View Full Version : The Federal Election Thread
DIEHARD
24-07-07, 12:03 PM
Liberal disunity fuelling polls: Rudd
Federal Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd says the disarray in Liberal ranks is behind the government's poor showing in opinion polls.
The latest Newspoll shows Mr Rudd and Labor still holding an election-winning 10-point lead after a fortnight of bad publicity for Prime Minister John Howard's Liberal-National coalition government.
In more bad news for the government, the poll found that any last-ditch effort to replace Mr Howard with Treasurer Peter Costello would not turn around the coalition's fortunes.
Nearly one in three voters say such a change would make them less likely to vote for the coalition, while 60 per cent of those polled said it would make no difference to their vote.
Mr Rudd, who is campaigning in Tasmania, said he was not concerned about Liberal Party tactics ahead of the election.
"I'm completely relaxed about what tactics the Liberals want to adopt," Mr Rudd told Southern Cross Broadcasting.
"The truth is that they are in quite a degree of internal disarray at the moment.
"Remember, Mr Howard is the one who told the country that disunity is death in politics and there's a fair bit of disunity in the Liberal Party at the moment.
"They are in disarray. Australian people spot all this at a distance. They see through it all. You can't pretend that this is just a fine and dandy relationship between the prime minister and the treasurer."
Leadership tensions re-emerged last week when excerpts from a new biography of Mr Howard were published in which Mr Costello made disparaging remarks about Mr Howard's record as treasurer.
Mr Rudd said the comments had completely undermined the government's scare campaign against Labor's economic management.
He said it was time Mr Howard, who turns 68 this week, told voters whether he planned to remain for a full term if re-elected this year.
"Mr Howard, when repeatedly asked this question, refuses to commit to that," Mr Rudd said.
"And part of the reason he refuses to commit to that is because of the massive internal instability in the Liberal Party between himself and Mr Costello.
"Remember how disabling it became for the Labor Party when you had Mr Hawke and Mr Keating at each other for a long long time? I believe the Liberal Party is getting to that same level of internal disabling."
Federal Health Minister Tony Abbott says the Howard government's good but not perfect record will see it win the next election.
"The government has a record, it's not a perfect record but it's a good record and all Labor has is a wish list," he told reporters in Sydney.
"The Howard government is not perfect ... but we have successfully steered Australia through all of the storms of the last 11 years."
Asked whether the government had manipulated those storms, Mr Abbott said; "I don't think that's fair. Obviously there are various policies the government has adopted over the years which have turned out to be electorally popular, but what's wrong with that?"
Mr Abbott, who is attending a state and territories health ministers meeting, said it would be unprecedented to lose the next election.
"It would be unprecedented for a competent government in a time of economic success to lose office ... records do get broken but certainly it would be unprecedented and that's why I remain confident that if the government stays the course ... we will be appropriately recognised by voters," he said.
"(Opposition leader) Kevin Rudd can't have it both ways.
"He can't support all the government's significant policies while at the same time claiming there is something fundamentally dishonest about the way this government governs."
Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has dismissed the latest biography of Prime Minister John Howard which goes on sale on Tuesday as disappointing and lacking in insight.
"I've flicked through it, I don't think it's much of a book myself," Mr Downer told ABC Radio.
The biography, John Winston Howard, by academics Peter van Onselen and Wayne Errington, has caused ructions within the government, revealing Treasurer Peter Costello's criticism of Mr Howard's tenure as treasurer from 1977 to 1983 and his spending as prime minister.
Mr Costello is also shown to have suggested Mr Howard leaked a memo to damage him in 2001.
Mr Downer said the book had created some controversy and media excitement.
"I'm very disappointed with it. I thought it might have been a little more insightful," he said.
"At the end of the day, the public are concerned about their own lives, their livelihoods, issues like interest rates, their jobs, the children's jobs, their income, their mortgages.
"These are the issues that are important to people, not a bit of gossip about whether John Howard said this, or Peter Costello said that, or I said something else years ago."
Source: http://www.ninemsn.com
DIEHARD
27-08-07, 01:20 PM
It should be Kevin in a Ruddslide
KEVIN Rudd has surged in popularity despite a week of reports about his jaunt to a strip club and a record bumper surplus by the Howard Government.
