THE debate over our seemingly weak productivity performance has come full circle, reverting to the explanation the big end of town was happy to accept under John Howard: almost all the weakness is explained by the special circumstances of the mining and utilities industries, which are nothing to worry about.

That's why it is so refreshing to see a succession of Australian politicians in recent years say what they believe about China, without fawning before the apparent views of the Communist Party. Some commentators have compared the Opposition Leader Tony Abbott's direct address to the Australia China Chamber of Commerce in Beijing last week to the approach taken by John Howard when he was prime minister.
The comparison is accurate. However, the essential point is that a degree of bipartisanship is involved here. Abbott's position is similar to that of Howard. But so was Kevin Rudd's.
Abbott has received some criticism for saying that ''China should prosper even more if its people enjoyed freedom under the law and the right to choose a government''. Yet, in April 2008, Rudd went even further in his address at Peking University. He spoke about China's ''problems of broader human rights'' in general and Tibet in particular.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/abbotts-realistic-approach-to-china-only-offends-fawners-20120730-239zj.html#ixzz229D23BxL

To which the chinese can point out to all the human rights infraction and illegal wars performed by Australia under John Howard's "regime" and since... It takes a boastful idiot like Abbott to tell China what they should be doing when the Chinese know more about what works for them in this point in time while preparing for a more diversified but strong future... What do you think Rudd was booted out by his own party... Rudd was like a loose cannon and still is... Imagine: China 1.5 billion people. Australia 22 million... 68 times more humans in China. A massive political strong monopolitical system or a strong lying monopoliticalsystem US style to maintain the "values"?... 

The Chinese know what to do and they are doing it at their own pace... Flybutts like the Abbotts are only small annoyance to be swated...

US, not China, is often the bully

It's an old story. So entrenched is the belief that China is a rapacious and belligerent state that whenever a dispute involving China arises Beijing is instantly assumed to be in the wrong.

And in Australia if the dispute also involves the United States the conclusion comes even quicker, of course.

For years Beijing has generally been following a pacific, non-confrontational policy in the South China Sea, where its legitimate interests conflict with the claims of other states.

''Calm down, sit down and negotiate a co-operative compromise resolution'' has summed up its approach - and that approach is one that has led Beijing to amicable boundary settlements with a dozen neighbouring states.

But then the United States buys in to these local disputes, proclaiming its national security interests in the South China Sea with patrolling warships, and offering its muscle to anyone opposing China.

So a country that might have considered opening negotiations now would be emboldened to take a hard line. Here again, one sees the American proclivity to spread and accentuate conflict the world over.

Of course, Beijing's natural reaction to this expression of Washington's ''pivot'' to the East is to reassert its own claims and, right on cue, Professor Ross Buckley (''China's bellicosity opens doors for US'', July 27) jumps in to depict China as an aggressive, threatening bully.

Neville Maxwell Bowral

An independent review has found the Federal Government's industrial relations laws are operating well and have not damaged productivity.

Business groups and the Opposition have fiercely criticised the Fair Work Act, but the review has found the legislation is operating broadly as intended.

The review concluded that since the act has come into force, wages growth, flexibility and employment have been strong.

It says the exception is productivity growth, which has been disappointing. But the panel says it is not persuaded the industrial relations laws are responsible.

The Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten says he is very pleased with the review's findings.

Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott says the Government is trying to bully its critics into submission by proposing tougher regulation of the media.

Mr Abbott has delivered a speech to the conservative think tank, the Institute of Public Affairs.

He says the Federal Government's failures have been fairly condemned by most media outlets and the general public.

Mr Abbott says he opposes the recommendations of the Finklestein Review into media and promised to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, the section which conservative columnist Andrew Bolt was prosecuted under last year.

"Any prohibitions on inciting hatred against or intimidation of particular racial groups should be akin to the ancient common law offences of incitement and causing fear," he said.

"Expression or advocacy should never be unlawful. And this is not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing with Bolt. It's a matter of the right to free speech."

The article for which Andrew Bolt was prosecuted under this legislation was almost certainly not his finest. There may have been some factual errors. Still, if free speech is to mean anything, it's others' right to say what you don't like, not just what you do.

It's the freedom to write badly and rudely. It's the freedom to be obnoxious and objectionable. Free speech is not bland speech. Often, it's pretty rough speech because people are entitled to be passionate when they are arguing for what they believe to be important and necessary. Speech that has to be inoffensive would be unerringly politically correct but it would not be free.

If it’s alright for David Marr, for instance, to upset conservative Christians, in his attempt to have them see the error of their ways, why is it not alright for Andrew Bolt to upset activist Aboriginals to the same end?

The rallying cry attributed to Voltaire, 'I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it', should have been invoked to defend Bolt, no less than it has been to justify robust speech from different points in the philosophical compass.

In his speech, Mr Abbott also accused the Government of declaring a Jihad on mining magnates.

"There's the jihad against mining magnates," he said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-06/abbott-accuses-govt-of-trying-to-muzzle-free-speech/4179798

And the chi-ajitasyon baby Abbott has been hailed by the same media for pooing in your pockets...

Independent MP Tony Windsor has launched a furious attack on Opposition Leader Tony Abbott in Federal Parliament.

The Opposition again interrupted Question Time to accuse the Prime Minister of lying over the carbon tax and asking her to apologise to the Australian people.

But Mr Windsor repeated his claim that Mr Abbott told him during the negotiations after the last election that he would do almost anything to become prime minister.

"He made the point not only to me but to others in that negotiating period, that he would do anything to get that job: 'I would do anything to get that job, Tony, the only thing I wouldn't do is sell my arse'," Mr Windsor told Parliament.

The independent MP said Mr Abbott had been totally inconsistent on carbon pricing.

"You're an absolute disgrace in the way in which you're wandering around on this issue," Mr Windsor said.

"You have exactly the same target, you have the audacity to say you'll achieve that target through a much more expensive arrangement of putting a price on carbon."

Mr Abbott later said there were plenty of things he would not have done to become prime minister.

"I wasn't prepared to introduce a carbon tax in breach of my pre-election commitments," he said.

"There are lots of things I'd never do to get the top job, and one thing I'd never have done is break a pre-election promise."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-08-16/windsor-launches-attack-on-abbott/4203518?WT.svl=news0

Yes, Tony did not sell his arse... he gave it away to the miners and the denialists and the rich bums...

THE June quarter national accounts should confirm that reports of the death of productivity have been greatly exaggerated.

The accounts, including their headline estimate of gross domestic product (GDP), are due from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) on September 5.

The way things are shaping up, the odds favour a solid rise in GDP in the quarter of between 0.5 and 1.0 per cent.

A figure in the middle of that range would vindicate the latest forecast by the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA), in its quarterly monetary policy statement last week, of above-average GDP growth of 3.75 per cent for the year to the June quarter.

One interesting consequence of that would be that - because we already have estimates of hours worked from the ABS - GDP per hour worked will have risen by about three per cent.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/breaking-news/gdp-figures-to-show-productivity-growing/story-e6frfkur-1226452780142#ixzz23mm9JAln

And who have greatly exaggerated the death of productivity?... The Merde-och press and its political brat, Tony Detritus... 

There are many reasons to be proud of Australia — and the economic system is definitely one of them. The Australian economy is among the most liberalised in the world and the unemployment rate is less than in most other western countries. Many industries are thriving.

But it is worth to take a look behind the facade. To take a look at those who are behind the success of the Australian economy — the workers.

Karen, a middle-aged woman from Sydney, and Bruno, a young aspiring scientist, are different in many ways, but still in the same crucial situation: Despite their excellent qualifications, they cannot find a permanent job.

By no means do they count as unemployed, however, although Karen, as a contract worker, cannot be sure to have a job next month; and Bruno, as a casual worker, sometimes cannot work for several weeks. Australian employers seem to have found a way to adjust the rules to their benefits. As a result, the casualisation of the workforce in Australia is one of the highest in the world.