference which is not only alarming, but almost sickening.

The mysterious hard-hitting facts which Bob Katter claimed to be carrying about in his briefcase, every one of them has been taken as fact by both sides, without any public discussion or scrutiny, as they nervously cobbled together their warring rural assistance packages in a bid to schlep their way into power. For all we know Katter could have had a house-brick smuggled inside his Samsonite and none of us would be any the wiser as there was so much forelock-tugging going on by the major parties that nobody dared question his hillbilly manifesto. 

Julia won the day. And it was on the very first day and at the very first press conference where we gained our first insight into the policy perversions these new government arrangements have delivered and will continue to deliver.

The first is the enormously expensive $10 billion rescue package for the bush. You’ll remember this as one of the big ticket policy items from the five-week campaign. Well, you won’t actually, because it wasn’t discussed at all, but it’s starred item number one on the agenda now. Which is unnerving in itself, as both Labor and the Coalition, mindful of the extent of the deficit and the amount of money that had been spent wisely/blown indiscriminately on stimulus, ran parsimonious campaigns where they promised little in the way of major spending.

To placate and capture the rural independents, that former sense of fiscal rectitude has been shredded. In an attempt to maintain a veneer of economic responsibility, Julia Gillard explained that the rural assistance package would be funded through savings elsewhere.

For “elsewhere” you can read “the suburbs”.

There’s two ways you can find $10 billion for rural Australia. You can do it by cutting services in suburban Australia. Or you can do it by enlisting the taxpayers of Parramatta, Ipswich, Werribee and Elizabeth – you know, those pampered, la-di-dah suburbs on the outskirts of our major cities – to kick in so that the forgotten people of Tamworth (even those with 10k ride-on mowers) can find relief from the horrors of their pastoral existence.

The good news for Tony Windsor’s constituents is it may soon be cheaper for them to have a moan down the phone to each other about how utterly desolate life in the bush is.

The second hint of a policy shift came about by accident. Julia Gillard made an interesting policy slip at her first press conference when she was asked about the importance of broadband in rural and regional Australia, and inadvertently raised the issue of timed telephone calls.

“In this country today,” Ms Gillard said, “…if you want to ring a business in the centre of Sydney and you’re doing it from Tamworth, that is going to cost you something different than if you are doing it from another business in Sydney, and it’s that differential in costs that has borne on businesses in regional Australia and families in regional Australia ever since we had the telephone.”

As one of the journalists present pointed out, the only way you could alter that reality is through a cross-subsidy – that is, by charging city people more to use the phone than country people.

And as a side point, it’s worth noting that Ms Gillard’s new-found concern over the cost of phone calls for country businesses doesn’t factor in the massive differential between the price of rent for city and country businesses. 

But in the current climate, you wouldn’t dare mention such a thing as it jars with the mood of the times.

A new Cabinet will be announced within days and there is a strong chance it will include Rob Oakeshott as Minister for Regional Assistance, or whatever they choose to name the portfolio. His first three requirements in the portfolio will be a bucket, a shovel, and a whole shedload of cash, as we tackle the imagined, cavernous gulf between rural and suburban living.

And that’s the problem with this weird election result. Living in Australia should not be a competition. These blokes are turning it into one.

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

Get The Punch on Facebook

Most commented

332Is it sexist? We've got nothing to compare it to
298It takes selective memory to call Howard era a golden age
296Why do our universities teach shonky "magic"?
249Gillard's mapping a route but will probably still be routed
172Friday dilemma: Should smacking be illegal?
170A comedy of errors that's not very funny
163Julia Gillard is on the highway to the danger zone
147Outlaw bikies cannot be judged outside the law

130 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • sal says:

      09:04am | 09/09/10

      David,
      I take umbrage at you using the case of Tony Windsor as representative of all rural workers.  He is a long serving politician (wages not so bad I’d guess) and may well own large property holdings.  He would, however, represent people of many differing occupations and wage brackets.
      It would be like claiming Rupert Murdoch made squillions from his media interests, therefore you as a journalist must also have money to burn.
      I spent many years living in regional Australia.  It extends beyond Armidale and the east coast for that matter.  Not everyone is in the same position.  Some own large holdings, some tiny places, some rent.  Some work in complementary industries.  Try working as a farmhand, teacher, bank teller, roadhouse attendent, cook, hospitality worker, in a video store, as a nanny, nurse, cleaner, or any other non-mining occupation.  You are still forced to pay huge rent, more for services, fuel, food and yet your wage is not inflated.
      Is the answer for everyone to move to a capital city?  This would create as many problems as it solved.

      Reply

    • Michael says:

      10:31am | 09/09/10

      I don’t understand your point - you seem to be repeating what David said, but disagreeing with him.Sort of… Sure, it’s tough all over. People loose their jobs and pay rent and power bills and stuff, but the point is, we all do no matter where we live. There are advantages to living in the city and there are those for living in the bush. We all have choices and we make them. I would love to live in the bush, but sadly, I would get as much work there as a farmer would in the city. For me, I pay slightly less for gas and power, but much more for rent/mortgage. I could buy a damned nice house in the bush for the cost of a few years mortgage payments here. Point is, it’s not all beer & skittles in the city… or the bush. Nor is it all bad. This article is about disproportionate representation. Simple.

    • Rosie says:

      12:05pm | 09/09/10

      Agree Michael I don’t think poor Sal comprehended David’s comments. I find Sal’s comments as always trying to put words into all our mouths. Sadly only Labor supporters get sucked in! Watch out if she likes what she reads about the Libs she will chuckle but is never game enough to acknowledge the goodness of it.

      I prefer to retire to the country for the relaxed lifestyle, fresh air and most of all to get away from inhaling the automobiles exhaust fumes that is in abundance in the city. Therefore I am blessed to be able to afford to have the best of both worlds, city for the theatre, shopping, top medical etc and country for the comfortable lifestyle I so much deserve because I was smart enough to prepare for my retirement when I had the earning power.

      PS - You see we don’t all need Labor’s NBN. Far from it and would much prefer to see the $43b spent on health to ease the waiting list of Australians in need of surgery.

    • The Badger says:

      04:04pm | 09/09/10

      Rosie

      Perhaps you could post your comments by carrier pigeon from the bush.

    • sal says:

      04:13pm | 09/09/10

      @Rosie,
      I have never attempted to put words in your mouth.  I gain too much enjoyment from your own words coming out, immortalised in print.

    • GeminiPaul says:

      09:04am | 09/09/10

      Brilliant! Brilliant Brilliant!  A great essay. I raise my glass and salute you Mr Penberthy…(I’m still cackling as I write). I’m going to read and reread this. One never gets tired of such excellence. Outstanding! Well bloody done!

      Reply

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      10:14am | 09/09/10

      Brilliantly forgot to mention that most urban wealth is real estate driven and real estate prices are driven by production output (eg manufacturing/banking) which is fed by primary resources produced in the bush (where Windsor,me and about 2 million Australians are)
      Sydney is basically a gigantic shopping mall built around a bridge and a opera house built by money from the wool resource boom. Not from intercity real estate transactions ! if the bubble bursts the bush can still provide a renewable food source, if of course the farming industry survives this cycle of suburban and CBD rural property development greed.

    • Terence O'Beirne says:

      05:10pm | 09/09/10

      Peter@hay,  Your bushie rant cannot go unanswered.
      1] Answer the question
      2]The Opera House Lottery commenced in 1957, Ceased 1986 and raised about$100.0 m ,cost of project around$ 103.o m in addition $.900 raised by public subscription——-so much so for your wrong inferrence that the wool boom underwrote this marvel.

    • Front Row says:

      09:14pm | 09/09/10

      Peter,
      Like you, I’ve grown up in the regions and still live here. I am also politically to the right of Ghengis Khan.
      However, it’s important to get a few things right.
      The wool industry to which you refer was massively protected for a generation.
      The landholders at the turn of the century were paid massively over the odds to set up “soldier settler” arrangements for those returning from WWI.
      Many of those tiny, unviable properties are now sold off or subsidised by larger interests through taxes.  The rich got richer through the taxes and bonds of the war.
      People in rural Australia are going through a hard time in pockets, the same as we always have.
      The difference is that, these days, we somehow seem to think we have some kind of cultural right to stay exactly where we are, living exactly the same way we have, and the rest of the country should pick up the tab. The ABC’s rural department is the great perpetuator of this grand sense of doom.
      Now, I know it’s gone the other way, too, but two wrongs don’t make a right.
      If people in the country were more prepared to support local businesses in small towns - instead of ordering everything in from warehouses on the outskirts of the cities (through the soon-to-get-faster internet) or driving half an hour to save five or ten bucks on their groceries, we might have our communities back.
      Best

    • steve parker says:

      09:09am | 09/09/10

      Spot on David - I haven’t seen too many people with ride on mowers in Ascot Park, Adelaide lately or gotten home from the City train much before 7pm - standing up all the way because of the commuter rush.

