|
Post by pim on Mar 15, 2020 11:48:03 GMT 10
There's talk now of "national emergency" and the need for the business of government to be placed on a "war footing".
Fair enough as an idea. But what sort of an emergency is it when it's a case of "Oh, the emergency's not happening until Monday and in the meantime yez can go to the footy and do all your other stuff 'coz the virus is taking the weekend off!"
Yeah right!
And as for "war footing" the last time we put government on a war footing was during WW2 and the wartime Curtin Labor Government included Leader of the Opposition, a certain R.G. Menzies, in the wartime Cabinet so that it was a government of national unity.
Does this mean that in 2020 to deal with the Coronavirus emergency the Morrison Government will include Anthony Albanese as Leader of the Opposition in the "war footing" government?
Or is this yet another case of Scotty from Marketing indulging in spin and talking points?
|
|
|
Post by Gort on May 7, 2020 15:08:30 GMT 10
I feel a "small target" Labor coming on ... Labor poised to ditch big spending, taxing policy platformBy Rob Harris May 6, 2020 — 10.30pm Federal Labor's big spending education and health policies appear set for the chopping block as Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese warns his shadow cabinet that COVID-19 and its legacy will define politics for a generation. The Labor leader has told his shadow cabinet to prepare for a "full reappraisal" of the party's policies in the wake of the coronavirus induced economic crisis, warning the ALP would face major budget constraints if it wins the next federal election. Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese is warning his shadow cabinet they can't pursue big spending policies.CREDIT:ALEX ELLINGHAUSEN In a leaked caucus document, seen by The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald, Mr Albanese has set an ambitious timeline for Labor to overhaul its priorities and policy options for the COVID-19 recovery. Mr Albanese's six-page memo to MPs reminds them it will be "important to acknowledge the constrained fiscal situation that will likely confront an incoming Labor government". The economic consequences of the federal government's response to the coronavirus outbreak, including a $130 billion wage subsidy program, will trigger a likely budget deficit of about $60 billion this year and $100 billion the following year. The domestic economy is predicted to shrink about six per cent in the calendar year with unemployment expected to peak at about 10 per cent. "Our policies must also be developed through a clear-eyed lens of winning the next election, not how we would like to address all current issues given that we are not in government," Mr Albanese writes. He says all policy proposals must reflect that the ALP is "looking forward not backwards" and take into account "the public reaction to potential conflict". Mr Albanese plans to make his fifth "vision statement" since becoming leader on May 11, when he address Labor's caucus almost 12 months since the party lost its third successive federal election. The veteran Labor figure has repeatedly declared Labor's 2019 policies, which included billions more funding for schools and hospitals through controversial revenue raising measures such as scrapping negative gearing and scrapping franking credits, would be reviewed ahead of the next election. Four working groups, each led by two shadow cabinet ministers, have been tasked with analysing the implications of the coronavirus crisis for Australia's economy and social welfare net and geopolitical consequences. Opposition treasury spokesman Jim Chalmers and shadow finance spokeswoman Katy Gallagher will lead the economic response, while climate change and energy spokesman Mark Butler and Industrial Relations spokesman Tony Burke will oversee policies relating to jobs and the security of work. Health spokesman Chris Bowen and social services spokeswoman Linda Burney will head the social protections policy-making group, while deputy leader Richard Marles and senate leader Penny Wong will develop Labor's "engagement with the world" working group. The outcomes will form the backbone of Mr Albanese's first budget reply speech in October and be used to reshape the ALP National Platform in the lead up to its national conference in December. "COVID-19 and its legacy will be with us for the next 12 to 24 months and will define the public discourse and debate between now and election day," Mr Albanese writes. The process of rewriting Labor's policy platform has proved highly sensitive, with home affairs spokeswoman Kristina Keneally's call to give Australians "first go" at jobs by cutting temporary migration dividing MPs this week. Some of Mr Albanese's critics within the party say the new process is "a long laundry list" with "no guidance from the Leader about what he wants to stand for". "Caucus is supposed to come up with themes?" one said, on the condition of anonymity. Appointing only a handful of shadow ministers to run the process also risked declaring "which are the most important members of shadow cabinet", they said. "That has just pissed everyone else off." www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/labor-poised-to-ditch-big-spending-taxing-policy-platform-20200506-p54qfi.html
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2020 7:21:34 GMT 10
The realisation that the economy has changed is stating the bleeding obvious, no surprises there, the government still needs to scrap franking credits and negative gearing.....and asset rich and cash poor are not the most needy in society.
|
|
|
Post by Gort on May 22, 2020 13:22:12 GMT 10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2020 16:40:40 GMT 10
Anthony needs liposuction on his fat jowls...
|
|
|
Post by pim on May 22, 2020 17:32:09 GMT 10
I think Albo is having a very very good day
|
|
|
Post by Gort on May 22, 2020 19:10:39 GMT 10
LOL That's hilarious. Instead of filling in the form estimating the number of staff that might qualify, some companies were filling in the dollar amount estimated instead. Looks pretty straightforward to me. Example of registration form: How could you mix up dollars with number of staff? Some business people are pretty stupid eh? How many were signed up? Was it over 500,000 businesses? I wonder how many of them stuffed up the form?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 23, 2020 21:20:00 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Jun 17, 2020 0:34:49 GMT 10
Interesting ... I agree with this bill passing as it contains measures to improve the handling of sex offences ... but I find it intriguing that Labor passed it even though the Labor Party Platform "prohibits" supporting mandatory minimum sentencing? Does the party platform mean anything these days? Labor waves through bill creating mandatory minimum sentences for child sexual abuse offencesCoalition laws have been a major sticking point in caucus as Labor’s platform prohibits minimum sentences Mark Dreyfus told Labor caucus there was no prospect the government would compromise on mandatory minimum sentences in the child sexual abuse offences bill. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP Labor has waved through a government bill creating mandatory minimum sentences for child sexual abuse offences – despite a prohibition on such minimums in its platform and Senate support to amend the bill.On Monday evening Labor, the Greens, Centre Alliance and Jacqui Lambie combined to pass a version of the sexual crimes against children bill which included opposition amendments removing mandatory minimums and creating a review of sentences – but Labor later backtracked after the Coalition ruled out passing the amended bill in the lower house. The Law Council had lobbied against mandatory minimums on the basis they restrict judicial discretion, and could result in lengthy sentences such as five years in prison for an 18-year old who had a sexual relationship with a 15-year old or exchanged graphic images with them on Snapchat. The government leader in the Senate, Mathias Cormann, said it was “extremely disappointing” that Labor had “used a procedural trick to vote against the minimum mandatory sentencing for child sex offenders”. “The legislation that we’ve put forward, was entirely appropriate – about 39% of child sex offenders don’t do any time in jail,” he said on Tuesday. In the Coalition party room, Scott Morrison said the government would send the bill back to the Senate “time and time again” and would not negotiate on it. “We are proud – we stand up for kids, especially the most vulnerable and defenceless,” he said. Despite passing its preferred form of the bill in the Senate on Monday night, the shadow attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, told Labor caucus on Tuesday morning that there was no prospect the government would allow it to pass the lower house. Dreyfus urged caucus to approve the shadow cabinet’s decision to pass the bill in its original form. He argued Labor could not let “the perfect be the enemy of the good” and pointed to the bill’s 12 other schedules which protected children through measures such as presumptions against bail and improved processes for child witnesses. Senator Louise Pratt and the shadow assistant minister for treasury, Andrew Leigh, raised concerns – expressing disappointment Labor had not argued further that mandatory sentencing doesn’t work, arguing the bill harms the independence of the judiciary and would make Closing the Gap between the outcomes of Indigenous and non-Indigenous offenders harder. Nevertheless the motion passed unanimously. Shortly after noon the original bill passed the House of Representatives and after question time it passed the Senate when Labor voted with the government to pass it without insisting on previous amendments. The Greens senator Nick McKim accused Labor of an “appalling backflip”, warning it would result in “significant miscarriages of justice”. He said the bill “places at significant risk teenagers in Australia, engaging in what has throughout human history been quite normal teenage behaviour” with sentences of four, five, six or seven years in prison. Cormann clarified mandatory sentencing “does not apply to offenders who are under 18 when they commit the offence”. The bill passed 44 votes to 8. The bill has been a major sticking point in Labor’s caucus before. In July former frontbencher Kim Carr challenged the party leadership over the bill, suggesting to vote for it would contravene the party’s platform. The 2018 platform agreed to at the party’s last national conference says Labor opposes mandatory sentencing and detention regimes. In November, Carr, the deputy chair of the Senate legal and constitution affairs legislation committee, wrote a dissenting report calling to remove mandatory minimum sentences from the bill. It argued that mandatory sentences have “perverse unintended consequences, such as making it more difficult to prosecute criminals and making it less likely that juries or judges will convict guilty people”. In a statement, the Law Council president, Pauline Wright, warned that mandatory sentences “erode an important incentive to plead guilty, which will lead to more contested trials”. She said the bill sets a “dangerous precedent” and the Law Council believes mandatory sentencing “is inconsistent with Australia’s voluntarily assumed international human rights obligations”. The Carly Ryan Foundation chief executive, Sonya Ryan, said the bill had been “politicised” and mandatory sentencing aspects had held up the “other, very good aspects of this bill”. “These measures include greater protection for vulnerable witnesses – like children – in the court process,” she said. “There are increases to maximum penalties for child sex offences so that parliament is sending judges a clear message: society will no longer tolerate inadequate sentences for child abusers.” www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jun/16/labor-waves-through-bill-creating-mandatory-minimum-sentences-for-child-sexual-abuse-offences
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2020 4:47:34 GMT 10
Party platform remains for equality and justice, and Dreyfus is in the one of the good ones league, I for one respect his judgement though mandatory sentencing has issues, there should be considerations made for young people.
Coalition platform remains largely inequality with trickle down economics of giving to the rich, privatisation that has seen health and education eroded by the private sector and injustice for the indigenous people.
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Jun 24, 2020 10:15:28 GMT 10
This looks like a good move: Labor moves to end energy wars with bipartisan national frameworkBy Rob Harris June 23, 2020 — 11.00pm Labor leader Anthony Albanese will move to end the decade-long energy wars by offering the Morrison government bipartisan support to design a new policy which drives job creation and investment in renewables. Ahead of an address to the National Press Club of Australia on Wednesday, the Opposition Leader has invited Prime Minister Scott Morrison to begin negotiations to develop a national energy framework in an attempt to cut through years of conflict over the issue. Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese.CREDIT:ALEX ELLINGHAUSEN Labor is prepared to enter into discussions with the federal government without seeking a specific model and will not call for the return of the contentious National Energy Guarantee or Clean Energy Target.Mr Albanese says he is also prepared to set aside agreement on a future emissions reductions target in order to produce an "enduring" national policy and provide investor certainty. He says Labor is also prepared to support the development and use of carbon capture and storage (CCS) methodologies and while it remains opposed to the government's Emissions Reductions Fund - on the grounds that it is an inappropriate use of taxpayer money - it is prepared to respect all of its contracts. It will also call for any future policy to be "scalable" to different emissions targets by future governments and draws the line at a domestic nuclear power industry. In a letter to Mr Morrison, Mr Albanese says both the Reserve Bank of Australia and the Business Council of Australia had lamented the lack of a clear and comprehensive policy to entice greater investment into the energy sector. "We have the opportunity to move beyond past partisan approaches to energy policy, to draw on the community's clear desire for more bipartisan approaches to difficult policy areas, and finally deliver an enduring, effective and bipartisan energy policy for Australia," Mr Albanese writes. "Labor is not naive about the challenges of achieving bipartisan agreement on energy policy. That is why I am proposing a specific framework for any future discussions, as well as outlining the aspects of the approach Labor is willing to take in any future negotiations." Industry and RBA analysis found new investment in renewable energy generation fell by 50 per cent in 2019 following the Coalition's decision to dump the NEG in late 2018. Mr Albanese praised the government's recent Technology Roadmap discussion paper for outlining technologies that will decarbonise the energy sector and wider economy. "While there is much to admire in the draft Technology Roadmap, it does not represent a new national energy policy that will deliver the technological change that it espouses," he writes. "It is a roadmap that says where we are going as a country, but it doesn't answer how we get there." Labor will offer to support the government in supporting the development of CCS technologies, on the proviso it establishes new finding mechanisms, remaining opposed to any new CCS projects being funded by the taxpayer-funded Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) or Clean Energy Finance Corporation. He told Mr Morrison the government should commit to "re-fund ARENA" for any discussions to have a "credible chance of success". "As we address the greatest health and economic crisis we have seen for generations, it is only by working together that we can deliver the leadership Australian business and families are rightly crying out for," he writes. www.theage.com.au/politics/federal/labor-moves-to-end-energy-wars-with-bipartisan-national-framework-20200623-p555g1.html
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Jul 1, 2020 11:03:32 GMT 10
One year in and 58% vs 26% Mind you, Labor has everything going its way this Saturday: 100 years of statistics saying governments do not win by-election seats from oppositions.
The donkey vote favours Labor.
The "gun lobby" is preferencing Labor.If Labor does lose this by-election it will be a disaster for Labor and Albo in particular.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Jul 1, 2020 11:28:58 GMT 10
Yes it will be. I don’t give a shit about the polls this far out from a federal election. You’re obsessed with them. There’s a vast space full of highways, goat tracks and rabbit holes in between those two positions. Should Labor lose in Eden Monaro then Albo’s leadership is toast. That’s called a no-brainer. Who knew? The factors you mention show how little you understand about the electorate such as the state of the Barton Hwy (a big issue in Yass as a dormitory town for Canberra) and Kotvojs’ backtracking with double somersault and pike on climate change given the recent summer from hell experienced by the Far South Coast and the lingering animosity towards Scotty from Marketing in that part of the world. But you’re right. All the ducks are lined up for Labor to retain the seat so if the Liberals take it in a by election you can pretty well write off Albo’s leadership. By elections are always a much bigger test for opposition leaders than for incumbent governments since this is one of the few opportunities that an opposition leader has to strut his stuff so there’s a lot more riding on this by election for Albo than for Scotty from Marketing. Scott Morrison can afford to lose this one. Albo can’t. Who knew!! If Albo Labor loses (and within Labor circles they see the Eden Monaro by election going down to the wire - not everyone in this huge electorate lives on the far south coast*) my prediction is that Jim Chalmers will step up to the plate. In which case it’ll be a race between how long it will take Chalmers to establish his own stamp on the leadership and how quickly Scotty from Marketing can call an early election. * Queanbeyan has ballooned in its population since even though it’s located in NSW it’s really a part of Canberra suburbia. Being in NSW it’s a popular place to buy a house because you get freehold title to your property under NSW law whereas the ACT is all leasehold. So Queanbeyan has a population of 60 000 which puts it not far behind Wagga as a major regional centre in southern NSW. In addition to that there’s Canberra suburban development spilling over into NSW between Canberra and Yass. All containing voters in Eden Monaro. The demographics of this electorate are changing and not necessarily in a way that favours Labor. They probably like their franking credits too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2020 15:19:59 GMT 10
Poles are a reliable indicator...polls ..eh..! Leadership is fickle and while no certainty in any future changes what one can say the punter out there is tired of the pitbull politician, those that attack rather than have the ability to debate, and from what one observes so far Jim Chalmers is no pitbull debater...gets his message across without the frothing at the mouth...
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Jul 7, 2020 11:41:04 GMT 10
Speaking of Leak ... I notice that the 2030 "target" has been pronounced "irrelevant" by Joel Fitzgibbon ... Joel Fitzgibbon says it will be difficult to set an ambitious interim target because Scott Morrison has allowed emissions reductions to flatline. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP Labor’s resources spokesman, Joel Fitzgibbon, says an emissions reduction target for 2030 has become “irrelevant”. He’s also declined to say whether the opposition should adopt a concrete commitment for 2035. www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jul/05/irrelevant-labor-frontbencher-says-no-use-focusing-on-2030-emissions-targetAND ... Townsville's Labor mayor has urged the federal ALP to select regional Queensland candidates who are allowed to publicly express support for new mining projects. So much for "It's Climate Change" ... more like: "It's the Economy Stupid".
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Jul 18, 2020 11:01:18 GMT 10
LOL There's trouble a brewin' ... ALP revolt over climate policy: ‘we may never win another election’GREG BROWN AN HOUR AGO JULY 18, 2020 Labor sen Alex Gallacher, with workers, from left, Mark Bennett, Craig Stanton, and Michael Vogt. Picture: Morgan Sette A growing number of Labor MPs are urging Albo to adopt the Coalition’s 2030 emissions reduction targets, with one warning the party may never win another election unless it takes a more moderate position on climate change.
Amid concerns Labor needs to broaden its appeal, senators Alex Gallacher and Glenn Sterle have backed resources spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon’s calls to adopt the govt’s medium-term target to lower emissions by 26-28% of 2005 levels by 2030.
“If we don’t accept that, we may never get back into govt,” Senator Gallacher told The Weekend Australian.“The reality is, we are going to have a deficit that you can’t jump over. We can’t constrain our economy in terms of what some of the people on the Left want to do. Just do it and move on. “It may tear the heart out of some of the people in the conservation world but really it isn’t going to tear the heart out of the electorate. And it certainly won’t tear the heart out of a lot of people we want to vote for us.” Sen Sterle, from the WA Right, said: “Joel is on the money. I support Joel’s position”. Sen Gallacher, from the SA Right, took aim at opposition climate change spokesman and Left faction heavyweight Mark Butler, who has flatly rejected adopting the govt’s 2030 emissions targets. “The beauty of (Labor) is on one side you have got Mark Butler and the other side you have me,” Senator Gallacher said. “We will never see eye to eye. Somewhere along the line he has got to come my way a bit. “We can’t keep dodging and weaving to some band of bloody followers who want to save the planet. We all want to save the planet but we need to do it sensibly and pragmatically and not cut our nose off to spite our face. “All of us bear the responsibility of the last (election) loss because we all knew there were faults with some of our policies, franking credits and the like, and we never made enough noise. No one is going to ever do that again.” Sen Gallacher and Sen Sterle joined the chorus of pro-coal federal MPs, including Mr Fitzgibbon and Qld Right MPs Shayne Neumann and Anthony Chisholm, calling on the Qld Labor govt to approve the stalled $900m extension of the New Acland coalmine. Mr Albanese last month moved to end the climate wars by proposing Labor and the govt co-operate on a bipartisan energy policy framework that could be “scalable” for the parties’ different levels of ambition. Labor has committed to net-zero emissions by 2050 but is yet to land on a medium-term target, which is likely to be set for either 2030 or 2035. The party went to the 2019 election with a 45 per cent emissions-reduction target by 2030. WA frontbencher Matt Keogh, an early backer of Mr Fitzgibbon’s push last year to reach a “political settlement” on the 2030 targets, said his position had not changed. “The key focus has to be on the net-zero by 2050,” Mr Keogh said. “There is no benefit having an argument over what the Coalition’s target is while it is currently in govt.” Mr Neumann, Labor’s veterans affairs spokesman, said any medium-term target needed to be realistic. “We have to look at the fact that the govt is taking virtually no action on climate change and it makes it harder for us,” he said. Senator Gallacher, who was elected to parliament in 2010 after a 22-year career at the TWU, warned that Labor’s primary-vote drop in the Eden Monaro by-election showed the party had failed to broaden its support since the election. He said the party needed to “have a few rednecks among us” as it sought to win back working-class and regional voters. “We appeal to a base that is too narrow,” Sen Gallacher said. “The tragedy of Eden-Monaro was the Shooters and Fishers getting people we should have. I’m quite comfortable with those sort of voters. Not everyone in the ALP is. “We are losing swathes of voters who used to be rusted on to us because we just don’t sound like them anymore, we don’t look like them anymore. “We have to be a very broad and inclusive crew and, heaven forbid, even have a few rednecks among us. I wouldn’t be unhappy with that.” Sen Gallacher, who began his working career in the 1970s as a labourer and a truck driver, said the party had lost its way by focusing too much on winning the support of social progressives. “I honestly look at some of the posns we take and I wonder who we are talking for,” he said. “I have been a ALP member for a very long time. I think we have moved significantly away from where we used to be. That is not a bad thing but you have always got to keep your followers within arm’s length. We are a mile ahead of some of our followers. That is why they are looking for other places to put their vote.” Vic sen Raff Ciccone, meanwhile, called for an overhaul of state and fed environmental laws to create new blue-collar jobs in the forestry and mining sectors. He said there needed to be changes to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to limit the ongoing legal injunctions lodged by environmental groups. www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/alp-revolt-over-climate-policy-we-may-never-win-another-election/news-story/b5fcf0b12d642fced8425ff39aed1256
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Jul 18, 2020 11:09:54 GMT 10
Mind you, Albo did me a favour this morning. I was staying in bed watching ABC Weekend Breakfast and then along came Albo ... whining like an EH Holden diff about parliament not sitting in August... His whining was the motivation to turn off the t.v. get out of bed and get moving.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Aug 12, 2020 23:21:52 GMT 10
Why Labor is holding its breath and lurking beneath the surfaceNicholas Stuart 12 August 2020 www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6873807/why-labor-is-holding-its-breath-and-lurking-beneath-the-surface/?cs=14350Deputy Opposition Leader Richard Marles (left) with Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese[/img] If you think politics doesn't matter, just look at Victoria. Something there went very wrong. Blunders allowing the virus to escape into the community slipped through the very structures designed to protect us. It was a design failure. Blaming lax security guards or, more sensationally, the myth of horny, locked-up detainees, isn't an answer. Stopping COVID-19 has always depended on strategies chosen and implemented by politicians. If these failed, it's up to the politicians to explain why and how. Premier Dan Andrews looks calm and confident before the microphone, but outside the carefully arranged backdrop of the briefing room where he's in control, things are falling apart. Scott Morrison, by contrast, looks better and better. Yes, economic relief is disjointed and inadequate and yes, the terrible rate of deaths in aged care homes suggests massive and deep structural problems. Nevertheless, such concerns fade into the background when there is such a simple score available for measuring success. Feds 1; Vic 0. People generally ignore politics except if it directly affects them. They haven't forgotten about voting - it's just they don't need to focus on it until an election draws near. At that time they'll switch on and make a judgment on all that noise they've been listening to in the background over the past three years, think about the leaders, decide (yeah, nah) and choose who (if anyone) to vote for. This is a (very) long way around getting to the problem that's facing federal Labor at the moment. It's also the context in which to interpret the straitjacket constricting the party. Push too hard, and it will be marked down for not getting with the program. Say too little, and it risks allowing the government to float to the election; the result a foregone conclusion. Which brings us to Richard Marles' speech last week at the National Press Club. In a tight, focused, and detailed speech, the opposition's defence spokesman castigated the government's handling of the $90 billion project to build submarines as the cornerstone of defence into the 2050s (and beyond). His case was faultless; his advocacy flawless; his passion fierce and fiery. So why, at the end, did I come away wondering "what was that about?" Marles' problem was that despite (a) proving, conclusively, that the project was financially out of control, and (b) that it was unlikely to ever provide the strategic answer we'd hoped it would, he left his final summation drifting in the wind. At first I thought this was a blunder; now I realise it was a feature. To the ordinarily attentive listener, his conclusion appeared preordained: there is no point whatsoever in proceeding with the submarines, but that's not what he said. Unless the submarine is fitted with land-attack missiles, its key (and only) real ability will be its effectiveness at sinking enemy ships. While this is highly useful for a balanced force, it's a luxury for one on our budget. Simply maintaining forces and capability in each domain (air, land, sea, undersea, cyber and space), while retaining a submarine fleet of 12 boats - twice the current number - will completely unbalance our forces, swallowing an enormous percentage of the defence budget at extreme risk. The subs are vulnerable to one simple technological advance. They won't be able to dive deep enough to escape new, self-guided torpedoes, which will search out and destroy them. So if the conclusion to abandon the sub is so straightforward, why didn't Marles just go ahead and draw it? French defence contractor Naval Group is building 12 new submarines for Australia in a program that is already pushing $100 billion.The answer is this is all just part of a phoney war to stay relevant. It's not that Marles doesn't have ideas, but that he doesn't want to get pushed into outlining policy before he can capitalise on ripping strips off the government. That's something he can't do at the moment, because nobody's listening. That's why the opposition is stoking the political fire, making sure there's enough wood to keep it burning, but not allowing it to flare up before the election. Denied the opportunity to press the government about defence more closely in Parliament, Marles is simply talking up this most egregious example of mismanagement so he can push it in the public arena. It's an ersatz issue; what you talk about when there's nothing to say. This is why he didn't push alternatives or, more radically, advocate dropping the project. That's not what he's about. Marles wants to keep the issue bubbling along under the surface (so to speak), ready to raise closer to the election. Albanese was also present at Marles' speech. He knows this election represents his first, last, and only chance of becoming PM. He won't let it slip by. He's buoyed up by the party's recent, hard-fought victory in Eden-Monaro. The truth is, of course, that this is a poll that Labor should always have expected to win. The electorate was badly devastated by the bushfires. Nevertheless, sitting member Mike Kelly had resigned, and Morrison was throwing everything he could at the seat, attempting to capitalise on his personal popularity. He failed. The government's still wildly ahead nationally, however, 52 to 48 in the latest poll. That's landslide victory territory, which is why Labor's task is so fraught. Marles' speech suggests Labor's not attempting to convert voters yet. It can afford to play the long game. The election's still at least a year off and there's no point in engaging. Running deep and silent is a far better strategy for now. Nicholas Stuart is a Canberra writer and a regular columnist
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2020 7:34:26 GMT 10
Albo remove Joel Fitzgibbo...he's a trouble making fuckwit.
The baboon is also warning of a Labor party split over his coal and gas support....https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/12/joel-fitzgibbon-blasted-by-mark-butler-for-backing-gas-led-covid-recovery-plan
|
|
|
Post by pim on Aug 20, 2020 9:14:51 GMT 10
Albo remove Joel Fitzgibbo...he's a trouble making fuckwit. The baboon is also warning of a Labor party split over his coal and gas support....https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/aug/12/joel-fitzgibbon-blasted-by-mark-butler-for-backing-gas-led-covid-recovery-plan We don’t handle “debate” very well in this country do we. Ponto do you really think that the Labor Party is split over climate change and fossil fuels v renewables? Really? Sure, Trickles wants to talk this up into a huge civil war ripping the Labor Party apart - and just settle back and watch how he saturates the thread with his spam posts as a result of what I’ve just said. But forget all of that Trickles bullshit. That’s just Trickles being Trickles. You want a split that rips the Labor Party apart? I’ll give you a split. In fact three of ‘em: 1916 over conscription for WW1 where half of the Labor Party followed Billy Hughes to join the Deakinite Liberals to form the Nationalists - the grand daddy of the Menzies Liberal Party, 1931 where the Scullin Cabinet split over responses to the Great Depression and Lyons and Fenton joined the Nationalists to form the United Australia Party, the daddy of the Menzies Liberals with Lyons as PM, others joined a breakaway Lang faction that supported the Lyons-led UAP and what was left of Labor was a small rump. That was the worst split in Labor history. We really looked like we were history. Meanwhile on the left the communist party was recruiting members hand over fist so Labor was squeezed from both sides. They were our worst days as a movement when every day was a shit sandwich. But we came back from that and quicker than our enemies expected. The third split was in 1955 over the Petrov Affair. What didn’t help us was the tragedy of “Doc” Evatt, that brilliant man who’d been Australia’s foreign minister in the Curtin government of WW2, President of the UN General Assembly, High Court judge ... and leader of the Labor opposition after Ben Chifley died at a time when he went into his own mental breakdown. He became erratic, lost his judgement and his mojo. He was correct to stand up to the Groupers but with his advancing dementia he lost his political judgement and the rest is history with Labor being kept out of office until the makeover by Gough brought us back in 1972. Sorry for the history lesson but it’s necessary when our opponents try to talk up a “debate” and call it a “split”. In their universe they want to believe that “unity” means we all sing from the same song sheet and speak exactly the same lines, led by a “messiah” type leader with ... what’s the word? Oh yes ... “charisma”. Yeah right. Bill Shorten’s achievement after the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd mess was to unite the party after the 2013 defeat and focus on giving it a policy platform from which it could launch another bid for power. His strategy of the 3 Ps - Party/policy/people - was the correct one. It’s true that he fell short on the third one and it’s also true that two out of three isn’t good enough when the calculus he’d set for the party required three out of three. But let’s not deny his achievement of party and policy. They endure under Albo. Labor’s policy on climate is galaxies ahead of the Coalition which doesn’t have a climate policy and the Coalition’s energy policy is to deny economic reality and favour fossil fuels over carbon neutral renewables. Do you really think Joel Fitzgibbon is going to lead a walkout over coal and gas? He’s a politician who represents an electorate where coal mining is important and he wants to keep his seat. Do you think Albo doesn’t understand that? Seems to me Albo’s approach is a cool head and keep your powder dry. It’s called leadership.
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Aug 20, 2020 10:47:27 GMT 10
So ... ignore them! But you can’t, can you.
Oh the irony!!!Poor old Pimp ... surrounded by "Loopies"; "Racists"; "Extremists" ; "Cartoon spammers"; "Jew haters"; "Illiterates" and "Bandwagon hoppers" ... Keep ruminating. In clinical psychology, rumination or brooding is classified as an element of OCD*. The intrusive and distressing thoughts brought about by rumination soon become impossible to stop. It's precisely this loss of control over one's thoughts that has led many psychologists to make a connection between this condition and OCD*. * Obsessive Compulsive Dutchman.
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Aug 20, 2020 11:36:25 GMT 10
Meanwhile ... Labor has a real problem: Newspoll: Federal Labor stuck in a hole in mining statesSIMON BENSON AUGUST 19, 2020 Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese in Sydney on Tuesday. Labor has a primary vote of 37 per cent in NSW, leading to a 51-49 lead on a two-party-preferred basis. Picture: Bianca De Marchi Federal Labor has recovered electoral ground in NSW but failed to reverse its decline in the key resource states of Queensland and Western Australia amid division within caucus over energy, mining and emissions targets.Exclusive analysis of Newspoll data averaged over the past three months shows Scott Morrison still commanding an election-winning lead nationally of 51 to 49 on a two-party-preferred basis. The Prime Minister also remains dominant across all mainland states, with record approval ratings of between 65 per cent in Victoria and 72 per cent in Queensland.The state-by-state and demographic breakdown shows the LNP surging ahead almost three points in Queensland to an unassailable lead of 59 to 41, with the Coalition also increasing its margin in WA by almost two points to 56 to 44. But Labor has reversed its position in NSW, with a primary vote of 37 per cent, leading to a 51-49 lead on a two-party-preferred basis. This represents a three-point gain since the election, which saw the Coalition record 51.78 per cent to 48.22. It has also consolidated its lead in Victoria, helped by Greens preferences, lifting almost three points on a two-party-preferred basis since the election to lead 56-44. The two parties remain almost deadlocked in South Australia. The demographic breakdown reveals Labor’s deeper problems with people of faith, which senior party members admitted was a significant issue that Labor had failed to address following last year’s election. Those identifying as Christian favour the Coalition by 52 per cent to 29 per cent, while those identifying as having no religion favour Labor 38 per cent to the Coalition’s 33 per cent. Mr Morrison’s popularity is strongest in Queensland, with a preferred prime minister rating of 64 per cent compared to Labor leader Anthony Albanese on a low of 22 per cent. Even in Victoria, where the Coalition trails by the largest margin, Mr Morrison leads 57 per cent to 27 per cent on this metric. Many female voters have yet to make up their minds about Mr Albanese, with more than a quarter uncommitted.Mr Albanese’s approval rating is also in negative territory in Queensland and WA. Support for the Coalition was strongest among male voters, at 44 per cent, compared to 39 per cent of female voters. Labor commanded only 33 per cent of the male vote and 35 per cent of the female vote. Scott Morrison’s popularity is strongest in Queensland, with a preferred prime minister rating of 64 per cent compared to Labor leader Anthony Albanese on a low of 22 per cent.
The Coalition also leads across all income groups, including low-income earners and non-tertiary educated voters, technical and trades, and those with university-level education. The only age demographic group leaning more towards Labor was the 18 to 34-year-olds — 36 to 33 per cent in favour of the ALP — while the 35-49 age group was split between both parties. The Coalition was heavily weighted to the over 50s and over 65s. The quarterly analysis reveals an electoral divide between the two biggest states of NSW and Victoria and the heavyweight resource states of Queensland and WA. Labor is embroiled in a faction feud over energy policy and emissions targets, which Mr Albanese is struggling to shut down. It also reflects the influence of the Greens and One Nation. Labor’s two-party-preferred lead is assisted in Victoria where the Greens have the highest support — 14 per cent. The Coalition’s two-party-preferred lead in Queensland and WA is boosted by an 11 per cent primary vote for One Nation in the Sunshine State and 8 per cent in the west. The right-wing minor party has failed to get above 1 per cent in the other states. www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/newspoll-federal-labor-stuck-in-a-hole-in-mining-states/news-story/61913f930b91f09055bd364239bb8d2a
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 9, 2020 10:26:46 GMT 10
What’s Albo got to say for himself? Quite a bit so it would appear ...
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 9, 2020 10:31:45 GMT 10
Albanese touts 'smart-regionalisation', blasts 'Barnaby Joyce fantasy model'www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6916368/albanese-touts-smart-regionalisation-blasts-barnaby-joyce-fantasy-model/?cs=14350 Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese says any push for decentralisation must be backed up by proper investment in infrastructureLabor leader Anthony Albanese will pledge "smart regionalisation" and an increase in heavy manufacturing in a pitch to country voters on Wednesday. Part of a series of "vision statements" the party's federal leader is giving around the country, Mr Albanese will call for good jobs, better access to health services and high speed inland rail. Decentralisation would need investment in infrastructure, Mr Albanese will say in Coffs Harbour. "Smart regionalisation] won't just happen by moving a couple of government agencies from Australia's largest inland city - the Bush Capital - into regional communities," he will say. "That's the Barnaby Joyce fantasy model. It failed. Decentralisation requires genuine investment, serious policy-making and determined implementation." Transport will form a major part of the pitch, both in building inland rail between Brisbane and Melbourne, and in increasing manufacturing of trains and trams in the regions through a national rail plan. High-speed rail "would also be an economic game-changer for communities on its path," Mr Albanese will say. The speech will also sidestep an awkward issue for Labor, the role of coal-fired power. Mr Albanese will call for the government to invest in renewable energy technology, and accuse it of ignoring potential jobs, and the potential for hydrogen exports. "The right plans will create hundreds of thousands of jobs in new industries, including in regional Australia whilst also reducing power prices," he will say.
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Sept 9, 2020 10:50:25 GMT 10
|
|