Scotty from Marketing's shit sandwich

[pim]

... and it isn't even his fault. But he still has to eat it even if his polls (the polls! OMG the polls!) are up in the stratosphere. As gravelly-voiced old Arthur "Cocky" Calwell used to say "you're a rooster one day, and a feather duster the next". Enjoy your strutting and pivoting and your spin doctoring, Scotty from Marketing, you'll be a feather duster sooner than you think and when it happens it'll be before you can utter a final cock-a-doodle-doo.

So what is Scotty's shit sandwich. And I repeat it isn't even his fault! It would happen to anyone who occupied the PMs Lodge right now. The shock development in Auckland where COVID-19 has reared its ugly head again shows just how quickly we have to snap back (ahh yes ... remember how Scotty from Marketing promised us how the economy would "snap back"?) into lockdown. NZ shows us how it can happen overnight, just like that. And why would businesses risk investment in an environment that is in permanent tipping point where it could all go belly up in a heartbeat?

NZ reveals how COVID has us living permanently on a tipping point

A shock outbreak reveals how quickly we have to flip back into lockdown. Why would businesses risk investment in an environment like that?

Bernard Keane August 12, 2020 Crikey


My fellow Kiwis, this hurts me as much as it's gonna hurt you

The deeply unwanted message out of Auckland this week is that nowhere is safe from COVID-19. Not even the poster child of the pandemic, New Zealand — which racked up nearly three months without a new case — has been able to keep it at bay. No one at this stage knows how a South Auckland man and his family contracted the virus and how many work and school colleagues have been infected. There’s no obvious connection with travel or recent entry to the country which, as in Australia, is limited to citizens and a tiny number of exceptions, and via quarantine.

The likely scenarios — that the virus penetrated NZ’s border restrictions Victoria-style, or that it has been circulating undetected in the community — are equally alarming. Either way Auckland has been plunged back into strict lockdown and the rest of the country moved to stage two restrictions while authorities try to shut down the infection chains for all four active cases, in line with NZ’s strategy of draconian but shorter shutdowns. If it can happen in NZ it can happen in Australia’s COVID-free states. And while the response might not be as harsh as the Ardern government’s yesterday, it would have inevitable consequences for state economies. Until there’s a vaccine — a phrase that’s launched a thousand hot takes — we’re living on a tipping point. One day relatively normal life; the next, lockdowns, school closures, panic buying, queues and rationing.


Panic buying yesterday in an Auckland supermarket

Previous experience seems to have trained consumers to get their panic in early and hit the toilet paper and pasta aisles as soon as rumours of lockdowns begin circulating on social media. Maybe next time we’ll all have stocked up ahead of time. Great for big retailers, abysmal for other businesses considering investment. Lack of investment will remain the persistent problem in job creation in coming years. It was a problem in Australia before the pandemic: the government predicted it would be a disaster this year pre-Victoria (July’s forecast was for a fall in non-mining investment this year of just under 20%) and it will be much worse now. The challenge for many businesses will be paying down debt once banks end their repayment moratoriums — not borrowing more. Who wants to invest during a tipping point in which lockdown and panic could ensue at any moment?

This puts into context the claim of big business, the government and their cheerleaders in the media that sprinkling a little magical economic reform dust on the economy will turn around business investment. Businesses weren’t investing before the pandemic, not because it was too hard to sack workers and cut wages, or because the tax rate paid by large and multinational corporations was too high, or because the GST was too low, or there was a forest of red tape for business to navigate — but because, in the words of the Reserve Bank in February, “slower domestic demand has weighed on non-mining investment”.

The RBA, consistent with that, now doesn’t expect non-mining investment to pick up until after consumption picks up — well into the 2020s. That’s assuming we don’t end up in a nightmare scenario where no vaccine is found and we remain permanently on a tipping point between something like normality and a J.G. Ballard novel, all while keeping our borders closed. The government could bring back WorkChoices on steroids and cut company tax to zero, and it’s not going to do much to lift investment, if anything. The stubborn problem remains that while the virus is a threat, governments — state and federal, but the latter can raise debt most cheaply — will have to fill in part of the missing household demand and shrunken business investment with income support and public investment. Unless we want life on the tipping point to be a long, deep recession.

And here's the shitty part of Scotty from Marketing's shit sandwich, this small government/low taxes/budget surpluses/middle class welfare Prime Minister whose Treasurer invokes Thatcher and Reagan as his lodestars and whose trickle down economics are sanctified by his Pentecostal God Inc. business model religion with its Prosperity Gospel, is going to have to embrace John Maynard Keynes - not just as a one-off emergency measure to tide us over until the magic vaccine appears and we all "snap back" to pre-pandemic "prosperity" (and there's the fairy tale because pre-pandemic wasn't "prosperous") - but permanently. He's going to have to make it so that it's "John Maynard Keynes meets God" as Scotty from Marketing pumps squillions into social housing (subsidised! Not at market rates!), roads, schools, hospitals, child care, the arts, tertiary education, public broadcasting. Shoot, he'll even have to renationalise the Commonwealth Bank, Telstra and Qantas.

[Deleted]

<img src="//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/bbcode/video-preview.png" video="<iframe width=&quot;658" height="370" src=" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>" alt="Video Preview">

[Deleted]

Again, with the loo paper!
What is it that you worry more about the crap that comes out before the food that goes in?
Humanity. I wonder and despair!

[pim]

Aug 13, 2020 11:05:25 GMT 10 @grimphoenix said:

Again, with the loo paper!
What is it that you worry more about the crap that comes out before the food that goes in?
Humanity. I wonder and despair!

“What is it you worry more about the crap that comes out before the food that goes in?” I suppose that’s a variation on the theme of putting the cart before the horse!

Meanwhile, as Scotty from Marketing spins on, blathers on and pivots on, unaware- or maybe in denial about - the giant Keyneseyan shit sandwich that’ll be served up to him and which he’ll have to eat if he wants to stay prime minister, child care workers have already been force fed their shit sandwich by the government of Scotty from Marketing - and face that ongoing diet for the duration of the government of Scotty from Marketing. I bet they don’t have franking credits to fondle to give them consolation ...

CORONAVIRUS / ON THE FRONTLINE

Childcare workers face no shifts and no support

Childcare workers in Victoria fear dodgy operators will pocket pandemic subsidies and rip off casual staff.

Gina Rushton 13 August 2020. Crikey


I am so clueless and out of my depth. Nobody takes me seriously. Is it the way I talk?

Last month the federal government ended its free childcare scheme, under which parents paid no fees and the government paid childcare centres 50% of the hourly rate cap. Education minister Dan Tehan says the package had succeeded in keeping services “open and viable”. He boasted that 99.3% of 13,400 childcare services were still operating on July 1 and the government would pay operators a transition payment of 25% of their fee revenue until September 27. This tells us nothing about how the money is being distributed and whose shifts have been cut. “[The scheme] wasn’t universal and then it was gone,” executive director of Community Child Care Julie Price said. The government then singled out childcare educators to be refused JobKeeper payments even though the scheme was funded until September. “[Without JobKeeper] we don’t have nearly as strong an emphasis on paying the wages of educators … That is why unions were calling for the payment to come back because it is tied to paying people not businesses,” Price said. Community Child Care represents non-profit centres in Victoria and said it was casual workers who were falling through the cracks. “Not that we expect every single educator, including casuals, to get the same level of pay [through the pandemic] but we would hope that all employers take reasonable steps to keep as many of their employees engaged,” she said. “Our services are concerned that their casuals haven’t been engaged and will have gone off and found work elsewhere … Basically they got no shifts during the first shutdown and they were just getting back to fairly regular shifts and now they’ll have very few or no shifts and they can’t access JobKeeper so they’ll have to go on JobSeeker.” The Victorian government announced last week that children enrolled in the state’s childcare services would be granted an additional 30 days (on top of the existing 42 days) of allowable absences under the current subsidy system. Parents who are “permitted workers” will be able to access childcare.

Not so lucky second time around

In the first round of funding, Ruth Harper was able to keep on employees at her small not-for-profit community-run childcare centre in Fitzroy. Since the free childcare scheme ended and coronavirus cases soared they haven’t been so lucky. “We’re looking at having to stand down our casuals for the duration of this [stage four lockdown],” Harper said.
Her centre receives a lower rate of the childcare subsidy so has a higher gap fee to find with parents. “Two-thirds of our income is made up of that gap and if we are waiving the gap and not getting much income we’re going to be losing money,” she said. “If we were still getting JobKeeper we would be able to keep them.” The Victorian government also announced a 5% “top up” to the transition payment for centres in Melbourne and Mitchell Shire that have lost childcare subsidy revenue because attendance rates dropped.

‘We all thought it was a joke’

“If you think that all other goods and services are getting that 25% anyway and taking in whatever fees they’re taking in and we lose a lot of fees and we only get 5% more … We all thought it was a joke when it was announced,” Harper said. Cardinia Lakes Early Learning Centre’s director Tamika Hicks says half a dozen of her staff had taken money out of superannuation. “Educators who have got no leave left and casual workers will fall through the cracks,” she said. “We don’t have a lot of a buffer to fall back on and a lot of staff used up annual leave in the first lot of closures because they didn’t want to attend work if they had children.” Hicks, who has worked in the sector for 20 years, says services that were “doing the right thing” were struggling while services that weren’t could technically profit during the pandemic if they chose to pocket support cheques without spending them on wages. “If I’m a dodgy operator I’m going to say: ‘My attendance is down and I’ve got a couple of full-timers so I have to keep paying them but [the casuals] I will drop back to 15 hours or stand them down with no pay so I can pocket or put money back into the business and I know worst-case scenario my staff can apply for JobSeeker,’” she said. “This can happen because there is no wage guarantee now that JobKeeper is gone.”

Gina Rushton
Gina Rushton is a journalist and writer who has written for BuzzFeed News, The Saturday Paper, The Australian, Meanjin and The Lifted Brow. She is a Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists media excellence award winner and Australian Human Rights Commission media award finalist for her coverage of reproductive rights.

[Deleted]

Conservative rortism...its endless...trickle down economics to the rich welfare state..


Companies using millions in jobkeeper payments to pay increased dividends to shareholders

Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson says companies involved should lose jobkeeper eligibility, branding it ‘corporate welfare’



Stock exchange disclosures show that over the past week retailers Adairs and Nick Scali, and dental chain 1300 Smiles, increased their dividend payouts after receiving jobkeeper funding. Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP


Ben Butler

Published onTue 11 Aug 2020 14.19 AEST

1,734

Companies are using millions of dollars in jobkeeper payments designed to keep Australian workers employed during the coronavirus crisis to help pay increased dividends to shareholders, sparking calls for an overhaul of the system.



Stock exchange disclosures show that over the past week retailers Adairs and Nick Scali, and dental chain 1300 Smiles, increased their dividend payouts after receiving jobkeeper funding, and market observers expect additional shareholders to reap similar benefits as more companies report their results over the coming fortnight.



Shareholders trousering big dividend payments include Nick Scali managing director Anthony Scali, who will collect about $2.5m, and 1300 Smiles founder Daryl Holmes, who is to receive a $1.8m payout – the same amount the company received in jobkeeper.





Investors and the corporate regulator have become concerned that the rivers of taxpayer gold may be used to disguise the true financial state of businesses, leading the Australian Securities and Investments Commission to demand that listed companies break out jobkeeper payments in their reports to the stock exchange.




Peter Whish-Wilson, the Treasury spokesman for the Greens, wrote to Treasury secretary Steven Kennedy on Tuesday, proposing companies that pay dividends lose their eligibility for jobkeeper.



The treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, did not answer Guardian Australia’s questions about the issue. “The eligibility criteria for jobkeeper is clear,” he said.



Peter Morgan, a former fund manager at Perpetual who is now an independent investor, said jobkeeper was supposed to keep employees in their jobs but there was “obviously money going out the door on a short-term basis, not only to reward shareholders but in a couple of cases there are principals who are clearly quite well-off”.



“Whether it’s wrong or just taking advantage of a short-term business anomaly is another question.



“The program was not rushed, but it was quick, and it does need to be reviewed.”



He said that as reporting season went on he would be watching to see whether big companies such as developers Lendlease and Mirvac, building materials groups Boral and Brickworks were also bolstering returns using jobkeeper and “how far it touches the banks”.



Adairs did not pay a half-year dividend but increased its full-year payment from 8c a share last year to 11c this year.



Despite reporting a 19% rise in profit after tax, Adairs qualified for $11.3m in jobkeeper payments.



This was about 60% of the $18.6m in dividends declared by the company.



An Adairs spokesman said that the company benefited from only the $5.3m paid to employees who were still at work, with the remainder passed on to workers who had been stood down.



Nick Scali, where profit was flat for the year, declared a final dividend of 22.5c a share, up from 20c a share last year.



The company received $3.9m in jobkeeper payments, about 20% of its final dividend payout of $18.2m.



Profit at 1300 Smiles fell by more than 8% but the company was still able to pay a final dividend of 12.5c a share, up half a cent from the previous year.



The $1.8m it received in jobkeeper payments was about two-thirds of the final dividend of $2.9m.



Nick Scali and 1300 Smiles have been contacted for comment.



Whish-Wilson first raised concerns that companies receiving jobkeeper might then pay dividends to investors with the Treasury’s Kennedy in April.



Kennedy, who was appearing before a senate committee on Covid-19, said the issue would be looked into as part of a six-month review of the program.



On Tuesday, Whish-Wilson told Guardian Australia that “Australians will see this as a rort”.



“And they are right – this is corporate welfare, which is neither fair nor affordable,” he said.



“I fully understand why shareholders are concerned about a lack of transparency.



“Since Covid-19, easing of reporting requirements around continuous disclosure on the ASX has also left many shareholders in the dark.”



One market observer said the jobkeeper program was “an invitation to abuse” that was amplified by the lack of transparency.



“Break it out so I can see what’s real,” the source said.



While government support payments are a matter of public record in the US and New Zealand, Australia does not publicly disclose jobkeeper payments.


Last month, in the run-up to reporting season, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission warned companies that they should “prominently disclose” details of government support, including jobkeeper, in their financial statements.

[pim]

And there’s the rub Ponto. And it goes to Scotty from Marketing’s shit sandwich: with the coronavirus the Melbourne “second wave” and lockdown followed by the sudden NZ lockdown means that nobody in the private sector is going to risk employment generating investment. Trickle down economics can’t work in this climate. That leaves the government as the only source of capital not just to “stimulate” the economy but keep it on life support. So it’s Keynes, Keynes and more Keynes. Scotty from Marketing will devote all of his skill at doublespeak and marketing spin to make black look white, squares look like circles and make out that day is really night. He’s even had Frydenberg put forward the crazy loopy notion that Thatcher and Reagan are the lodestar that guides current economic policy.

In the end the contradiction between any future he might have as Prime Minister being Keynesian, and the government he leads and the constituency that supports him being all about trickle down economics, will bite him on the bum.

Australia's economy in crosshairs as pandemic threatens global supply chains

By Stephen Bartholomeusz August 12, 2020 amp.smh.com.au/business/companies/australia-s-economy-in-crosshairs-as-pandemic-threatens-global-supply-chains-20200812-p55kya.html

If the trade conflict between the US and China last year wasn’t by itself sufficient to reshape global supply chains, the coronavirus pandemic has almost certainly ensured that the dramatic increases in global trade that occurred over the past few decades will be to some extent unwound. A recent McKinsey Global Institute study estimated that between 16 and 26 per cent of exports – or about a quarter of companies’ global sourcing, worth between $US2.9 trillion and $US4.6 trillion ($4.1 trillion and $6.4 trillion) in 2018 dollars - could be "in play." By that it means production of those goods could revert to domestic production or be shifted to new locations. A Moody’s analysis this week concluded that supply chains would become more robust, more fragmented and more regionally focused, with the pandemic accelerating fundamental shifts in trade relationships. Boston Consulting Group (BCG) produced its own analysis late last month, estimating that global trade would fall by $3 trillion this year (from $18 trillion to $15 trillion) and won’t return to 2019 levels until 2023.

Trade flows were likely to shift dramatically, with the value of trade between the US and China likely to fall and trade between the US, European Union, India and ASEAN increasing. Australia’s trading patterns were also likely to shift, with the energy coal trade with Japan and Korea declining and the value of the iron ore trade with China and India increasing. The future shape of global trade and globalisation matters. It’s important to the global economy and geopolitical stability, both of which have been unsettled by, initially, Donald Trump’s trade wars on everyone, but particularly China, then the coronavirus and, more recently, a more significant and wider deterioration in the US-China relationship. It matters particularly for Australia, given how trade-exposed this economy is. BCG said that over the past 20 years, a period when globalisation was accelerating, manufacturing as a share of Australian GDP had fallen from 13.8 per cent to 5.6 per cent, making Australian companies and consumers reliant on imports for value-added goods in almost every sector and dependent on a relatively small number of global supplies. It described Australia as the "last stop" on global supply chains, which perhaps explains why the impact of the pandemic on supply hit so quickly and so hard. It is obvious that, after the experience of the pandemic, countries, including Australia, will seek greater security for their supplies of pharmaceutical products and medical equipment and other health and health sector-related supplies.

The increasing intensity of the tit-for-tat conflict between the US and China may be a pre-election phenomenon – Donald Trump is trying to make his aggression towards China, which he justifies on national security grounds as well as a response to the coronavirus’ origins, an election issue – but is unlikely to abate regardless of the outcome in November. As a US ally and part of a loose coalition of Western economies, Australia, so dependent on China as a customer for our resources and a producer of manufactured goods, has more at stake than most in the impacts of the pandemic and the geopolitical tensions on global trade flows and the shift in focus from the efficiency of "just in time" sourcing to supply chain resilience and national security. We’re not alone, however, with Moody’s estimating that China accounts for between 20 and 25 per cent of advanced economies’ total imports – as much as 40 per cent for the machinery imports for the US, EU and Japan and 25 per cent of antibiotic imports for the US, Japan and Korea.

Remaking those supply chains to diversify or "re-shore" the sources of supply will be disruptive and costly. While it has reduced its dependence on Australia for iron ore over the past decade, lifting Brazil’s share, its access to natural resources remains heavily concentrated. Australia still accounts for 59 per cent of its iron ore and concentrates supply. It is also exposed to some technology imports, most notably computer chips, its biggest imported item. It imported $US312 billion of them in 2018. Its role as the anchor point for much of the network of global supply chains had been changing. Its status as a low-cost producer was overtaken by others as it became wealthier and its own ambitions evolved towards more value-added activities and global technological leadership. It is still, however, very exposed to global trade and the open markets for its products that existed before the tariff war with the US and the pandemic. Its massive domestic market provides some insulation but shrinkage in global trade will hurt China as much, if not more, than any other major economy. It isn’t surprising that there have already been significant responses to the vulnerabilities exposed by the pandemic. The US and Japan, for instance, have put billions of dollars of their stimulus packages into incentives for companies to re-shore production of critical products.

McKinsey says trade in goods had already fallen 13 per cent in the first three months of this year. It’s probably a reasonable conclusion that it has fallen further since, as the full impact of the pandemic became more evident. It says that companies could shift a quarter of their global product sourcing within five years as they restructure their supplier networks, attributing the pressure to onshore or "near shore" or diversify supply chains to more than just the trade disputes and pandemic. It says changes in the environment and the global economy are increasing the frequency and magnitude of shocks for companies, with 40 weather disasters last year generating damage of more than $US1 billion for each event. Disruptions, it says, now occur on average every 3.7 years and the financial tolls of the most extreme events have been climbing. Companies, it says, can expect to lose, on average, more than 40 per cent of a year’s profits every decade. The acceleration in the globalisation of trade over the past 30 years, when trade was growing at more than twice the rate of global GDP, stalled to some extent with the 2008 financial crisis and is now clearly decelerating or, more likely if the pandemic and trade issues do produce the anticipated re-engineering of supply chains, reversing. The unwinding of a process that helped improve the lot of vast numbers of people in developing economies and made an increasing range of goods more affordable in advanced economies will have major implications for the global and individual economies, none of them obviously positive.

Stephen Bartholomeusz
Stephen is one of Australia’s most respected business journalists. He was most recently co-founder and associate editor of the Business Spectator website and an associate editor and senior columnist at The Australian.

[pim]

Another shit sandwich Scotty from Marketing needs to eat, and eat willingly, if he wants to transition from being the glib Scotty from Marketing to becoming a long term Prime Minister long remembered for his courage and leadership is the shit sandwich called “Accountability”. When Scotty from Marketing utters “the buck stops with me” you know it’s a glib phrase. This is “ScoMo” the daggy dad from the suburbs whose approach to his job is to default to “Scotty from Marketing”. Is that all he knows? Can he bring himself to say “the buck stops with me” in the same spirit as Harry Truman who as President of the United States had a sign on his desk: “the buck stops here” and you knew he meant it. Can he transition from Scotty from Marketing to PM Morrison? The jury is out on that one and the clock is ticking ...

’The buck stops with me’: the words our political class utter with contempt

The evasion of responsibility by the federal and Victorian governments over the pandemic is the product of a long-growing culture of non-accountability in Australian politics.

Bernard Keane August 14, 2020 Crikey


Scotty from Marketing and friend

Who was responsible for the fateful and fatal decision to allow Ruby Princess passengers to disembark in Sydney in March, leading to hundreds of coronavirus infections across Australia? Some combination of Australian Border Force (ABF) staff, Department of Agriculture officials and NSW Department of Health staff. Quite how they combined may never be fully known, given the Commonwealth is refusing to fully cooperate with a NSW inquiry headed by Bret Walker SC. Home Affairs minister Peter Dutton has tried to bluster his way out of questions about the culpability of ABF staff by claiming such questions are an attack on his personnel. How about responsibility for the Victorian outbreak from hotel quarantine?
Good luck identifying that, with Victorian ministers refusing to “engage” with parliamentary inquiry questions about who was in charge of the hotel quarantine program because they were “gotcha-type questions”. The state’s health minister refused point blank to answer questions in parliament about her portfolio.

As for aged care, the federal government has refused to accept any responsibility for scores of deaths in Victorian nursing homes it funds and, allegedly, regulates. Scott Morrison has refused to do media conferences for fear of being asked questions about it. Government bureaucrats won’t reveal which facilities don’t comply with its infection guidelines because it might harm those facilities’ reputations (a variant of Martin Pakula’s “gotcha question”). In the face of all evidence, Health Minister Greg Hunt claims aged care facilities were “immensely prepared” for the pandemic and, Dutton-style, dismissed questions as an attack on aged care workers.

The collective evasion of responsibility by politicians and senior bureaucrats and refusal to answer questions about responsibility for the deaths of Australians is the product of a long-term shift in political culture to resist accountability, responsibility and transparency. For decades now, the political class has resisted not merely being held responsible for anything damaging, but undermined processes that might have led to them being held responsible. They’ve used a suite of tools to do this. Outsourcing not merely means governments pay the private sector to provide services, but to absorb at least some responsibility for failures away from a notionally accountable political system to an unaccountable private one. In some cases, such as aged care, even ensuring compliance with the law is outsourced from regulators to private providers. Taking questions on notice is probably the single most widely used tool of evasion in government. The whole purpose of parliamentary accountability is blunted if opposition and cross-bench politicians are unable to obtain answers from bureaucrats and politicians during parliamentary hearings and sittings until months later, after both bureaucrats and ministerial staff have ironed out any information that might occasion awkwardness for the government. That’s why royal commissions, where witnesses have no escape and must answer, have become the only real method of compelling powerful figures to explain themselves.

We’re living in the peak era of media management. Politicians and their spinners become much more professional in the traditional arts of refusal to answer questions and dropping material to favoured outlets for uncritical coverage and backgrounding against opponents. The same story applies to public service media management. Despite employing thousands of media staff, departments and agents are saying less than ever, responding with pabulum or simply refusing to even answer queries, while departmental executives refuse to comply with Freedom of Information laws. Meantime the notion of ministerial responsibility is dead, buried and cremated, with ministerial staff now providing an extra layer of protection for politicians. A scandal-plagued minister like Angus Taylor would have been sacked even under the low standards of the Howard government; Peter Dutton appears impervious to any blame for the long succession of scandals and debacles in his department; Bridget McKenzie was only dismissed on a trivial technicality when the political heat became too great, rather than for independently verified rorting of taxpayer funding for political purposes.

Politicians argue that, whatever else, they face ultimate accountability at the ballot box. But that simply doesn’t apply to most scandals and disasters. Voters don’t vote on the basis of the ethics or integrity of governments, but on the economy and jobs first, health second and daylight third. And even a shambolic, scandal-plagued government can be re-elected if it receives sufficient media support and the opposition commits to enough policies to facilitate a scare campaign. Don’t count on Daniel Andrews necessarily being held to account by Victorians for the outbreak, or Scott Morrison being held responsible at the ballot box for the appalling scandal of Australian aged care. Voters don’t think that way. Our political class has spent decades cultivating a culture of political unaccountability. That won’t change just because of hundreds of deaths.

[Deleted]

Shit sandwich for the residents in age care....