      Reply

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      10:20am | 09/09/10

      Lets make urban Australia totally independent from rural Australia. Urban Australia can then become a total import driven economy like 6 or 7 Singapore’s dotted around the Australian coast, I’m sure that is sustainable.

    • Terence O'Beirne says:

      12:31pm | 09/09/10

      Thanks, Peter of Hay for informing me the Opera House rides on the sheep’s back!  Pray tell me Lord Squatter—what happened to the $m’s raised by the hugely popular State Lottery introduced to fund this 8th wonder of the world ? Methinks you are in some time warp in the Wanganella Pub!!    Old Cobber.

    • Hamish says:

      12:37pm | 09/09/10

      Peter, I appreciate that you want to defend regional and rural Australia, but what you say just isn’t true. There is no doubt that Australia’s rural and regional areas do produce wealth, but not much compared to the cities. And the reason they do produce wealth is precisely because our rural and regional areas are expected to be productive and competitive, unlike in most of the rest of the world. Especially Western Europe. Think about what you’re saying. If rural and regional Australia are so much more prosperous and productive than urban Australia, why do you want our money?

      As you say, if we had no rural Australia, we’d just end up like Singapore, which has a much higher standard of living than Australia. As does Hong Kong.

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      01:05pm | 09/09/10

      @Terry of Suburbia…perhaps when you were near the Wangenella Pub you should have taken the time to read the plaque on the nearby Peppin memorial “1961 Australian Wool Exports 350 Million Pounds (not $) then think about when they built the opera house. Most of those sheep were not running around Sydney western suburb’s
      Rural NSW grew the wool, Sydney spent the profits from it and returned “SFA”

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      01:22pm | 09/09/10

      @Hamish.. Most of what you term “your money” appears to be money borrowed against urban real estate assets. Simple point if primary resources do not come into to fuel the city, the city will deflate (real estate asset value) very fragile and I doubt sustainable if relying on imports.

    • T.Chong says:

      09:20am | 09/09/10

      David , leave the Clampetts and Bodenes (?) out of this .
      They were intentionally funny.
      As for rural / regional v. suburban, what most commentators fail to notice is that the vast majority of “country “people are Townies, living a suburban type of life , little different from suburban life in Sydney, Melbourne etc - obvios differences of course, but largely same lifestyles.
      One example - Mudgee, NSW.  Nice place,  wine, sheep, coal at Ulan a plenty, but hardly pioneers battling the bush.
      Rural / regional is nt all “Dad and Dave”. Townies ( vast majority of residents) and their suburban bretheren have more in common than the political parties are willing to acknowledge.
      Without the false division , the Nats would be irrevalant.

      Reply

    • Darryl Price says:

      09:29am | 09/09/10

      I think you have captured the developing perception very well in this article David. You can’t blame our urban cousins for feeling that this period of catch up will be all at their expense. Some of us just want a doctor - not a super clinic - and a decent bitumen road. Three years ago I saw a red brick outdoor stage/sound shell being demolished in Brisbanes Botanic gardens, presumably to build something bigger and better. I don’t mean to sound like the Four Yorkshireman parody, but we would kill for a red brick outdoor performing space in our town.

      Reply

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      09:29am | 09/09/10

      Ah yes , the timed phone call issue , Labor’s kept quiet on this one for some time , but there it was , the little slip from Julia , best we add this back door beauty to the Green’s death tax wish.
      After all , next July nothing will pass the Senate unless the Greens extract their extortion demands from Labor in the shape of death tax legislation , introduced by Bandt the bandit in the House of Reps.

      Reply

    • Fred says:

      10:25am | 09/09/10

      You do understand the difference between the Reps and Senate right??  Just because Bandt introduces something in the Reps doesn’t mean it will automatically pass because of the Greens balance in the Senate… he still needs 75 other people to agree with it before it goes anywhere near the Senate.  Which means that EVEN IF all of Labor vote for it, they still need 3 other people to vote for it as well… include Wilkie and they still need 2…

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      12:09pm | 09/09/10

      Timed calls will become a non-issue once every country shack and outback humpy has a new you-beaut ALP fibre connection. 

      We will all be using VOIP.

    • Bill says:

      12:16pm | 09/09/10

      @ Fred, yes he does understand. What he wrote is fine.
      Give it a re-read.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      02:08pm | 09/09/10

      Fred :  Sure , i certainly understand our parliamentary system but it seems you don’t understand what i said in my comment. The Greens will make it clear to the Labor minority that nothing will pass the Senate unless they pass any Green Legislation put up in the House of Reps.
      The 2 Judas M.P.‘s will be forced to support it as well ,  because they don’t wan’t the country to have to go back to the polls.
      As for Bandt the barbarian , he will do what his boss , Brown the Green tells him to do.  Just keep in mind that Bandt tried to win his seat as a Green candidate in the previous election , failed , and was then put up (by the Greens ) as an independent.
      This cobbled together rabble posing as a govt. is unlikely to last 3 months.

    • Fred says:

      04:20pm | 09/09/10

      Ah ok.  Well my opinion is that what you’ve laid out is extremely unlikely, but just as you cannot prove it will happen, I cannot prove it won’t.

      Also the failed-Green-turned-Independent… not Bandt. You mean Wilkie?

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      06:49pm | 09/09/10

      Fred :  Yes , my mistake , i did mean Wilkie , my apologies to the Barbarian. Thanks Fred.
      It is a scenario that is very likely to come about , not once , but many times , depending on the period of survival of what passes as a govt.

    • Michael says:

      09:37am | 09/09/10

      Abbott nailed it in his election launch when he said that for labor, this election was not about Australia, but about labor & their lust for power. They would do - and did give - anything for power. labor have sold out the people of Australia for the interests of a few simpleton ego maniac independents. Sure, they got what they wanted, and they will no doubt rationalise their actions by saying they got the best for their constituents, but the truth is, they kneecappped democracy by doing exactly what the majority of people did not want (They even said so in their dribbling, ego-stroking speeches). All in the name of self-interest. I sincerely hope their self-interest continues and their childishness makes this government unworkable, sending us back to the polls to get a real government and end their political careers.

      Reply

    • remlap says:

      01:16pm | 09/09/10

      This election was not about Australia, but about both major parties & their lust for power.

    • Roja says:

      01:45pm | 09/09/10

      That you judge the decision two days after it is made makes it sound like the sourest of grapes Michael, in particular that the coalition’s lust for power was not sated rather than any realy ability to assess the situation on the actual results. 

      You are clearly sad that the vast majority of independents felt that Abbott was in no way, shape of form fit to govern.  A feeling shared by many in Australia.

    • Dash says:

      03:30pm | 09/09/10

      Roja, you are in a group that represents 38% of Australians who wanted the ALP! You are part of the minority for which this minority government stands. Fact is, most of us (on 2PP or primary) didn’t want the ALP. Most of us didn’t vote for the ALP and most of the seats didn’t go to the ALP. This is an illegitimate government! The independents you speak of, screwed their electorates where 90% of people didn’t want the ALP either! Windsor and Oakshott are both on borrowed time. Gillard dropped her pants for them. Bribed them with $10b and cabinet positions. She also formed a coalition with the Greens which was announced after the elections. In essence, this government is a fraud of the highest magnitude. That’s what you stand for: an absolute disgrace!

    • Roja says:

      03:53pm | 09/09/10

      Actually Dash when all electorates are included in the final count, Labor is going to win the 2PP vote.  The 90% figure in the electorates of both indies is not backed up by any credible evidence, and even if it was the fact is they voted against the Coalition for an independent. 

      Harsh reality (which I am told is an issue for left leaning people) states that more than 50% of elected officials in this country wanted the ALP to take power.  As such they have now taken power and you conservatives can whine all you like, and it is abundantly clear that you will, Tony Abbott and the Coaltion lost.

    • Michael says:

      04:49pm | 09/09/10

      You might find this hard to understand roja, as you clearly have some kind of issue going here, but no, it’s not “sour grapes” although, havoing worked closely with this labor government, I have nothing but contempt for them and their complete lack of vision, ability to govern and most especially their morals. I was merely commenting on Abbott’s statement and the reality of what has followed. I did not make any comment as to the legitamacy or otherwise of the labor government, but not I will: gillard is a puppet of the nsw labor factions who put her there. Her government has a 3 year history of wild spending and very, very little to show for it. As I said, I have worked with the dept of environment for some years now and am disgusted at the complete lack of policy, will or anything else from labor. These people have one policy only that they will stand by and fight for doggedly - POWER. As for the performance of the independents and labor, time will tell. I will watch for your retraction in a couple of years.

