Does Yesterday’s Man, And His Team, Have Answers For Tomorrow’s Problems?

Yes, one will think they are having feelings of deja vu, if this nation is unlucky enough to experience an L-NP government. Proudly sitting on that front bench, will be 16 MPs from the Howard government.

One could say, it will be a rebirth of the Howard government, six years after it was turfed out of power.

When Hockey and Abbott, along with Morrison say, we did it then, we will do it again, they mean, we will also be doing it with the same people.

Now some might find this comforting, Abbott apparently sees it as a sign of stability.

Even the election campaign of Abbott’s has just been picked up and dusted off from his 2010 effort. Nothing new in view.

Since the Howard days, nothing has been the same. We have experienced a major GFC; which much of the world has not yet recovered. We have seen a massive change in the world order, leading to the emergence of the Asian century. The economy has become global, as never before. We have seen the rising of the new technical and digital age.

Yes, we now have global trade and exchange of business, in a world where boundaries no longer count. Workers now move around the globe seeking work. It is becoming near to impossible to make big, and even some small industry pay taxes.

Yes, we are now in a world where tax revenues are decreasing each day.

Last night, we saw the two candidates that wish to be treasurer for the next three years.

Did we hear anything of the falling tax revenues?  Did we hear anything of the structural imbalance within the budget? Did we hear of any plans on how to deal with the big problems, this and many other countries are facing, many that will need global answers.

All we heard from Hockey was lying, about debt, and manipulating and refusing to put his costings up front.

From Bowen, I would have liked to hear some answers to problems that are in the present, and the near future. I would have loved to hear some talk of taxation reform that might have prepared us for the future.

Yes, things like Better Schools, training opportunities to grow workers’ skills. Mr. Abbott, your dream of Independent public schools will not deliver. There is no evidence or data available, that says they will.

Same goes for the dismantling of the public hospital system, reverting back to being one of local community boards. That was discarded early last century, when hospitals moved from being Cottage Hospitals to the massive network of high technology hospitals we have today. Once again, yesterday’s solutions, for the problems of today, and tomorrow.

Then there is the dismantling of Medicare Locals, which many communities are already getting benefits. No thought taken, of deliberately wasting the money that has already been spent on them. In NSW and Queensland, we see their governments closing down community medical centres that have existed for decades. Clinics that deal with women’s issues. That deal with sexual disease and much more. One example, is the Liverpool Women’s Medical Centre. Clinics that cater mostly for the poor, and at risk in our society.

Yes, then there is the great infrastructure the new highways of this time, the NBNCo.

We have the NDIS, that brings the disabled into this age, and enables them to be a part of the economy, not only a drag on it.

Yes, Mr. Abbott, we know that grandiose roads tickle your fancy, but what about public transport, rail and even at the airport in Sydney. Yes, all essential infrastructure for the future.

Yes, there is much money, already available to train our young indigenous youth.

Yes, Mr. Abbott, I know you did promise to give money for this, but before you go ahead, it might be clever to have a look at what is already available. In fact might be helpful for you, and cheaper for us if you actually took time out to see what the Labor government has achieved in the last six years. Your answer seems to be, demolish, and replace it with your own schemes.

Mr. Abbott, many of your grandiose schemes could work within what is already established. Two for starters are Labor’s PPL and believe it or not, the CEFC.

Mr. Abbott, there seems to be only one reason to dismantle the NBNCo. at this stage. That is your ideology, and hatred of anything Gillard. All evidence indicates that NBNCo. in the long run will deliver the best available, at the cheapest cost. Yes, sometimes it is prudent to take the long time view.

Sorry, I do not want yesterday’s men in charge. I say men, as fewer women seem to be there as decoration, and to serve their masters. Women who found being told they are sexy as a compliment worry me.

I do not believe that the answers that work in the past, will work today. The world we live in today has entirely different problems, therefore requires different solutions.

Mr. Shorten, is now talking PNPC, asking what a good society is. Yes, I agree with him, it is one where women and men see the same. One that caters to all.

A good society should empower all. Yes, I want a good society, do you?

42 comments on “Does Yesterday’s Man, And His Team, Have Answers For Tomorrow’s Problems?

  1. es, listening to Mr. Shorten, talking on education at the NPC. ABC24
    Goes for education. goes for broadband. Goes for NDIS. Goes for CEF. Goes for protecting the environment. Goes for protecting Native Land Rights.

  2. Yesterday, Mr. Hunt announced another bureaucracy. A commission for endangered species.

    Mr. Hockey made great play of the word waste last night. Who decides what is waste.

    I wonder, after years of efficiency dividends, or whatever they are called, if there is much waste to be found in the Commonwealth Public Service today.

    I suspect, that Labor has been cutting the service for years.

  3. yes they have experience taking aus to war in iraq based on lies, they have experience in turning a blind eye to the awb paying bribes to saddam hussein, they have experience in lying about children overboard and terrorists on asylum seeker boats, they have experience in hurting working families with work choices and much more experience that hurt australias reputation around the world.

  4. If they have so many ex-Ministers, why do they need a Commission of Audit to tell them what government departments do. Are they that stupid?

  5. Speaking of cost & waste, here is a table of the extra tax companies will have to pay to fund Liealot’s Rich Women’s Have a Baby Scheme.

    And if he thinks the tax slug won’t be passed on to consumers, he’s more stupid or mendacious than we thought.

    And if anyone still thinks voting for the Liars is a good idea, after reading this I hope they enjoy the real cost of living increases they’ll have to pay when this mob gets their bums on the Treasury benches.

  6. In the debate Tony Abbott used imperial measurements.

    “We cannot go on for another decade the way we have over the last six years and we’ve had a Government which has not advanced us one inch, one yard over the last six years on this.”

    Advancement! Ummmmmm. Perhaps he should have used notes or are metrics just a fashion of the time. See this.

    Yes, indeed yesterday’s man. Most have caught up to the decimal system, even us oldies.

  7. I reckon $1.65 a day and a big bowl of gruel for hard work is the foundation of a good society.

    And also children working down the coal mines is the Utopian dream of the “Working Family.” Advance.

  8. Australians want a stable functioning Government in the recent Labor era
    we have had 3 Prime Ministers and 3 Deputy Prime Ministers. Two of each
    unelected by the people, the days of this dysfunctional rabble are over.

  9. scaper, it is not a good idea to take from the bottom, to give more to the top. Not prudent, as if you weaken the bottom, the top will topple over.

  10. Jane, that was definitely (one of) my WTF moments, Abbott saying that Woolies and Coles won’t pass the extra costs onto consumers…ummm, since when…

  11. Yes, Voyager, that is true, and governance has continued without faltering. The economy is still among the best in this unstable global economy,. Yes, Voyager there could be rough seas ahead. If so, surely we want one that can identify and deal with todays and tomorrows problems. Not one, that seems to be struck back, in the past, a long way back in the past.

    We witness, the new Treasure of a few short weeks, take the Opposition treasurer of, is it six years taken apart.

    Stability, keeping men from a government, kicked out over six years ago, does not excite me. One could call it stagnation, the inability to come up with anything new. The inability to see what needs to be changed, and the lack of guts to do it


  12. Fed up, so many excellent points made by yourself. A question..has the world changed in the last almost 6 years? I personally believe that we have but it’s become very much a slow down of evolution since Abbott became LOTO, in fact regression if anything. We used to talk about *the great dumbing down*, so perhaps Abbott is a man of the times…

  13. But isn’t $1.65 a day and a really, really big bowl of gruel for all, equality?

    Gee, you seem to want gold plated socialism when gruel for all and a generous stipend would be within reach.

  14. scaper, you are not even making sense today. That is disappointing.

    Then it is hard to defend the indefensible.

    The looks on the face of that audience last night, the time for blustering is long past.

  15. They say the polls are bad. It appears it depends on what ones you follow.

    That aside, I remember another election, where Howard was traveling badly. The Tampa, a few lies, false pictures, soon turned his luck around.

  16. Abbott’s conviction is to do whatever it takes to get elected. That is his conviction. ABC 24 Drum

  17. Go back to the drawing board on climate policy, business tells politicians
    A clean slate could build public confidence and offer long-term investment certainty, says the Business Council of Australi……………

    .Big business wants the main parties to go back to the drawing board on climate policy after the election to try to come up with an agreed plan for an economically efficient way to reduce Australia’s emissions and offer investment certainty.

    In what amounts to a vote of no confidence in the environmental policies of both major parties, the Business Council of Australia says the government’s independent research body, the Productivity Commission, should be asked to have another look at the cheapest way to reduce to Australia’s greenhouse emissions.

    When it was asked to review international carbon policies in 2011, the commission found that in general carbon pricing was most cost-effective, so long as it was not “crowded out” by other regulations and climate subsidies.

    New modelling has suggested the Coalition’s Direct Action plan – of buying emissions reduction through competitive government grants – is at least $4bn short of the money it needs to achieve Australia’s minimum emissions reduction of 5% by 2020. Many business groups – including the BCA – support carbon pricing but have criticised Labor’s model……

    What I have been saying for a long time. Business will not want the uncertainty of dismantling CEF and all it entails. It will not be looking forward to Abbott’s threats of DD and more elections, that follow to do so.

    The present so called carbon tax is a moderate attempt at deal;ig with man made climate change. In fact many business benefit from it.

  18. Min, no one can deny, the world has changed. Change more quickly, than any other time in my lifetime. Maybe, except for WWW ll, when I was born. .

  19. Could you imagine, five years ago, the time we spend today, sitting in front of a computer, at work or at home. Should extend that, to wherever we go

  20. Yes, the CEF, including the so called carbon taxes, create jobs.

    “.A very different approach is emerging between Australia and China’s treatment of jobs and industries providing goods and services for environmental protection.

    In Australia, major investors are reported to be planning for the impact if the Coalition wins power, axes the carbon price and dismantles the clean energy finance system. They expect private funding would be directed away from large-scale renewable power – starving the sector of capital – due to regulatory uncertainty and a lack of solid returns.

    In stark contrast, China recently announced it will elevate environmental protection to a “pillar industry” that would receive government support in the form of tax breaks and subsidies to tackle dire pollution. There are staggering amounts of money involved………….

    “………….Strewn throughout the Coalition’s policies are calls to reduce regulation and constraints on business, particularly the carbon tax and the mining tax.

    Overall, the clear impression is that the Coalition views environmental protection as a constraint on industry that should be minimised – like trips to the dentist – rather than a business opportunity in its own right………………..

  21. Yes, we ignore the environment at our own peril.

    “……A pillar or the whole foundation?

    Thinking of environmental protection as an industry in its own right is innovative but perhaps it misses the bigger point that the whole economy depends upon it.

    As the late US senator Gaylord Nelson famously said, “The economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment, not the other way around.”

    Adapted from Daly (1996) Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development
    Click to enlarge
    Rather than think of environmental protection as an industry competing with other industry sectors and other social goals, we should think of it as the foundation of all of our economic and social goals.

    When speaking as a teacher to classes on environmental law, a metaphor that I like to use is of a tree where social and economic goals like jobs and housing are the fruit we aim for and education, good governance and justice, and a healthy environment are the roots that sustain the tree..

    The foundation of a good society?

    Still, the Chinese approach of recognising environmental protection as an industry has the benefit of saying clearly that there are jobs in it. Can we learn from that? Can we make the environmental protection industry a major job creator and export earner?

  22. Instead of squabbling between youselves about how much of other people’s money you can spend and where, and how much more you can squeeze out of them, lets hear your ideas about how you can reduce the horrendous levels of direct and indirect taxation on working people and retirees by cutting the waste and the gifts to those who do not deserve it.

  23. It’s important at this perilous moment in our political history that candidates and their leaders say the things by which they wish to be judged years from now.

    It was refreshing to at least hear Malcolm Turnbull label both sides’ refugee policies as “harsh” and “cruel” (though he’s not proposing anything that might be better). Former Liberal leader Malcolm Fraser has referred to “Australian gulags” in PNG.

    That kind of honesty is a start. But others – including community, religious and business leaders and media commentators – need to step up explain why this campaign isn’t normal politics, and that it will likely lead to some very bad policy.

    For anyone who thinks the use of ‘perilous’ above is an overstatement, let’s review the situation.

    The 43rd parliament was a tough one, and the hostility between the government and opposition benches reached new heights, largely because of the inflamed debates over the carbon tax ‘lie’ and boat arrivals issues.

    Nonetheless, the Labor minority government went through a methodical process to work out some major reforms – Disability Care, the Gonski education reforms, federal/state health care funding, the Clean Energy Futures package and tax and superannuation reforms.

    It also did quite a lot of damage with off-the-cuff announcements. Media law reform was a stinker, so too was the undemocratic bastardry of the MRRT, which supposedly was worked out by Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Treasurer Wayne Swan in a closed-door meeting on a BHP laptop.

    But after three years of laying its policy cards on the table – three years interrupted and destabilised by frequent bursts of enthusiasm from senior journalists that the ‘Rudd camp’ was about to return to the fore – the right thing to do would have been to ask voters, “so what do you think of all that?”

    The Rudd forces within Labor, which grew stronger with every piece of commentary published in their favour, decided otherwise.

    What Labor needed to do, given Gillard’s low primary vote figure in the opinion polls, was to change its boat-arrivals policy, its carbon-tax policy, its fiscal policy, and say to voters “that was all a bad dream – this is the real Labor Party”.

    Labor’s big-hitters – the likes of Simon Crean, Craig Emerson, Greg Combet and Stephen Conroy – were banished to obscurity, and Labor became all about policy backflips and the presidential figure who would save the party (or whatever there was left to save), Kevin Rudd.

    In normal times, that would be enough to finish Labor. Voters certainly see through the cynicism of parachuting Rudd in to save the government he’d been white-anting for three years. The acrimonious tango that was being danced by Julia and Tony, suddenly became an absurd hip-hop dance-off between you-culture-savvy Kevin and a bemused Abbott. And Tony can’t rap.

    More importantly, Tony’s team can’t rap. He’s apparently given several of them strict instructions not to say anything, or show off their dance moves at street level again, until he’s safely installed in the Lodge.

    Labor last night issued a statement that begins: “The Rudd Labor Government today issued an all-points bulletin for the safe return of Shadow Minister for Health, Peter Dutton, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science, Sophie Mirabella and Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Senator Eric Abetz.

    “We have grave concerns for the whereabouts of these three senior Shadow Ministers. If Mr Abbott wins the election on 7 September, they will all be senior Cabinet Ministers. Yet we have not heard a peep from them all campaign.”

    Voters don’t get to hear Dutton’s policy detail on health because Labor is poised to turn anything he says off-message into a “cut to the bone” scare campaign.

    Mirabella can’t be let loose, because she’s so prone to hyperbole and distortion of facts on the carbon tax. Heaven help Abbott if she pipes up about the finer details of Direct Action.

    And a twitch of Abetz’s eyebrow is a sure sign that “WorkChoices is back”, according to Labor.

    So those three must remain mute. Enough damage has already been done by new candidates. First was Jaymes Diaz’s breathtaking display of ineptitude on Abbott’s ‘six-point plan’ to stop the boats.

    Then on Sunday evening we saw Liberal candidate for Wakefield Tom Zorich admit on Sky TV that he was “not across” his own party’s carbon emission reduction plan, Direct Action.

    Given that Tony Abbott had worked so long and hard to make carbon policy the bête noire of a prosperous Australia, you’d think any Liberal candidate would have some idea of the Coalition’s alternative.

    I hope now readers will understand my use of the word ‘perilous’ above.

    With the polls currently favouring an Abbott victory, it looks likely the………..

    Read more:

    Political Bastardy?

  24. How many budget deficits did Bob Menzies deliver, Just read 17. Cannot remember, but do recall a couple of nasty mini budgets were he got the figures wrong. There was one Horror Budget, that even after all this time, is hard to forget.

    For all the time, he was in power, a record he still holds, many say, he wasted the post war boom.

  25. …………………”The Coalition’s alternative climate change policy will cost billions of dollars more than Tony Abbott claims and has no chance of meeting Australia’s emissions reduction target.”
    Mark Butler on Thursday, August 15, 2013 in a press release

    How much will the Coalition’s Direct Action plan cost…………………..

    …………Our ruling

    Mark Butler says Direct Action will cost at least $4 billion more than the Coalition reckon, and has no chance of meeting its target. The report he cites as evidence is the latest in a long line of models showing the Coalition’s figures don’t add up.

    It’s not quite fair to say Direct Action will go over budget AND miss its emissions target. It’s basically an either/or situation. Either Direct Action remains capped and misses the reduction target, or Greg Hunt will spend more than was budgeted in order to reach it. The policy is supposed to be reviewed in 2015, so who knows? It could all change again.

    One thing politicians can’t be allowed to do is claim that a policy is costed because they’ve announced how much they’ll spend. Costing something inherently involves measuring whether the amount you’ve budgeted will achieve what you think it will.

    We can’t be sure what the future will bring but at this point, Butler has much more data on his side than Hunt.

    We rate the statement Mostly True.

  26. Ragnvald @9.42pm, speaking of wasteful spending money on people who don’t deserve it, I would have thought you’d be outraged at Lielaot’s gifts for rich women to have babies.

    After all, women who earn $100-150k/annum, shouldn’t need government money to afford to have a baby. Most of them would already have generous parental leave schemes financed by their employers, unlike their very much less well paid sisters.

    And it’s not very good form to rob retirees to finance rich women’s maternity leave, don’t you agree?

    And then there’s the price hike big companies will impose on everyone as they pass on Liealot’s great big new rich PPL tax to the rest of us.

    I must say I never thought that you’d have a word of criticism for anything the Liars do, but it seems you’re on board with this one. Well done!

    And for all the Liars whingers, you should ponder on this.

  27. Why Labor Really Worries About Coalition Cuts
    By Ian McAuley

    The Federal Government’s dire financial situation is the truth that can’t be named this election. Why? Because neither party is prepared to do what must be done, writes Ian McAuley

    In the Kivila language of Papua New Guinea the word “Mokita” is best translated as “the truth everyone knows but is unwilling to tell”. In the election campaign our Mokita is the structural deficit – the budget deficit that would occur if the economy were growing at its long-term average rate – which results from the inadequacy of our taxation base.

    Earlier this year the Grattan Institute, while finding that so far Australia has not had a significant debt or deficit problem (contrary to the propaganda of the Coalition and the Murdoch press), also found that on present trends we face an ongoing deficit – a structural deficit – of 4 per cent of GDP (pdf)…..

    …………which results from the inadequacy of our taxation base…………….

    Debt or spending is not the problem. It is our tax base? When are the pollies going to begin talking about what they intend to do.

  28. As a retiree, I am disgusted that my superannuation is affected (and in the long term ‘effected’) by a PPl scheme that favours the rich, and their ability to rort same.

    Why is Abbott introducing a ‘GREAT BIG NEW TAX’? Why is he engaging in ‘class warfare’, particularly against the elderly?

  29. Yes, those hand outs to middle/upper income earners are to be restored. It is the economy stupid.

    “…..Even though taxes have fallen sharply and show no sign of recovery to pre-GFC levels, neither Tony Abbott nor Kevin Rudd is talking about increasing taxes. For a little while Abbott held open the possibility of an increase in the GST, but when Rudd made it a campaign issue that door was closed. Rudd has also promised stability in superannuation tax arrangements, shutting off the possibility of reversing the huge revenue leakages through granting “self -funded” retirees tax exemption on their first $100,000 of income.

    Abbott has gone further, promising to cut company tax (except for large corporations), and to abolish the mining and carbon taxes. At the same time he is promising subsidies to the finance sector (the private health insurers and the salary packaging industry) an absurdly generous (and easily rortable) parental leave scheme and $17 billion for roads. That $17 billion, because of our accounting standards, would show up as net Commonwealth debt, so would have to be met with savings if an Abbott government were to keep to its balanced budget target………….”

    Wonder why Abbott does not believe these woman will put the money through the pokies, as they believe low income muns do.

  30. “…………The Commonwealth could continue to starve the states of funds, but one consequence is that they turn to expensive and inequitable ways to support their revenue base. Stamp duties on house sales discourage labour mobility and fall heavily on those who have unstable employment. Car registration and driver’s licence fees are akin to poll taxes, and, as fixed charges, do nothing to help the environment through discouraging vehicle use. Gambling taxes are paid disproportionately by the poor. And so on.

    Chris Richardson, of Deloitte Access Economics has said that “our standard of living is at risk if Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd continue to ignore ‘root-and-branch’ tax reform”. Ross Gittins warns that “both sides’ belief that government debt is evil condemns us to a life of inadequate public infrastructure”. Richardson and Gittins have broken the code of silence, but our politicians haven’t.

    It is easy to heap blame on both mainstream parties, but the reality is that the “right” has been mounting a sustained attack on the public sector for at least the last thirty years. As Noam Chomsky points out, we have been encouraged to hate government, and to see taxation not as payments we make to bring some decency to society and to fund public goods, but as a form of theft to be resisted………”

  31. I see that Mathias Cormonn agrees that self funded retirees will suffer. But all, according to him is not lost. as profits improve, you will get more back.

  32. Everyone will suffer except for Abbott’s buddies. You bet they will destroy as much as they can. You just have to look at the way Abbot has carried on over there years, all his life actually. Just a me man and all for himself, and goes destroys everything else. We are in big trouble if the Australian public are so stupid to vote him in. It is worth fighting like hell to stop him

  33. And here is what the Indonesians think of Abbott’s idea of buying Indonesian fishing boats..from the Jakarta Post.

    “I think the government should voice protests to the coalition’s very insensitive plan which clearly shows their poor knowledge about the situation in Indonesia,” he said in a statement made available to The Jakarta Post over the weekend.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s