The national policy agenda which nobody voted for

TimB says:

08:23am | 02/09/10

12% and “many more”? And this consitutes some sort of of majority?!

I know who’s post is full of arrogance, and it’s not David’s.

Let’s have the ETS explained. Properly. The total cost to each man woman and child, and the supposed enviromental benefit it will bring. Then put it to a referendum.

Bet it fails completely.

Tuccaboy says:

08:28am | 02/09/10

Arrogance is the wrong word, Jeremy.  Accuracy on the overview of the current situation is a far better word because we, the voters, did not vote for a union between Labor and the Greens nor the concessions the Greens obtained.  What I see is a strong similarity between Anna Bligh introducing the sale of Government assets after she was re-elected but not telling the Queensland voters beforehand, even though it was evident that it was in her plan all along.  The deal stitched up between Gillard and Brown now smells awfully like it was planned well before the election because it has all come about far too smoothly.

Jim says:

08:36am | 02/09/10

What’s more arrogant, Jeremy, is the green (red) contingent claiming 12% voted for their policies! Maybe 1-2% did, the other 10-11% just couldn’t bring themselves to place a 1 next to the main party candidate they were leaning towards.

Kelvin says:

09:59am | 02/09/10

So that means that 88% didn’t vote for it. Lets see, that is a simple one that even a Labour/Green supporter can work out which side of the argument has the majority support - it’s not the 12 percenters.

Tuccaboy is right - where was the Greens/Labour coalition on polling day or during the campaign. Greens are placed first here because they are now clearly calling the shots (for the time being at least.)

One saving grace from all of this is that it might start to flush out the actual Greens policies for the nation to examine them, rather than have them hiding in the bushes like they have for all these years.

John Goslino says:

10:16am | 02/09/10

Well put Jeremy, at least someone here can analyse things.  Politics is somewhat like a game of chess and the Greens and Labor feel they can both win by agreeing a pact, even one borne from convenience, like the Coalition decided many years ago, as you would appreciate Tuccaboy.  Together Greens & Labor represent close to 50% of votes cast.  The same applies in a sense to the independents, at least temporarily, they will be in a coalition of sorts, and this kind of thing happens worldwide, including the UK.  The Greens gained the greatest increase in support at the election, and are the third most significant group, so they have some clout Jim even if you dismiss it.  You must be convinced to vote for a ‘main party candidate’ due to being inspired by compelling policy platforms or great party leaders like Gillard and Abbott, just like you always do.  And Penbo, surely the parties are not spilling all the beans on deals (and sometimes policy costings) with the independents as they lever advantage, at the end of the day are you or me going to judge what the independents agree to as being in the national interest, or what Wilkie ought to believe in and do, whether state or Federal related?  You have the typical arrogance of someone who is not involved in any policy decisions.  And why do we bash Getup, regardless of its evident political leanings?  The entity has done some positive things to encourage debate and participation, maybe this has not been offset by a similar conservative version, but does this matter? And whoever said the majority of people in Oz - if we can even determine that - know what is the best policy to address climate change, and what an ETS or price on carbon actually means?  TimB, do you have any ideas?  Penbo doesn’t know.  Should we ask people at the Rooty Hill RSL Club or at Penbo’s pub?  So perhaps we leave it to a broader cross section of parliament and experts to advise us.  Too many are quick to score some cheap points to fill media space but contribute nothing but hot air.

Returned Man says:

10:44am | 02/09/10

How many voted for the Nationals? Bet it was less than 12%. And yet their leader would get to be PM whenever Tone is out of the country. Explain how we voted for THAT one, peoples.

1 of 128 says:

11:00am | 02/09/10

Math not your strong point Jim? The Greens have recorded a swing so far of +3.76% in the HOR and +3.73% in the Senate. The Greens would have been rapt to get a swing of between 10 amd 11% as suggested by yourself. Arrogance is Tuccaboy thinking he knows what we did and didn’t vote for!

Just Sayin' says:

03:24pm | 02/09/10

@ Returned Man

That’s a long standing arrangement that was known to everyone before the election.  Anyone who pays the slightest attention to politics knows that this was the case for all those years under Howard as well.  It’s hardly the same thing as springing the news of a deal on the unsuspecting public before the count has even finished.  Stick to relevwhat’s relevant.

Mark says:

03:42pm | 02/09/10

David is spot on with this article. When did we agree to the “sunday market” bargaining of some self important independant. It still remains that 78% of the population doesnt want an ETS. The noisy minority always forget that what they are - a minority.

Jeremy should go back to his leftist minority electorate - probably in Tassie.

Jugger says:

04:54pm | 02/09/10

Spot on Jeremy.  You asked who made Penbo king, well it was his boss Mr M.  Now Mr M is mad, and that means Penbo is mad, cos Mr M controls Penbo via a hand up the back passage!  Mr M has just been taught that he doesn’t, in fact, run the country.

And as far as things we voted for go Penbo, well the majority of the population voted in 07 for an ETS.  The public pressure for it was so great that the PM and the opposition leader had both agreed to implement it.  Then all of a sudden your friends in big business made sure that the opposition leader got knifed, followed later by the PM.

Now, thanks to the independents, we finally might get what we voted for back in ‘07.

So sorry, Penbo, that your boss doesn’t like the outcome of this election, but its funny to see you squeal like a stuck pig as Mr M manipulates your back passage!

Long may it continue, and go the independents!

Johnno says:

07:39pm | 02/09/10

I forget how many people voted for the GST and Workchoices. Could someone remind me?

Northern Steve says:

08:37pm | 02/09/10

@Returned Man,
The 12% Greens/4%Nats comparison is not a fair comparison.  The Nats only competed in 17 seats across the whole country in their own name.  If you look at their per-seat vote of about 26,000, and compare that to the Greens of about 9300, you see fairly quickly that proportionally the Nats outpolled the Greens quite substantially.

Another way to look at it is that the Nats polled on average 29% in each seat they ran, compared to 11-12% for the Greens.

tonyg@tonygavin.cim says:

10:22pm | 02/09/10

Andrew Wilkie just hasn’t gone far enough - he’s fialing to stand up for important (and endagered) minorities. When is the free foood and soft, government supplied seats going to be delivered to the pixes and faires at th ebottom of the garden. This bloke needs to start focusing on the BIG issues - like pixies and Faries, and their rights!

acotrel says:

06:55am | 03/09/10

David Penberthy obviously doesn’t live in the bush.  Anything which improves rural production and decentralises industry can only be good for Australia!

Returned Man says:

08:26am | 03/09/10

Yawn @Just Sayin and Steve - even without the agreement the Greens have made with Labor, you can’t deny the significant swings to that party and the fact that they now hold the Senate balance of power. THAT’S what I was referring to. The Nationals received absolutely nothing near such a result (and nice try with the “per seat” argument Steve - Hur, hur, hur ... keep digging, pal) yet their leader, of a party that receives well under 10% of the total federal vote, gets to be PM when the Liberals leader is out of the country (under a Coalition government).

Regardless of whether this has been the arrangement for the past few decades or the past month, why does no one question it, and yet go for the Greens’ throat when this party (that has only existed since 1996) receives “only” 12% of the vote?

Aitch B says:

02:36pm | 03/09/10

@Johnno:

The Howard Liberal government went to an election with the GST as official policy and was returned with a reduced majority as I recall, so plenty voted for the GST.

Workchoices was a different matter. The Libs promised industrial relations reform but obviously there were aspects of the eventual legislation that were considered by many to be somewhat draconian and biased towards employers. Given that they had a majority in both houses at the time they could pretty much do what they wanted!

Sue says:

10:48am | 04/09/10

No ...the arrogance of condoning that 12 %  of the vote gives you the right to make policy is amazing.

Front Row says:

07:02pm | 04/09/10

Jeremy,
So, out of every hundred people, you want the views of 12 to dictate to the other 78.
Have you thought about what you’re really suggesting here? Or is this the way they did it in the Motherland?
What solution for the other 78?

Steve says:

10:20pm | 07/09/10

So what. It’s pretty easy to support putting a price on carbon when you don’t pay the power bill!

jb says:

08:27am | 02/09/10

Very good point!

Aitch B says:

08:20am | 02/09/10

So what is your problem with a politician - from any political persuasion -  writing a sporting piece, Rob? If it was a Labor politician I’m sure you’d be gushing all over it.

MarK says:

08:52am | 02/09/10

I found that piece from Kevin Andrews to be an excellent bit of writing.

If you are that biased you cannot bring yourself to read or at least recognise that a member of the “other side” can actually write something interesting off the topic of politics you really need to get out more.

I am no fan of Peter Garrett the BatMan but have every Oils album (a lot still on vinyl) and listen to them regularly with much pleasure.

Get a rounded life Rob. Your mind will be happy for it. It is probably a bit lonely at the moment.

Rob r Charteris says:

09:04am | 02/09/10

Interesting… did I say anything was bad about Andrews writting a sports article? ummm no. you fellas love jumping to assumptions don’t you now. That is a sign of a narrow minded view of the world and certainly not of a rounded life as you seem to be claiming there MarK. Perhaps take a break, a Kit Kat break… there you go! all better now?

Dash says:

09:16am | 02/09/10

As opposed to say the ALPs job of running the insulation scheme, or the school halls program Rob. Or running the grocery choice program or running fuelwatch. Or say, delivering on more affordable housing (lol), or laptops to school kids. Or say the great job the ALP has done on running the green loans fiasco or deliveing “cheaper better childcare”. Or the “not negotiable” profits tax or delivering the East Timor Solution which never actually existed. Open your eyes Rob. People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Sensible people know that the state of the economy is due to the surplus and debt free nature of the previous government, the financial services reforms passed down by the Howard government (its impact on governance and capital quality within the financial services sector) and the appetite for our natural resources by China who btw has GDP growth of almost 10%. If you think throwing $900 at dead people, pissing taxpayers money down consultant black holes, taxing the sector driving our economy and overheating the economy (increasing interest rates) with the second stimulus was running the economy well, you have rocks in your head where some brains should be!

MarK says:

09:38am | 02/09/10

“Rob r Charteris says:

09:04am | 02/09/10

Interesting… did I say anything was bad about Andrews writting a sports article? ummm no”

Errrr. Is this the way you flatter people?

“Now you have members of the Coalition trying to jump ship, one even trying his hand at sports writting on this very site. Must be they can the end is coming. “

Yes yes yes. I see the praise dripping from every word.

/roll eyes.

Robert S McCormick says:

10:33am | 02/09/10

Come off it Rob Charteris! Your even mentioning “... one even trying his hand at sports writing…” is an implied negative criticism which typical of the ALP.
Are you sure you were not a failed candidate who hasn’t the guts to use his real name? A bit like “Persephone” who did not have the guts to use her eal name & was loud in her praise of the ALP & Julia but who disappeared as soon as the 1st Edition of Julia called her “Grab for power & legitimisation” Federal Election. An election which blew up in her face for no matter what deals she started with the Greens during the campaign & completed yesterday, no matter what deals she stitches together with the Independents, she will, until she actually wins a federal election by getting an ALP Majority., never achieve Political Legitimacy as Prime Minister.
Nor, thanks to the lovely mess she created, for that matter, will Tony Abbott
Whichever one becomes PM they will be ‘lame duck’ editions. Until either the ALP or the Coalition actually win a Federal Election & gain a working majority in their own right neither Abbott nor Gillard will have any Political Legitimacy whatsoever.
Of course, Rob, you & your ALP know all about inept economic management for you tried to bankrupt Australia under Whitlam, you damn near succeeded with Ketaing & then Rudd & Gillard started the whole process over again starting in 2007. What is the Federal ALP Government’s current debt position now? On 24/6/10 it was reported to be some $94 billions & increasing at $100 millions per day.Now that 68 days have passed Gillard & Swan have added another $7 billions. Total Federal (keeping State ALP debts aside) ALP debt now stands at over $101 billions & they are adding a cool $1billion every 10 days. Nice one!

MHT says:

11:20am | 02/09/10

It should also be noted Robert that only one Australian treasurer since federation has had the distinction of claiming the economic ‘Olympic’ trifecta…double digit unemployment, double digit inflation and double digit interest rates, yep,  a Liberal…John Winston Howard.

Mike T says:

11:31pm | 02/09/10

Rob…i realise that as a Lobour man you would love nothing more then to disregard history and MOVE FORWRAD, but can i ask you if the LP ran the economy well when they were in power untill three years ago??? So rather then make opinions based on assumptions lets look at which party has run the economy better whilst in power….the answer is pretty clear my friend, even to an ALP stooge

Rob r Charteris says:

09:08am | 02/09/10

It’s funny how you snivelling lib’s have this weird narrow minded way of looking at reality, if you don’t get you’re way you get all upset about it. We call it negotiation you call it held captive. What are you really scared of? The process? The fact that the longer it goes on the more we see that rAbbott is a phoney and all his baloney is coming back to bite his silly ass? I say let the process go, the country is still moving along. In fact the new economic numbers out yesterday really throw the foot back in your liberal mouths. Like I said before the election you guys don’t have anything for a policy except fear and smear and now major cost blow outs.

Robert S McCormick says:

01:06pm | 02/09/10

Fair enough, MHT, but as both the ALP & Coalition repeatedly tell us “They have no control over interest rates”- at least whilst they are in Government. Didn’t we have double digit interest rates under Keating too? He gave us “The recession we had to have”& didn’t that also have double digit unemployment? I remember the interest rates in particular for I was in business then & we were being charged rates around 16% on our loan!

Farkurnell says:

07:53pm | 02/09/10

Gee Thatmosis,with 13% of the electorate Raving Loony’s you better get out of Oz before its too late. I think you need a reality check , like it or not the Raving Loony’s are here to stay .Tony needs to wise up and accept the brave new world, and also he needs to buy a new calculator.

Trevor says:

12:40am | 03/09/10

“whilst money is being wasted daily on public servants doing their usual thing, nothing but with bells on”

Well, myself and all the public servants will be interested to see how you get on if we genuinely do nothing for a while.  With or without bells.  Please don’t expect any government benefits or services while we take a completely undeserved holiday.

Is there anyone else you’d like to take a swipe at while we’re here?

Damocles says:

01:57pm | 03/09/10

Hey Farkurnell, it’s funny you should refer to “the brave new world”,  maybe you should read “Animal Farm” as it is more pertinent in this political zoo we find ourselves. Oh, by the way, have you even read “Brave New World”? I think it’s a strange reference to make in support of any political party,

KH says:

08:38am | 02/09/10

There was an election, and a signifcant number of people cast a vote that made no sense (i.e. ‘green’ or ‘independent’, yeah right)  They are the ones responsible for this mess.  To form a government in this situation, either side is going to have to make concessions.  Thats just how it is.  Julia Gillard didn’t make the rules here.  Meanwhile, Abbott has been doing his own deception work, looking at the big $7 billion hole his budget has….....I knew he was hiding something, why else would you not want any scrutiny of your budget? 

These people are POLITICIANS.  They are all inherently devious and untrustworthy.  They are all interested in personal power.  Thats why they are there.  It certainly isn’t for the good of the country, now is it.

Reg says:

08:55am | 02/09/10

FUV you’re sounding rather petulant. Blaming “she and they” for not getting you favourite party elected is rather childish. None of us vote with any certainty that our pet peeves will be addressed, we are in fact only one tooth in a cog with 12 million teeth and government, as well as voting, is a tedious business.  Certainly no place for the petulant or the impatient.

Damocles says:

09:10am | 02/09/10

@Fed Up Voter…...Right On! Couldn’t have said it better myself. With Australia being ripped apart by these bloody minded, power hungry, selfish, self centred morons, I’m with David, heading to another, saner country, except I’m heading for China where there is some semblance of leadership and order. Yeah, you can all shake your heads, but I’ve lived in China and the people love their country and they all pull together and they have more day to day freedom than we have. This country is royally stuffed!!

farkurnell says:

08:59pm | 02/09/10

Damocles.Just remember while your their not to disagree with the Govt,and not to get on any blogg sites suggesting some democratic or social reforms.

Damocles says:

01:50pm | 03/09/10

Hey farkurnell, why would I bother disagreeing with the Chinese government or get on to a blog site suggesting some democratic or social reforms, when it gets me nowhere doing any of that here in good, old “democratic” Australia? Don’t kid yourself that your opinion carries any weight in this country. You’re dreaming mate!

Jim says:

08:53am | 02/09/10

Because a) the Greens and Labor have made back room deals prior to the election, b) Nats contested 17 seats only, of those 17 no Lib candidate sat, c) Greens plonked a ‘candidate’ in all 150 seats. So it was not Labor against 2 candidates, it was the coalition against both a Labor and a Green in each seat.

ZSRenn says:

08:57am | 02/09/10

Is it possible to speak to someone in a more senior position please?

The Liberal/National coalition has been around for decades.

We knew we were voting for it and its policies on Election Day.

That is the difference!

TimB says:

08:57am | 02/09/10

Because, apart from some rare examples (like in WA) the Nats and Liberals don’t run against each other in electorates. The Greens and Labor do, effectively giving any Labor/Greens coalition 2 candidates per seat.

If you don’t see the obvious issues with that, I can’t help you.

John A Neve says:

09:02am | 02/09/10

Jim,
I would not know if the Greens and Labor did “back room deals”, you obviously have an inside ear!!

As to where the parties stood candidates; surely that is a decision for them and the electorate can vote accordingly?

But I note you have not answered my question!!!!!

MarK says:

09:05am | 02/09/10

“Why is it that a Liberal/National coalition is acceptable and a Labor/Green or Labor/Independent isn’t?”

Might have been handy to actually have the Labor “coalition” partners known as such pre poll don’t you think?

“Hi I am Rob Oakeshott and will be aligning myself with Labor after I gin about being important and coming up with fantasies of bipartisan cabinets for a few weeks” sounds and looks a bit different to the “Oakeshott Independent:” campaign and advertising we saw in Lyne.

Nothing wrong with it. Be better to declare it early don’t you think?

Same for the Greens. Bob “we have no deal with no one I know nothing about preference deals - what deal” Brown really has a bit to answer for too don’t you think. The whole Sgt Shultz I know nuthing defence looks a bit suss now don’t you think?

Couldn’t care less who Labor compromises it self for. Seems a bit desperate to do it after the fact doesn’t it? I love how Brown and the other Greens will get more updates and better access to the PM etc than any of the Labor ministers did under Rudd and Gillard. Such irony.

John A Neve says:

09:18am | 02/09/10

Jim, ZSRenn & TimB,
You all seem to forget this is a claimed democracy.
Who stands what, where and how is up to them. The electorate makes their choice who to vote for.
Do you three think the electorate is stupid?

Green Dogma. says:

09:22am | 02/09/10

It’s how devious Gillard operates.  History will record her penchant for dealing in and knifing OUT. She didn’t mention BEFORE the election that she would if necessary for her retention of power, sign a Greens deal.  Her immediate Labor future rests on her “performance”, whilst her longer-term future is stuffed. 
Perhaps you should trace Green dogma over the last thirty years in Tasmania.  How Greens stopped everything, how they stopped clean hydro-power (I’m referring to beneficial clean hydro projects other than the Franklin), how the two who Labor dealed into their cabinet routinely behave.  Last week, when the newspaper “found them out”, publishing their plans to go against their own Green policy by attending an AFL event, the two of them hurriedly cancelled.
You don’t obviously know what Australians will have to contend with.  Just look at Bob Brown’s demeanour, his smirk.  Look at Milne’s countenance -  If you think that Greens dogma will not hold the high percentage of Australians who did NOT want an alliance with them as captive, you are unfortunately misled.
In order to lodge a valid vote, I was required to second preference names that I did not trust or want.  The electoral system forced me to do something against my will in order to express a democratic right.  There’s since been many comments about this unhealthy imposition.  Perhaps optional preferential voting would have avoided this unsavoury situation.
The Greens will dictate terms. Listen to Brown’s tone and constant smug “we have balance of power” reminders - the only Aussies who could feel comfortable would have to be the minority who chose him.

Macca says:

09:23am | 02/09/10

@Jim, Tony Crook ran against a Lib in his seat, and I think there were a few other seats that were joint contested by the Coalition. However I agree with your post

Dash says:

09:31am | 02/09/10

Probably John because they announced their coalition after the election! And probably because the three aligned independent seats were the worst performing seats for the ALP! Now we all know that our Socialist leader and her ALP stands side by side with the green policies of open boarders, decriminalisation of illicit drugs, increases in the company and individual tax rates, a carbon price and shutting down coal fired power stations (which btw will send all of our utilities and consumable prices through the roof. Hyperinflation here we come!). If we had been told that before the election, the ALP would have been smashed at the ballot box! The ALP is prostituting itself before the greens and the independents to hold on to power when they dont have the primary vote, the 2PP vote or the most seats. Nothing short of disgraceful!

Rappo says:

09:32am | 02/09/10

If no Nat or Lib contested the same seat, how did Uncle Wilson get beat by a Crook?

TimB says:

10:24am | 02/09/10

@ John A Neve. Do I think the electorate is stupid?

The whole electorate? No. A significant portion of it? Yes. Yes I do.

Although “stupid” is a bit harsh. At the very least, ignorant and uniformed. It’s the only thing that can explain the Green vote in the face of their unworkable pi-in-the-sky policies.

Jim says:

10:52am | 02/09/10

@ the comments on Crook - the WA Nationals do not consider themselves part of the Coalition. They might have the same stance on some issues but they’re not in the Coalition as such.

John says:

11:59am | 02/09/10

The Libs and Nat are two separate parties who don’t generally compete to win seats, and whilst this is different to the Labor and Greens, at the end of the day they get together to form a coalition with, err, one agreed set of policies? So why do they pretend to be two parties if they share the same platform and as ZSRenn claims, we knew who we were voting for and its policies on Election Day.”  That means we should be able to ask any Liberal supporter what the National party platform is and its policies.  If it’s the same as the Liberal one then the obvious question is why the charade, why don’t they merge (except in WA)?  If there is electoral advantage in fielding two affiliated candidates in the one seat then the Libs would do it, but obviously they don’t need to do so in areas where the Nats are a safe bet.  That means electors either choose Nats or Labor/other.  The fact that Nats have lost reps like Katter and co suggests there are a fair number of people even in rural electorates that don’t agree with the Coalition idea, and hence some choose to go independent.  This is a democratic choice, but some on here seem to think the only thing that matters is red v blue, and can’t countenance any change or give value to personal preference.

MHT says:

12:44pm | 02/09/10

“I’m referring to beneficial clean hydro projects other than the Franklin”...and which ones would they be Green Dogma?

Reg says:

12:48pm | 02/09/10

The shouldn’t the WA Nationals be up there negotiating as one of the Independents Jim?  I bet the voters thought they were in with the rest of The Various National Party camp followers. .

Michael says:

01:42pm | 02/09/10

Think about it this way. If Labor had gotten the majority on August 21, then of course they wouldn’t have been looking to form a coalition with the Greens or anybody. The ALP, like everyone else, now finds themselves in the current predicament and so therefore it necessitates aiming to form a minority government with others. If the aim is to rule as a majority in one’s own right, it would make sense that they wouldn’t announce it during the election - they didn’t really count on this scenario. What is wrong with adjusting to an unexpected situation?

Rob r Charteris says:

03:58pm | 02/09/10

TimB says:10:24am | 02/09/10 “@ John A Neve. Do I think the electorate is stupid? The whole electorate? No. A significant portion of it? Yes. Yes I do.
’ You really are a wanker, I mean really who the %#@& do you think you are, what an absolute prat.

Northern Steve says:

08:46pm | 02/09/10

Hey, Rob, can you make a sentence out of the following three words?
‘Pot’, ‘Kettle’;‘Black’?

Do you really need to resort to using such language here?  Is it because you can’t construct a reasonable, logical argument?

TimB says:

10:33pm | 02/09/10

@ Rob, who do I think I am?

I think I’m someone who’s much smarter than the likes of you, that’s who. I mean you’re a guy who has such a limited vocabulary that he constantly repeats the same useless insults (“snivielling libs”, “dribble”, etc), can’t even get basic maths right and has no idea how polls work….

To the mods I hope to god you let this through. I know we’re trying to limit the “attack” posts here, but it’s hardly fair that me and many of my other fellow Punchers have to sit here and take Rob’s mindless abuse without a right of reply.

Rob r Charteris says:

10:03am | 05/09/10

TimB says:10:33pm; Water off a ducks back, you’ll have to do better than that. People have a right to vote and dont need to be dictated to by the likes of you, it’s as simple as that. My assessment was spot on.

TimB says:

03:41pm | 05/09/10

Rob, did I dictate anything to them? No. Did I say they didn’t have a right to vote? No. Stop putting words in my mouth.

All I made is an observation based on the fact that most people’s voting decisions are based on what they get from newspaper headlines and 5 minute grabs on the 6 o’clock news.
Most of the Green voters have no idea what the full range of Green policies are, and seem to think they’re simply an idealistic bunch of save the world, stop the pollution sort of mob. It goes much further than that, with policies that don’t have any sort of basis in actual reality, but your average voter doesn’t have a clue.

The same general logic goes for voters of ALL political persuasions who make up their minds based on a few sensationalised headlines too, and there’s a lot of them out there.

So I stand by my negative assessment of a good portion of the electorate no matter what childish insults you throw at me. Grow up.

KH says:

10:24am | 02/09/10

The thought of Tony Abbott in the driving seat is even more frightening.

Nicole says:

11:42am | 02/09/10

@KH, the mear fact that you Labor voters have learnt nothing from the 07 election is astounding. If Labor and the tree huggers do get in, God help us all.

Johnno says:

07:50pm | 02/09/10

“... is frightening”.

Ever notice how conservative voters are always motivated by real or imagined fear? They always seem a scared bunch, seeking the reassurance and security of daddy’s hug.

Excuse me, I must get my pitchfork, them boat people’s comin’ to steal my job.

Reg says:

09:20am | 02/09/10

Rosie you illustrate very well the priorities of a typical Liberal voter, so God help your Grandchildren if a coalition of the various liberalities should stagger in.

eeldraw says:

09:51am | 02/09/10

Hilarious!

An Abbott supporter picking on Gillard’s ears… Oh the irony.

Thanks, I needed a good laugh.

Nicole says:

10:22am | 02/09/10

I would like to add further to that Rosie. That screeching, hideous voice that makes my ears bleed. I for one don’t want to listen to that voice for the next three or so months (that’s how long it will take for someone to knife her). Surely something can be done about that. Otherwise, my mute button is gunna be working overtime !

Dash says:

10:49am | 02/09/10

Yeah imagine Reg, we might have a surplus budget again. The record levels of foreign debt may be paid off. We may not have to pay ridiculous power and utility prices because of an ALP/Green carbon price or the additional cost to business of the 3% super levy or an ETS. Inflation may then be kept in check. We may no longer have rorting of taxpayers money as occured under the school halls program and we may not have to piss billions away on an NBN which by the time it’s finished, will be out of date. Imagine Reg, responsible government again. God help us all if the Labor Green Socialist Alliance stagger in with fewer primary votes, fewer 2PP votes and fewer seats! I’m not sure we can afford another 3 years of waste and rorts. Thank God for China, Howard’s financial services reforms and Costello’s $20b surplus. It’s a shame the ALP has pissed it all away on $900 bribes, rorts and fixing failed schemes!

Rosie says:

10:57am | 02/09/10

Reg - correct I do hope I represent a typical Liberal voter, the kind that appreciate very much that we live in a democratic land of opportunities where if you are prepared to work hard you do not need to vote in a socialist party for the handouts to survive.

eeldraw - no it isn’t hillarious I was serious! I look at Tony Abbot I see ears of a boxer, someone who has the strength and capacity to do something that only the tough guys are able to do. When I see Julia Gillard flick her hair behind her ears exposing her sagging earlobes I see vanity and stupidity. Vanity because of her vainess to wear heavy dangling earrings just to look good and stupidity for not knowning what it will do to her ears later on in life. Also the stupidity for not rectifying it if she is going to be in full view of the cameras as Australia’s PM.

sal says:

11:11am | 02/09/10

@Rosie,
I hope concern for your grandchild extends to teaching that name-calling and teasing people about their physical appearence is cheap, inappropriate and no way to argue a point as an intelligent adult.  That’s the concerning part.

Vicki PS says:

12:07pm | 02/09/10

@Rosie: “I look at Tony Abbot I see ears of a boxer, someone who has the strength and capacity to do something that only the tough guys are able to do. ”  And that would be to punch people in the face and head for the amusement of himself and the baying crowd?  Terrific.  And what do the bumps on his head or the lines in his palm tell you about his capacity to lead the country, Rosie?  Do you also believe Tony is stupid not to “rectify” his low brow and gormless expression?  It would make us much sense as the rest of your bizarre mandate-by-old-wives’-tales formula.

Rosie says:

01:30pm | 02/09/10

Sal

Don’t concern yourself about my grandchildren, they have strong family support that will teach them to be very comfortable in their own skin and to react positively to any criticism because together a solution will be found.

Vicki PS

Don’t be so naive, boxing is an Olympic sport. Remember, Mohammod Ali!

Tony Abbott’s appearance is bearable for exposure to the world and by no way has turned stupid due to his boxing. He has proven to be a very intelligent, dignified politician who will put the nation before self interest. Unlike Julia Gillard who is grovelling, horse trading and pork barelling not to become a 3 month PM wonder, the shortest female PM in Australia’s history.

Nicole - Julia Gillard can afford to have both done!

Shane From Melbourne says:

01:45pm | 02/09/10

“I do hope I represent a typical Liberal voter, the kind that appreciate very much that we live in a democratic land of opportunities where if you are prepared to work hard you do not need to vote in a socialist party for the handouts to survive.”

When did the Liberal Party abolish all the middle class welfare? Damn, I’ve been dozing again. So PPL, Family Tax A + B, First Home Buyers Grant, Baby Bonus etc. are off the table? See what happens when you miss a press conference…..

Vicki PS says:

02:05pm | 02/09/10

@Rosie:  “Don’t be so naive, boxing is an Olympic sport.”  So are synchronised swimming and rhythmic gymnastics: so what?
” Remember, Mohammod Ali!”  Oh, I do.  These days the poor beggar can barely string two words together—not a terrific advertisement for the long-term durability of the ex-pug.  If Tony Abbott hasn’t turned stupid due to boxing, I can only conclude that his gormlessness is congenital.  Ditto his funny-looking ears.  Sad really.

Nicole says:

02:35pm | 02/09/10

Vicki PS, you want to talk about stupid, look no further than Jooolya and Swan. Dumb and dumber. Jooolya can barely string a sentence together, let alone run a country. Swan just stands next to her, with a vacant look and nods his head. The only way Jooolya gets through interviews or press conferences, is because it’s all written down for her by her puppeteers. I wonder if Labor do manage to kiss ass enough and get in, if we’re going to have to add a few of her words in to the dictionary? ‘Wada’, ‘Cupa Toyee’ and my all time favourite, ‘Ostralya’. My ears hurt already.

Reg says:

04:03pm | 02/09/10

Nicole, get it right, it’s Ustrayn and it’s not limited to any party. John Howard was appalling with his drawl. Now I’d like to check out your fiendishly broad Ustrayn accent, I guess you’d fail miserably ‘cos you write okker.  (And it’s mere fact.)

Why is it so astounding to find that someone has not learned anything, you haven’t.

Evan Findlay says:

04:44pm | 02/09/10

Nicole,
Why don’t you try that mute button and give us all a break.

Nicole says:

05:07pm | 02/09/10

Reg, Reg, Reg. I write ‘ocker’ because, well, I can. And I’ve learnt lots of things. One, that it’s ‘ocker’ not ‘okker’. Two, I thought Kev was bad, but Jooolya is sooooo much worse and now we’re really stuffed.Three, Evan wants me to mute myself, but that’s not going to happen. I have far too much fun.

acotrel says:

07:05am | 06/09/10

‘Tony Abbott’s appearance is bearable for exposure to the world and by no way has turned stupid due to his boxing. He has proven to be a very intelligent, dignified politician who will put the nation before self interest.’

There is a difference between intelligence and rat cunning!  Malcolm Fraser has Abbott’s measure.  You always need to look for his objective in his statements. He will do and say anything to gain power!

Macca says:

09:32am | 02/09/10

What is wrong with a Carbon tax? hmmm.

Well, it will result in higher electricity prices as Australia’s electricity is generated by very cheap and efficient Coal Power Plants, which unfortunately produce a lot of Carbon Dioxide.

This will inevitibly be passed onto the consumer, in the form of higher electricity prices, and also in increased costs in anything that has to be manufactured, i.e packaged food being the most obvious, but even abbattoirs need electricity.

Also, the Australian economy is highly dependent on the Mining industry, which, also unfortunately, also produces a lot of Carbon Dioxide. Any price on Carbon would impact on the mining industry. This could potentially impact on jobs, tax revenue and many other things which indirectly impact on the average Australian’s way of life.

MarK says:

09:43am | 02/09/10

And not one other top economy in the world is having one.

There was thingy called Copenhagen - look it up

iansand says:

10:31am | 02/09/10

MarK - That’s correct.  No other economy has a carbon tax.  The EU has an emissions trading scheme (an entirely different thing, unless you worship at the temple of Liberal Party Misinformation)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme

King O'Malley says:

11:11am | 02/09/10

Why?  Why do we NEED to cut emmissions when one decent sized volcanic eruption can emit more CO2 than a year’s worth of coal fired power?

Why do we need to tax CO2 when the science isn’t settled and where the sun only needs to increase its thermal output but 0.5% to change the climate of the planet far more than taxing cow farts could ever achieve?

You greenies are all stupid. A pox on all your houses. Fools.

Dash says:

11:56am | 02/09/10

King O’Malley - May I suggest you might find an answer when you look at who’s selling alternative energy! And just watch as the ALP supporters and Green voters start bleating when their power and utility prices start going through the roof as a result of the Carbon tax. Anyone with half an economic brain, would realise that these costs will be passed on to the consumer. Also, the ALP has now formed a coalition of sorts with the Greens. If they close coal fired power stations as well (a green policy), be prepared to welcome in the new era of hyperinflation folks. How far did Gillard run from the ETS when power companies started to factor the costs into their future pricing models! She’s now bending over with her nickers down in front of the independents. Lets hope they don’t like what they see! Oh and Dale, some of the top spellers in the world are against a carbon tax.

Reg says:

12:32pm | 02/09/10

It’s cow belches mate and by the way King O’Malley was an illegal immigrant who swam ashore at Emu Park and lived in a cave until he got elected. Explain that one please. 

I’m a bit concerned that Tony tried to persuade the voters with an $11.6 billion hole that he now says is only a misunderstanding between the Liberals and the Treasury. As a mere voter, I still don’t understand it and yet I was supposed to accept it at face value. Liberals and “Various Nationals” did.

Daryl says:

01:30pm | 02/09/10

Reg, the LNP didn’t use the government’s treasury to cost their election policies. The LNP don’t employ the people sitting in treasury. Treasury costed the ALPs policies and would like to hold on to their jobs! Shock horror, treasury find a hole in the LNPs costings but everything is super fine over at the ALP. What a complete beat up! How stupid are people! This is the same treasury that said the backdown in the profits tax was only going to cost the ALP budget $1.4b when reality was more like $8b. This is the same treasury that said the NBN would cost $4b, no wait its$7b, no hang on it’s more like $44b. This is the same treasury who called a tax review which excluded the GST a “root and branch” review . I guess people believe what they want to believe and ignore what they don’t.

dale says:

02:06pm | 02/09/10

Coal plants may seem cheap but what are the long term costs?

Australia has some of the best scientists in the world for solar and green tech but we refuse to fund them so they go overseas.

I love how everyone dosent want to do there part. The world is grinding to a halt because instead of curing desease and exploring space we are too busy researching viagra and beauty creams.

Google helium3. there is an answer for your energy. Abundent on the moon but is anyone trying to get it… no

so lets just settle in with the status quo and not lead the world.

And have a look at england, they have a bipartisan aproach to climate change where as we have a opposition leader that thinks its “crap” because the mining companys say so

KH says:

03:34pm | 02/09/10

You know the old saying - ‘necessity is the mother of invention’.  Maybe if electricity was ridiculously expensive, it might inspire someone to come up with something better.  As long as we keep making excuses nothing will change.
For me, not so concerned - I am already in my 40s.  Im happy to do the old ‘hari kari’ before it gets too bad…......But I have nieces and nephews - who are only 3 - 7 years old.  in 2050 they will be my age, which really isn’t that old.  Assuming they are still alive then.

Reg says:

03:49pm | 02/09/10

Daryl do you mean to say that a private firm costed the Liberal Party and the National Party offerings and said it was all ok? On your suggestion, why would we be surprised at that? So am I correct in thinking that when the Treasury was presented with the calculations of the private assessors, they shot holes in it to the tune of $11.6 billion dollars?

I’m a little at a loss to understand the threat to the Treasury officials if they didn’t support Labor, compared to the threat if they didn’t support the Liberals if they got into power. Not that I don’t believe what you say.

Rob r Charteris says:

04:14pm | 02/09/10

iansand says:10:31am; Dont ya just love when those liberal types shoot their mouths off without knowing the facts!

So the score now ALP 74 to the Coalition 72 + 1 Independent that is not sure what he is.

So MarK I’m sure you’ve got some form of scare and smear on the new Coalition of ALP, Green and Independent. I await for your dribble

Evan Findlay says:

04:54pm | 02/09/10

MarK,
Not only does the EU have a ETS but also our closet neighbour, New Zealand. But why would you bother doing any research before making a comment. You never have before.
Maybe you should get in touch with Mr Abbott, he’s an expert on all things New Zealand!

Roja says:

05:45pm | 02/09/10

@Daryl - “This is the same treasury that said the backdown in the profits tax was only going to cost the ALP budget $1.4b when reality was more like $8b.”

Actually they took into account the evidence the mining companies gave them about the long term value of the expected incomes - so the figure was in fact correct, the ALP had vastly underestimated the amount of money the tax would bring in.

“This is the same treasury that said the NBN would cost $4b, no wait its$7b, no hang on it’s more like $44b.”

They never said anything of the sort, making things up destroys your argument, rather than help it. 

The rest of your rant is utter rubbish, treasury are independent - Abbott & Hockey are simply economically incompetent and did their best to hide it.  They are trading on the good name and skill of Peter Costello, who they shafted at the cost of winning this election. 

Of course it wasn’t only their ecomonic inability they wanted to hide - it $4 billion in cuts that formed part of their costing that they never mentioned pre-election.  So they are incompetent, and liars.

Northern Steve says:

08:53pm | 02/09/10

One of the ‘holes’ in the Liberals costings was that Treasury assumes that the money for the NBN can be borrowed by the government at a rate of 4.9%.  The Liberals assumed a much higher cost of borrowing.
I would love to know where the government is going to borrow $43B at a rate of 4.9%pa.  Especially with an economy that is starting to overheat due to demand from China.  I mean, official interest rates are 4.5% and likely to rise.
I don’t know where Treasury got this 4.9% figure from, but if that is the basis of the NBN funding, then guaranteed the $43B figure will go much higher.  I reckon the hole is more in the Labor side than Liberal in this instance.

TimB says:

09:13am | 02/09/10

7 Billion Nosthow. And even with that….

“Treasury added that if some of the assumptions that the Coalition had used to come up with the figure did not hold up, the net benefit of its policies could be as low as $500 million.

Treasury’s costing of the government’s promises and savings proposals suggested Labor’s economic plans would raise the underlying cash balance in 2013-14 by $106 million.”

Worst case scnario, the Coalition gets a net benefit of $500 million as compared to Labor’s $106 million. That’s nearly 5 times as much savings.

Who are the real amatuers?

Andrew says:

10:07am | 02/09/10

I seriously laugh out loud when I read this tripe.

Is this the same treasury that made a $10,000,000,000 miscalculation on the mining tax? Run by the same guy who said it would make no difference if the mining tax was 50, 60, 70, 80 or 90%?

Julia’s BER program runs at a waste of 40-50%, the mining tax is miscalculated by 50%+ and you have the arrogance to claim that the treasury (who by the way are pretty ordinary public servants who mostly can’t find a good job in the private sector) has found a budgetary hole of less than 1% of the $1.3 trillion budget.

Talk about rusted on Labor? Under Rudd they were terrible under Julia they are worse! And you have the hide to call the coalition amateurs.

David C says:

10:08am | 02/09/10

and the end result is what? even after the “hole” who has the bigger budget surplus?

nosthow says:

12:09pm | 02/09/10

@TimB @ Andrew- actually the $7 billion was the very least amount it could be Timmy - possibly $12 bilion - but of course you Liberals just keep trying to pretend black is white. I laugh ! Yes Andrew the Coalition are amatuers - even tony Windsor is worried now about this big, huge $12 billion black hole - and justifiably so ! All over the print media and TV today chaps - ya cant escape it .

Jason CR says:

01:55pm | 02/09/10

Nosthow

Just keep rambling on about Abbott being an idiot etc etc.  It suits you.
When it comes to actual economics and costings, you clearly should stay out of the conversation.
If not, please tell us about the $10 billion miscalculation from treasury regarding the mining tax?  Surely treasury didn’t get it wrong did they?

Evan Findlay says:

05:11pm | 02/09/10

Jason CR,
Count me in with Nosthow. I’ve read enough about Abbott to know he is an idiot.
The ten billion dollar miscalculation was not an error or an oversight but merely the difference in costings due to price fluctuations. I mean, you do realise that we are part of the worlds economy and we are subjected to free market forces and as such prices for our resources will vary depending on supply and demand. So when the price goes up the government receives more tax revenue, when the price goes down they receive less.
See…. not that hard to comprehend. Just requires a little bit of reading.

Roja says:

06:03pm | 02/09/10

Andrew / Jason CR - The miscalculation was on the part of the ALP as they had vastly underestimated how much money the tax would bring in.  When the mining companies gave them their more detailed data on expected commodity values it became clear the tax could be reduced at only a $1.5 billion cost.  Their initial calculations were correct based on the available information at the time, where the liberals costings were not even correct at the time they were made.

Andrew - the BER had a cost over run of up to 12%, in NSW only.  Overall it was closer to 4-5% - you clearly don’t actually do any research do you. 

Then laughably, you weigh liberal spending up against the entire government budget to come to a 1% rate of error.  Nice try, but Tony was out by $11 billion.  $7 billion because he dodgied the books, $4 billion because he included measures that were never announced in the election. 

They not only got what they released wrong, they didn’t even release everything to the Australian public.

Abbott is now a proven liar, like it or not.

Northern Steve says:

09:00pm | 02/09/10

Roja,
How do you get a cost overun of 4-5% when State Schools (the biggest component of the BER) were building schools at twice or three times the price per m2 of the private schools?  That figure comes out of the inquiry that specifically refused to look at real value for money, only compare like projects in the BER that were all equally overvalued.  The real wastage was approx 1/3.

Mike Franklin says:

01:06pm | 02/09/10

Yes Robert “minor things most electorates already had” ...let’s not forget the twelve years under Howard!

AJ says:

04:49pm | 02/09/10

I like the word lollipop.

TimB says:

09:33am | 02/09/10

No it’s not happening. What you have voted for is a cost of living rise to everyone in the country for a net effect of zero once China builds another bunch of coal plants to cancel out whatever we do.

But hey, at least you get a nice warm fuzzy feeling knowing that you’ve played your part in making life harder for millions of Australian’s in order to satisfy your need for a token gesture.

Nicole says:

10:33am | 02/09/10

Hey Jack,
If you’re that keen on chucking your money away, I’m more than happy for you to aim in my direction.
A big fat ETS that bleeds everyone dry is really going to save the planet, isn’t it?

Northern Steve says:

08:55pm | 02/09/10

TimB,
China has made a commitment to 20% renewable power by 2020.  They are now the lead manufacturer in Solar Cells in the world.  We have lost our competitive edge in solar cells due to inaction.  We’ll end up being importers instead of exporters if we’re not already

Adam Diver says:

10:29am | 02/09/10

You are so wrong Shane.. pork barreling only occurs in marginal electorates, everyone knows that, (and independeant electorates which you rightly pointed out)

Gregg says:

10:58am | 02/09/10

We all know that Adam and it seems ridiculous that our counting system is not coping better with a close result and in doing so it is pandering to Gillard’s desire and the debacle we are having.
Why the hell the AEC does not have a system where as soon as a seat can be declared, counting resources do not get moved to other seats is a question that needs to be asked.

There are only a dozen if that marginal seats and only Corangamite listed as close and yet the votes counted for it seem to hardly moved for a couple of days.
It also needs to be asked why is 13 days allowed for delivery of a postal vote and if it was more like six days and up to people to get themselves organised better if they wanted their vote counted, then we’d not be in this mess.

Perhaps it is timely for the GG to come out and say time to piss or get off the pot, fat chance though!

Simon says says:

11:13am | 02/09/10

Nonsense.

We have had an entirely legitimate election with a difficult but entirely legitmate result, which is taking some legitimate time to finalise.

Meanwhile, we have a wholly legitimate caretaker Prime Minister doing her job in good faith, to find a constructive resolution. That’s her job and her duty to the Nation.

We have a a number of members, either minor party or independent to one degree or another, who must legitimately take time to decide , (we must hope in good faith rather than naked self-interest) which Party they will allow to govern in minority.

We should also have been able to hope that the Liberal and National Parties might have approached this problem in good faith, though given their misleading nonsense about debt, spending, the economy, population change and climate action,  and their misleading budget costings, there’s fat chance of that now.

The fact is that after nine months of deliberate Liberal distortion, smear and spite, the Liberals could not gain a clear majority either, not even with the aid of a rather wobbly old National Party coalition.

There is no cause at all for either bad attitude, panic, hysterical calls for a fresh election, nor for the sort of sneer and smear being peddled by AdamC.

AdamC says:

11:26am | 02/09/10

Gregg, I completely agree with everything you said. It seems our counting system is far too slow and too manual, for starters.

I also think someone, preferably the GG, but even the party leaders themselves, needs to put some kind of declared timeline around this process. As it stands, were are all just twiddling our thumbs while the indies grandstand. (I also accept this almost certainly will not happen.)

A Bob says:

12:10pm | 02/09/10

The electoral legislation allows 2 weeks for postal votes to arrive.

Usually the margins are so great that the AEC can declare a seat because even if all outsanding votes went to the second place candidate it wouldn’t make a difference. This time, some seats are so close they have to wait until all votes are received or the 2 week deadline hits.

It has nothing to do with efficiency. Even with an electronic system there would still be a need for postal votes and we would be in the same situation.

It seems to me that some have such a short attention span that they can’t cope with a two week wait.

“Just make it stop… please… somebody make it st-o-o-o-p!”

It’s not the indies fault, the GG’s, or because of some conspiracy theory. Due process is a bitch.

Gregg says:

01:48pm | 02/09/10

@ A Bob,
We know of the time allowed for postal votes Bob, but how long agao was that set and I would have thought a week was plenty of time.
And then why not see a transfer of counting resources from adjacent electorates where seats had already been decided to those seats where some faster counting could see an earlier result.

We have a would be government crowing over how efficient our life would be in spending $43B on fibre optic cabling and yet we cannot even manage some simple logistics and are left with a country in limbo and that is just ridiculous.

Whatever the outcome from the independents, I’d not mind betting they have well and truly shot themselves in their feet and that of any other potential independent candidates for the future.

A rather large mouse says:

02:03pm | 02/09/10

The AEC is one the worlds most accountable, apolitical and trusted Electoral bodies in the world. Our system is second to none and should not be tampered with for any reason. Also each election the AEC has to hire 70,000 plus trusted casual staff (you can not let just anyone count ballots) with no fervert political motivations. It is a huge task they undertake and they do it well, I find your criticism of the way we do things in Australia insulting and ill informed.

AdamC says:

02:18pm | 02/09/10

Simon, I am not questioning the legitimacy of the election result, I am criticisng the current situation as untenable and democratically unacceptable. I don’t doubt that all electoral systems would have trouble coping with such a close election, but I simply don’t see the point in this absurd spectacle of negotiation by media that may or may not succeed in creating a government whose life is likely, as the saying goes, to be nasty, brutish and short.

I also made the bleedingly obvious assertion that the independents’ circus act is sustained partially by the personal desperation of Julia Gillard. I don’t know if that qualifies as smearing or sneering, perhaps the bar has been lowered on such things of late.

A Bob, I would still argue that this situation shows the benefits of some kind of electoral reform. Surely rules could be tightened in terms of timing and processes implemented to automate counting of ballots? It is not a matter of one’s attention span but of limiting uncertainty.

Gregg says:

02:55pm | 02/09/10

@ Rather Large Mouse,
The AEC itself is not being criticised in regard to qualities re
” accountable, apolitical and trusted Electoral bodies in the world. “
However that is not to say improvements cannot be made, for even with a ” system second to none ”  and ” 70,000 plus trusted casual staff (you can not let just anyone count ballots) with no fervert political motivations. ”
And yes one trusted senior person was removed from a NSW electorate post I understand.
Mistakes still occur such as mishandling of votes which has caused votes in two electorates to have been invalidated.
That you find criticism of the way we do things in Australia insulting and ill informed is being somewhat removed from the desire to examine any potential improvements .

Obviously you do not want to dilute the aforementioned qualities but it is only with people blinded to improvements that we will fail to improve.
So if that is your lot, be insulted.

Simon says says:

04:01pm | 02/09/10

AdamC trying to sound both reasonable and smart alecky at the same time.  Falls rather flat when you read what he actually did say the first time.

The fact is that we are watching our democratic processes at work right now.

There’s no call whatever for any interference from Yarralumla. None at all.  Its nonsense to suggest such a thing and dangerous nonsense at that.

iansand says:

04:26pm | 02/09/10

@ AdamC - Why is it “democratically unacceptable”?  Have you seen some tanks outside?  Is the fabric of society collapsing?

In other news, Iraq still does not have a government 6 months after their election.

AdamC says:

05:19pm | 02/09/10

Ian Sand, I think it is rather odd to make comparisons between Australia and Iraq. Or even Australia and Italy. We are not used to Immobilisme and I don’t see why we should suddenly embrace it.

Simon, I am not sure if you are addressing me directly in your first paragraph or not, but I can assure you I am not ‘trying’ to sound anything. I think my style across myriad comments on the Punch is fairly well established. I don’t know if I was going for reasonable and smart alecky, but I certainly don’t see any inconsistencies in what I said initially and my subsequent comments.

On the subject of ‘our Bryce’ and any possible involvement in imposing a timeline, you will see I acknowledged that this will almost certainly not happen. That doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be quite nice (and very popular).

Hamish says:

05:31pm | 02/09/10

So, Simon and A Bob, you are saying there is nothing wrong with having two country independents who rode in on the back of very few primary votes and one other who gets in on the back of hereditary title making demands via the media of the leaders of the major parties who have just spent a month telling everyone what they were going to do if they got in? What if Tony Abbott decided to support the NBN to get the independents’ votes after saying for a month he wasn’t going to support it? Surely that’s a betrayal of the people who voted for him?

While no one cares that Julia Gillard has already dumped her climate change PR stunt in favour of a parliamentary talkfest, we have already seen her change her policy platform to suit the independents. How much of a deviation from her publicly announced policies is justifiable?

Luckily, I don’t think Tony Abbott will change anything to get the independents’ votes beacuse if he’s sensible he won’t want government under these circumstances and he is the natural ally of Katter and Windsor anyway. As AdamC quite rightly says (and it appears he has not been challenged on this) it’s now Julia Gillard’s last chance to avoid the noose.

Fair go says:

02:24pm | 03/09/10

You have to wonder why anyone bothers to psot a reasonable opinion here at all. Simon eg has made some good points quiet sensibly.

But Hamish for some reason wants to pretend he really said something else. And the OP is busy trying to pretend that his own posts meant something else.

Simon, you keep going son. You’re worth reading.

John says:

11:07am | 02/09/10

My Denison neighbour voted for Wilkie because their family turned away from Labor, as did the electorate of Denison.  Wilkie’s future rests on the fact that he benefited from the swing away from Labor.

Wilkie’s yearned-for political future will be very short-lived if he sides with Labor.  He will be punished at the next election, whenever it may be.

Adam says:

12:09pm | 02/09/10

And? I didn’t say he should side with either, merely pointed out that his decision to pursue his policies is a reasonable one.

d says:

02:14pm | 02/09/10

John,

Look at what the Howard government did to him…

Do you think he would side with Artard?

MHT says:

02:51pm | 02/09/10

He’s still an independent John, which part of that don’t you or other commentators understand?

MarK says:

10:46am | 02/09/10

“In fact, I recall this being the central plank of the Coalition’s platform: that they are better economic managers, have fully costed everything and are going to bring us back to surplus faster and greater than Labor”

go to

http://www.news.com.au/features/federal-election/b-black-hole-blow-to-tony-abbott/story-e6frfllr-1225913057300

“The Treasury documents have found the Coalition would improve the Budget bottom line by $863 million over the next four years - well below the $11.5 billion improvement predicted by the Liberals.  Treasury’s best-case scenario is for a $4.5 billion Budget boost.

“Treasury has said Labor would improve the bottom line by $106 million - double its prediction of $44 million - and that its costings are “about on line”, Mr Windsor has said”

Hmmm indeed. Treasury says one thing. An accounting firm says another. The Libs deliver a better bottom line regardless. Hmmmm

Oh yes how accurate have Treasury been in the past….lets see. Predicted the GFC, err no, the inflation genie was out of the bottle. Modelled and costed the NBN…....not allowed to and not released anything commissioned as yet. Got the mining tax numbers right….nahhh just changed the underlying assumptions and then predict the prices of resources will always rise into the future.

Yeh….I see why you say hmmmmm. Lots to think about.

The Badger says:

11:10am | 02/09/10

@ Mark
Spin spin spin
aren’t you getting dizzy?

You can’t explain this one away.

No wonder Abbott didn’t want to release his figures and kept his budget data deep within his budget smugglers.

Give it a rest, you’ve been sprung.

Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.
Mark Twain

Duff says:

11:37am | 02/09/10

MarK, you know full well that the current Libs position as ‘better economic managers’ is wholly undermined by these revelations.  Even your insulting tone cannot hide the fact that you have cobbled together a desperate defence of the indefensible.

TimB says:

11:44am | 02/09/10

Badger,

Labor savings- $106 million
Liberal savings- $500 Million

It’s right there in black and white facts, no spin. If you can’t tell the difference then you are a fool.

But just to be sure you understand, lets see if you can follow this example.

You have 2 options: Someone promises to give you $20, and will deliver exactly that.
I promise you that I’m going to give you $100 but will only end up giving give you $70.

Do you bitch about the $30 “hole” or do you acknowledge that you’re actually $50 better off under my deal?

In fact this is pretty much the same sort of thing that was behind the “Tony Abbot ripped billions from hospitals” lie.  Labor voters are so busy being ungrateful about what they don’t get, they fail to acknowledge what they actually get.

MarK says:

12:08pm | 02/09/10

Don’t you hate when the facts get in the way of a good leftie rant.

Seriously the piece I linked is derogatory towards the Libs and yet it shows them saving more worst case scenario.

Yeh I really spun that up.

By the way this Labor administration is yet to deliver a surplus budget. Lets not get to ahead of ourselves.

Just like the 2PP vote you grasp onto anything and call it a mandate or a decisive factor. You will dump this when it doesn’t suit the cause soon enough.

It is so yawn worthy it is funny.

Still whatever floats your boat.

Nicole says:

12:11pm | 02/09/10

@TimB, that was a good, simple explanation, but some still won’t understand. For those who still don’t get it, I suggest finger puppets.

Duff says:

12:11pm | 02/09/10

TimB - there are so many things wrong with the example you use.  No one has delivered anything at this stage.  We are trying to assess who is the one most likely to deliver what they’ve promised (and elect them on that basis).  The massive cost discrepency goes to credibility and ability.  So the answer to your question is, in fact, “yes” we should bitch about the guy who is promising far more than he can deliver because it shows he is the one less likely to be the better economic manager. 

If you want a better example, imagine yourself hiring a builder.  The first guy says he can build it for $100k and a 3rd party cost assessor agrees that’s about right.  The second says he can build it for $50k but the cost assesor says that’s crap, it’ll cost more like the $100k the first guy promised.  Who would you hire?

The Badger says:

12:21pm | 02/09/10

@ Timb

Nice of you jump in and defend the indefensible.

Don’t you Liberal hacks ever admit to getting something wrong?

wait
it’s the mole that is preventing us from releasing the budget data
wait
It’s treasury just wouldn’t understand our costing assumptions
wait
I will not capitulate to the demands of the independents
wait
I will, but when the truth comes out, I’ll get Joe (is that billions or millions) to explain everything.

Really Timb, just admit Abbott and the b-team made a serious error and without Costello they are lost economically.

Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt.
Mark Twain

Muttley says:

12:37pm | 02/09/10

LOL. Fantastic piece of rationalisation there Tim. Abbott lies, then tries to blame others as his numbers dont add up. Given how much the libs have droned on about the financial mis management of labour, dont you think they would have got their numbers right? You’re right about one thing. It is all there is balck and white. Abbott’s lies that is…. As the great liberal motto goes “never let the facts get in the way of a good story”

MarK says:

01:07pm | 02/09/10

Ahhh I see its all about credibility and stuff all of a sudden.

Can we see the costings of the NBN done by Treasury please?

Can we also see an explantion as to why Treasury got the mining tax wrong by about $12 billion?

Any time. No rush. It is so funny this false hysteria. I love how the only party to give the country a surplus budget federally for 15 years and the one Treasury predicts will bring the higher surplus in the same timeframe as Labor is accused of having “black holes” and being “poor economic managers”.

Hahahahahahahaha. Read what you guys write. It is just as funny going back a few days to look at the same people making the same comments when the 2PP preferred swung back to Labor. All I hear is crickets about that now.

Dear oh dear. Carry on. This is really entertaining.

TimB says:

01:47pm | 02/09/10

I see that the “be ungrateful about getting more money and bitch about the hole instead” option is popular.

I’d wipe my hands of the whole thing and say you deserve what you get, except your inability to master simple logic is going to affect the rest of us too.

I’m getting to the point where I wish we could do what the Germans did. Split the country in 2, send the Labor/Green voters to one half whilst the Coalition voters stay in the other. The policies of both sides are applied to their relevant territories. See which half of the country falls over first.

...trick is how to divide it. Suiggestions on a postcard please.

hot tub politcal machine says:

01:53pm | 02/09/10

Attacking public servants for doing their job is the basest form of cowardice in Australian public debate

Whent the head of treasury was an appointment under Howard - attacking him as pro Labor betrays a lack of both principles and comprehension.

I can only assume those who do this are either unprincipled or ignorant.

Duff says:

02:32pm | 02/09/10

“Hahahahahahahaha”.  Geez, you got me there.  I have nothing to say to that.  You win.  Damn, you’re good!

Gregg says:

03:04pm | 02/09/10

@Duff,
Despite any variations Treasurey may have come up with, be it $7B or $11B how can you claim Labor to be better economic managers when they can make backflips over the mining tax and claim there’ll be no difference to the bottom line for Oh!, we just found another $11B we didn’t know we would have!
So that’s a couple of goes at getting the existing budget right and they still haven’t said boo to other than three mining companies.
And their sound financial management has taken us from a $20B surplus to a massive deficit and eroded an infrastructure fund at the same time whilst also not giving full costs on the NBN.

Duff says:

04:00pm | 02/09/10

@Gregg, there was this thing called the global financial crisis and ensuing global recession.  It blew out quite a few budgets around the world.  Most are still recovering.  I’m sure you will have noticed that we escaped it in fairly good shape and that we were governed by the current Labor government during this time.  I am also sure it will not have escaped you that Tony Abbott has pretty much alleged that it never really happened and that our government did everything wrong in reaction to it.  In all this he claims he is the better economic manager.  Yet, when finally pinned down and forced to divulge his economic homework, we find there is a $10b ‘black hole’ in his costings.  What more can you really say?

MarK says:

04:54pm | 02/09/10

It’s OK Duff. No shame in running 2nd to me /shine fingernails

@Gregg - valiant try. It won’t work. Those damn facts that get in the way of Treasury being the be all to end all on financial costings are not welcome here mate!!

I mean who would have thought that 2 independent bodies skilled at financial work and modelling would come up with different answers having decided to plug different predictions and assumptions into a computer model.

It is a travesty of justice. It is an abomination to maths. It is inconceivable and unbelievable all at once. It is so weird my head just exploded and my brain is searching for a bar to drown its sorrows.

What is the world, and Treasury of course being at the centre of said world, coming too when 2 bodies can’t agree on the number that indicates the goodness of the policies in the eyes of most people quite ridiculously.

ARGGHHHHHHHHHH…....so confuddled. OMG.

Oh well I will still wait with much patience for the NBN costings to be revealed.

Roja says:

06:17pm | 02/09/10

@MarK - In all of your self adulating fluff, you have at every opportunity avoided any rational discussion about that massive $11 billion mistake they made (well to be truthful, $4 billion of it was unannounced savings that I expect was lost in the pre-election mail).  Then you sit back and gloat about how right you are, great spin but no substance.

Where’s the NBN costing?  It’s around and it’s a lot more advanced than the policy on a napkin approach of Abbott and Hockey.  Certainly the discussion here is about the liberal party failures, we know your opinion on the labor party as we have read it ad nauseum. 

Really you seem to think Costello is still shadow treasurer, you know, the competent one that you used to have rather than the pack of idiots now in charge.

Joe Blow says:

06:29pm | 02/09/10

How about the states that voted Coalition (yes the ones making all the money for the country) look after themselves, and those states that voted Labor (yes the ones relying on the free handouts) go their own way and let’s see where the budget black hole ends up?!! 
It’s a cultural thing isn’t it lefties?  Someone else will pay the bills, eh?

Mike T says:

12:20am | 03/09/10

Dear Duff, Badger and other ALP sttoges.

RE. Which side can manage the economy better?

When you interview somone for a job you look at who has displayed the the abilities to perform the job from thier past experience, you do not go on how well they spin or what they say they are going to do when they MOVE FORWARD…bottom line is that how they have performed in the past is the best way to know how they will perofrm in the future. With this lovely analogy in mind, let me ask you this…. both the ALP and the LP have had the chance to manage the economy over the last decade, so which has proven to run it better??

now i know you answer will be the ALP, but i want you to answer this question whilts looking in the mirror and see if you can do it without giggling…

MarK says:

08:02am | 03/09/10

I will not be coy here Roja.

“Where’s the NBN costing?  It’s around and it’s a lot more advanced than the policy on a napkin approach of Abbott and Hockey. “

Shenanigans

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/the-costings-problem-called-broadband/story-e6frg6zo-1225913536653

“Then you sit back and gloat about how right you are”

Yes I will.

Toodles

Jack says:

10:42am | 02/09/10

I voted for an effective method to mitigate the effects of climate change which has been proven over and over by scientists but is constantly denied by hicks who want to make a buck today.. Look, the bottom line is climate change is happening and whilst there may be a small cost today the costs of not addressing it are insurmountable.

An example.. If we allow the world to heat up another 2 degrees we will see large parts of third world countries going under water and becoming unliveable. Bangladesh currently has a population of app 150 million, it is predicted that if nothing is done to mitigate climate change within the next 50 years it is possible that 1/3 of the population will become displaced. That is app 50 million people.. where are they going to go?? Not China, not India.. they won’t go anywhere but south to Australia.. how will 20 million people stop 50 million boats?? Impossible. Does that scare you? Let’s think to the future and not about buying the next plasma tv for our spoilt kids, I’m sure you’re not starving Louisa.

Shane From Melbourne says:

10:56am | 02/09/10

You produce carbon. You pay your own share. No Freeloaders.

Louisa says:

11:46am | 02/09/10

I find it very sad that you believe that crap, Jack.

Macon Paine says:

12:28pm | 02/09/10

How about we introduce a voluntary carbon tax? (As a trial so we can gage how many people take this seriously)
So people who really want to pay this tax (like Jack and Shane) can go on the Governments “carbon tax payer” registry. This could then be factored into all their household utility bills! And the government could then issue them with their official “carbon fighters club” card which they would have to present everytime they make a purchase on anything (even a pack of gum from 7/11). Of course as it’s voluntary their honesty (and convictions) would be counted on to make the system work (and save the planet!). I assume Jack and Shane you’d be up for this?

Shane From Melbourne says:

01:57pm | 02/09/10

Yeah sure, I’ll pay my share for the carbon I produce- as long as everyone everyone else does- that is the beauty of a carbon tax as opposed to an ETS. No exemptions, no permits to pollute, no compensation, no Freeloaders. Of course it must be coupled with carbon tariffs to be effective. I suspect Louisa and Macon Paine object to paying income tax as well…...

Gregg says:

03:19pm | 02/09/10

That’d be one boat per person is it Jack?
Do you reckon they all have dinghies that they can row that far and can they bring their own water or is it that you just had Treasurey knock up some round figures for you!

Macon Paine says:

03:28pm | 02/09/10

Shane, nice strawman but I did not ask you about paying your fair share if everyone else does. I asked if you would sign up to pay the carbon tax if it was voluntary. So i’ll ask again, would you?
From your previous answer we can deduce you lack the courage of your convictions ie your all talk no action, which is sad but not really that surprising.
I wonder what Jacks response will be!

Shane From Melbourne says:

06:11pm | 02/09/10

@ Macon Paine. You’re full of it. I have a conviction- no freeloaders on a carbon tax. You’re the one that introduced the voluntary carbon tax BS. I believe that everyone should pay for the carbon they produce. Individuals, Corporations, Industries, Nations, no exceptions.

Macon Paine says:

07:22pm | 02/09/10

@ Shane
It was a simple hypothetical question Shane. The voluntary carbon tax could be considered a true litmus test of someones conviction on this issue. If people are prepared to pay when they aren’t being forced that indicates true conviction, these are the people who really want to make a difference.
As others here have pointed out most people in Australia want action on climate change, so to placate them I say bring in a voluntary carbon tax and let them have their action. You get to keep your smug self righteousness and I get to keep more of my tax dollars! Its a win win!

The Badger says:

01:47pm | 02/09/10

The people going into meltdown are the coalition supporters.
They fear - rightly that the longer this uncertainty goes on, the more likely it is that Abbott will self destruct.

David C says:

11:39am | 02/09/10

the prospect of greens/labor may appeal to the intellectual elite of the ANU or the ABC or the chardonnay/latte socialists or the doctor’s wives but is it what the Labor party is all about? Is it a true representation of the Aussie battlers?
(and the budget is more than 5 times better off even after Treasury redo of the numbers under the coalition)

MarK says:

12:02pm | 02/09/10

No bleating here. I for one could not think of a more positive thing than to have Labor and The Greens in formal alliance. For the Liberals - truly.

I also suggest if you slur the name of a major accounting firm you come right out and name them. Give them a call. Call them and accuse them of massaging. See how you go. Real name and address please of yourself just for completion.

I am also keen to here you give Treasury your backing now and forever more and say hand on heart that they are infallible.

It is like the 2PP vote all over again.

Use it while in your favour. Dump it when it no longer suits.

Heath Karl says:

02:27pm | 02/09/10

Ahh, David C, the good ol’ party of the Aussie battler, thats why they privatised the banks, and why they take millions of dollars from the biggest bosses in the land, and why they now believe in the trickle-down free-market lie. No, you’re right mate, better just whinge about the socialists, the workers who have actually read a book, and understand the nature of economics. Can you, Aussie Dave, tell your labor theory of value from your marginalist utility? are you completely ignorant of the ALP adoption of the socialist objective way back in the 1920s, or that in its platform states “the socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange”? Nah, easier just to complain about the bloody intellectuals.

David C says:

04:21pm | 02/09/10

Heath
I am not having a go at the intellectuals at all. I am just questioning if the Labor party now is the Labor party that went to the polls.

Richard says:

12:17pm | 02/09/10

Fully agree. I’m not disputing the science, which seems fairly self-evident to me~ but an E.T.S, or a carbon tax, or any other sneaky trick to make us pay more for our day-to-day living, is way off base. Who came up with that idea? As far as I can tell its just going to end up as another financial instument to get leveraged up to the hilt to try and keep the music going in our economy just a little bit longer.

Its such rubbish, if all the governments of the world had let the market crash in 2008 like it needed to, global production of greenhouse gasses would have fallen! But no, instead we go into debt to fund stimulus programs which result in phoney economic growth which perpetuates the current Carbon-intensive status quo. We need change, and change is trying to happen, but idiot politicians just keep getting in the way and preventing that with their stupid stimulus measures.

dale says:

02:16pm | 02/09/10

So you agree with the science and you think its a problem

BUT

its not my problem….

Shane From Melbourne says:

07:24pm | 02/09/10

An ETS is different from a Carbon Tax. Look it up in wikipedia. But get the terminology right.

Rosie says:

01:53pm | 02/09/10

Say whatever you like and also the Gillard/Labor/Green Coalition team! The Abbott/Liberal/National Coalition team have spoken and have come to a significant conclusion about their costings.

That silly want to be Kingmaker Tony Windsor should have kept his mouth shut before blabbering on ABC Lateline about something that he didn’t understand fully. Treasury have made it clear that on the assumptions made by the Independent Accounting Firm used by the Coalition their costings is OK if they become the Govt. Treasury even went as far as saying that it could be improved. If you listen to what is being said by the experts you will understand how it works.

James says:

03:03pm | 02/09/10

Rosie, are these the same experts that Phoney Tony said couldn’t be trusted with the costings? Tell me the way that the goal posts constantly change for you can you even tell your a*se from your elbow anymore? The fact is Mr Liar Liar Pants on Fire and his Dodgey Brothers tried to claim something that wasn’t true - to the tune of $12 billion!! I guarantee you that if this had been known prior to the election we would’ve had a very different result! If anyone is a silly kingmaker it’s none other than Mr Great Pretender himself, your precious Tony Abbott!!!

Rosie says:

04:17pm | 02/09/10

James! Yeah right like the silly independents put all your trust on Treasury! A good team would not be so gullible as to accept the results of Treasury or any organisation for that matter before profoundly looking into it.

What a joke? This is the same Treasury that calculated the RSPT! The first mining tax that Wayne Swann/Kevin Rudd/Julia Gillard swore black & blue was the best thing for this country! Whatever happened to that big black hole???????

Don’t worry that Independent Tasmanian Devil was going to back Labor all the time but carried on like a big fat pork chop revelling in his 5 minutes of fame. Now it is 74 Labor & 73 Libs so it is up to the other 3 Amigos!

James says:

09:06am | 03/09/10

“A good team would not be so gullible as to accept the results of Treasury or any organisation for that matter before profoundly looking into it.”
I find it hysterical Rosie that you LNP supporters would cry foul about the integrity of Treasury, when it was your esteemed Peter Costello himself who designed the Charter of Budget Honesty for the Treasury department - ostensibly to make the costings of government and opposition election promises more transparent to the voters of Australia. Not so hot when the shoe’s on the other foot is it?
If you believe that Treasury’s now biased towards Labor with its calculations, I’m afraid you’ve only got Costello to blame for that, although the MRRT that the revamped RSPT is now called, the costings have been accounted for, where’s the black hole there Rosie?
Try not to get too upset about Mr Wilkie backing Labor - hey, maybe it’s sweet revenge after the way he was treated by the Howard government way back when?
Labor now only needs 2 of the 3 independents to win. All I can say is, Politics really does create the strangest bedfellows!!!

Heath Karl says:

02:09pm | 02/09/10

I think if people voted on all the issues we would have no taxes, free beer, and, like you say, environmental brinksmanship with much more powerful nations because you would rather millions of chinese in poverty than paying more for your electricity. Aussie indeed.

Heath Karl says:

01:56pm | 02/09/10

I remember the Greens formed out of the struggle to save the Franklin River, and had to struggle against the Tasmanian workers and unions to protect this invaluable part of the country.  It was an altruistic fight, they achieved no financial gain from the sacrifice they made, unlike the unions, who only do anything if it involves their own financial ends. All the Tasmanian workers and unions care about is protecting their own little racket of ecological destruction to turn a buck. They disdain at concern for the environment, and environmentalists disdain at the workers concern for themselves.

Moreover, I remember 2004, when Mark Latham unveiled his forestry policy, and the forestry wing of the CFMEU responded to his promise of protecting all their jobs (by transferring the forestry sector largely into a tourism sector), by supporting the anti-worker Howard government. So in Tasmania, the unions betray the ALP and their workers and in turn blame the Labor party. Typical.

The Badger says:

01:39pm | 02/09/10

Fox?

No thanks

I’ll just ask Bolt

Joe Blow says:

05:10pm | 02/09/10

That’s like saying if you want the real truth on western democracy and capitalism just ask Osama Bin Laden.  I hope you are joking?  You are joking?  You’re not joking?  You meant it? 
Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagh!
“Climate change is not real because some people have invested in green companies and made money ... therefore Climate change is just made up so people can make money” .. I think that is the general core of the program isn’t it Christine?  Everyone except the US Republican movement is wrong on climate change!!
Hannity is so far right Andrew Bolt can’t even see him!!

Evan Findlay says:

05:27pm | 02/09/10

You mean the ultra right wing rantings of the Murdoch media. I’m sure it will be unbiased!

Jim says:

02:12pm | 02/09/10

Didn’t the greens block a wind farm recently because of a parrot??

Max says:

03:49pm | 02/09/10

Holly actually thinks we care about the 350 people in Tassie. Maybe we should call it Greenland and float it off closer to the South Pole. Lots of Wind power there.

jb says:

03:55pm | 02/09/10

Actually Rosie in one respect you are right, had The Greens gone with the coalition it would have proved they were bipartisan and truly the 3rd major party in their own right with the ability to become the big player in the next decade.
I suspect now they wall fall away with all the aplomb of the democrats, one nation, and many other insignificant parties of the past.
New parties like the liberal greens will take over where Bob Brown left off in the next three years and become the party he dreamed with realistic policies for a modern world with green values actually meaning compassion for all living things.
A little soul food for us city folk if you will.
They have my vote and Old Bob helped by truly coming out of the closet!

Louisa says:

04:32pm | 02/09/10

Tasmania is but a pimple of the bottom of Australia

Joe Blow says:

04:49pm | 02/09/10

Holly,  good to see you back.  You went very quiet there for a while when it was looking gloomy for Labor.  I woudl have thought you wouldn’t have cared though, because you’re a swinging viter, right!?

James says:

05:12pm | 02/09/10

I guess that’s why Phoney Tony was throwing 1 billion dollars at Tasmanian independent MP Andrew Wilkie, huh Luisa and Max? That’s a lot to pay for an arse pimple!!!

Louisa says:

05:28pm | 02/09/10

Oh come on James, Mr Abbott would have known which way this guy was going to swing and he was always going to back The Old Maid.

Joe Blow says:

06:15pm | 02/09/10

Maybe Tony was going to ensure that the new hospital included its own pimple lancing surgery?  Or perhaps Tasmania can lance itself over the free 100MB NBN provided by Labor.  Bottom line is that Tamania has to receive free stuff because it is run by Green/Labor and therefore can’t (or won’t) pay it’s own way.

James says:

10:45pm | 02/09/10

I’m going to have to fail your logic there Louisa. Why on earth would Phoney try to bribe Mr Wilkie $1 billion if he already knew that he’d back Julia Gillard? Oh wait a minute, I get it. What’s another billion $$ worth of lies when you’ve already tried to pull the wool over the rest of Australia to the tune of $11 billion, hey?

@ Joe, lol, Pimple lancing surgery is the BOTTOM line is it ? Har har, that’s a LOW BLOW Joe!!!

C1 says:

04:15pm | 02/09/10

Dave,

I could not have put it better myself. Scary times ahead.

Kosmiester says:

11:34am | 03/09/10

Well Christian,
When something looks like a duck, talks like a duck and smells like a duck, then it is a duck. Tony ” Daffy Duck” Abbott strikes again. We had to wait until after the election to see him stumble. I dare say he is on his knees now. Come on big fella…. prove me wrong that you don’t have a glass chin when it comes to politics.

Joe Blow says:

05:16pm | 02/09/10

Gee Rob, thought you’d left the country last week .  but good to see you are back with all the inside news.  Though that $1B pales agianst the $43 Billion NBN bribe so every granny in Woopwoop can have 100MB broadband to their house.  I know my nan can’t wait to find out what broadband is….... so she can have it too.

Rob r Charteris says:

07:10pm | 02/09/10

Joe Blow says:05:16pm; “Gee Rob, thought you’d left the country last week” I guess you thought wrong Mr Blow. And at least the ALP has been up front and transparent about the NBN and not doing quiet under table billion dollar bribes. Silly rAbbott he obviously wasn’t listening when Wilkie said “Ethical” with ethical being a key word. Btw, I live in the bush and I can’t wait for 100MB NBN to come past my door ;  ) because if you did live out here you would know how useless wireless is.

C1 says:

04:58pm | 02/09/10

Perhaps not Good Bye but rather ‘au revoir’ as we will be heading for a new election within a year.

Sorry to be pedantic but his name is Andrew Wilkie not Alan.

Nigel Catchlove says:

05:25pm | 02/09/10

and you cant ! even get ! Andrew’s name right !

MarK says:

05:26pm | 02/09/10

You say this like it is a surprise - who would have thought a former Green would side with Labor….the shock of it all lawl

nosthow says:

06:09pm | 02/09/10

@C1 - you are quite correct C1 it is Andrew - I was so excited juggling the keyboard and opening another bottle of Champers - please forgive !

iansand says:

07:21pm | 02/09/10

Yes.  You weren’t thinking about Australia.  In Australia only seats, and the concomitant votes on the floor of the Reps, are what matters.  The highest primary vote and the highest two party preferred vote are irrelevant smoke and mirrors.  By both sides.

Stevem says:

06:05pm | 02/09/10

Absolutely JB there is something very uncomfortable for me with how she operates!

Think we are in for a very devisive 3 years!

Joe Blow says:

06:35pm | 02/09/10

Holly, where is Gillard going to cut when the NBN is finally costed at twice what she estimates?  No, let’s be nice.  Assume it only blows out by the same amount as the BER/Pink Bats wastage - say $6-8 Billion. 

So Wilkie gave up $1B for $340 million that will never be delivered.  Good ol’ 1 term Wilkie!

Farkurnell says:

07:28pm | 02/09/10

David & Holly ,You can tick off one of the 6 new hospitals( Ive added Tony Crook’s electorate into the mix) due for funding in the next 3 years.

Simon says says:

07:03am | 08/09/10

Yup, what Shell said.

Someone tell Leigh Sales, pls.