    • Roja says:

      05:36pm | 09/09/10

      Fair enough, it was not your sour grapes then it was Abbott’s.  Strangely for someone so bang up keen about the welfare of Australia you did nothing but snipe, attack and complain about the indies decision & the ALP.  Which, if I am not mistaken was about all Abbott had to offer in this election (eg I’m not Labor!!!).

      As for my retraction in a couple of years, will happily give it then - I’m just overjoyed that I won’t have to hear your retraction after Abbott stuffed everything up.

      Offer up a competent leader like Turnbull for 2013 and I will actually join you.  I simply wanted the NBN which as far as I can tell was the only difference between the two packs of clowns we just had offered up to us.

    • Dash says:

      06:22pm | 09/09/10

      Roja, 8% voted ALP in New England and 13% in Lyne. Is that credible enough for you. Compare that to the coalition vote and even you might be able to understand my point. Doesn’t matter because we’ll be back at the polls within 18mnths and these clowns will loose their seats over their decision. And hopefully now that the ALP has joined the loony left, our two time not elected PM will finally get the arse (no pun intended)! And yes, as I said the ALP offered $10b and bribes to get that “more than 50%”. And yes you will hear a lot more complaining because there is a great deal of anger out there from the majority of voting Australian’s who did not want the dirty rotten rorting wasteful ALP.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      09:18pm | 09/09/10

      Dash :  Amen Amen Amen.
      Well said and absolutely correct . Roja will be the first to wail when the cobbled together rabble posing as a govt. is brought down by the looneys , who are currently propping them up , so that they can blackmail
      Labor into accepting their death tax legislation .

    • Catweazle says:

      12:22am | 10/09/10

      Dash, In Lyne about 4.6% gave first preference to Greens also.  And although we don’t get official reporting of where prefences went for those people who voted for Oakeshott, the indications are that they probably went somewhere around 35-40% each to Labor and Nationals, with Nationals probably having a wee tiny edge.  (That’s based on phone poll and murmurings from within AEC.)  That leaves about a quarter of Oakeshott voters giving second preference to Greens.  (There was another independent candidate, but the bloke didn’t do a thing after nominating.  didn’t show his face, didn’t make any comment or statement about his positions, didn’t even make available so much as even his phone number! )  Crunch the numbers on that and it isn’t clearcut at all that Lyne is now a ‘conservative’ seat.  Looks to me to be a pretty lineball split between the conservative alliance and what you mob like to refer to as the ‘rainbow’ alliance.

    • Roja says:

      12:39pm | 10/09/10

      Ah Dash, I get what you are saying but the reality is they voted for an Independent because they wanted neither liberal nor labor to represent their electorate - a sentiment I strongly agree with, they were both terrible options.

      Oaky had to make a decision to go with one side or the other, he didn’t choose your side and you and all the other liberal party cheerleaders are quite miserable about the fact.  Put simply our democratic system has played out and it appears that the ALP is marginally less terrible that what the Coalition offered.

      You’re point about the $10b bribe (of which only $1b is new) appears utterly hypocritical in light of the fact that Abbott offerred way more than that to go with his $11b costings hole and his other $1b hospital bribe and god knows what else he would have parted with to get the power he so desperately craves.

      Abbott looks good for the reason he will always look good, he will never be PM to be found out for the fraud that he is.  I don’t doubt the failings of the ALP you mention, I just don’t see Abbott as a better alternative.  Neither did Windsor, Oakenshot, Wilkie or Brandt - who according to our democratic process are the 4 that mattered, besides the other 72 that got elected of course.

    • 2 sides says:

      01:48pm | 10/09/10

      @ Dash, Sure the Coalition used some rubbery numbers with their estimates to get a figure… but that’s what budgets are about… estimates on prevailing conditions into the future.  But your snide remarks about Abbott fail to also take into account Labor’s big economic black whole… the Resources rent tax… which was lauded at something like $10billion, but the latest number is about $2.5billion… where is that black hole going to be covered from?  How will they manage to achieve a surplus now?

    • Dash says:

      03:01pm | 10/09/10

      2 Sides, you’re absolutely correct but I think you meant to direct your comments to Roja not me. Roja, time will tell I guess but in my opinion Oaky’s a dead duck and so is Windsor! And if there’s a bigger fraud than the socialist feminist radical homewrecker of a PM that’s been not voted for twice now, I’ll eat my hat. The Green coalition is a fraud for starters! It appears grocery choice, fuelwatch, 200+ childcare facilities, the ETS, the East Timor Solution, the promise of Laptops in schools, green loans, the obligation not to touch the private health rebate, the Parramatta rail link, the “not negotiable” profits tax and public ownership of our hospitals by July 2009 were all frauds. Are we moving forward yet? Seen the Real Jooliya anywhere Roja? She’s not writing rants for the Socialist forum again is she?

    • Roja says:

      01:55pm | 11/09/10

      Nice rant Dash, but the election is over and Abbott lost on a points decision in a close fight. 

      We were talking about the legitimacy of the ALP taking power, where the majority of independents judged Gillard a better, more stable choice than Abbott.  That is the reality here, whether you like it or not.

    • Bemused says:

      09:40am | 09/09/10

      And how would you have crafted this article, Mr Penberthy, if the Independents had accepted the ever-increasing and generous deals offered by the Coalition? - a masterstroke in political negotiation? a sensible offer to those neglected in rural and regional australia? a much-needed impetus from the far-sighted conservatives?

      Oh that;s right - you only see the world from the lofty heights of your own self-importance.

      Reply

    • Michael says:

      10:43am | 09/09/10

      You tool! Whose self-importance exactly are you admiring the lofty heights of? Your sort of fanaticism belongs on a football field, not in political - or any other sort of intelligent discussion. See if you can acquaint yourself with your brain and it’s use, or go back to waving your scarf and chanting abuse at the ref at your local footy field. The neglected regional and rural Australia has been supported by drought relief, subsidies and allowances by urban Australia for years. When the computer industry went bad in 2000, did the farmers subsidise the programmers who lost their jobs? Did the government? Should 93% of Australia really be paying to carry the other 7% all the way?

    • Bemused says:

      04:19pm | 09/09/10

      Interesting illogical rant

    • Roja says:

      05:57pm | 09/09/10

      “Should 93% of Australia really be paying to carry the other 7% all the way?”

      Errrr, you might want to look up the difference between regional, rural and remote.  The 7% you refer to, which I can only assume you pulled from the NBN numbers, covers cities less than 1,000 population, those people outside of city limits, remote areas and the thousands of scattered indigenous communities - all of which are not getting fibre to the home.  Regional includes towns of less than 100,000 - which makes up a much, much bigger number than 7%. 

      You should be particularly careful when throwing around the statement “intelligent discussion” whilst getting the facts so horribly, horribly wrong.

      Also the computer industry went bust due to city dwellin folk being easily parted with their money without understanding what they were investing in.  While drought is largely beyond anyone’s control.  Also those generous drought relief payments to which you refer would be known in the city as… the dole.

    • Murray says:

      09:48am | 09/09/10

      Well said Penbo!  The rural landed royalty have long believed that the extent to which the rest of us currently fund their lifestyles was insufficient for their station. 

      Hopefully the government can stand strong and keep it to shameless porkbarrelling, and not start re-establishing tariff walls and such so the rural darlings can go back being protected from the real world.

      Reply

    • IMHO says:

      09:52am | 09/09/10

      Good one. Where’s the cost analysis that shows that, for the average punter, the cost of living is higher in “the bush” than in suburbia. And when you choose to live in the country don’t also choose a slower pace of life, and less variety in what you can choose to eat, be entertained by, or do as a job.

      Can’t have it both ways country folk… Or maybe now you can!

      Reply

    • Moby says:

      03:21pm | 13/09/10

      And what did you pay for petrol last time you filled up????  Just curious….....

    • Forther says:

      09:55am | 09/09/10

      I used to live in the country but moved to Sydney for better work opportunities.

      I think there are few people in this country that are doing it easy.

      But one thing is for certain, the country has missed out on their “fair share” of pork-barrelling over the last few decades.

      The recent election campaign focused on ignorant bogans from the outer-west with dog whistling about boat people, a few bits about crime and then a budget surplus to help us through the end of the GFC and don’t worry about those mining companies earning billions cos we should leave them alone or else they can’t pay sparkies $150,000pa to work for them.

      I am very pleased to finally see some focus and attention on rural issues. These are issues that are vital to the health of our nation - water resources, food production etc.

      To trivialise it in this manner misses the point.

      Reply

    • Duff says:

      11:01am | 09/09/10

      @Forther, just curious: which lifestyle do you prefer?  City or rural?

    • Jimmy says:

      11:06am | 09/09/10

      Forther, agreed.

      Penbo, fair enough on your skewering Labor (although both major parties grovelled obscenely behind-the-scenes for this power grab), but no fair on skewering those in the country who have for so many years put up with sub-standard services on top of their other hardships. And I don’t mean sub-standard compared to urban folk, I mean sub-standard.

      Also, using those areas in our cities that are having a hard time of it as a comparison does not dimnish the fact that rural areas need upgrades and availability of services we in the cities take for granted. There are many that need to see the improvements a better-run government would bring, but we all have to stump up a bit to achieve this. The comfortable middle/upper-class that will scream blue mruder over this really need to look beyond their own noses and accept a society means compromise and sharing of resources.

      Or is that too unselfish for a capitalist plutocracy to handle?

    • Forther says:

      11:38am | 09/09/10

      Duff

      For now I am tied to the city as I wouldn’t really be able to get a job in the bush (I’m not a farmer like my uncle or some cousins and don’t want to be a shop assistant at the loacal Coles/Woolies like some other of my cousins are forced to do). There are advantages and disadvantages of both areas.

      Maybe when I decide to retire I can sell my overpriced Sydney house (which I am yet to be able to afford to buy but am looking to do so in a few months once I have $70,000 for the deposit) and buy a cheaper property in the bush and pocket the difference.

      I find the trivialising and marginalising of the concerns of rural Australia to be pointless.

    • Duff says:

      02:01pm | 09/09/10

      Ok, trivialising those concerns may not be helpful.  fair enough (although it was a funny piece).  I suppose i was asking for your opinion on which life is better (rural vs urban) because I get the impression that most people in rural Australia love it and want to stay there.  Penbo’s point, i think, is that we shouldn’t forget that while we’re tallying up the have’s and have not’s.  You came to the city for work, not for the pleasure of it.  People move away from the city for the pleasure of living rural.  Says it all, don’t you think?

    • Forther says:

      03:29pm | 09/09/10

      Duff

      Many people in the bush stay there because they know the city is far too expensive for their qualifications. I’m a lawyer educated at a regional university. I know there would be no way I could live in Sydney if I wasn’t on a lawyer’s salary (6 figures).

      Many people find it easy to move from Sydney to the bush because of the difference in living standards that they can afford. Sell your $1.5m 4br house in Strathfield (that you bought back in the 90s for less than $500k) and buy a 4br house somewhere in the bush for about $300k. You’ll have $1.2m in the bank.

      This is a luxury country people don’t have. Their salary is paid for country “rates”. Thus that $300k house is pretty difficult to afford when you only earn less than $50k per annum. Even if I was lawyer in the bush I would be earning less than half what I earn now in Sydney plus the work wouldn’t be very interesting.

      Similarly, the person earning $50k per annum in Sydney struggles to live, too.

      If you’re a farmer then your income isn’t that much due to business expenses.

      It’s not that one side has it better than the other, it’s that both sides are struggling. But the bush has been ignored for the last 30 years. Now there is some attention being paid to it and Penbo (and some other journos) deride theis attention.

      Essentially you have to compare like with like.

    • Duff says:

      04:53pm | 09/09/10

      @Forther, the answer is: move to Brisbane.  Seriously.  The legal work is interesting, the houses are cheaper, you still get paid 6 figures and you can have a rural-style life if you want it as the commute is far, far better than in Sydney and there are really nice properties easily within an hour’s commute.  I think too much emphasis is placed on Sydney and Melbourne in this country.  Perth, Brisbane, Adelaide and Hobart.  All really good options for a young professional like yourself.  Maybe instead of pumping money into the bush we should be encouraring people to spread out to these smaller cities.

    • Denny Crane says:

      10:01am | 09/09/10

      David,

      The $10 billion for the bush is easy to find, simple maths, the 2 train lines promised.
      QLD - Petrie to Redcliffe
      NSW - Epping to Parramatta

      Julis will say due to budget constraints ie bush might see the $10 billion, we will have to suspend the tarin line, till after the next term of government, add some spin in, and thats what will happen

      Reply

    • Markus says:

      10:30am | 09/09/10

      The Epping to Parramatta line is not something the Federal Govt should have ever promised to begin with.
      It is not their responsibility, it is the state’s, and with the promise made by the Federal Govt to build it went any claim that you should judge state and federal Labor as separate entities.

      If Sydney residents want an Epping to Parramatta line they should stop voting for a state government that has been dicking them around on it for over a decade.

    • AJ says:

      10:02am | 09/09/10

      This is the sort of thinking that created the economic imbalance in the first place. The mis-allocation of resources between city and the bush has been going on for years and hasn’t had any real attention since the Whitlam grand decentralisation plans. 10Billion is hardly a massive amount of money to square the books given the 4 times larger amount required to roll out fibre via the NBN. There are unrecognised benefits in supporting our rural communities not the least of which is providing an opportunity for increasingly overcrowded city dwellers an alternative place to live. Our agriculture sector for instance, provides us with much cheaper beef prices than is the case overseas and it will be a case of “don’t know what you’ve got till its gone” if we run down our primary industries beyond viable survival. 10 Billion? Pah! Cheap at twice the price.

      Reply

    • Tombarina says:

      10:05am | 09/09/10

      Speaking as an ex-bush battler as outlined above, “kudos”. 

      In the country, you’re drip-fed the mentality that you’re doing it tough for the benefit of the entire country. In reality, there’s a pile of money to be made and more tax breaks, subsidies and handouts than you can poke a stick at.

      Now a city-dweller, I often host visiting friends from the bush - they turn up in their (subsidised) $100k LandCruiser Sahara wagons to visit their (subsidised) kids in their (subsidised) $30k a year boarding schools, en route to the family (tax-break) holiday unit at the coast. 

      The hypocrisy of a system which simultaneously assures you that you’re the only sector of society doing an old-fashioned day’s work while shelling out $ hand over fist to compensate you for your (lucrative) choice and to prop up unsustainable communities is staggering.

      Reply

    • Sam says:

      11:52am | 09/09/10

      For every one of your ‘landed gentry’ mates that you have, there are many more ‘farm labourers’ and their families who don’t have the benefits you refer to, and for all of them it really is a daily struggle.

    • Tombarina says:

      12:37pm | 09/09/10

      Sam, I take your point.

      My (poorly expressed) argument was that the loudest squealers and ‘poor me’ chest-beaters ARE the so-called landed gentry.  For example, I know one lot who put managers onto their property, moved into a newly-purchased house in town to do stuff-all, then discovered to their outrage that they were no longer eligible for the remote area education subsidy for their kids. So they bought ANOTHER house, this time on a block just outside the qualifying perimeter (35km, from memory, because there were three existing schooling options in their town) , listed it as their mailing address, and were able to get the full whack of subsidy for their kids to attend school on the coast - where the parents bought a unit as part of their off-farm investment tax-friendly swag.

      Existing subsidies and tax breaks are simply rewarding people who don’t need them, and shoring up unsustainable communities.

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      10:07am | 09/09/10

      Penbo has it escaped your attention while cruising across the Hay Plains between Adelaide & Sydney in your Ferrari, that the National Party for the past 20 decades has only been rubber stamping Liberal policy for the price of a couple of ministeries ? stop the car and smell the cow pads Penbo

      Reply

    • Duff says:

      10:08am | 09/09/10

      Excellently writing! Really, very good.  This combination of humour with a point of view is your calling.  I love the $10k lawn mower and a briefcase of complaints containing a brick!

      Reply

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      11:38am | 09/09/10

      Does anyone on the Liberal or Labor front benches mow their own lawns ? I don’t think Tony Windsor like many others in the bush has a Jim’s Lawnmowing service nearby !

    • Mike T says:

      01:43pm | 09/09/10

      4 Million….I Believe that windsor has just sold his farm for this figure or is about to. Another strugling farmer. I think we should pass the hat around to make sure we can hire a few guys to help him carry his money to the car

      And before anyone jumps on my statement, yes i know that thier is strugling farmers….but thier is not any more people strugling int the bush then thier is in the city

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      02:35pm | 09/09/10

      @Mike..the struggling people in rural communities just get by without the plethora of social support located in cities. The argument that an outer suburb is just as isolated for support is hard for me to put in the same category as people beyond 50, 100, 150, 200 kms away from these support mechanisms. In some cases without a GP practising in their town.

