On the basis of his first two days, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Tony Abbott is up against himself in this election.

Tony Abbott signs a contract promising that Work Choices is dead, buried and cremated on Neil Mitchell's show. Pictures: 3AW

If he had faltered under pressure, that would be one thing, but his early stumbles on industrial relations have come before the real pressure is even on.

Late on Friday when it became clear that an election would be called the next day, he moved to close off an inevitable attack angle on him. An Abbott government would not touch Labor’s Fair Work IR laws during its whole first term and then, only after an explicit mandate from voters obtained at the subsequent election.

The timing was perfect marking a promising start to his campaign. Labor was gearing up for the mother of all scare campaigns claiming Mr Abbott planned to bring back WorkChoices under another name. So Mr Abbott’s move was a pre-emptive strike designed to remove fears that he was an IR wolf in sheep’s clothing. And it carried the added benefit of ensuring his inclusion in the front page election coverage on the morning the poll was called. Smart.

If there was a cost, it was that surrendering on IR would betray small businesses pushing for greater flexibility and tarnish Mr Abbott’s reputation as a conviction politician. But on balance, applying the political tourniquet was judged to be well worth that price. Its objective was singular. Remove doubt. If voters heard the message, Labor’s gathering IR scare campaign would struggle for traction. Indeed it would look shrill and desperate.

Yet now, that doubt he sought to erase is back in earnest - invited in by the Opposition itself. Despite an embarrassing gesture yesterday of signing a piece of paper in a radio studio - itself a hangover from his admissions about sometimes telling porkies except in written statements - Tony Abbott has confirmed that, unlike the Fair Work legislation itself, the accompanying regulations, where a good deal of the system is contructed and regulated, are not off limits.

In one fell swoop, Mr Abbott had undone all his good work. Like it or not, IR is back on the scare list and the burden of proof has once again shifted to the accused. Mr Abbott must prove he is not slipping and sliding or concealing dark plans to strip out your penalty rates.

As the pace quickens in this election campaign, Liberal loyalists will be biting their nails and hoping these wobbles are not a precursor to the wheels falling off altogether.

99 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      08:22pm | 19/07/10

      Yes the mad monk showed his true colour today. He is as you say an IR wolf in sheep’s clothing. It would have come to the forth earlier, but he’s been keeping his head down. He had basically been gagged by his own party for fear he would do exactly what he has down today, only hours into the election campaign. But unfortunately for him and his poor party he had to come out of his hiding hole and be the front of the liberal campaign. I bet the nail bitting started long before the campaign did. And what did we get today Abbott in half blossom. We’re yet to see him fully unfold. You could almost believe he is on the ALP payroll. A vote for Abbott is a vote backwards.

    • Anthony of WA says:

      08:54pm | 19/07/10

      What are you worrying about IR for? well I suppose working for Rudd and Co with their staff turn over you have something to worry about

    • BobM says:

      01:25pm | 20/07/10

      Gee, no asylum seeker boat announcements since the election was called. Amazing.

    • Jason CR says:

      08:38pm | 19/07/10

      Ok Rob, scare campaign Mark II wins and Labor get re-elected.

      You obviously think it’s good IR for 15-18 year olds to be denied working 2 hours after school.  Are you happy with that aspect of the Labor IR legislation?? 

      Also, what do we actually get from Labor?? No policy on climate change, no policy on asylum seekers yet, Tanner and Faulkner gone, Rudd on the front bench.  Instability galore.

      Instead of continually displaying your hatred for the man, can you actually tell us what Labor will bring?

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      10:06pm | 19/07/10

      Jason CR says:08:38pm; “No policy on climate change” I think the debate stops right there, your just not mature enough. And you might call it hatred, I call it the truth. End of story, grow up!

    • TheRealDave says:

      12:59am | 20/07/10

      Because the Libs would never stoop to using a ‘scare’ campaign would they Jase?

      Got your Fridge Magnet handy?

      *cough Tampa*

    • harriet says:

      07:31am | 20/07/10

      Jason 15-18 yearolds can work for 2 hours after school, their employers just need to pay them for 3 hours. Just like being thrown out of question time and still being paid a daily sitting allowance.

    • Phil says:

      08:15am | 20/07/10

      Harriet

      Do you live in the real world? Do you own a small business? Didnt think so.

      What I suggest the unions and labor supporters do is purchase some small businesses in order that they actually know how things works, how difficult it can be to get things done, and the additional impost things like this make life more difficult.

      This part of the legislation was introduced so employers could not ask a person to come into work for 1 hour in the middle of the day, 5 pm etc for 1 hour only and fair enough. Noone would argue about that at all.

      It does however take away an opportunity for school pupils to work 1 1/2 hours - 2 hours after school in a local shop to either get by, help with their studies or allow flexability with their finances. I would say most school or uni students have done this type of work.

      Labor got rid of some of the worst parts of workchoices, but kept a great slice of it that worked. Most coalition voters would have said it went to far. Loyalty is a two way street. Employees are free after years of investment and training to give notice and vacate the workplace. Employers whose own money is invested in many cases into the business do not have that flexability. Some employers have lost unfair dismissal claims because they sacked someone on the spot for stealing. Is that really fair. No its not. Sure some employers abused the system, but so will they under labor.

      Did many nurses not loose out big time under the Work Fair System?

      Labor will run a scare campaign, and many will fall for it. Rod, Chong, Dave, Nosthow. et al How many of you were sacked under work choices unfairly? How many of you actually lost money in your pay packets?

      And do you know what you as working families can start your own businesses. Yes you can move forward into self employment. Take a risk, then know what real life and gambles are about. And can I just say this, so can your union superannuation fund. They can buy many businesses for the sheeple to work in at inflated hourly rates, penalty rates, holidays, no unfair dismissal laws. But do you know what they wont.

    • iansand says:

      09:38am | 20/07/10

      Phil - I’m sure you are correct about the need to run a small business to fully understand the problems.  How many Coalition politcians have that experience?  It will help me to make up my mind about for whom to vote.

    • gil4d says:

      11:38am | 20/07/10

      good point phil i have yet to meet a single person or even hear about one that lost a job / pay /or conditions under work choices. the anti work choices furfeys put out there by the unions at the last election was the biggest scam ever

    • Peter says:

      11:54am | 20/07/10

      @ gil4d. Workchoices stripped people of fundamental human rights. Despite what your views on unions might be, people have a right to be represented by them and to not be ripped of by some employers..

    • Jason CR says:

      12:07pm | 20/07/10

      @Harriet, thanks for the clarification. 

      Oh by the way, can you tell me where these businesses are that hire you for 2 hours but pay you 3?  My two teenagers think that’s great.  I might also get myself one of those part timers myself. 

      @Rob,  oh that’s right Bob Brown has one and you’ll use their climate change policy.

    • Jason CR says:

      12:26pm | 20/07/10

      @The Real Dave

      Tampa as an example of a scare campaign??  Just going back through the archives and there it is - 2001….point proven. 

      Oh by the way - no child will live in poverty by 1996 Dave.

    • Phil says:

      03:18pm | 20/07/10

      Peter

      Please name names of those who got dudded. They would be in the minority.

      What fundamental human rights were lost by workchoices.

      You are talking through your hat.

      It is widly acknowledged that some employers did the wrong thing. Just like Kevin Rudd’s wife. I beleive hers and many others were an oversight, others not so.

      Were you unfairly sacked, did you ever earn less as a result of workchoices.

    • Peter says:

      03:33pm | 20/07/10

      @ Phil. There are plenty of people who got dudded on AWA’s, especially those who received under CPI pay increases relentlessly for 8 years, hence why AWA were becoming on the nose to everybody. Being on an AWA means you have no right to representation. You have a right to membership of a union, but that’s it..

      I was not unfairly sacked, treated or otherwise, but plenty of people were/are.  For example, i know of a particular workplace where people on AWA’s were assessed for performance. People were rated from 1 to 5, 1 being the best. Now managers where instructed to fill in a certain number into those categories. For example, you can only have 1 or 2 people out of 40 as being in the top group. Then the managers were limited to only 2 people as being rated 2, etc etc. As they had quota’s on how many people can be assessed as doing a good job, the others were constantly getting dudded. A managers best friend would get a good pay rise, but not his best worker.. That’ s how things worked with AWA’s in the corporate world. It was not based on performance, productivity or anything.. Go back to Award system i say… At least it was fair for all, workers worked as team and not enemies as they do now as they chase their own little piece of the pie….

    • Brad Price says:

      08:49pm | 19/07/10

      So it’s OK for Labor to have the ability to make changes under the legislation but not the Liberals? He’s pledging to not make changes other than would be possible for Labor to also make given the current framework.

    • iansand says:

      08:08am | 20/07/10

      Labor could, if they chose, repeal the whole scheme.  What does Mr Abbott mean?

    • nosthow says:

      08:53pm | 19/07/10

      Tony Abbott is the most unbelievable leader the Liberals have ever had ! And todays stunt of scribbling rubbish on a piece of paper is just so typical of the lack of depth of the Coalition. Workchoices will be back in full under an Abbott government make no mistake about that ! Tony when quizzed about his scriblings couldnt even gaurentee that it was true - “Oh I cant be sure workplace relations rules will definately stay the same he said just minutes after signing his “rock solid guarentee - all 8 words of it ! Laughable and sad that the Liberals are in such a mess !

    • Jason CR says:

      10:36pm | 19/07/10

      Nosthow,

      I can remember being promised 260 child care centres.  How many were delivered??? 30 odd.
      Why?....simply because the government said that the child care situation changed with ABC and other factors. 

      Why are Labor allowed to change policy along the way?  Yet Abbott isn’t allowed to tweak changes along the way with IR, if needed? 

      It’s sad when scare campaigns rule our country.

    • mags says:

      11:51pm | 19/07/10

      What a pity you don’t take more trouble over really listening to what is said. Tony Abbott said that the LAWS will not be changed - the regulations within the framework of the law have already been tinkered with by that qieen of liars,Julia Gillard ,because she got it wrong to start with. TA said that they would refer any possible changes to REGULATIONS to the Fair Work Commissioner. Got it now?

      I do wish you Labor apologists would get the facts straight before you mouth off. I heard some stupid Labor person ,whose name I didn’t catch, claim that Tony Abbott was instrumental in the Work Choices legislation when in fact he wasn’t the Minister for Industrial Relations at the time and had actually voted against it in Cabinet. Another case of not letting the truth get in the way of a good rant. I hope you Labor people keep this argument going because sooner or later people will get te message that your idol Julia is as useless as the man she stabbed in the back.

    • Ripa says:

      01:47am | 20/07/10

      Tony Abbott is the most real leader in Australian politics, he has never swayed from his belief, when you vote for him you know what you are getting , unlike labor, Rudd, Jooles they are puppets , seriously australia has only ever been prosperous under liberals, the labor socialists only want to control us.

    • Seano says:

      08:03am | 20/07/10

      @Jason - I think it’s funny how you claim scare campaign as if only one side ever uses negative tactics. Obviously we all have our preferences but not all of us are quite so blinkered.

      The reason Abbott can’t be trusted to “tweak” IR laws is because of the out and out attack on worker’s rights that he championed under the Howard government. The fact that Abbott, who by his own admission cannot be trusted, vacillates between “dead and buried” and “tweaking” the laws should be enough to have all workers scared.

      If you want to pretend that’s a scare campaign then by all means go ahead, but the reality is the situation Abbott finds himself in is entirely of his own making. Abbott cannot be trusted because he is untrustworthy and therefore unelectable.

    • nosthow says:

      09:14am | 20/07/10

      @Jason CR - my old Liberal party buddy ! You must be working overtime Jason to try and prop up poor old Tony - hows that Campaign office coming along - organised yet ? No I doubt it. Just like the Liberal Party huh ? Do they give you a day off Jason ? Or do they make you perform under “Workchoices” conditions - you know the unfair and rejected by the elctorate system that Abbott wants to bring back !

    • Jason CR says:

      11:28am | 20/07/10

      Nosthow,
      Now, now don’t be precious because you were caught out on your comments that Rudd would definitely be leader and will win the election.  You’re a political guru - I’m an emergency services worker.  We’ll leave it at that son.

    • Anne71 says:

      12:51pm | 20/07/10

      I have to agree with nosthow. I could have considered voting Liberal if Turnbull was still leader, or if they’d put up Joe Hockey instead. But Abbott? I seriously cannot put my finger on it but there is something about that man that really worries me. I don’t know what it is, but it means that I couldn’t trust him as far as I could throw him. So there is no way the Liberals will be getting my vote this time around. I think there’s going to be a lot of other people feeling the same way - they’d like to vote Liberal but they don’t want to vote for Abbott. So they won’t.

    • Jason CR says:

      01:10pm | 20/07/10

      Anne71

      If you’re happy with Bob Brown controlling the senate and effectively running our country, that’s fine.  Good luck - you’ll need it.

    • William says:

      09:13pm | 19/07/10

      Oh my god Rob. How about you regurgitate some more meaningless cliche’s from Julia and the labor party for us all? “A vote for Abbott is a vote backwards”. Are you so mentally challenged that you can’t even think for yourself? You have to take lines straight from Julia’s own limited vocabulary? Wow. Pathetic.

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      10:12pm | 19/07/10

      William says:09:13pm; watch them knicker bockers they’ll get all twisted on ya

    • DC says:

      10:41pm | 19/07/10

      Dead, buried and cremated.  How many times has he said that over the past 72 hours?  I think he’s giving Julia Gillard a run in the “how many times can a slogan be repeated” stakes.

    • B says:

      01:38pm | 20/07/10

      The poor bloke has to repeat it over and over again because he is asked the same stupid question over and over again ad nauseum because it is the favourite scare stick Labor are using to hit people over the head with.  The voting public have undergone a “rude awakening” in the past three years both federally and state.  We are not stupid out here in voterland and although this scare compaign worked well in 2007, it is as transparent as shower scum to most of us now.
      Maybe some Labor apologists could ask Julia and Wayne some questions like what are they going to do and how much is it going to cost taxpayers to address the class action by people whose businesses were destroyed and lives lost by the insulation mess Labor created.?  They were promised restitution and then Labor backflipped on that.  Why aren’t the unions standing up for the people who lost their jobs when these legitimate businesss put their faith in the government but were screwed royally… you know… the working families who were looking forward presumably.  Another question that springs to mind is what is Julia doing about the boat people and has she decided on her policy - “to Nauru or not to Nauru that is the question”?  Is she planning on wasting more public money building a detention centre which is not wanted in East Timor?  How about this one - Julia could you tell us how much the carbon tax will be on everyone and what can we expect the increases to groceries, fuel and utilities to be in view of the fact that even with a hint of a carbon tax these things have gone up already and pensioners have had to choose between electricity or food before the big tax is even introduced?  Can journos please ask these questions?

    • Neil says:

      02:24pm | 20/07/10

      Your kidding right DC? Gillard and media who have decided to play the game with her are the ones repeating workchoices at every available opportunity not Abbott. He was asked about it a zillion times yesterday! And everytime you heard from the Government all they had to say all day was “workchoices”.and in the same breath “moving forward” The Unions (especially Paul Howes) should be proud of their Julia repeating workchoices like a good little Union parrot that she is.

    • DC says:

      10:46pm | 19/07/10

      Can anyone actually read what he wrote down?

      Work Choices
      Dead buried cremated?

      So if he calls it something else, he can claim that he was only ever referring to Work Choices?

      Considering he’s been telling small business that he would take work place reform to the election so that he can change the unfair dismissal laws and introduce individual work place agreements, he has actually left himself open to the criticism he is currently facing.

      In other words, Tony Abbott is his own worst enemy.

    • Joe says:

      11:10pm | 19/07/10

      Wow Labor has nothing that they have achieved over the last three years so they have to reach way back in history for a scare campaign. Pretty pathetic.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      11:24pm | 19/07/10

      Personally I still blame Tony Abbott for budgie smugglers making a come back….......(yes, Liberal fanboys it’s just humour and I have to laugh in this election otherwise I’d cry about the lack of choices in this election)

    • BobM says:

      04:22pm | 20/07/10

      Speedos are the uniform of the Royal Life Saving Society of Australia - they even have one in Victoria(http://www.lifesavingvictoria.com.au/www/html/7-home-page.asp )  I’m sure you’d be the first to put your hand up to be saved by a bloke in budgie smugglers if ever you were drowning, but if they offend you so much - just go ahead and drown then. And PS - Lifesavers vote too.

    • Press says:

      11:25pm | 19/07/10

      Short memories, eh.

      The reason Abbott is already in difficulty selling the “dead and buried”  policy explanation is very simple. Too many of the dead and buried around his neck already.

      Here’s just one of ‘em. The Liberals went to the last election with an ETS.  They then buried it and negotiated *another* ETS. And when their (unelected!) leader tried to make that ETS stick, they slaughtered *him*.

      And then? Why, Igor, bzzzt nzzzt bzzzt - apply a few poll shocks and Hey Presto, Zombie Turnbull, back from the dead!

      For God’s sake. As soon as it suits ‘em they’ll undead and unbury whatever they like, including Work Choices.  You watch.

    • BobM says:

      02:56pm | 20/07/10

      @Press - just like Garrett and “as soon as we get in we’ll just change everything”,  eh?  At least he is a man of his word - even if he can’t run an insulation programme without getting people killed.

    • Press says:

      03:51pm | 20/07/10

      Agree. Poor judgement, poor joke. Got off my butt and told him so, too, in writing. Anyone can.

      So, then, remind me. How long is the current list of Liberal Never Evers? Hmmm?

      Just to keep things in perspective, in burying its ETS, your Party not only publicly immolated its own chosen (unelected) Leader of the day. It broke a good faith undertaking to negotiate major legislation, too.

      Rather more weighty stuff than a foolish throwaway to a shock jock, hey.

    • Sirro says:

      12:45am | 20/07/10

      Note to Labor sympathisers. The 2007 election was fought on Workchoices (or partly anyway). This election its a side issue though without doubt your lot will continuously focus on it to you own detriment. Good luck!

      This election will be fought on the Rudd/Gillard Labor governments record, not any previous policies or past governments.

      On that record alone they should be at 33% primary support (core Labor) and nothing more.

      Other issues like being first timers, having a woman in charge and the general happiness of some of the recipients of the cash giveaways will get them to 35-36% first preference. Add the 11% of the Greens 12-13% and they will get to 47% or so of the two party preferred ....

      Thats not going to be enough ... especially in the marginals.

      Julia can bleat about moving forward and blah blah blah all she likes. She and they are gone. The electorate are fractured and I dont think they like what Julia is offering. Its all been seen before at state level and it looks and smells like

    • Bleeding Heart says:

      01:28am | 20/07/10

      It will be interesting to see if we do have a double dip recession with the bad news flowing out of Europe.
      Employers were able to offer part time hours to full time employees because of Workchoices.
      Under the new laws, mass sackings & redundancies will follow as it is written into law and the flexibility to reduce hours is no longer there, no different to how it worked in the past really and that is where IR in this country is now.
      Firmly rooted in the 1970’s and Gillard says that Abbott lives in the past, talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

    • J says:

      02:19pm | 20/07/10

      No redundancy pay under work choices though oh and my employer let lots of people go part time during the last two years

    • Chris L says:

      05:35pm | 20/07/10

      It’s rather odd seeing how many businesses actually increased their profits during the GFC. The large corporation where I work laid off heaps of workers and have sent a lot of processes offshore using the GFC as an excuse yet their profits are soaring. Yes, I realise the increase in profits (and employee stress) is partly due to retrenching so many people (along with the work of their employees) but it seems they could have managed quite fine without such drastic measures. Now we’re losing staff constantly as they burn out from shouldering the work of all the people who are gone.

      What I get from this is that corporations aren’t the fluffy, caring types that the Liberals would have us believe, but more the faceless, profit-seeking types (yeah, I know. Go figure). If the regulations to prevent them from misusing and abusing those who do the work for them were gone I don’t think there’d be many who could resist the temptation.

    • DaveinPerth says:

      02:13am | 20/07/10

      Do we have to wait for the election for Malcolm Turnbull to take over the opposition leadership?

      Or will it happen a week before ?

    • Seano says:

      08:05am | 20/07/10

      It may as well, Abbott is unelectable.

    • Luke4 says:

      11:33am | 20/07/10

      Abbotts unelectable, why then sack the PM?

    • Seano says:

      01:09pm | 20/07/10

      Because we was no longer working with in the democratic party process, he was no longer making good decisions and he had lost his ability to communicate effectively. IMO he had burnt himself out.

      The sacking of Rudd doesn’t make Abbott electable despite the fantasy that Abbott might have pinched it from Rudd. Rudd was still way ahead on Preferred PM and Tony Abbott was still Tony Abbott which is his biggest problem. Rudd would have hung on to a reduced majority.

      On the day Rudd was rolled they should have been playing “Don’t dream it’s over” to accompany the panicked look on Abbott’s face.

    • Leo says:

      01:52pm | 20/07/10

      Rubbish, the Unions thought Rudd was going to lose the election. As the Government all kept saying before they knifed the Prime Minister. If an election were held today Abbott would be PM. They were panicked about losing the “unlosable” election which they thought they had sewn up when Turnbull was Leader of the Opposition.

    • Mike says:

      02:11pm | 20/07/10

      Should have seen the look on their faces when Abbott rolled Turnbull. Panicked I would describe it. And so were the actions they took after Abbott took over the Leadership.

    • Seano says:

      03:50pm | 20/07/10

      From behind in the polls? To say Rudd being rolled because of panic over the unelectable Abbott is simplist and naive at best. But when you’re desperate I guess you grab on to anything that floats.

      @Mike - I’m sorry mate but as much as the hard core conservatives love him many more either despise or fear him. His inability to open his mouth without putting his foot in it doesn’t help.

    • getagrip says:

      04:18pm | 20/07/10

      Get a grip Seano, Rudd was dumped because The Labor Union Government of Australia that’s run by Paul Howes and associates panicked as they always do and as hard it is for you to accept or acknowledge alot of it had to do with Abbott exposing the d@#k head!

    • Seano says:

      05:36pm | 20/07/10

      The only thing Abbott exposed was too much of himself in his budgie smugglers. As Rudd was still ahead in the polls your rhetoric is hollow.

      “The Labor Union Government of Australia that’s run by Paul Howes”

      You’re mistaken if you think this sort of silliness will win votes or change minds.

    • jamie says:

      06:27pm | 20/07/10

      seano - errhh that’s what surf life savers wear mate, budgie smugglers. your another one of these drop kicks obsessed with Abbotts body. stick to your workchoices campaign

    • Seano says:

      09:34pm | 20/07/10

      @Jamie - errhh so? The issue was Abbott’s posing and narcissism. Since I made no mention of the sls movement I fail to see how that makes me the “drop kick”.

    • Mike says:

      07:32am | 21/07/10

      So you think Abbott should wear board shorts when he’s surf life saving sean not budgie smugglers like everyone else, in case idiots like you give him a hard time about wearing a surf life saving uniform? So all the other guys in budgie smugglers are posing too I suppose.

    • Drew says:

      02:30am | 20/07/10

      Can’t be anything more meaningless than what happened today William. I don’t think even Tony knows his own policy. Talk about losing the race before its even started. The liberal leadership appears totally useless and confused. This note stunt clearly shows the libs are on the defensive allready. And it seems Mr Abbott is so confused he doesnt even know his own policy on work choices. Change it, don’t change it, who knows! Keep spinning that policy roulette wheel Tony.

      ps
      Cant wait for Julia to own Abbott in the debate.

    • Jason CR says:

      12:21pm | 20/07/10

      Julia is continually questioned about having three debates by the press.  Each time she replies with the same “oh I’ve had many debates with Tony blah blah blah” 

      We are talking about a debate with two leaders at an election, not debates on a morning TV show!!!

      She can’t comment on her meeting with Rudd, can’t comment or tell us what was discussed with her meeting with Bob Brown.  What can you tell us Julia??
      We’ve seen stunts by Labor staffers at shopping centres, stunts where children are placed in parks behind her etc. 

      Abbott has said he’s happy to have 3 debates and didn’t have to ask the factional thugs’ permission.  If she’s allowed, I can’t wait either.

    • Faul Kinell says:

      06:11am | 20/07/10

      Peter Costello must be churning, just watching Abbott flailling about. Costello could be thinking his popularity may look in better shape soon and I think he may be smelling a possible comeback as leader when the Liberal Party say next please?

    • PatC says:

      07:25am | 20/07/10

      I find it passing strange the anyone capable of rational thought would even consider voting for a candidate who promised no changes to IR laws if they were elected. It would mean that they have no substance and no vision so some changes are inevitable.
      Does that mean that the only change Abbott could make would be to reintroduce WorkChoices - of course not - and I find it disheartening that the Labor party continues to insult my intelligence by claiming that is all Abbott is capable of doing.
      I think that a commitment not to change the IR Act in their first term and to take any changes to the Act to the electorate as part of a second term platform is a fair commitment.
      It still does not mean I will vote for them though.

    • Seano says:

      07:45am | 20/07/10

      Abbott is the same bloke who promised to tax big business to fund a social welfare prgramme. Something that idealogically he’s never going to do and therefore he has no credibility what so ever. The signed guarantee stunt proved that Abbott is the Liberal’s Mark Latham, unelectable.

      The only guarantee we can take from Abbott is that he will have the best interests of the Australia workers at heart until 5 seconds after they’ve voted.

    • Ryan says:

      09:49am | 20/07/10

      @Seano: Mark Latham was one of yours pal, don’t try and stick your crappy low class leaders onto the Liberals, he is yours to keep and show as the true class of Labor politics, just like Gillard is with her lying, complete incompetence and her backstabbing of her workmates.

    • Seano says:

      01:13pm | 20/07/10

      Calling Abbott Lathamesq is entirely appropriate, they have a lot of similarity in style, attitude, arrogance and both were generally seen as unelectable. “crappy low class” seems an apt description for them both.

    • Evan Findlay says:

      09:23pm | 20/07/10

      Seano, Abbott was nowhere near the level of intelligence that Latham was. Latham problem was that he had a short temper and let it get the better of him. So I’m with Ryan on this, Don’t mix him in with that conservative rabble.

    • Daniel says:

      08:45am | 20/07/10

      Abbott is addicted to work choices. He loves the policy. He cant be trusted. He will make life harder for us in Sydney if he gets to be Prime Minister.

    • Dash says:

      09:33am | 20/07/10

      The unemployment rate is higher under this Labor government Daniel. It’s gone up since they came to power. Great management of IRs! Lets debate Labors lies from the 07 election and their failure to deliver on just about everything they’ve started. Lets deal in reality shall we instead of union scare mongering from the communist left of the Labor/Green coalition.

    • Nathan says:

      09:18am | 20/07/10

      Lets get over Workchoices. Its not coming back. Like Tony said, its dead and buried, Lets get onto some real policies. Whats Labor’s climate change policy? There is very little substance at the moment in the campaign due to Abbott being stuck answering the same question over and over again and Labor just using their scare campaign about workchoices and paying their own staffers to herrass Abbott in budgie smugglers. It just shows the Labor party have no direction (except moving forward) no substance and only rely on spin. SOMEONE ASK LABOR A POLICY QUESTION, the MSM have a lot to answer for in this campaign so far.

    • SkepDad says:

      09:32am | 20/07/10

      This Work Choices nonsense is the most cynical scaremongering I can remember seeing.

      Howard took Work Choices to the 2007 election.  It cost him his job.  There is simply no way that they would pick it up again, even in another guise. 

      Don’t you people feel insulted when politicians wave boogeymen around like this?  Neither party has anything of real substance to say, so they treat us like morons with scare campaigns. Whuck?

    • Hermoine says:

      12:55pm | 20/07/10

      No.  Howard did not “take” Workchoices to the last election.  Howard introduced “Workchoices” without ever putting a policy stronger than abolishing unfair dismissal before the voters at any time between 1996 - 2004.  Workchoices was introduced purely because the Government gained control of the Senate and could introduce whatever it damn well pleased, whether it had been part of their election policy manifesto or not.  Workchoices reforms took effect in 2006, and were then amended later that year because they were judged to be too harsh.

      (By the way, given the way the Senate works, the Liberal/National Senate majority in 2004 has made life difficult for the Government to get through some of their policies endorsed by the electorate in 2007 - Fuelwatch and an ETS springs to mind)

      The Australian people, never having being asked about the policy, had every right to vote against it and in favour of a different system - which they did in 2007.

      So “Workchoices” may “have ceased to be.”  It may be an “ex-Workchoices”; but given past history there is nothing to stop the Liberal Party in Government introducing legislation and calling it “tweaking”.  They have been promising to do so regarding unfair dismissal for the past three years… it is not a cynical or empty threat at all.

    • SkepDad says:

      04:11pm | 20/07/10

      Yes Hermoine, the Howard government introduced legislation after being returned in 2004 with 81 seats to 65 and a 5.5% lead in 2PP.  Shocking that a popularly elected government should exercise their mandate to do something they believed was in the nation’s interest, isn’t it?

      So they were unceremoniously tossed out of government, with an 11% swing, in the 2007 Work Choices referendum. 

      And somehow you think they would be interested in reviving the policy that had them tossed out of government on their ear?  How’s the weather on planet nonsense?

      There’s nothing to stop any government from introducing legislation on any topic through the democratic process.  Shall we talk about the ALP’s intention to introduce legislation on internet filtering, when 98% of 88,000 respondents are opposed in polling?  That makes Work Choices look as popular as free ice cream.

    • Greg says:

      04:56pm | 20/07/10

      Hermoine, firstly workchoices cost Howard the election. Lets hope the numerous policy failures of Labor and Gillard cost it this election (e.g. insulation fiasco, rorting of school schemes, non delivery of election promises on grocery choice, laptops, childcare facilities, more affordable housing etc). Second lets talk about the real issues not about mere scare tactics of Labor’s union bosses. Lets talk about the increase in immigration both legal and illegal. Lets debate the performance of this government over the last 3 years. There’s plenty of failure to talk about. Thirdly, the Australian people were never asked if they wanted Gillard as PM either! By your logic, that must make you extremely angry given their disregard for the democratic process. In 1975, they tried to be unconstitutional with the Khemlani affair and it cost them the election in December that year (that’s right Whitlam was dismissed by the people!). Lets hope the same happens here and we get rid of this lates pack of incompetent Labor morons. Otherwise the state of NSW is coming to the whole of Australia.

    • James says:

      09:36am | 20/07/10

      Deja vu?  The last line is the same as what Abbott is now saying about Work Choices.
      May 2, 1995 (doorstop interview):
      Journalist: “So you’ve left the door open for a GST now, haven’t you?”
      Howard: “No, there’s no way that a GST will ever be part of our policy”.
      Journalist: “Never ever?”
      Howard: “Never ever. It’s dead. It was killed by the voters at the last election”.

    • SkepDad says:

      10:56am | 20/07/10

      The 1998 election was widely regarded as a referendum on the GST.  Which Howard won.  Seems the people got what they wanted, regardless of how you feel about it James.

      The problem is not that policies are re-evaluated (which is to some extent the government’s job, in response to changing circumstances and public opinion) it’s that they feel they have to use words like “never” to shut down dishonest scare campaigns.

    • James says:

      11:18am | 20/07/10

      @SkepDad; So it’s okay to lie when attempting to shut down dishonest scare campaigns?

      Let’s stop pretending that Abbott is being honest on work choices (all politicians are blatant liars)

      Abbott is between a rock and hard place on work choices and the Liberal party only have themselves to blame.  If he says he’‘ll never change IR laws he’s lying (there’s nothing wrong with some tweaking of legislation - and it’s inevitable as it will be necessary at some point)

      If he says he will change IR laws he is committing political suicide.

      Whether or not Australia voted for the GST, Howard blatantly lied about it when he said “never” and I was pointing out just how similar a situation it is - not that I am against the GST, nor am I for the Labor party.

    • SkepDad says:

      12:25pm | 20/07/10

      Nice attempt at a strawman there James. 

      It’s possible to say “never” and believe it - i.e. truthfully.  It’s also possible to say never earnestly and know that you’re exaggerating a little, but are aware that you have to be seen to be strongly opposed to satisfy the hysterical panic merchants.  It’s also possible to say never and be flat out lying in the hope of sneaking into government and shouting “surprise!”.

      The media and the ALP would have us believe it’s the latter with Abbott.  I disagree, and believe it’s one of the former two.

      It’s also possible to honestly re-evaluate an honest “never” at a later date to bend to the public’s will.  To be otherwise is to be fundamentalist.

      As far as being between a rock and a hard place, the Libs walked away from Work Choices three years ago.  It was dredged up by the ALP scare squad and the AWU, not by any Liberal policies. 

      You said it yourself - if he says “yes”, the ALP/AWU fear machine goes wild.  If he says “no” he’s branded a liar.  If he says “maybe” he’s branded sneaky. 

      Before you brand me a Liberal stooge, I’m voting Green.  But I’m open-minded enough to see that Abbott has nowhere positive to go on IR due to disgraceful and utterly dishonest fearmongering on the part of the ALP.

    • Jason CR says:

      12:35pm | 20/07/10

      @skepdad, it’s like banging your head up against a brickwall isn’t it?

      They’re now going back to Howard’s comments.  I wasn’t aware that Howard was still in politics.  However, I’m happy to talk to you about Rudd, James.  He’s going to be on the front bench of a re-elected labor isn’t he??

      I find it quite amusing that Abbott was actually against Workchoices, but lets not allow the truth get in the way of scare campaign mark 2.

    • antman says:

      01:20pm | 20/07/10

      Skep Dad, Howard won the ‘98 election with less than 50$ of the two-party preferred vote. How is that a mandate? I reckon the Australian people voted against the GST but got it anyway.

    • SkepDad says:

      03:45pm | 20/07/10

      Antman, let’s continue this train of thought after Gillard sneaks in on Green preferences.  Then I’m sure you’ll join me in complaining bitterly about everything the ALP does based on the fact that they have no mandate.

    • Chris L says:

      05:46pm | 20/07/10

      Skepdad, you’re voting Greens? I would have expected you to be voting the Secular Party. I’m not being sarcastic either, you should google them.

    • Greg says:

      09:37am | 20/07/10

      Look at the media falling over itself to swallow the bullsh!t that Labor is feeding them. Nothing has changed from the last election. Editors of the major media outlets have already started campaigning for the Labor party. Some things never change. Voting for Labor in 07 was clearly a mistake. Only stupid people make the same mistake twice!

    • Ryan says:

      09:43am | 20/07/10

      What is clear is that Labor have nothing grubby to go on so they are trying to flog this old line. What is absolutely pathetic is the FACT that workchoices is long gone and yet they poorly attempt to flog this dead horse by questioning Abbott’s integrity, this coming from a bunch that support a lying incompetent backstabber as their leader. How does that saying go.. the one with the pot and the kettle.. yes you know the one.

    • Seano says:

      10:54am | 20/07/10

      Labor didn’t have to question Abbott’s integrity, he brought his integrity into when he admitted that he can only be trusted on scripted comments.

    • Ryan says:

      02:57pm | 20/07/10

      @Seano: oh well, at least with Abbott we KNOW we can trust him on scripted comments, not even Gillards close mates and working partner can trust her, the public can’t trust her on ANYTHING.. not even her scripted comments.
      As for Swanny, I certainly wouldn’t want to be caught in the trenches with that poor excuse for a human being.

    • Seano says:

      09:28pm | 20/07/10

      Actually ingoring the amusing rhetoric all we logically KNOW Ryan is that we cannot trust Abbott because he’s admitted he can’t be trusted.

    • Ryan says:

      10:08am | 21/07/10

      @Seano: on non scripted remarks.. On the other hand Gillard and Swanny have PROOVEN they cannot be trusted on ANYTHING.

    • Richard says:

      09:50am | 20/07/10

      This workchoices scare campaign is a laugh. I hope the Unions and Government keep it up, considering it’s not even a Coalition policy it makes them look desperate with nothing else to fight the Opposition on. I’m sure as the campaign moves on there will be plenty of shit to dish out on the Gillard/Rudd/UNION RUN Government. The Coalition have obviously been quite so far, but I’m sure there are a few bombs coming Gillards way.

    • James D says:

      10:58am | 20/07/10

      Workchoices is no laughing matter for the thousand that protested it, nor is a laughing matter by those who will be affected by the changes Abbott will undoubtedly make. Didn’t your mother even tell you Richard, its better to be safe than sorry? People who actually work hard for a living, are not prepared to take the risk on Abbotts lies.

    • Seano says:

      11:02am | 20/07/10

      Work"choices” in the form and depth that it was implemented was not a part of the LNP policy the first time it was rammed down worker’s throats. Therefore as an architect of work"choices” and unable to get his story straight on IR Abbott’s credibility on this issue is highly questionable.

      The coalition have largely been quite because it’s the only way to keep Abbott out of trouble. Unfortunately for Tony and the LNP you can’t win an election that way. It’s a shame for Australia really that the LNP didn’t put up a sensible alternative rather than the unelectable and expendable Tony Abbott, they might have had a shot.

    • Stewart Henstock says:

      10:49am | 20/07/10

      The IR is back on the list only because the media want it to be so,just like the media wanted the boat people to be an issue.
      Boring real life issues such as being able to pay ones power bill or waiting at emergency for 2 hours before being treated don’t seem to be emotive enough for the lame stream media.
      It seems the Labor Party in moving forward are prepared to hide in their comfort zone of the past.
      Wake up Gillard!
      Work Choices was an issue in 2007.
      The issues today are health,education and the economy and if the Labor Party continues to fail in implementing it’s policies as they have clearly shown…why vote for them.
      This election isn’t about the Opposition Party,it’s about Labor and their failings as a party to prosecute their policies in a manner void of wasting millions of tax payers dollars.

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      10:49am | 20/07/10

      Tony Abbott may be the Mad Monk, he may (like ALL politicians) play with the truth when it suits him. Once again people, & in particualr St Julia of the ALP, dishonestly twist what he actually said with regard to Industrial Relations.
      Fact 1: Abbott was openly & vehemently OPPOSED to the introduction of WorkChoices.
      Fact 2: He, very reasonably given the very short time the ALP’s NEW Industrial Relations Legislation has actually become Law, stated he would NOT change those new laws in a Coalition’s 1st Term & gave the reasons why.
      He said, and we must ask how often he has to say it (hopefully not as often a Jules-baby has blathered on about F@#$%&g something Forward) that a Coalition Government would give those ALP Laws time to settle in, see how they work and if, just as the ALP would do, some adjustments are needed make those adjustments if the Coalition is returned to office in 2013.
      The problem for the Federal ALP Government is that it’s Prime Ministers & Ministers have told so many lies, distorted the truth so much that they can neither recognise nor differentiate between Fact, Truth, Lies & Dishonesty.
      Me? Pro-Coalition? At the moment: Yes. But I will not hesitate to attack them if they win government & fail us as the ALP has done.

    • stephen says:

      11:35am | 20/07/10

      Mr. Abbott tends to react awkwardly to things, which gives him, I think, an unfair disadvantage. He’s not that bad, only unfortunate, given our inclination for first impressions. His real anchor, however,(now that Julia is ‘moving forward’) is his paid parental-leave. The Liberals should do all they can to dissuade Tony from persisting with this codswallop.

    • Kitty of Miranda says:

      11:56am | 20/07/10

      Labor will give you what you want: no work, no success in business, propaganda, lies, goverment controll in every acpects of your life, money for the mates. Is that good? Oh yes, vote for Labor and the Greens and you will destroy this country forever. Go for it.  What Labor gave you in the last 3 years? NOTHING and this will continue with bigger troubles. Carbon tax, good for the prices to go up more and more. Who will pay back the 100 billion dollar depth? You my naive and stupid voters. Go for it.

    • Miles says:

      12:00pm | 20/07/10

      I simply can’t believe that Labor are re-hashing the same scare campaign from last election.  Can Labor not actually come up with something new?  Can they not actually promote what their strengths are as opposed to having to run a scare campaign on how bad the ‘other’ side is?  Oh that’s right, they don’t have strengths - only weaknesses like the proposed ETS and Internet Filter which they will not speak of word of pre-election.

    • Desmond Harris says:

      12:35pm | 20/07/10

      Typical media beat up. Play the man, on behalf of Labor, instead of scrutinising the ones that are in power. Labor stuffed up so much that they had to assassinate a first term Prime Minister-they created history-where is the in depth scrutiny? No the media, in its desire to help Labor, would rather promote Labor lies that Tony Abbott would bring back work choices.

    • Jason CR says:

      02:16pm | 20/07/10

      Desmond, spot on.

      - Labor had a different leader 5 weeks ago. 
      - Two competent ministers jump ship.
      - Rudd has been promised a front bench spot. (even after secretly tipping off Oakes and causing embarssment to Gillard)
      - No ETS
      - Flawed and bungled policies by the dozen.

      Why don’t the Labor sheep in here tell us their first term accomplishments instead of the same old boring scare campaign mark 2?? 

      A group of washed up unionists who have absolutely no idea of how to run a government.  They remind me of a dog chasing a car.  No idea what to do once it catches it.

    • Tom says:

      02:28pm | 20/07/10

      Can someone please explain to me what would be the rationale behind Abbott re - introducing Work Choices, when it was the major reason the Liberals lost the last election, and also that Abbott is on record as having opposed it in cabinet meetings?

      I realise the Libs have some questionable policies, but I’m sure they aren’t stupid enough to do something that will all but ensure they get booted out of office.

    • BobM says:

      04:26pm | 20/07/10

      Tom - have you been under a rock?

    • Helen says:

      03:35pm | 20/07/10

      I’m waiting for them to test the new PM with quesitions, instead of letting her (as they did with Rudd in his hay day) deliver long whining speeches and taking a couple of nice little prepared questions afterwards. I can’t beleive the ambush on Abbott about workchoices while Gillard minces around in the Townsville sun smiling and eating cup cakes. It’s as if Gillard doesn’t need any serious questions to answer about her 3 years of stuff ups, backflips cost blow outs etc. It’s all about workchoices, that don’t even exist. I could understand an ambush if Abbott said he wanted to re-introduce workchoices, but it’s a non policy for christ sake!

    • Andrew says:

      04:16pm | 20/07/10

      What was so wrong with the old Workchoices? It gave employers some protection from dud workers and from people who train at their expense and then cut and run.  Dreadful. Shocking. We cannot possibly have that.  If someone steals or deliberately flouts safety regulations they cannot possibly be dismissed! That would undermine workers’ rights and their ever increasing pay and good conditions.
      Yes, there were some problems with the old Workchoices but media over-reaction, union screams at the loss of power over employers and an opportunistic Labor Party saw us dragged right back into the dark ages of IR again - and it can only get worse.

    • DD Ball says:

      06:57pm | 20/07/10

      Mr Abbott is a genius. He has done no more than speak the truth, quietly, and now journalists are falling over themselves saying what they think he should be saying to attack the ALP. The truth is the journalists have not reported on these issues as they should, and now, by being quiet and speaking the truth, Mr Abbott has these people telling everyone about the ALP failures. He is a genius.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

#markwebber just wasted petrol faster than everyone else in monaco #f1

Anthony Sharwood

In my sports column on The Punch tomorrow: why Eurovision was easily the best game on the weekend. Mummy bloggers, you'll like this one!

Daniel Piotrowski

The Logies could learn a lot from Eurovision #lamethings#sbseurovision

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @ellehardytweets: Already despondent about the next fifty one weeks. #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter