Election 2010: Who will you be voting for? and why? (Constructive forum responses)

[dcrofty]

Oh and I think I'll be voting greens.

Not so much because I want them in power (won't happen anyway) but so that the 2 major parties see that there is voter support for green issues and have to greenify their policies a little bit.

 

[willsy01]

Milhouse is doing a great job.......and by great I mean spectacularly shite. Those of you discounting TA due to his religious beliefs need to realise Milhouse is just as bad, if not worse. When I find the article i'll add it.

All this said though, TA is no shining beacon either. We're fucked either way. All I will say is make sure you know who gets which preferences.

1 Said Sorry several times.

2 Ratified Kyoto as it is about to expire without successor.

3 Organised "best and brightest summit" - if anything useful came out of that, I missed it.

4 Set up "fuel watch", a costly fiasco since abandoned.

5 Set up "grocery watch" another costly fiasco since abandoned.

6 Established the Australian Social Inclusion Board. This rarely heard of bureaucracy was set up because "Every Australian should have an opportunity to be a full participant in the life of the nation. Unfortunately, too many Australians remain locked out of the benefits of work, education, community engagement and access to basic services. This social exclusion is a significant barrier to sustained prosperity and restricts Australia's future growth". If there is any evidence to support this argument it wasn't included in the announcement. The Board has been described as a "complete wank, .... the biggest waste of tax dollars imaginable, towards some more Rudd-style feel-goodism". That was in May 2008. It probably did seem a big waste of tax dollars then, but it's been turned into a drop in the ocean by what's happened since.

7 Set up the home insulation program - what a disaster! It was a disaster because Rudd so wanted the Feds to be able to claim the credit he gave it to his Dept of Environment. This feel-good department, whose Minister's previous experience was lead singer with a rock band, is full of environmental scientists and climate change disciples with zero experience in dealing with the real world or delivering real programs. Four deaths, a minister demoted, (not sacked or had his salary reduced) and $50 million to former union heavy Greg Combet to fix it, and Combet says that may not be enough. And the claimed environmental benefits were grossly exaggerated. Rudd said he took full responsibility but I don't what that means - he's still PM, he's still drawing his salary and privileged superannuation benefits.

8 Set up SIHIP (Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program). This program was initiated by a Memorandum of Understanding in September 2007. In July 2009 the ABC (hardly a hot-bed of opposition to the ALP) reported on its Lateline program that it was yet to build a single house. That was despite $45.54 million of its $672 million budget having been spent. A government report dated August 2009 said the program was being criticised as: too slow to deliver; its governance was overly bureaucratic; the program is too costly in terms of unit cost of housing and administration. The revised program budget is still $672m with each new house expected to cost $450,000 or $529,000 after factoring in a proportion of administration costs and "contingencies". As at 1st February 2010, 2 of target 750 houses and 70 of 2,500 refurbishments had been completed.

9 Sent money direct to taxpayers and non-taxpayers to spend on large screen imported TV's to stimulate the economy and avoid the effects of what Rudd and Swan called the worst depression since the 1930s. In fact unemployment was 11% in 1991 and in 2009 didn't get to 6%, which not too many years ago would have been regarded as virtually full employment. Remember Beattie's target 5%? But if you can't maintain your popularity rating by sending money to voters what can you do?

10 Promised that every child in every school in Australia would get a computer. This program is moving so slowly that most of the people who were high school students at the time of the promise will have left school before they see a new computer.

11 Set up the $70m green loans mess - people gave up their jobs, paid $3,000 for qualifications and insurance to be trained as assessors, only to find the demand for green loans had been grossly exaggerated, many more assessors were trained than the program envisaged, and there was no work for most of them. The Courier-Mail reported on 2 Feb 2010 that: "The Federal Government predicted up to 200,000 homeowners would take up the loans and only 1,000 have done so ....instead of training 1,500 to 2,000 well-qualified assessors the Government permitted a blow-out and it is now estimated there will be up to 11,500 well-qualified assessors". The program has now been transferred to Penny Wong's department - that should fix it.

12 Turned a good budget surplus into such a huge debt that our grandchildren will have so much trouble servicing it that our population will have to increase rapidly. Blamed the GFS while steadfastly refusing to give any credit to Howard or Costello for leaving them an excellent budget position to work with.

13 Didn't include any major infrastructure in the stimulus package because the effects would be felt too slowly (except for duplicating school halls and gyms).

14 Set up the home solar hot water initiative which was abruptly ended three weeks early with eight hours notice. This caused chaos in the industry, and many people intending to lodge applications missed out. Peter Garrett blamed a cost blow-out from the original estimate of $150 million to $750 million a year for the cut-back.

5 Disbanded "Work Choices". He had to do this because it was the unions' self-funded campaign against it that got him elected. Replaced it by giving back powers to the unions and re-instating the Industrial Relations Club. Set up Fair Work Australia with what seems to many as an over-representation of people with union backgrounds.
16 Changed the previous government's immigration laws so successfully that the exponential blow-out in illegal boat arrivals created a need for a lot more accommodation on Christmas Island.

17 Said "the science is in on climate change" and claimed the ETS would fix it. Labelled sceptics as deniers.

18 Attempted to railroad the ETS through the Senate before Copenhagen for no other reason than it would have allowed Rudd to strut the world stage.

19 Went to Copenhagen taking 114 government free-loaders with him (one of the largest of the 190 delegations), at huge cost to the Australian taxpayer and the world's environment. I haven't seen any announcement of the cost of the junket (and I doubt I ever will), but I'm sure that whatever was going to be achieved, at least 100 of the free-loaders were superfluous to requirements. And it was fairly predictable that nothing would be achieved.

20 Refuses to debate the use of nuclear power generation to reduce pollution because it's against ALP and union policy.

21 Has opened one of 2,650 promised "trades training centres", one of 260 promised child care centres in schools and TAFEs, and 2 of 31 promised GP Super Clinics.

22 Attracted 752 retired nurses back into the profession using a return-to-work bonus. When they announced this scheme Labor hoped 7,750 would take up the offer.

23 Removed Labor's original election 2007 promises from the ALP website.

24 Promised to take Japan to court on whaling, but now says that will not be until November, probably after the election. As time goes on, I find I'm becoming less convinced about who is really at fault here, Japan for fishing in international waters, or the protestors for disrupting a legitimate commercial operation.

25 Has so far kept the Henry tax review secret for political reasons. Last week Rudd was saying it wouldn't be released until after the election. Wiser heads have since made him realise people won't vote for a new tax system when they don't know what's in it. And there must be something nasty in it, either unpalatable to the voters or inconsistent with ALP policy, or it would be heralded as another triumph for the Rudd government.

26 Announced he will keep 30% of the state's GST to fund 60% of their hospital costs. The 60% funding will have strings attached. The states have not been given any of the details, just the executive summary, and he expects them to agree to the proposals without knowing what the strings are, or what he might take back with the other hand under the Henry tax review. The announcement doesn't explain how it will improve delivery of hospital services, but it will probably add another layer of bureaucrats to the health system. Australia already has 450,000 bureaucrats looking after 290,000 health professionals. The announcement was hurriedly made in March 2010 after it had been pointed out that he had imposed a June 2009 deadline on himself for reform of the hospitals system. Perhaps this explains the lack of details. Refer back to the criticisms of SIHIP above. I think it'll be deja vue all over again. Rudd said if the states block his plan he will take it to a referendum, which of course is just grandstanding.

27. Turned Gillard loose with $16.7 billion to give building contractors, states and bureaucrats a feast in return for COLA.s and unwanted libraries and gyms – the insulation racket all over again in spades.

28 Last week he trotted out five senior ministers to criticise the Senate for being "obstructionist". The 5 were Jenny (SIHIP) Macklin, Penny (ETS) Wong, Lindsay (clean nose) Tanner, Nicola (new hospital system) Roxon, and Greg (Mr Fixit) Combet. I think Rudd is lucky the Senate has been obstructionist because if it wasn't he'd have more failures to add to his already impressive list. I noticed Julia was too smart to join the line-up of losers, and has managed not to be associated with too many of the above "achievements" – actually lying low while the schools building fiasco and criminal activities are unfolding. But watch your back, Kevvy.

 

[Arete]

quote

What a vitriolic load of half baked, half falsified gobshite. Did you just quote Piers Ackerman or something?

 

[5h1f7y]

Labour got rid of work choices as soon as they were elected.

Liberal made work choices

Nuff said

 

[Australia]

Before I begin this post, I'd like to thank the traditional owners of this land, King George 1 and his descendents.

Labour got rid of work choices as soon as they were elected.

Liberal made work choices

Nuff said

Liberals revolutionised labour market...

Labour Kicked us back to the 1980s

Nuff Said - sums it up nicely, thankyou

What a vitriolic load of half baked, half falsified gobshite. Did you just quote Piers Ackerman or something?

Shrug, up to and including number 24 all struck me as true... so it cant be half falsified

 

[willsy01]

What a vitriolic load of half baked, half falsified gobshite. Did you just quote Piers Ackerman or something?

lol

10chars

 

[scblack]

What a vitriolic load of half baked, half falsified gobshite. Did you just quote Piers Ackerman or something?

Maybe you could point out for us those that are incorrect? While there is some commentary all the lefties on this site would feel the need to disagree with, each point is in essence true.

 

[Arete]

Maybe you could point out for us those that are incorrect? While there is some commentary all the lefties on this site would feel the need to disagree with, each point is in essence true.

You are an intelligent individual and I don't need to hold your hand through the article pointing out where fact turns to creative extrapolation, inventive personal conjecture and playground name calling. There's been widespread bipartisan acknowledgement of the Rudd administration's failure to adequately deliver on policy - Even Kerry Obrien who couldn't keep the smirk off his face when Rudd won the election is railing against the party... Resorting to talk back radio/tabloid media style lambasting and finger waving adds nothing to constructive debate and is decidedly low brow.


To my mind, the Rudd administration has failed, and I'm left wing. Previous to Rudd's spectacular ability to lose an election handed to him on a sliver platter, the liberal leadership was hacky sacked about like a posioned chalice until of all people it was handed to Tony Abbott and the progressive, promising elements of the Liberal party were pushed from the forefront. There's a gaping chasm of currently unrepresented poltical and social ideology by our lacklustre leadership options and, as
- environmental (both parties currently presenting an ostrich impersonation as the most effective strategy)
- research (rip funding and tell scientists to fuck off overseas - both parties)
- higher education (increased reliance on full fee internationals, reductions in tenureship from both parties)
- social policy (Labor - promise a lot, deliver little, Libs - retroactive religiously inspired policy from the leader which has to be curtailed in the party room)

are the policies that affect me the most, I fall into that chasm of inadequate representation.

 

[brisneyland]

Milhouse is doing a great job.......and by great I mean spectacularly shite. Those of you discounting TA due to his religious beliefs need to realise Milhouse is just as bad, if not worse. When I find the article i'll add it.

Are you referring to Rudds religious persuasions? So far I have not seen anything to suggest he has been trying to inflict his own particular brand of religion on society at large. I'd be interested to see your article, if that is what your're referring to.

Before I begin this post, I'd like to thank the traditional owners of this land, King George 1 and his descendents.

What is this, some kind of white supremist sarcasm or something?

 

[MasterOfReality]

Are you referring to Rudds religious persuasions? So far I have not seen anything to suggest he has been trying to inflict his own particular brand of religion on society at large. I'd be interested to see your article, if that is what your're referring to.

You must be aware of Rudd's constant Sunday interviews outside his local church?

Why always there? What is he trying to convey?

If you think that Rudd is not as fundamentally religious as Abbott, then you might be in for a rude shock.

The internet filter is a start.

 

[thecat]

You must be aware of Rudd's constant Sunday interviews outside his local church?

Why always there? What is he trying to convey?

If you think that Rudd is not as fundamentally religious as Abbott, then you might be in for a rude shock.

The internet filter is a start.

It doesn't generally directly influence labour policy as Abbotts views did with RU48

The Labour caucus will generally thrash over and sieve out that sort of stuff.

Lets not forget that the liberal party under howard also took donations (some of which are still under investigation)from the Exclusive brethern and John Howard was happy to met with them on several occasions, often at short notice (They don't vote but they have money, go figure).


At Least Rudd had the knackers to refuse to meet with the whack jobs

 

[TonyG]

You must be aware of Rudd's constant Sunday interviews outside his local church?

Why always there? What is he trying to convey?

If you think that Rudd is not as fundamentally religious as Abbott, then you might be in for a rude shock.

The internet filter is a start.

He may have as strong a religious belief as Abbott, but he doesn't shove it down everyone's throat as much. Abbott really is a "bible basher", and that's the issue here. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, the question is how much they force those beliefs into policy, and I think the internet filter is another issue. That's a moral stance rather than a relgious one

 

[MasterOfReality]

He may have as strong a religious belief as Abbott, but he doesn't shove it down everyone's throat as much. Abbott really is a "bible basher", and that's the issue here. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, the question is how much they force those beliefs into policy, and I think the internet filter is another issue. That's a moral stance rather than a relgious one

I haven't seen or heard anything that indicates that Abbott will enforce his beliefs into his policies since becoming leader of the opposition.

Of course, all politicians are full of shit as Abbott hinted at last night, including himself. At least he has the honesty to say that.

If I had to choose between the drivel that comes out of Labor, or a religious bent from Abbott, I know which one I would rather put up with, even though I dislike religion.

The religious nutbags fully support the filter and want it expanded beyond the leaked list of sites.

 

[willsy01]

Are you referring to Rudds religious persuasions? So far I have not seen anything to suggest he has been trying to inflict his own particular brand of religion on society at large. I'd be interested to see your article, if that is what your're referring to.

http://www.themonthly.com.au/monthly-essays-kevin-rudd-faith-politics--300

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...ion-in-politics/2007/01/27/1169788728254.html

 

[TonyG]

I haven't seen or heard anything that indicates that Abbott will enforce his beliefs into his policies since becoming leader of the opposition.

Of course, all politicians are full of shit as Abbott hinted at last night, including himself. At least he has the honesty to say that.

If I had to choose between the drivel that comes out of Labor, or a religious bent from Abbott, I know which one I would rather put up with, even though I dislike religion.

The religious nutbags fully support the filter and want it expanded beyond the leaked list of sites.

Agreed on Rudd, and I understand your views on prioritising their respective short comings, but lets be honest, neither of them are a "good" choice, it is just a case of picking the cream of the crap. I'm totally despondent at the moment with my choices of respective Prime Ministers, and I'm not convinced yet that Abbott isn't just too loose a canon for the job. Sure Rudd is twat and just simply isn't good enough for the job, but are you confident Abbott is. I'm not, the guy is time bomb and could end up destroying our international rep by making such stupid comments. I'd hate too see 2 decades of great work by Australian businesses ruined by a loose lipped Prime Minister. I think that is a real risk with Abbott. Let's not forget what damage was done by one loose comment by Keating, if Abbott was PM and made a habit of this sort thing it could become a real issue.
If the Libs were smart about this they would keep Abbott there until Labor announce the next election and switch to Hockey or Turnbull and not give Labor enough time to vilify them.

 

[MasterOfReality]

Agreed on Rudd, and I understand your views on prioritising their respective short comings, but lets be honest, neither of them are a "good" choice, it is just a case of picking the cream of the crap. I'm totally despondent at the moment with my choices of respective Prime Ministers, and I'm not convinced yet that Abbott isn't just too loose a canon for the job. Sure Rudd is twat and just simply isn't good enough for the job, but are you confident Abbott is. I'm not, the guy is time bomb and could end up destroying our international rep by making such stupid comments. I'd hate too see 2 decades of great work by Australian businesses ruined by a loose lipped Prime Minister. I think that is a real risk with Abbott. Let's not forget what damage was done by one loose comment by Keating, if Abbott was PM and made a habit of this sort thing it could become a real issue.
If the Libs were smart about this they would keep Abbott there until Labor announce the next election and switch to Hockey or Turnbull and not give Labor enough time to vilify them.

Yeah, the choices are not great but I'd prefer anything to the Rudd/Gillard/Swan trio at the moment.

I think Abbott may be turfed before the election in favour of Turnbull, as he recently announced he is not retiring/resigning, or Turnbull will be put up into the shadow treasury role before the election. It just all seems a bit to fishy with him hanging around in the shadows.

Rudd will probably get turfed after the election if he wins. Who do you reckon will take his place? Gillard is about unpalatable as it gets, with her Kath and Kim drawl. Combet no chance, as he is just another number out of the union sausage machine. I think Tanner might be given a go.

 

[TonyG]

Yeah, the choices are not great but I'd prefer anything to the Rudd/Gillard/Swan trio at the moment.

I think Abbott may be turfed before the election in favour of Turnbull, as he recently announced he is not retiring/resigning, or Turnbull will be put up into the shadow treasury role before the election. It just all seems a bit to fishy with him hanging around in the shadows.

Rudd will probably get turfed after the election if he wins. Who do you reckon will take his place? Gillard is about unpalatable as it gets, with her Kath and Kim drawl. Combet no chance, as he is just another number out of the union sausage machine. I think Tanner might be given a go.

If I was choosing a Labor canditate for the role it would be Tanner, by head and shoulders. No way would you choose Gillard or Swan.

 

[Adrian]

Did anyone watch Q&A last night?? Very funny. Hockey for emperor.... not.


Was an insightful political slugfest.

 

[Regan of Gong]

Thoughts on Tony Abbot's "gospel truth" remarks last night?

I think that it while it was very true and honest, probably a stupid thing to say- you only had to read the headline of the SMH today to see that.

 

[thecat]

I think Kerry Obrien can't believe the luck he's had in the last couple of weeks