    • Mike T says:

      04:10pm | 09/09/10

      Pete posted “The argument that an outer suburb is just as isolated for support is hard for me to put in the same category as people beyond 50, 100, 150, 200 kms away from these support mechanisms. In some cases without a GP practising in their town”

      Not sure where i made that argument at all mate. My argument was that i fully concede that aspects for the country folk are difficlut (especially health) but many things are more difficlut for the city folk, which i believe balances out. Are the city folk demanding that house prices should be subsidisied becuase they are disproportionate to those in the bush?? are they asking why the sturt highway to have a toll so as to share the pressure on the city folk?? Pete as much as you would like to, unfortunately you dont have ownership of the word “hardship” in the bush… you just have different types of hardships my friend.  And by the way, im happy to compare my cost of living any day of the week with you my friend…the difference is im not on here complaining about it

    • Diamantina Dick says:

      10:17am | 09/09/10

      Nice fiction piece, not to be confused with reality. David needs to broaden his horizons and actually spend some time in the bush, just like 95% of Australians,  99.9% of contributors to this forum and 100% of those who have previously responded.

      Urban Australia is over represented at every level of Goverment and polcies are biased accordingly. The current situation has simply highlighted that. Urban electorates are so happy on the Goverment teat they think they can afford to even vote Green. I rest my case.

      The independents should push for the abolition of personal income tax for anyone living to the west of the Great Dividing Range as part of the Tax review, this will provide a much needed enima for the struggling city fringes and move the country forward.

      Reply

    • Tombarina says:

      11:42am | 09/09/10

      In a word, Diamantina Dick, bollocks.
      There are people in the bush doing it tough. But the vast majority of them aren’t. And higher costs associated with petrol, groceries, etc are more than offset by vastly lower median house prices and extensive subsidies for everything from education to diesel.
      Finally, it’s a choice. No one’s holding a gun to anyone’s head. And for the record, I stuff up your assertion that 100 percent of previous respondents aren’t from the bush.  I just choose not to buy into the “we’re the hard-working backbone of the nation - take that, you lily-livered urban libtards” mentality.

    • Diamantina Dick says:

      02:57pm | 09/09/10

      Tombarina, having read your other comments there seems to be a common thread. You seem to resent allowances and subsidies offered to certain rural residents. As someone else pointed out, you may be working on too small a sample to begin with. You also seem to think susidies are propping up unsustainable communities. I’d simply ask you to consider what, over a long period of time, has made these communities unsustainable and how in the space of a century Australia has become one of the most urbanised populations in the world?

    • Tombarina says:

      03:58pm | 09/09/10

      Dick, I have a major issue with middle-class welfare of any ilk.  Subsidies, safety nets, assistance - these were designed to help people in genuine need, not those who either choose to live cheaply in a country town or those with enormous asset bases. 

      That said, I’m equally unenamoured of baby bonuses, family payment, first home buyers grants and the mortgage belt whingers who have a couple of kids then expect the rest of the community to fund them.

      I don’t resent allowances and subsidies offered to certain rural residents. I do resent flagrant and unnecessary ‘appeasment’ expenditure to any sector.

      BTW, I’m basing my sample size on 30 years on the land and in country towns.

    • nosthow says:

      10:24am | 09/09/10

      The people have spoken Penbo and Labor is the new government for the next 3 years. Lesson to the liberal party - dont go to an election ever again with no policies and no vision for the future - and also have as a leader someone who is genuinely electable not someone like the Mad Monk. Labor lost seats this election not because of anything the Mad Monk did but because of their own leadership problems re the Rudd/Gillard coup. In the end Tony only had a pair of twos and Ms Gillard had a full house ! Take note Liberal supporters. And good morning everyone - I have a clear head this morning having gotten over our monster victory celebration.

      Reply

    • Jasperjen says:

      01:17pm | 09/09/10

      Yes the nation did speak but unfortunately only 3 of them were listened to. !!!!!!

    • nosthow says:

      04:26pm | 09/09/10

      @Jasperjen - winners are grinners Jasperjen and the losers can please themselves - hows that warm lemonade tasting ?

    • Andy W says:

      10:27am | 09/09/10

      The only way you could alter that reality is through a cross subsidy? Or you can use VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol), No line rental, free local and national calls, and works just like a normal phone.
      All you need is access to a decent internet connection.
      The NBN will be the death of line rental and timed phone calls.

      Reply

    • TrueOz says:

      10:31am | 09/09/10

      Let me tellya story ‘bout a man named Kev,
      A sorry sacka shit, an’ he got rolled by Red,
      Then one day she was shootin’ at some fools,
      When up through the ranks comea coupla tools,
      (Windsor that is…and Oakshot…conscience free)
      Well the next thing ya know ol’ Reds a big PM,
      The face-less-hacks said move away from there!
      Said in the bush is the place ya oughta be,
      So she rolled at the broadband, and moved to…

      Oh! – you all know the song! Now sing along!

      Reply

    • TimB says:

      01:00pm | 09/09/10

      Genius. Utter Genius. Someone needs to do a Youtube clip of this.

    • Lails says:

      02:02pm | 09/09/10

      Thats GOLD!!!!

    • Steve Putnam says:

      10:26pm | 09/09/10

      @TrueOz Get over it. Windsor & Oakshot went with the people that could do the maths. Hockey can’t count past ten without taking his shoes & socks off. Abbott still has difficulty even then. Your parody is about as funny as a toothache.

    • TrueOz says:

      02:54pm | 10/09/10

      Well Yiiiihah Steve Putnam! Ya’ll take ya boots off an’ relax a liitle good buddy. Bid Red’ll be along reeyl soon with some grits ‘n moonshine for ya’all. Now shes in control’ada fed-er-aal cheque book ag’in, why it’s free grits ‘n moonshine fer ev’ryone. Ya’ll come back now - yer hear!

    • Bob H says:

      10:38am | 09/09/10

      The idea that everyone bush wears Bob Windsor tweeds on a Lexus ride-on, manicuring the country estate while sipping on a chardonnay traveler, is a good counter balance Katter’s “the government’s been shooting our families and putting our heads on sticks alongside the roadside” type message.  But these are the extremes most rural people live modestly and put up with inadequate services, maybe it is about time they took a share of the tax dollars.  The $10bn will go to the local MP backers, land owners and businesses which is the same as in the cities, so it will all be fair.

      Reply

    • AdamC says:

      10:38am | 09/09/10

      Great stuff, Penbo.

      This rural and regional persecution complex, foolish as it is, is not new. It actually got a big run about a decade ago, when Kim Beazley came up with ‘Country Labor’ to take on the Nats in the neglected bush. I don’t know what happened to Country Labor, but it isn’t that surprising that, in the circumsatnces, Gillard has found a veritable cesspit of fatty hogs to grease up the hicks.

      Until Australian governments are prepared to stand up to the remote vote and state the simple fact that you will never have equal access at equal cost to services in vast, sparsely populated districts as you get in Sydney and Melbourne, these sort of auctions will occur every time someone from the country gets a whiff of power.

      I guess, from a governance persepective, it is a shame that vast billions will now be spent subsidising remote-area access to super fast internet and the like, rather than on the increasingly severe hard infrastructure bottlenecks we have in this country. But what can you do, huh?

      Reply

    • AJ says:

      11:37am | 09/09/10

      How about go west young man?

    • Hamish says:

      02:39pm | 09/09/10

      Great points AdamC. The NBN is a classic example of this. Labor say they are going to provide super fast broadband to 93% of Australians. Sure. Fine. However, you could roll it out for 75% of the population (i.e. people in major cities) for virtually nothing. Indeed people in Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane can already get very, very fast broadband (they don’t use it though ‘cos it’s not worth paying for). What the NBN is actually about is spending $40 billion to roll out super fast broadband to the 20% of the population who won’t get it through the private sector because it’s sub-economic.

      I guess the Labor Party feel everyone, even if you live on a remote cattle station, 200km from the nearest pub, has a right to super fast porn.

    • TC says:

      05:23pm | 09/09/10

      The job’s still not done Hamish.

      Surely if you can watch porn at work in the city it’s a right to watch porn at work in the bush. It’s simply not fair that one group are so heavily favoured.

      What Labor really need to do is remove that inequity and have all paddocks, fences, and signposts on the road to town hooked up so these poor harddoneby country folk can have the same services as the urban pansies.

      And a ride on mouse

    • Simon says:

      10:39am | 09/09/10

      If life is so wonderful in regional Australia David, why are towns stagnant or atrophying everywhere?
      If it’s so bountiful as you insinuate, why is it that in our town you can’t get into surgery because the hospital is heritage listed and the roof lets water leak all over the operating table.
      Ever had to wait 12 months to see a medical specialist ot 6 months to see the dentist?
      The ‘gentleman farmers’ you speak of constitute a very small number of the people that live in regional areas.
      And those gentlman farmers are what keep small towns going with their business activity.
      Let’s get some facts on the table and stop whipping up this divide between country and city when we should work together.

      Reply

    • Mike T says:

      01:56pm | 09/09/10

      mmm simon. Been to RNSH hosp lately or many of the other city based hospitals??? dripping roofs is not specific to country hospitals….  in regards to the lack of specialists, this is not due to a lack of funding champ. In actual fact Medicos are better paid as an incentive to go to work in the bush. My partener, who is a locum GP recieves available shifts of all the hospitals based around the country and the fact is that the more rural the hospital, the better the pay. Of course this an incentive to draw Doctors to the bush as many prefer the city lifestyle. My point is that lack of funding is not what drives doctors away from the bush… in fact if you did a cost analysis of what the amount spent, per person on health, you would no doubt find out that individuals would chew up more then a city dweller (this is its common sense that the fewer the population, the more a service costs per person). I have no problem with it costing more to treat people in the bush (as the countyr supports the city in many ways), but im sick of whinging that they dont get thier fair share

    • Nick says:

      10:41am | 09/09/10

      Superb and insightful! Australians have always been susceptible to rural sob-stories and the “plight of the bush” - and unfortunately the media does little to correct the record. 

      The squatocracy deserve a special from of contempt for their utter hypocrisy. Sydney’s most elite private and boarding schools are full of their offspring. We always hear of droughts, floods and crop failures. But when good times returns - which they always do - these professional whingers don’t let up.

      Sydney has been getting screwed over by the Commonwealth Grants Commission for decades but no one gives a damn.

      Reply

    • Old Cobber says:

      06:22pm | 10/09/10

      Easy,easy, They [Squatters] build a gross monument to themselves at Wangenalla. Wonder what Grant that came under? Bring back the Wool floor plan and the single desk create tarriffs on every thing except Tractors ,chemicals and ammonium phosphate and we will all drive Rollers again like Grandad.  Geez, I wonder why all those bright young sheilas have gone and got professional heaps of dough jobs in the city?

    • what the says:

      10:45am | 09/09/10

      “As one of the journalists present pointed out, the only way you could alter that reality is through a cross-subsidy - that is, by charging city people more to use the phone than country people.”

      Journalists don’t you just love em?
      Can someone explain to the author and the journalist that you aren’t using petrol to deliver a phone call.  You are using copper wire and fibre. It’s called infrastructure. There is no additional cost once it is in place.

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      11:46am | 09/09/10

      There is a little thing called maintenance. Something that Telstra has been notoriously bad at since they have been privatized…....

    • Ellis Wyatt says:

      10:49am | 09/09/10

      Rather than ‘The Beverly Hillbillies’, surely there must have been a more appropriate photograph from ‘Deliverance’ that could have accompanied this article.

      Reply

    • r3830 says:

      10:56am | 09/09/10

      $10 billion in support of the country areas. That’s good - and yet, I’m still buying imported fruit juice concentrate, being sold imported grain - and being told to enjoy imported beef! Where’s the real support for our producers…. and in the long term - all our people?

      Reply

    • Elizabeth says:

      11:00am | 09/09/10

      David, I would have expected better from you than this ignorant piece. In trying to be funny you’ve ignored basic facts.
      This is not $10b in new money - I’m pretty sure Wayne Swan said it was less than $1b new. So it’s hardly a massive splurge on rural Australia that will kill of city and suburban areas.
      But then why let the facts stand in the way of a nasty jibe at rural people.
      I’m a city person who spent about 10 years working in various country towns and regional cities and I know where I’d rather live because of better services and job opportunities - and it’s not the bush!

      Reply

    • Jasperjen says:

      11:19am | 09/09/10

      The Boys from the Bush - first off lets define the Bush seems the Media nor City folks ever define what constitutes Regional, Rural and Remote Australia. Oakeshott and Windsor represent mainly Regional populace and very little of this 10 B is going to find its way to Rural or Remote.Then you have to take into accouint the landed gentry and the Bush battler it is all such a mix. Rural and remote Aust. will see little of this money.Fibre network is not coming to a town near you if you live in towns with populations under about 2000 and there will never be an upgrade of medical services.The Liberal Party Policy would have gone a lot further in Rural and remote Aust. Fast Fibre gee we would just love something a bit faster than Dial up or Cheaper than current satellite charges.We want Mobile, Television and Radio Reception long before fast internet. My first ambition is still a flushing loo.Would love a car that did not have about 50 battle scars from those Kangaroos that do jump out at us every time we leave the house to drive 100ks for a loaf of bread and a carton of milk
      .Fresh air does help keep away the need for constant Medical attention not breathing in all thoser City germs and pollution.Guess we all have to weigh up why we live where we live and sometimes it is not by choice. as far as lack of Education Facilities, dont feel sorry for our little school of 10 pupils where there is a remarkable relationship between headmaster/teacher the pupils and the whole community just not the parents where the whole village participates in school activities and we constantly turn out aspiring students. We dont need a big fence around our school for protection, every student looks out for each other ,no bullying,every child gets to participate in every activity they all have a computer , a bicycle, a tennis racket and a musical instrument,no one is left out of excursions or camps.Mr Oakeshott’s
      interpretation of Education in the Bush is all spin for his own amb itions

      Reply

    • Isabel says:

      03:28pm | 09/09/10

      “we all have to weigh up why we live where we live and sometimes it is not by choice.”
      Some people are born to people who were born to those who lived in a rural town. Not necessarily their choice to live where they live, but unless and until they are able to leave, that is where they are. Not all want or are able to go to university which is one way of leaving home - if you can afford accommodation, etc while studying. Not all are able to get any one of the reducing number of local employment opportunities. Mining towns become depopulated as fly-in fly-out becomes the norm. Downward spiral of services all round as the population lessens. Local Shires desperate to attract new comers, but catch 22, city folk don’t want to live without the amenities and such amenities will not be available until the population numbers warrant same. While some country schools may be as described above, there are others who are staffed by teachers who make it plain they would prefer to be elsewhere. Could go on, but it is all too depressing to think about!

    • hot tup political machine says:

      11:19am | 09/09/10

      Some fair points Penbo, but two of the complaints about the country - schools and hospitals, are kinda fair. I would love to live in the country now as I have no kids, but when I do have kids it would be back to the big smoke for better schools/healthcare for them.

      Reply

    • MelG says:

      11:21am | 09/09/10

      10 billion for rural australia, well if we had got Mr Abbott that would be a mere 2.5 years of paid maternity so forgive me if I have little sympathy for all the city based women on $150k per year that will have to make do on the minimum wage instead.

      Your right living in Australia should not be a competition, but it already is and was long before these 3 blokes came into the equation. There are wonderful things about living in the country but there are incredibly difficult ones as well. If you live in the country and get cancer you have an increased risk of dying from it, it takes 6 weeks here just to see a GP and huge numbers of businesses have closed locally due to the drought, water restrictions and downturn in agriculture and horticulture industries. These are not businesses that deal directly with farmers these are all types of businesses many of which had been around for decades which felt the flow on effect from the primary industries. Our town has a population of 12000 with the regional population of around 35000.

      Your comments show a real lack of understanding regarding the issues faced in rural and regional australia and the effects of the last decade of underfunding in vital services and infrastructure in these areas.

      Well I invite you to my part of the world in regional sa to have a look around then you can give me your opinion on how these blokes have suddenly made it about a competition because judging Tony Windsor and thinking that’s how all country people live is way of the mark.

      Reply

    • Barry Pattrick says:

      11:58am | 09/09/10

      Hey David - good yarn mate. I live on a cattle property near a small town which has a hospital but no Doctor , now thats like been bogged in the ute (just somewhere to sleep but doesnt do you much good) and the Chemist is 300kms away so by the time I get there ive forgotten what was the matter with me. So David old son just because youve been to the Ekka a couple of times doesnt mean you know all about the bush. A lot of us live out here so we dont have to line up for service we just have to be patient anyway I might go ring my neighbour up and tell him all about this $10 billion - thats if the phones working

    • Mike T says:

      04:21pm | 09/09/10

      Thanks Barry Patrick.

      Your call for help has touched me. I demand that we build a GP super clinic and a chemist on you doorstep. I dont care if it’s just for you and the costs are astranomical. I will also get on the blower as you dont have a phone and organise a Mcdonalds and a pizza hut aswell.

      Please continue to let us know of the disadvantages of living in a such an awful part of the world, it is clear that thier is No beneifts in doing so, only hardship. I encourage all city folk sell thier Porches and get rid of thier tiny mortgages, move to the country and get out a chemist and a GP each.

    • Barry Pattrick says:

      10:31am | 10/09/10

      Hey Mike T thanks for the kind thoughts -nice work but cancel the Pizza Hut as I am 160kms from town imagine the delivery charges - dont you just hate those $100 pizzas they taste the same as the cheap ones

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      11:55am | 09/09/10

      The welfare system is Australia is crazy. We complain about rural welfare but not middle class welfare. We give subsidies to some economic sectors but other sectors are left to wither. There is no rational overall economic / industrial planning. It’s all based upon politics and pork barrelling these days. Just crazy…..

      Reply

    • AdamC says:

      12:31pm | 09/09/10

      Shane, people in rural areas can access the same middle-class welfare (boby bonuses, family tax benefits and, soon, paid mat leave) as their urban cousins.

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      02:39pm | 09/09/10

      @Adam C…I doubt that the average wage of a female employee or job opportunities for one is anywhere near as prevelant or financialy rewarding in rural areas compared to cities. So I doubt paid maternity leave is as attractive in rural areas as it is in the cities.

    • Elizabeth says:

      12:02pm | 09/09/10

      Oh how I heart your writing and wit David. I laughed and nodded my head when I read this post… even though its not funny and pretty disappointing state of affairs.

      Reply

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      12:26pm | 09/09/10

      David Penberthy, you ask where the money to pay Julia Gillard’s $10 billion Bribe is going to come from. Then you offer us examples of a couple of possible sources. Why did you not offer up the source of all the money, after they had squandered the $23 billions in cash we had in the bank, the Rudd-Gillard-Swan & now Gillard-Swan duo have used for their extravagances? They simply went out & borrowed it. To date the debt they have created is reportedly well over $100 billion. When it was a paltry $94 billiont was increasing by $100 million every day & it will be increasing by more than that now!
      If the National Party, formerly the COUNTRY Party had used the undoubted power they had when in Government with the Liberals they could have forced the issue & ensured that all that infrastructure, services, facilities had been put in place years ago & upgraded as & when necessary. But they did nothing.
      They could have forced the issue over the blatant & deliberate policies of both the ALP & Liberals to enable the destruction of Australia’s manufacturing & agriculture. They could have put a stop to the USA-Australia Free Trade Agreement. An agreement which has been proven over & over to be of benefit almost entirely to the USA.
      Our supermarkets are full of IMPORTED FOOD. All of which Australia is perfectly capable of producing.
      ALL retail stores, no matter how big or small, only offer clothing, shoes,household goods etc. which are Made Overseas. There are NO Australian Made products available.
      Why? Because of actions by the ALP, Liberals & Nationals
      Only a very, very short time ago almost 90% of ALL vehicles, including buses,trains & trams, on Australia’s roads, tracks,farms etc. were MADE IN AUSTRALIA. Today, thanks to the ALP,Liberals & Nationals that has shrunk to less than 20%.
      Thanks to successive, traitorous politicians in Canberra Australia will become a notion which produces nothing. When, as is inevitable all the minerals, gas etc. run out we will have to import everything. We are already a net importer of FOOD.
      It is not so many years ago when we were told that “Australia Stands to be the “FOOD BASKET” of the World”.
      Thanks to stupid politicians & the bureaucrats who advise them we have abandoned any sort of protection for our manufacturing & agriculture by reducing or eliminating tariffs. Our politicians adopt they “Holier than thou” attitude by telling us that “International Agreements require us to reduce or eliminate tariffs & other protection”. May be they do but, whilst these idiots obey tthe rules, other countries, in particular the USA & all those countries which comprise the European Union, maintain existing barriers.We can’t stop them dumping their stuff on us but they, apparently illegally, prevent us from selling our products to them.
      If what they are doing is illegal then Australia should take legal action against them all or impose identical barriers.

      Reply

    • ThursdayPunch says:

      12:47pm | 09/09/10

      Couple of points here.
      1. Australia is NOT a net importer of food.
      2. Please elucidate for me how you propose to advance a nation in the areas of (by way of example only) steel imports (which we need as we don’t and never have produced steel competitively in this country) heavy equipment (which for those readers who don’t live in WA we use to mine the earth for minerals) and technology (which despite our own beliefs we still require from overseas) IF we have to pay exorbitant prices for. Follow me on this - if we charge outrageous protected prices for our exports, we will, and go slowly here tiger, h a v e t o p a y i n f l a t e d p r i c e s f o r o u r i m p o r t s. And these inflated prices will certainly impede or even destroy our growth. Get a business my friend and see how tough the real world has it.

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      03:38pm | 09/09/10

      @Thursday Punch ..Robert might be chewing at various parts of this argument and some I disagree with, but realy you are being an ignorant pompous prat if you think he, me and others in rural Australia don’t have a business.

    • Amber says:

      12:43pm | 09/09/10

      Very clever David. How hard can it be for country folk, who wouldn’t live in the city for quids and most city people dream of doing it?
      The big point made here is while some country- costs are higher, a lot are lower and it all balances out. They might not have the fastest broadband speed, but then we don’t have pollution-free peace and quiet. We all make our choices.

      Reply

    • Zaf says:

      01:00pm | 09/09/10

      RARA-land needs jobs and a focus on education, not hand outs and drop outs.  That’s the only thing that will make country towns viable, and the country economy sustainable.  Perhaps even make the country population grow?  These would all be good thigns for all Australians.

      Of course population growth will change the country - and are people who ‘joke’ about playing ‘spot the Aussie’ when they visit some of Sydney’s suburbs ready for that?

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      01:35pm | 09/09/10

      One of the funniest shows on record, and unfortunately, no pollie in Oz has have ever been able to equal it in style or substance.

      Reply

    • Dobbo says:

      01:35pm | 09/09/10

      While the inspiration’s flowing how about another hillbilly tune? This time inspired by the fears of John Howard and his followers Messrs Abbott, Dutton, Pyne et al that this unholy, nay ungodly bunch of perverts will destroy Australia.

      Something like: “There’s a red(head) under the bed/There’s a red(head) under the bed/ unless we get her out boys, we’re dead” - repeat ad nauseum, ad infinitum etc.

      Of course Little Johnny would vocalise and his backing band the Lib Saviours would accompany on banjos, lagerphones, bed pans or whatever fell most readily to hand.

      Perhaps those cartoonists who brought the delightful “Abbott Family” to us might like to set the thing to appropriately educational images?

      Diddle eh deh deh deh deh etc etc

      Reply

    • Steve Putnam says:

      06:05pm | 10/09/10

      I once had a great idea for a concept album: John Howard sings ABBA. Can you hear the drums Ferrrrnandoooe…...? The perfect gift for someone you hate!

    • Mike T says:

      01:38pm | 09/09/10

      Great article. The facts remain that living in a marginal seat or an area where an independant holds power guarantees you a bigger piece of the pie. I long for th day when OUR taxes are dispearsed on area’s where it is needed or with a sense of equality, but i guess thats asking to much. Oh and dont dare hope for equality if you dont have a family!!! How dare anyone mention putting resources behind somone that is not part of a “working family”

      In regards to the City vs country debate…..well im sick of it. Yes calls cost more from the bush and there is not as many Doctors out that way, but if you country folk think for a second that the pro’s and cons dont balance out then you are absolutley kidding yourselves… Tell me how much your mortgage is for starters. And to those saying that thye bush supports the city in terms of produce etc, well that is 100% true…. but if you think that the city folk dont subsidise many of the services which you receiev then you are living under a rock…

      So to summarise the bush supports the city, the city supports the bush, thier is hardship in the bush, thier is hardship in the city….....anyone that sees either of having a monopoly & calls for a bigger peice of th pie is calling for the govt to take the food out of the mouths of the other!

      Have to rush as im looking for a few members to build my working family then looking for a nice house in a marginal rural seat so that i can complain that life is to hard

      Reply

    • Denizen says:

      01:52pm | 09/09/10

      Wait… so let me get this straight. The coalition is made up of the Liberals - who represent mainly urban and city voters – and the Nationals – who represent rural voters. And all you right wing nutbags, who rely heavily on rural voters to form ANY kind of government EVER, think it’s a good idea to slag these people off because their elected representatives got them a good deal after this election? Brilliant! What a strategy! And you guys wonder why rural voters are turning to the independents? Keep up the fine work people, you deserve everything that’s coming your way.

      Reply

    • posy says:

      02:16pm | 09/09/10

      correct Denizen - in a nutshell

    • Mattb says:

      10:14pm | 09/09/10

      Couldn’t have said it any better Denizen, these two indy’s have finally shown rural Australia how you get more support for the bush. Hopefully rural australia will take note of the events of the past couple of days and turn to the indy’s in their electorates in droves and sent the barnaby joice’s and Warren truss’s into the political wildernesses they belong and with any luck drag the rabbit and bitchy cockroach with them

    • howy says:

      02:04pm | 09/09/10

      If the rural folk were smart, they’d remind average Aussies everyday that both major parties support Australia importing most of it’s food from Asia.

      Once Australians realise this and they force the govt to stop the imports they can then raise the prices of their produce and the country towns will prosper once again. The fight against a one World government starts in Bathurst.

      Reply

    • Trevor says:

      02:24pm | 09/09/10

      One of the things that sometimes isn’t appreciated is how making the country a more attractive place to live will removed some of the pressures on the city.  Traffic, soaring house prices, infrastructure that exists but is unable to cope with the volume of people that are now there.

      We are a country that crams most of its population into a few tiny areas that are long distances from each other.  Anything that encourages the population to spread out slightly more evenly has the potential to benefit everyone.  Subsidising rural Australia in some ways will indirectly help solve other, different problems in the city.

      Reply

    • Kevin says:

      02:52pm | 09/09/10

      something similar happened in the past State election in WA.  Nationals wanted to quarantine funds for regional WA - 25%, calling it Royalties for Region.  Liberal and Labour both jostled for it by announcing support, but the Liberals won the day… this Federal development looks very similar…

      Reply

    • Soos says:

      04:16pm | 09/09/10

      First it was Lib against Labor, then rich against poor; now it is country Vs city. The name of the game is Conquer and Divide..it keeps us away from the real problems that we, as a nation, are facing.

      Reply

    • Robert s McCormick says:

      04:55pm | 09/09/10

      Thursday Punch, according to Bob Katter, like him or loath him he does his homework, the Aust.Bureau of Statistics says we ARE a net importer of FOOD (We bring in more than we send out)
      Certainly there are, as in every country, things we for economies of scale, can’t or don’t produce & it is cheaper for us to import them. But why have successive Federal Government’s allowed almost our entire Textile & related manufactured production to go off-shore? Why are the USA & European nations allowed to maintain their tariffs & quotas on Farm Produce whilst insisting that we should remove all our barriers both financial & biological?
      One example: This country is free of “Fireblight” &, give successive Fed.governments their due, we want to keep that devastating disease out because if it became endemic in this country it would destroy an otherwise “Clean, Green, Healthy Apple industry”. What has happened? The World Trade Organisation has told us we are breaking the law. They have ordered that we MUST allow this, possibly infected, material into Australia. Material the countries which control the WTO won’t allow into their own! By what right does any Foreign country, or organisation controlled by them, presume to think they can over-ride the Laws & Regulations created & approved by our Parliament. I say to Hell with them all.
      Oh, and by the way, ThursdayPunch, I did have my own, successful, small business & despite the “recession we HAD to have” I survived very nicely, thank you!

      [easy on the caps Rob - they don’t add anything apart from a sense that you can’t control your emotions. mods]

      Reply

    • Peter Whiteford says:

      07:17pm | 10/09/10

      Robert McCormick

      Australia is not a net importer of food.  If you look at the ABARE web site you will find that we export nearly three times as much as we import in terms of wheat, beef lamb and rice etc.  We also export more fresh fruit and vegetables than we import.  The only food item where we import more than we export is processed fruit and vegetables (i.e. mainly things that come in tins and jars)

    • Pete says:

      05:45pm | 09/09/10

      By your argument, people paying to post a letter across town should pay less than across country. Fortunately, this argument was debunked over a century ago. Return to start, do not collect $200 dollars, etc.

      Reply

    • Edward James says:

      06:27pm | 09/09/10

      David you’re not spot on.  You are way off base. Internet use where phone lines exist cost the same in the bush as the city. If you buy broad band then you can use Skype phone calls are what they are. Tony Windsor is a politician he is on a good wicket compared to most of us city or country. I am not impressed with the way you attack Bob Katter a brick in his globite is my recollection, You wrote For all we know Katter could have had a house-brick smuggled inside his Samsonite and none of us would be any the wiser as there was so much forelock-tugging going on. You David Penberthy are in a position to have checked what he was promulgating. Why is it you did not? After all you are in the business of braking news! Perhaps it is because the two parties not much preferred are a big source of your employers revenue and news. But Bob Katter has a point he has represented his electorate for over twenty years and the fact is politicians should exercise their influence in the best interest of their constituents. Why would you attack any politician for doing what he was elected to do? If not simply to sensationalize your own pretty ordinary work product.  Edward James

      Reply

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

      07:04pm | 09/09/10

      It wouldn’t be so bad if it was really about improving the rural foodbowl of Oz, but the reality is that unless you live in Oakeshott’s or windsor’s electorate, people in the bush will continue to get diminished services. What I don’t understand is where you bloody townies think your food comes from.

      Reply

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      09:47pm | 09/09/10

      China? Argentina? Vietnam? Thailand?

    • Reg says:

      10:05am | 14/09/10

      ...or where do you bushies think your market lies? Stand on Pennant’s Hills Road in Sydney any day and watch the semis zooming between Darling Downs or Gatton in Queensland and Sydney markets.

      Interstate road improvement were not only for Oakeschott’s electorate, they were a subsidy to interstate truckers which no doubt increased their profit margin rather than supplied cheaper prices to the market.

      You choose your life-style so stop whinging. The continual negativity from National supporters has rubbed off on the Liberals and it is one perpetual moan. Now daily news consists of the same moaning from all sorts of Liberal affiliated organisations intent on legitmising moaning so that the Liberal and National lap dogs don’t look so miserable.  If you like country life with its advantages and deficiencies, GREAT, just don’t push it on me, I spent the first 40 years of my life there.

    • Farkurnell says:

      09:27pm | 09/09/10

      Instead of spending $43bill on Surfing the net why now churn a.few $bill into building some decent beaches along the Murray Darling ,add a few wave machine theme parks and we’ve got a new bush tourism industry.This will kept the young bushies from straying towards bright lights of the Gold Coast and abandoning the heartland.Eventual the ASP will sponsor a grose surfing contest and Events NSW can spend some tax dollars on supporting the Bush surfing culture.The skys the limit in this new sunshine paradigm.

      Reply

    • Lisa H. says:

      12:01am | 10/09/10

      Interesting that the Liberal offer of tax relief for low income earners in rural areas wasn’t seen as innovative policy

      Reply

    • Pavlo says:

      01:09am | 10/09/10

      Love the photo.
      Which one is Julia?

      Reply

    • what the says:

      03:15pm | 10/09/10

      There’s two ways you can find $10 billion for rural Australia. You can do it by cutting services in suburban Australia. Or you can do it by enlisting the taxpayers of Parramatta, Ipswich, Werribee and Elizabeth

      you make it sound like theres no taxpayers outside the cities.  if you dont give regional people their fair share, theyll all have to move to the cities. then will you be happy?

      Reply

    • Reg says:

      10:57am | 14/09/10

      I’d have thought the answer lay in the numbers. There are RELATIVELY few taxpayers outside the big cities. For example, Sydney has in excess of FOUR million people, approximately 20% of the population of Australia.

      It’s my understanding that most country people are happy to avoid such dense situations and in so doing, welcome the deprivation it brings. You can’t have it both ways, either you prefer isolation and sneer at the townies or you invite the raving horde to squat in your orchards.

 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Lucy Kippist

lucyjk 07 Feb 12 09:10PM

RT @JenBrockie: A take on social media from India http://t.co/5XCerDTB @tehelkadotcom

Lucy Kippist

lucyjk 07 Feb 12 09:08PM

RT @alaindebotton: So many of our problems would be alleviated if we had 3 or 4 exceptional friends living within a 2 minute radius.

Paul Colgan

Colgo 07 Feb 12 07:22PM

RT @latikambourke: Yes, @PeterSlipperMP is genuine.

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 07 Feb 12 06:41PM

It's terribly unfashionable to admit but my Cityrail train just left on time again

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Interest rate barney barely even rates as interesting

by Tory Shepherd

66

Interest rate barney barely even rates as interesting

Stop all the cheering, cut off the champagne. Prevent the pollies from barking and silence the drums.…

Life slips away while you’re filming it on your phone

by Tory Maguire

71

Life slips away while you’re filming it on your phone

Some friends of mine had lunch on Saturday with a mate who spent so much time artfully composing photos…

Other stuff to be angry about today (with chorizo pic)

by Anthony Sharwood

34

Other stuff to be angry about today (with chorizo pic)

That dopey Spaniard. Three-time Tour de France winner Alberto Contador has been banned for two years,…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: City vs country: What would you change your life for?

Dieter Moeckel says:

We made the tree change from Darwin to Wonbah more than 15 years ago. After fencing, a road, and couple of dams our money was gone. Super is enough to live comfortably. We have geese growing old and stringy the only one that made it to the pot committed Kamakazi by flying into a tree; the chooks are… [read more]

From: I’d rather have a piece of toast than listen to crap lyrics

Erick says:

Led Zeppelin are responsible for my all-time favourite mixed metaphor: "There you sit, sit and stare, like a book on a shelf rusting." (Misty Mountain Hop) I laugh every time I hear it. Hmmm, I believe I've decided what to play on the way to work today. [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

Well, puck me with a fitchfork. The F-word is apparently an acceptable part of Australian speech. That’s… Read more

150 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed