In the evening as we watched Australia elect a government sworn to repeal the carbon tax, we couldn't help remarking on the irony, particularly as we watched the results come in while listening to the fire in the paddock across the river crackle and burn. As darkness fell, we could see little red pockets of fire scattered amongst the thick woodlands to our north and hear the crash of the occasional burnt out tree as it fell – in early September, on the edge of a temperate rainforest. We may have got a little drunker than we'd intended listening to the fire while watching Australians decide that what we could see, smell and hear either didn't matter or, if it did, wasn't important enough to truly do anything about it.

According to leaked details from the most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in the Sydney Morning Herald yesterday, the world's ice sheets are melting rapidly as the planet warms. Greenland's ice added six times more to sea levels in the decade up to 2011 than in the previous 10 years and the Antarctic melt produced a five-fold increase.

But, hey, at least our new prime minister is going to honour all his promises – including repealing the carbon tax, whether its the right thing to do or not.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/09/barrington-tops-farm-climate-change

 

 

Rupert Murdoch's public sector pay, sick leave tweet checks out

According to estimates by the Australian Bureau of Statistics for May 2013, the average weekly earnings of public sector employees were higher than private sector employees.

 

Public sector employees made an average of $1,269.70 a week while the comparable private sector figure was $1,066.30.

The ABS survey excluded employees in defence forces, agriculture, forestry, fishery and those working in overseas locations.

read more: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-10/murdoch-public-sector-pay-sick-leave/4948644

-----------------------------------

Gus: Here we have a phoney comparative "study" that does not tell the whole story. For example at what level is the cut off to be an "employee"?... In the public service, even managers and middle managers are "employees"... Are the "executives" included in the survey of private enterprise?... And why exclude certain employees from the survey?... Are apprentices counted?... Note that due to budget restraint, there is little training in the public sector...

My own survey shows that employees, say in a public corporation like the ABC, are earning less in the middle and upper echelons than their counterpart in the private sector. People in the private sector doing similar work (if there is such a thing, due to commercial compromises, public ethics and responsibilities) get far more money for their time spent. 

This ABC "fact-check" is lazy, ill-directed at propping up the rants of an old twisted man... Is Murdoch salary counted in this phoney survey?

 

read more: http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/what-abbott-has-in-store-for-australia/

WE ARE sure to be hearing a lot about what the election results have told us and it is true they tell us many things.

Things such as

1. People don’t like a Party where there is infighting going on constantly.
2. The public don’t like the direction the Right Faction has taken the Labor Party.
3. Even so, the ALP is still the most popular political party in Australia with the Liberals still having to rely on preferences from the LNP and National Party to form government.
4. A look at how the senate vote has played out makes it clear that people don’t trust Tony Abbott and don’t trust him or his party with too much control.

The number of primary votes came out like this:

• Australian Labor Party: 3,596,825 votes
• Liberal Party: 3,369,726 votes
• Liberal National Party: 927,826 votes
• The Greens: 893,964 votes
• The Nationals: 489,150 votes

Interestingly enough, The Greens, whom the Coalition write-off as a fringe Party, are virtually on par with The Liberal Nationals ‒ whom the Liberals rely on to form government as they are yet to be able to form government in their own right in my lifetime ‒ and more than 80 per cent greater that the Nationals, who also form the Coalition.

TONY ABBOTT AND HIS SIX POINT PLAN

(Gus: it was 5 points, then it was pointed by Gus that it looked like a super-religious tag considering the CONservatives called it the 5 "Pillars..." which has strong religious connotations...)

Those who had trust issues with Tony Abbott didn’t have to wait long before their suspicions about his ability to spin the gospel truth were confirmed.

Tony Abbott hasn’t even been sworn in yet and already things are looking shaky.

Tony Abbott’s “Real Solutions Contract” with Australia has 6 points or promises. As a leader of a Party of fairly simple MP’s and candidates, Tony may indeed be used to scrawling his name on contracts that simple, but none of these are backed up with realistic policies.

 

On the “stronger more diversified economy” experts now say that there will be little difference between the two parties on the economic front with revenue and overall taxes remaining largely the same.

The surplus that we heard so much about is now becoming more like a pipe-dream, with Abbott in his victory speech saying that we will

“…be on track to a believable surplus in three years.”

What does that mean? Believable to who?

Ross Gittins when writing about the Coalitions financial scare campaign for Fairfax put it like this:

“I was never taken in by their [The Coalition's] five years of frightening the fiscally illiterate.”

We have all heard how Australia is now open for business, with Abbott saying that the mining industry will now be free to take off free from all those things that were holding it back, the mining tax, the carbon tax, all the “green tape” and so on.

Maybe Abbott missed it, but one of his biggest cheerleaders from the mining industry, Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest, CEO of Fortescue last year posted a record profit and paid out their first ever dividend to shareholders. Twiggy’s dividend payout was a paltry $102 million, making it clear these miners are not doing it tough as Abbott would have us believe. These record profits, I guess, is what Tony refers to as closed for business?

The “carbon tax gone” was one of the big two promises. Something we have heard about for years and something that Abbott was going to do everything in his power to see scrapped as fast as possible, saying several times that it was his top priority. He was even suggesting a double dissolution election so he could get it through the senate.

Well, what a difference a day makes. In his victory speech (at just past the 4 minute mark) Abbott tells us:

“In three years’ time, the carbon tax will be gone…”

On the “stronger more diversified economy” experts now say that there will be little difference between the two parties on the economic front with revenue and overall taxes remaining largely the same.

The surplus that we heard so much about is now becoming more like a pipe-dream, with Abbott in his victory speech saying that we will

“…be on track to a believable surplus in three years.”

What does that mean? Believable to who?

Ross Gittins when writing about the Coalitions financial scare campaign for Fairfax put it like this:

“I was never taken in by their [The Coalition's] five years of frightening the fiscally illiterate.”

We have all heard how Australia is now open for business, with Abbott saying that the mining industry will now be free to take off free from all those things that were holding it back, the mining tax, the carbon tax, all the “green tape” and so on.

Maybe Abbott missed it, but one of his biggest cheerleaders from the mining industry, Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest, CEO of Fortescue last year posted a record profit and paid out their first ever dividend to shareholders. Twiggy’s dividend payout was a paltry $102 million, making it clear these miners are not doing it tough as Abbott would have us believe. These record profits, I guess, is what Tony refers to as closed for business?

The “carbon tax gone” was one of the big two promises. Something we have heard about for years and something that Abbott was going to do everything in his power to see scrapped as fast as possible, saying several times that it was his top priority. He was even suggesting a double dissolution election so he could get it through the senate.

Well, what a difference a day makes. In his victory speech (at just past the 4 minute mark) Abbott tells us:

“In three years’ time, the carbon tax will be gone…”

The contract, which is slightly different to that on the “how to vote” cards; note the “within a decade” on the last point.

Within a decade?

We could have had two or three new governments by then. What an utterly irresponsible promise to make and ridiculous thing to claim. In all likelihood, Abbott won’t be in power in ten years to need to explain why this promise was broken.

A lot was also said by the Liberals about a stable and strong government.

Labor achieved a strong government that delivered huge reforms despite a hung parliament, internal infighting, a hung senate, a hostile media and a Global Financial Crisis. We will see how Tony goes with just a couple of these issues.

As for a stable party, we will watch Malcolm Turnbull with much interest; Abbott defeated Turnbull as the leader by a mere one vote.

I even saw John Howard talking about leadership stability and infighting on TV on election night, criticising Labor for its leadership struggles. I have three words for John Howard — Alzheimer’s, Peter and Costello.

Although those who are in the Labor Party may be licking their wounds at the moment there is much to be thankful for.

The bloodbath and night of the long knives predicted by right-wing commentators did not eventuate — not even close to their dire prophecies of doom.

Tony Abbott’s first statement after winning in his speech was that The Labor Party’s vote was at its lowest level in over 100 years. This was a complete and utter lie.

It was Labor’s worst result since 1934, but that is not over 100 years by any calculation. This statement shows that Abbott is extremely comfortable lying — or Joe Hockey did the math again.

 

 

THE RETURN OF RUDD

The debate will go on as to whether Rudd’s installation as leader was a success, or whether Labor should have stood behind Julia Gillard. Not that anybody will ever be able to produce a definitive answer.

My take on it, for what it’s worth, was that Kevin Rudd was like a relative that you haven’t seen in ages. You are all excited and happy to see them when they return, but the longer they stay the more you want to see the back of them as they start to irritate you.

(Gus: Rudd had been booted out the leadership and Prime Ministership by some heavies of the Labor party FOR GOOD REASONS. In his speech of defeat "acceptance", in which he bumbled and was all over the place, Rudd showed clearly why he was not up to the task of leading the Labor Party. Unless the others in that party were going to do the heavy lifting and throw Rudd out once more, the Labor Party could not go forward. It could not rely on Rudd. It's a shame in the history of this great nation that a man like Rudd actually nearly destroyed single-handedly its focus with his inability to see the damage he was causing while believing in his own crap. Julia was doing okay despite the "polls". May I say, Crean's father would have been appalled as the dumbness and shifty behaviour of his son, now "retired"...)

LOOKING TOWARDS THE NEXT THREE YEARS

So now, if you believe all the spin we will have a government that:

“Says what it means and means what it says.”

However, when it says “immediately”, it means three years. And when it says “as soon as possible”, that also means three years.

It is no wonder Liberal voters I have spoken to feel duped and betrayed already.

We will now have a government of

“No excuses and no surprises.”

They are right on that part at least; I, for one, am not in the least bit surprised that no excuses are being offered for the sudden three-year stretching of what were core policies the Liberals were elected on.

It is staggering to think that Tony Abbott has started out his term as Prime Minister by publicly stating a lie in his victory speech. It is the only time I can recall a Prime Minister-elect beginning immediately with a blatant lie. It will be no surprise at all to see him continue that trend throughout his term in the PM’s chair.

With a start like that, it is clear when it comes to integrity in politics, the carnival is over.

Well and truly!

 

 

An important message to the Labor party... Please don't cave in to that rabid Abbott and that meek Greg Hunt.... The way the vote got swung is not a mandate to help Abbott implement his stuff-ups. Should you be prepared to cave in, let me say you should have made this an election promise — so we could then go and vote for the greens, if you know what I mean... Thus don't stuff it up... Resist the temptation to be generous to that lying rat, "because of a mandate" which in all intent and purposes in no more than 1.7 per cent of the population changing its mind from the last election. This silly swing was strongly influenced by a massive deceitful swindle coming from the main mass media, under the baton of master Rupert — a liar extraordinaire.

Already the Liberals (TRUST US)  are planning to remove $300 millions from their stupid "direct action" program... No qualms, no apologies, after the "what you vote for is what you get" routine of the charlatan brothers — Abbott and his side-kick Hockey. They sold you a pup, didn't they? Bastards... They get this "savings" of 300 million bucks by several slashing gymnastics — unannounced in their policies — including cuts to the rebate for — you've guessed it — the clean energy installation on your home... Bastards. Trust them? A snake in the grass has more integrity!

Unfortunately, there are a couple of soft MPs in the Labor party who seem to hog the airwaves with gravitas, (who don't represent the views of the Labor party, I hope — unless the party is testing the water via these two dorks) about letting Tony get away with scrapping the carbon tax because of the "mandate"... 
And these two monkeys add without realising the horror of their stupidity that should Tony not meet the carbon reduction target, it will be on his head... FRANKLY THIS PLANET CANNOT WAIT FOR SUPERPRICK TO MUCK IT UP and for us to fix thereafter. Imagine, this bastard never gave you one inch and treated your members appallingly... So are you prepared to join the ranks of the Liberals (CONservatives)? Idiots...

There is no time to waste and, according to Gus, we should have already reduced our extra CO2 emission by a modest 100 per cent in 1996. SO, I DON'T CARE ABOUT THESE POLITICAL DITHERERS. The modest inadequate targets have to AT LEAST be met by 2020 and EVENTUALLY do far better quickly. The "direct action" Liberal (CONservative) program is designed to siphon funds out of the government into the pocket of rich polluting people. It won't achieve anything in regard to CO2 emission reduction. Full stop.

Kick that man in tights, in the budgies.... Ouch, it hurts but then he should have realised by now that the carbon tax is not a tax, but a carbon pricing... Trust the main mass media NOT to explain PROPERLY this MASSIVE DIFFERENCE to people...

Gus Leonisky

 

 

Conversing with Crabb, Abbott showed that he has gained, from his life experiences, successes and failures, the maturity and judgment to make a very good prime minister. He finally tore up the caricature of conservative Catholic zealot that his opponents and detractors have made for him. Allowing Australians to see more of this "full Tony" surely is key to his longevity as PM.

Tony Abbott's suppressing himself to win the prime ministership paid off with a handsome election victory. But had Australians been allowed to see more of Abbott the multi-dimensional person over the last four years, it would have been no contest.

Terry Barnes is a consultant and was a senior policy adviser to Tony Abbott when he was health minister. Follow him on Twitter @TerryBarnes5. View his full profile here.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-12/barnes-beyond-the-budgie-smugglers/4951406

--------------------------------------

Not on your nelly... Tony suppressing himself?... May be to get elected, but he is charge of a party of an immature rabid right-wing loonies — and already we have them tinkering with the rock solid "trust us" policies, reducing the money available for the "direct action" on carbon reduction... Tony can still be represented by a multi-dimensional caricature — as before. Tony was lucky though that the Labor party got weak knees and took Julia out... She would have made mince meat of him.

Without the full force of the mass media, including the ABC, all led by Uncle Rupe — first to pillory Julia by cajoling Rudd's ego, thus disrupting the perception of government working well, then by pissing on Rudd — Tony would never have got anywhere... 

By the way, it hurts me to degrade myself and be doing toon that are crass, below my generous intellectual rigour, apart from an accurate description of my perceptions.

 

from Paul Sheehan

 

 

Welcome to the Abbottoir

Tony Abbott is a misogynist, sexist, homophobic prick, a bully, a racist, a liar and is the worst PM in Australian history.

I'm quoting here. These are the words which introduce a Facebook page entitled ''Tony Abbott - Worst PM in Australian History''. The page was created even before Abbott has even been sworn into office. Within days the page received more than 166,000 ''likes''.

The comments on the page are as predictable as they as personal: ''Soon, Australia will faced be the spectre of [Abbott] … John Wayne walks his way around the corridors of foreign powers whilst representing Australia overseas.''

Abbott was pilloried because his daughters were active on the campaign trail. One comment had him ''pimping his daughters'' as if the three young women, who never caused a moment of controversy, were willing street-walkers. They weren't even allowed to be attractive. Another commentator: ''I don't care about his daughters, they are not hot at all.''

The community of people that hived around the ''Worst PM in Australian History'' website is a celebration of closed minds. The general tenor of the prefabricated outrage is a contempt for the democratic process itself. As one comment put it: ''This is an illegitimate government. It is an illegal government. 
And it will get no co-operation from us. Everything it sends to the Senate will be sent back, or put on hold, until it resigns or is removed.''
Completely absent from all the petulance is any sense of irony about its own intolerance.
The communications revolution, with the rise and rise of social media, has created the architecture for fundamentalism, where echo chambers of like-minded zealots affirm their righteous indignation at the cultural stupidity of the unbelievers. The ugliness of the fundamentalism is confined to neither right nor left. It sits at both extremes of the political pendulum.

It is no wonder that Abbott was so cautious and constrained during the election campaign. An entire sub-culture exists to analyse whatever he says and prove it is either wrong or stupid or both. Technology has vaulted ahead even since John Howard was prime minister and Howard hating was the national sport at university arts faculties, TAFE colleges, unions and sections of the then Fairfax Media.

The internet is so accommodating to the culture of abuse and group stalking that by the standards of political discourse on social media the ''Tony Abbott is the Worst PM in History'' site is mainstream. It wasn't tough enough for some. Another Facebook page sprung up, ''F--- Tony Abbott'', which has had 16,000 ''likes''.

Numerous chat sites and blogs operate as open sewers, such as the Facebook page, ''Tony Abbott is a s--- c---'', which had 26,800 ''likes'' the last time I checked. Typical of the contributions on this site was: ''Its only a matter of time till facebook bans this page so swear it up while we have the chance. Oh and ASIO will be reading all this so f--- you c---- too, get a proper job faggots.''

Much more insidious than the personality disorders of individual ranters and stalkers, the army of trolls, are the organisations that function like trolls, hiding their true agendas as they manufacture dissent. A classic example is GetUp!, which operates on behalf of big unions, the Greens and the hard-left while presenting itself as a community-based organisation.

Some trolls create trolling movements, with the aim of not just engaging in debate but in destroying the careers of chosen targets. The most famous were the two social media campaigns aimed at the broadcaster Alan Jones by targeting his advertisers.

A supposedly impartial organisation, Change.org (another American import like GetUp!), actively courted Jones' obliteration, sending out media releases about the number of companies which had joined the boycott. At its peak, the boycott petition gained 103,000 supporters. The organiser turned out to be a Greens supporter. At the height of the frenzy, the retail magnate Gerry Harvey, after ordering his company, Harvey Norman, to pull its advertising from the Jones show, put the question: ''You have to ask are you part of a lynch mob?''

Because these echo-chambers create such a din, their adherents come to believe they represent potent social movements. The campaigns to destroy Jones through viral trolling both bounced off the wider community. Alan Jones' show never ceased to dominate its timeslot and quickly returned to a full line-up of advertisers.

On a much broader scale, for six years we have seen an unremitting campaign of caricaturing Abbott as a man of unworthy ineptitude, the Speedo-wearing misogynist.

Now, with Abbott as prime minister, those who have patronised him in the name of tolerance cannot even acknowledge his grand gesture of working on behalf of the most disadvantaged Australians by taking on the indigenous affairs portfolio. His ally in this, Warren Mundine, a member of the Bundjalung people and former national president of the Labor Party, has been disdained via trolling hives as a sell-out for daring to argue that Aboriginal people can think outside a one-party state imposed on them by highly moral white people.

No nuance. No concessions. No goodwill. No irony. And on September 7, no success. When the electorate moved, the hives were pushed aside. They now buzz with rage.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/welcome-to-the-abbottoir-20130915-2tsrm.html#ixzz2f0OIITnf
------------------------------------
Please Mr Sheehan understand that Tony brought this character assassination onto himself by being a complete rat-bag, while being supported by complete rat-bags as well, in the media and in political circles... His duplicity in regard to many things has become legendary... His attack on the Carbon Pricing has been beyond the pale, including wanting to repeal it and replace it with something far more costly and quite ineffective in reducing CO2 emissions — while not believing in global warming. Let me tell you, the problems faced by this planet are far more serious than a few bad invectives directed at Tony Abbott — who, should he wish live like a monk in Canberra's police academy while awaiting the refurbishment of the Lodge is up to him... 

Tony has told far more porkies than any other politicians in modern times. Tony Abbott has been rotten to many people, including Craig Thomson, Peter Slipper, Bernie Banton, Pauline Hanson, Julia Gillard, etc. The list is long. Tony Abbott cannot claim the high ground of moral rectitude. Nor can people like you can say he has. NEVER.

 

Tony Abbott has shown he does not mind changing his mind. Few commentators have written pieces arguing for the Coalition to pass carbon price legislation; incoming prime minister ''Axe the Tax'' Abbott has.
He has swivelled on paid parental leave and school funding changes. His sister says his views on gay marriage are ''shifting''.
Here is another position Abbott will hopefully discard as retrograde and redundant - his insistence that the federal government should pay for motorways only and not for public transport.
For a party that professes allegiance to free-market principles, the Liberals are curiously insensitive to market demand for transport.

The ''market'' - in this instance, moving people around - is clear. Commuters are trying to avoid using a car if they can help it. Saturday's Herald report documented a steep rise in public transport use in Sydney, along with a slump in the rate of growth of car use. In the past decade, car use in Sydney rose by half the rate of population growth. Trips by train increased by twice the rate of population growth.
The trend is more pronounced among younger people. Inner west residents in their 20s are twice as likely to catch a train on an average weekday than was the case a decade ago. So, too, are twentysomethings living in St George or Sutherland or Fairfield or Liverpool. The trend is not confined to the inner city.
A week before the election, I interviewed Wentworth Liberal MP Malcolm Turnbull, in an attempt to add to the subgenre of political stories like "Turnbull disagrees with Abbott on issue X."
Turnbull is a public transport enthusiast. He tweets on the bus; he compliments NSW Transport Minister Gladys Berejiklian when the trains run on time.So, what did he think about Abbott's position that urban public transport funding was not in the federal government's "knitting"?
''I'm a great believer in mass transit,'' Turnbull said. ''I think that as our cities become larger and denser we are going to make more and more investments in mass transit.''
But Turnbull would not be drawn on whether or not he disagreed with Abbott. Instead, he laid out the intellectual justification for keeping Canberra out of public transport funding (though he did not say if he agreed with this justification).

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/the-data-that-proves-tony-abbott-should-change-his-mind-on-public-transport-20130915-2tsrk.html#ixzz2f0UowAaY

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/tony-abbott-in-police-academy-9/

 

 

HERE WE ARE nine days since the election that swept Tony Abbott and his Neanderthals to power ‒ although not quite in the Qld-style landslide they and Rupert Murdoch were hoping for ‒ and they have, astonishingly, not yet rolled into Government House to be sworn in.

For the media, including the ABC, the election seems not to have happened.

They ‒ rather like a Japanese soldier still hiding out in the Philippines and following the Emperor’s orders 50 years after the end of the war ‒ are still bashing Labor, stirring up leadership tensions and ignoring policy issues, while Rudd supporters still trot into TV studios to talk about the future of the Party they damaged so badly Graham Richardson is still billed as a “Labor powerbroker” (the word “power” being wrong), and scum from the rightwing think tank the IPA, busily planning the Hayekian paradise, are merely identified as “conservative commentators” by the ABC — rather in the way they might identify Genghis Khan as a “Chinese Horseman”.

So they continue to avoid any analysis of what an Abbott election will mean for Australia and Australians (while also loudly protesting their innocence in his election success “Wasn’t me Gov”) and we must search carefully for clues, rather in the way that a soothsayer would check the liver of a sacrificed goat or chicken for cancerous spots.

There were cancerous spots even before the election, of course, if you were paying attention. The release, finally, of dodgy costings by a panel of old Liberal mates, of a few of their policies, carefully timed for after the media blackout on election advertising. Then, even more cynically,  (which didn’t seem possible) the announcement, at 10pm the night before the election, carefully timed so that the next morning’s newspapers were already printed, of previously unmentioned policies of slashing funding to childcare and aged care and the removal of standards for teachers and nurses in those institutions. Hard to imagine too many families without an interest in either or both areas, and hard to imagine their voting intentions would have been unaffected by the announcement had they been aware of it.

It was very quiet immediately after the election, except for two things.

Firstly, the removal of Steve Bracks, who had recently taken up a diplomatic posting in New York — an act of vicious nastiness, ignoring the efforts of the previous Labor government to appoint a number of Liberal politicians (such as Nelson, Vanstone and Downer) to diplomatic jobs in a bipartisan spirit. It is a sign that anyone these people see as being “them” and not “us” ‒ not for us then against us ‒ will be shafted in the coming years.

Then came the instant stopping of funding for clean energy by the Corporation established for that purpose. If the Bracks thing was a signal that people would be shafted, the unseemly rush to block the CEFC was a sign the environment will be shafted. Campbell Newman in Queensland confirmed this with his welcoming of Abbott’s election as the removal of “shackles” holding back his hell-bent course of habitat destruction in that state.

Finally, in the couple of days came two announcements that are also omens for what is coming.

First was from Julie Bishop, the incoming foreign minister, whose first action had been the Bracks’ assassination. Her second action was to announce no more first class travel and accommodation for public servants travelling overseas on business. Of course, it was all complete nonsense — I understand it is decades since first class flights were allowed. Her first trip, to America, naturally, she proudly said would be business class — but, as others have pointed out, the airline would automatically upgrade her anyway. Nor was there any mention of the travel and accommodation perks of former Liberal PM John Howard, who has racked up huge sums in first class flights and luxury suites.

Still, the media loved it, which was of course the point.

As was the announcement yesterday that while renovations to the official PM residence “The Lodge” proceeded, Tony Abbott would “live” in the hostel-style accommodation used by Federal Police recruits while they do their training course. As with the Bishop announcement, you needed to understand that he still had available to him the luxurious Kirribilli House in Sydney where, presumably ‒ just like his hero John Howard who, uniquely among all Australian Prime Ministers, refused to live in The Lodge, such was his hatred of “Canberra” (that is: “government”) ‒ he will live when parliament is not sitting.

 

--------------------------

Gus : And Paul Sheehan wonders why we call Abbott a turdy dork... (see article slightly above)...

 

 

One of the nice euphemisms to have gained prominence over the past two months is “salary packaging”- it actually means “tax minimisation”.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, as everyone filling out a tax return will attest. It is wrong though to create the illusion that a tax lurk enjoyed by a minority of citizens is somehow of great benefit to us all. And it's particularly wrong for any government to effectively hand over money to the fortunate tax-minimised few because of political cowardice or naked opportunism. On the motor vehicle “salary packaging” front, governments of both stripe have been guilty of the former while the Coalition enthusiastically embraced the latter in the spirit of the election.

As it turned out, Tony Abbott really didn't need the tax minimisation industry's votes to win and now incoming treasurer Hockey is stuck with endorsing a dud, expensive and inequitable policy in the midst of his alleged “budget crisis”. Despite that endorsement, the car statutory method FBT/novated lease lurk is so large and growing that it will have to remain a target on the political horizon for at least a little fine-tuning.

That could be the regulatory risk conceded by McMillan Shakespeare CEO Michael Kay upon breaking his six-week silence. “Regulatory risk is a permanent one,” Mr Kay said. “Some people will take the view that regulation risk has increased, some will take the view that it has significantly decreased.”

Mr Kay might have an eye to a looming bigger picture: Hockey is hunting for money to spend on infrastructure. As Laura Tingle reported in the AFR over the weekend, Hockey is flipping in record speed from “budget crisis” mode to “budget stimulus”.

While the switch underlines the dishonesty of the Coalition's fiscal rantings over the past three years, it is a most welcome and necessary step for the economy in the short-to-medium term. Yes, as suggested here previously, sometimes you have to be able to trust a politician to lie.
So far, the “build, build, build” rhetoric is empty.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/that-big-idea-is-still-waiting-mr-hockey-20130916-2ttje.html#ixzz2f12r5OO4

With the possiblity of the states assuming environmental powers, and all the conflict of interest that brings, the federal government risks becoming the worst environmental vandals in modern political history.

THE NEW COALITION government still appears committed to implementing its 'one-stop-shop' environmental approvals process that cuts out all Commonwealth involvement. This will be accomplished by devolving the Commonwealth's environment powers under theEnvironment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999 (EPBC Act) to the states and territories.

To be crystal clear — the Coalition Government now intends to hand total responsibility for the protection of all national and internationally significant environmental issues back to the states and territories. These include World Heritage, National Heritage, Wetlands of International Importance, listed threatened species and ecological communities, listed migratory species, nuclear actions, the marine environment and the new water trigger.

Passing these important approval decisions over to state governments, totally preoccupied with satisfying resurgent mining companies, stifling public comment and access to the courts is, to use an old but particularly accurate adage, putting the fox in charge of the hen house. It would also leave these same governments in charge of approving state owned and funded developments — a stunning and ultimately dangerous conflict of interest.

The Business Council of Australia (BCA) started the rot with its disingenuous stories of project delays and environment assessment duplication, crying in the lap of a Gillard-led Government who took the bait, hook, line and sinker. Only a concerted effort by the Places You Love alliance of 40 environmental organisations forced Gillard to back down.

A subsequent senate inquiry concluded that there was no evidence to support the BCA's lament of debilitating "green tape" (because of course there wasn't any), but right up to election day industry continued to cry wolf, and despite a massive show of public support for strengthening the EPBC Act, the Coalition has maintained that it would proceed to devolve its environmental responsibilities.

But where does this leave the protection of National and World Heritage places in the future? While there are 114 natural, cultural and indigenous heritage places presently listed under the EPBC Act (including World Heritage sites), during the last few years, the Rudd and Gillard Governments had neglected to build a comprehensive range of heritage areas. Apart from the laudable listing of the West Kimberley, for example, additions of natural areas to the National Heritage List had virtually come to a grinding halt, strangled by ministerial inaction and a chronic loss of departmental resources.

http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2013/09/19/3851636.htm