The Labor Party now leads the Government by an extraordinary 14 points on a two-party preferred vote in the latest Herald Sun/Galaxy poll - a result that would see a landslide ALP win if repeated at the coming election.
Instead of damaging Mr Rudd's standing, revelations of a visit to the strip club appear to have helped him, with 85 per cent of voters polled saying it showed he was "a normal bloke".
A third said he was unlucky to be caught out. Just 10 per cent said it showed poor morals - and opinion was almost universal with male and female voters taking a similar view.
However in more bad news for the Howard Government, its economic credentials have taken a battering after Treasurer Peter Costello unveiled a $17 billion surplus last week.
Rather than attributing the surplus to good economic management, 51 per cent of those polled believe the Government accumulated its surplus by setting taxes too high.
Even 29 per cent of Coalition voters said the surplus had been achieved by excessive taxing.
Just 32 per cent of voters overall gave the Government credit for building the surplus through good economic management.
The Coalition's primary vote has shrunk to 39 per cent - down three points on last month - while Labor's primary vote has shot up three points to 47 per cent.
Support for the Greens and other minor parties was largely unchanged.
On a two-party preferred vote, the Labor Party now holds a 57-43 point lead over the Coalition - the overwhelmingly dominant position it held in April-May.
Over recent months the Galaxy poll has shown the Coalition clawing back support from Labor, but the weekend's poll shows those gains may have been wiped out.
The Government had hoped its strong surplus and the recent international market turmoil might boost its stocks with voters wary of Labor's inexperience on economic management.
However Galaxy Research pollster David Briggs said the impact of the recent rate rise weighed more heavily on voters than the strip club visit.
"The poll suggests that voters have been able to distinguish between issues of substance and non-issues, with the Government taking a hit on its economic credentials," he said.
Voters are also cynical about attempts by the Government to buy its way to an election victory with just 5 per cent saying that was the best way to spend the $17 billion surplus.
By contrast, 95 per cent said it should be spent on hospitals and schools, 72 per cent said spend it on infrastructure, 66 per cent said it should be given back to taxpayers as tax cuts, and 56 per cent said it should go to the states.
The Galaxy phone poll of 1004 voters was taken over the weekend.
Prime Minister John Howard yesterday called on Labor to reveal where it would cut government expenditure to pay for its promises.
Opposition treasury spokesman Wayne Swan earlier accused the Government of failing to be prudent in making election spending promises.
"Its approach has been to hoard the money and then to throw it at the electorate just before an election," he said.
Mr Howard used his weekly radio address to hit back at Mr Swan and accuse Labor of playing a "double dishonest game with the public".
"While Mr Swan fails to acknowledge that Labor's own post-Budget commitments exceed $4.6 billion, the weekend attack raises an obvious question," he said.
"If Mr Rudd has now decided to oppose the Government's commitments, which of them will be axed if Labor wins government?"
NEWS.COM.AU
Latest poll 'very bad' for Coalition
September 04, 2007
PRIME Minister John Howard has described the latest opinion poll showing the Government slipping further behind Labor as a "very bad poll for the Coalition".
The Newspoll, published in The Australian newspaper today, shows two-party-preferred support for the Opposition rising to 59 per cent compared, to 41 per cent for the Coalition.
"Yes, it's a very bad poll for the Coalition ... I recognise that," Mr Howard said on Sky News.
"What it does though is to encourage me, enthuse me to work even harder to convince the Australian public that the future prosperity and security of this country would be better under a Coalition Government."
Mr Howard also gave an insight into when the election would be called, ruling out a January election as "ridiculous" and saying it would be "well before Christmas".
Mr Howard said he did not deny the importance of the poll result, and his fellow Coalition members should do the same.
"Political figures who say they don't take any notice of polls are misleading the public and indeed being contemptuous of the public," he said.
Deputy Opposition leader Julia Gillard said the poll should be treated with caution.
"The latest Newspoll result shows Australians are rejecting Prime Minister John Howard's extreme Work Choices laws in favour of the Labor Party's plans," Ms Gillard said.
"The poll .... indicates people are embracing Labor's fairer and better alternatives."
It also showed Mr Rudd's drunken visit to a New York strip club have failed to dent his prospects of winning office.
But Ms Gillard cautioned against taking the poll at face value and warned that it would take a huge swing for Labor to win the next election.
"Labor knows that polls will go up and they will go down," she said.
TELEGRAPH
DO POLLS LIE?
With Athens behind us, a new sport has burst into the limelight: poll-watching. If you thought Olympic commentators could be predictable, stand by for four weeks of, ?How should we interpret the latest poll figures, Minister?? and ?Do you feel you?re the underdog in this race?? and the hoary reply, ?At the end of the day, there?s only one poll that matters?. But do the polls lie? And if so, how often?
In an Australian Journal of Political Science article following the last federal election, Justin Wolfers and I noted that the two grand dames of election polling - Morgan and Newspoll - had similar success rates in forecasting the election winner. In its election-eve polls, Morgan got it wrong on three of the past six elections (1990, 1993, 2001), while Newspoll did only marginally better, incorrectly calling two of the six (1993, 1998). As for relative newcomer AC Nielsen, they correctly forecast the 2001 election, but are yet to demonstrate a long track record. Indeed, we found that in 2001, election betting markets, run by the Northern Territory bookmaker Centrebet, were a better guide than the pollsters (as in horse-racing, when there?s money on the line, bookies have a strong incentive to get the odds right).
It is hardly surprising that pollsters don?t do a perfect job of predicting elections. One problem is that voting patterns are never stable. On average, my research shows that about 10 per cent of us change our vote from one election to the next. But a bigger issue is that since a typical poll samples only 1,000 to 2,000 voters, we can?t be confident that the poll result is an accurate reflection on the whole electorate.
What is the right margin of error to employ? The most common approach is to use a margin of error such that in 19 polls out of 20, the gap between the real figure and the poll estimate will be smaller than the sampling error. If the poll samples 1,000 people, its sampling error will be 3 per cent either way. With a sample of 2,000, the sampling error falls to plus or minus 2.2 per cent. Sample sizes for recent polls have been Newspoll, 1,100, AC Nielsen, 1,400 and Roy Morgan, 1,900.
But although the sampling error is sometimes noted in small print at the foot of an article, it rarely makes its way into the text. By contrast, the best US papers take a much more careful approach, explicitly using the statistical margin of error in discussing the results. This better informs the reader, and can be done without needless jargon. For example, the New York Times last week said of the US Presidential contest: ?the Times poll and several others released on Thursday showed the race to be deadlocked, with neither candidate holding a lead beyond the margin of sampling error.?
Taking into account sampling error, what do the polls tell us about the Australian race? In their latest polls, AC Nielsen and Roy Morgan have Labor with a lead that exceeds the margin of error. However, according to a Newspoll released yesterday, the gap between the two parties is smaller than the sampling error.
Another factor to remember is that the sampling error when comparing two polls is larger still, since both polls have their own margins of error. For example, while the usual sampling error for a single AC Nielsen poll is plus or minus 2.6 per cent, the standard error of a movement from one AC Nielsen poll to the next is plus or minus 3.6 per cent.
The bottom line? Changes in polls from one week to another are even more error-prone than the polls themselves. So statements like, ?since the last poll, Labor?s vote share is up 2 per cent?, should be taken with a pinch of salt.
Accurate reporting of the polls may make for less reading of the tea leaves by the nation?s amateur psephologists. But if this clears more space for journalism about the parties? vision for the future, that?s no bad thing.
First published in the Sydney Morning Herald September 1, 2004.
source (http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2536)
I know it's an old story, but it still has some relevant info....
The only good poll's are the one's that ladies dance on :woot:
Social Loafer
04-09-07, 07:12 PM
I know it's an old story, but it still has some relevant info....
The only good poll's are the one's that ladies dance on :woot:
I agree :clap:
So does Kevin Rudd :laugh:
I know it's an old story, but it still has some relevant info....
The only good poll's are the one's that ladies dance on :woot:
:rolf:
Coaster
04-09-07, 07:20 PM
I often wonder how the hell the get those poll results??
I have never been asked who i was voting for, and i know nobody who has.
Most of these polls are from Students, and biased news stations like Sun Lies.
Basically 47% of 0.000002% of the population who were polled, are gonna vote for labour. And then take into account that previous election polls have a strike rate of 50-60%..............
Capital_Shark
04-09-07, 07:59 PM
Anyone can come up with useless statistics. 14% of everyone knows that.
Anyone can come up with useless statistics. 14% of everyone knows that.
86% of everyone blindly eat them up.......
The galaxy polls survey only 3000 people by phone.
The galaxy polls survey only 3000 people by phone.
Never ever happened to me :(
The polls are inaccurate and dont show a true indication of preference to party or leader.
it is designed foe media uses and can easily be swayed or corrupted.
The polls are inaccurate and dont show a true indication of preference to party or leader.
it is designed foe media uses and can easily be swayed or corrupted.
Ohh OK :)
I agree :clap:
So does Kevin Rudd :laugh:
:laugh: :laugh:
Hoppy2007Dragons
05-09-07, 12:05 AM
In the words of the ever wise homer, statistics can be used to prove practically anything, 75% of people now that.
KEVIN 07 YEAAA
I think the '7' stands for the amount of debt in Billions his government will rack up per quarter, just like any other good Labour party has.
I think the '7' stands for the amount of debt in Billions his government will rack up per quarter, just like any other good Labour party has.
:clap: :rolf:
I think the '7' stands for the amount of debt in Billions his government will rack up per quarter, just like any other good Labour party has.
Some would say, a small price to pay! ;)
It took 3yrs of Johnys GST revenue to pay off the last Federal Labour debt ;)
It took 3yrs of Johnys GST revenue to pay off the last Federal Labour debt ;)
What about our current pool of savings
What about our current pool of savings
As long as Johny is in, it'll keep growing.....
Rudd 11 (from chaser:P) is more like it. :P
I wonder how many will vote for him because of what he wants to do with broadband.
PROMETHEUS
05-09-07, 10:19 PM
Anyone can come up with useless statistics. 14% of everyone knows that.
Stats are often used like a lamp post for a drunk..support rather than illumination.
PROMETHEUS
05-09-07, 10:20 PM
As long as Johny is in, it'll keep growing.....
Thats what Mrs Howard said...:rolf:
Steelers
05-09-07, 10:50 PM
It took 3yrs of Johnys GST revenue to pay off the last Federal Labour debt ;)
And that was after he claimed that Australia would never have GST.... :duh:
And that was after he claimed that Australia would never have GST.... :duh:
Somethings gotta finance the tips for Kevins Girls :D
We got a Wageline update at work yesterday.
"A $24.60 per week increase in all Award rates of pay.
Please note this will only apply to employer/employee respondents to State Awards who are not affected by Federal Work Choices Legislation."
Woo, the beginning of the end of award rates.
DIEHARD
06-09-07, 09:29 AM
The galaxy polls survey only 3000 people by phone.
That may be true, though that is still a decent sample.
But Rudd has been consistantly ahead in polls, week by week, company to company, it isn't the same 3000 people being sampled, that counts for something!
DIEHARD
06-09-07, 09:32 AM
I wonder how many will vote for him because of what he wants to do with broadband.
Me because I live in a metropolitan blackspot, which is a complete and utter disgrace.
I am forced to use dial up, which makes my life a misery and cripples my productivity at work and on other projects.
It is about time this country entered the 21st Century....
Hoppy2007Dragons
06-09-07, 10:44 AM
And that was after he claimed that Australia would never have GST
oh well better than the recession we had to have :duh:
oh well better than the recession we had to have :duh:
I won't hide that I am a Liberal fellow but that was not the fault of the Labor government because it was a global recession :)
Hoppy2007Dragons
06-09-07, 09:00 PM
Yes, but it would not have hit so much with good economic management.
i was more trying to point out that labour governments will tell us whats good for us just as much as the liberals, ie. the gst, whilst everyone *****es, the australian economy couldn't have moved forward with out it.
ps. i'm liberal all the way.
Get it from dad, he hates the labour government after the hawke govt told the soldiers they woudln't be getting payed and that they had to work fro free because the govt had no money, then a few weeks later found the money to pay them. Doesn't trust a labour govt as far as he can throw is his favourite saying. :p
Steelers
06-09-07, 10:50 PM
the gst, whilst everyone *****es, the australian economy couldn't have moved forward with out it.
Maybe that's the case, but Johnny Howard should have at least had the guts to tell the Australian public what they were voting for, instead of lying to them in order to get into office.
DIEHARD
07-09-07, 09:53 AM
Johnny Howard should have at least had the guts to tell the Australian public what they were voting for, instead of lying to them in order to get into office.
Exactly, if that is what satisfies some people as Australian democracy, it is very worrying.
One of the most sweeping changes, this IR reform (Which is unAustralian to its very core.) and it was hidden from the electorate. :mad:
See you later Howard!
Hoppy2007Dragons
07-09-07, 10:29 AM
Maybe that's the case, but Johnny Howard should have at least had the guts to tell the Australian public what they were voting for, instead of lying to them in order to get into office.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but i remember that election vividily because my parents got into an argument with a niece, because she voted for beazely because she didn't want gst and mum and dad were trying to explain how the gst was good, they knew this before the election that they were voting for gst and their average australians so i'm pretty sure people knew what they were voting for, he said we wouldn't have gst a couple years before the election and and then did a backflip come election.
Exactly, if that is what satisfies some people as Australian democracy, it is very worrying.
One of the most sweeping changes, this IR reform (Which is unAustralian to its very core.) and it was hidden from the electorate.
See you later Howard!
Make no mistake about it, the ir laws will still be in place under rudd, he will tweak them a little bit for small buissness, that i will admit is fairer but not much if the whole ir concept is unaustralian.
His policies are not much different from howards, like his pulling of iraq troops, if you read his statements closley, he will only be pulling 1/3rd of the troops out, training and reconstrution staff will stay in Iraq, its only sas and specific combat units he will withdraw, which will probably leave our other troops vunerable and our death rate will climb.
DIEHARD
07-09-07, 10:41 AM
Yea, his IR policies are so alike. :rolf:
He will just be tearing up AWAs and phasing out signed ones entirely.
He will be reinstating unfair dismissal and penalties.
And you can not get much more different on Iraq policy, Howard will have us there forever, we will not leave until the USA does and Howard will probably tell the USA to not bother cleaning up after the party and deploy troops to clean up and turn off the lights.
Rudd will get our troops out as soon as possible. It will be a staged withdrawal.
Besides we went to war and invaded a nation on a lie, an absolute lie, I have a massive problem with that. Our soldiers deserve better when they are called to serve our country...
Hoppy2007Dragons
07-09-07, 03:29 PM
Yea, his IR policies are so alike.
He will just be tearing up AWAs and phasing out signed ones entirely.
He will be reinstating unfair dismissal and penalties
All i have heard Rudd is say he will amend small busisness practices in regards to these things.
In a workplace with over 300 employees, unfair dismassal and awards still stand. I know he's changing it for small busissness which involves al lthese great thingsthat u mention. But if the new IR laws are so unaustralian why doesn't rudd remove them completly for the whole country. Find me that political statement and i will change my vote.
Besides we went to war and invaded a nation on a lie, an absolute lie, I have a massive problem with that. Our soldiers deserve better when they are called to serve our country...
Beazely would have sent our troops to Iraq if he was leader, he would have jumped when america said so. The main difference between the two parties when it comes to the invasion of Iraq minus your oil,wmd arguments in a legal sense is this. Howards govt said we were justified regardless of wmds because Iraq has broken its UN sanctions and we legally can invade for these indiscretions. Labour said well we would like to check that out. (i remember reading a press statment 4 weeks later that beazely said Iraq had broken Un sanctions.
Which legally gives a complying UN country the right to invade to make sure compliance.
Either way with horward or rudd, our troops will be in Iraq for many years to come, a staged withdrawal could take 20-30 years. A staged withdrawal could be very dangerous in Iraq, i'm watchign closley the withdrawal of British troops from Basra to see what the city does under Iraqi control.
Our soldiers deserve better when they are called to serve our country If they have a problem soldiers can refuse to serve in Iraq, noone is holding a gun against their head and forcing them over there, soldiers go for many reasons, the money, the thrill, the oppurtunity to assist the less privleged, fighting for the freedoms of others. Id say their serving the country pretty well and in fact are serving the ultimate right of every human to be free.
........And you can not get much more different on Iraq policy, Howard will have us there forever, we will not leave until the USA does and Howard will probably tell the USA to not bother cleaning up after the party and deploy troops to clean up and turn off the lights.
Rudd will get our troops out as soon as possible. It will be a staged withdrawal....
It was Kevins recomendation in the first place to keep troops there. Now he's changing his tone to suit his election campaign.....again :rolleyes:
A LEAKED letter from Kevin Rudd to Prime Minister John Howard shows the Opposition Leader backed Australia's involvement in Iraq in the aftermath of the invasion.
In the letter, obtained by The Sunday Telegraph, Mr Rudd told Mr Howard how to win in Iraq.
"Now that regime change has occurred in Baghdad, it is the Opposition's view that it is now the responsibility of all people of goodwill, both in this country and beyond, to put their shoulder to the wheel in an effort to build a new Iraq,'' Mr Rudd wrote in the letter........rest of article (http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,,22228315-5001021,00.html)
DIEHARD
07-09-07, 09:47 PM
In a workplace with over 300 employees, unfair dismassal and awards still stand. I know he's changing it for small busissness which involves al lthese great thingsthat u mention. But if the new IR laws are so unaustralian why doesn't rudd remove them completly for the whole country. Find me that political statement and i will change my vote.
It's actually under 101 employees for starters. Rudd is changing it so there are no AWAS and people who earn over 100k, who are in the position to independantly negoiate can have an independant common law contract.
They all love to spruk about how many small businesses have started up and rah rah rah, but what is the statistic, 3 out of every 4 small businesses fail. So I guess it's good they can screw over their staff and drag them down in their death throes. :rolf:
WorkNOChoices is the most comprehensive reform to I.R in over 100 years and it wasn't even voted on. He knew the Australian public would categotically reject it and all it stands for. That isn't how I want my democratically elected government to conduct their business.
But the voters will have their say in 2007 and those laws will be torn up!
They have also eradicated all unfair dismissal for all companies for operational reasons.
Which means....well anything you damn well want it to.
Yes it's great policy writing business a blank check. I'm sure we can trust them... I mean they always do what is right by people, they aren't the type who are after dollar. :)
Beazely would have sent our troops to Iraq if he was leader, he would have jumped when america said so. The main difference between the two parties when it comes to the invasion of Iraq minus your oil,wmd arguments in a legal sense is this. Howards govt said we were justified regardless of wmds because Iraq has broken its UN sanctions and we legally can invade for these indiscretions. Labour said well we would like to check that out. (i remember reading a press statment 4 weeks later that beazely said Iraq had broken Un sanctions.
Which legally gives a complying UN country the right to invade to make sure compliance.
The UN voted against invasion. I don't think it is right to defy the international community. What is our excuse if Russia or China want to invade any country in their region for some sham reason? None because we just set an international precident and devalued the UN.
The greatest world power with the greatest surveillance and espionage assets couldn't find any WMD in Iraq and they have occupied the country for years. They fabricated evidence. It really is pathetic reflecting on that period of history.
The UN Security Council wanted further inspections for weapons, but the trigger happy Yanks and Brits didn't want to wait, they wanted WAR!
"From our point of view and from the Charter point of view [the war] was illegal." United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
Either way with horward or rudd, our troops will be in Iraq for many years to come, a staged withdrawal could take 20-30 years. A staged withdrawal could be very dangerous in Iraq, i'm watchign closley the withdrawal of British troops from Basra to see what the city does under Iraqi control.
Where do you get all this BS from? :rolf: You'd be a great fiction writer.
That is really hilarious.
Australia has what 700 troops in Iraq. Italy, Ukraine, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Japan, Thailand as well as about a dozen other nations with deployments of 100-450 troops have all successfully withdrawn....and let me say it didn't take three decades to achieve!
And they all withdrew safely.
If Rudd gets in, our troops will be home as soon as practically possible. At least Labor has a policy on Iraq, unlike Howard who is on Bush's leash giving him the old golden handshake and the wink wink.
It was Kevins recomendation in the first place to keep troops there. Now he's changing his tone to suit his election campaign.....again :rolleyes:
Troops for rebuilding. It's something you do after you have destroyed something.
For me it's a simple question: is Iraq a better place, in a better state, are the people better off, since their "liberation"? If you can answer yes, then let's keep doing what we've been doing. if you answer no, then we need to find a better way!
And don't forget to ask yourself, "Is Australia a safer place for our involvement in Iraq?"
Troops for rebuilding. It's something you do after you have destroyed something.
For me it's a simple question: is Iraq a better place, in a better state, are the people better off, since their "liberation"? If you can answer yes, then let's keep doing what we've been doing. if you answer no, then we need to find a better way!
And don't forget to ask yourself, "Is Australia a safer place for our involvement in Iraq?"
The rebuilding isn't done yet, thats why they have to stay.
"Now that regime change has occurred in Baghdad, it is the Opposition's view that it is now the responsibility of all people of goodwill, both in this country and beyond, to put their shoulder to the wheel in an effort to build a new Iraq,'' Mr Rudd wrote in the letter.
I believe Iraq will be a better place, in a better state, the people better off, when liberation is complete.
"Is Australia a safer place for our involvement in Iraq?" - Well Australian troops have been in East Timor alot longer, which pisses of these extremist's even more than Iraq because we alone are controlling Muslim land. But we are there for the benefit for the locals, potenial increase in backlash from terrorist doesn't come into it.
If Iraq is on Rudd's election campaign, then why isn't East Timor?
We have a military alliance with the US, thats why we have troops in the Middle East, thats why we leave when they leave.
"Is Australia a safer place for our involvement in Iraq?" - Yes, because our increased relations with the most powerful military in the world. If a country like Iran or Nth Korea was to invade Australia to take control of our uranium, who's gonna defend our country? Our pre -WW2 second hand tanks :duh:
The rebuilding isn't done yet, thats why they have to stay.
If Iraq is on Rudd's election campaign, then why isn't East Timor?
We have a military alliance with the US, thats why we have troops in the Middle East, thats why we leave when they leave.
"Is Australia a safer place for our involvement in Iraq?" - Yes, because our increased relations with the most powerful military in the world. If a country like Iran or Nth Korea was to invade Australia to take control of our uranium, who's gonna defend our country? Our pre -WW2 second hand tanks :duh:
Mate, I agree with he first part, about leaving troops to rebuild, which is what I said. But they are not combat troops. BIG difference!!!
The rest of your post is waffle! But I might make up a "Welcome to Australia" banner in Korean, just in case........ :rolf:
Mate, I agree with he first part, about leaving troops to rebuild, which is what I said. But they are not combat troops. BIG difference!!!
The rest of your post is waffle! But I might make up a "Welcome to Australia" banner in Korean, just in case........ :rolf:
'Rebuild' troops? - Are they equiped with hammers & nails instead of guns & ammo?
Who is going to fight off the insurgents and maintain security for this to happen?
Labour was planning a full immediate withdrawl before X-mas how long ago? The tunes keep changing........
Australia's defence force is piss weak by comparison to Nth Korea and Iran. I used those two as examples because they are rogue countries. I was getting to the point of 'what if' Australia wasn't under the umbrella of the US & UK alliance, and hadn't been for all these years? We would be more vulnerable and alot less secure.
25% of Indonesia's population could paddle across with spears and bow & arrows to captulate half of Australia. Up against a modern army like Iran and Korea, what chance would we have? Just a thought, not a possible I know.....
'Rebuild' troops? - Are they equiped with hammers & nails instead of guns & ammo?
Who is going to fight off the insurgents and maintain security for this to happen?
Labour was planning a full immediate withdrawl before X-mas how long ago? The tunes keep changing........
Australia's defence force is piss weak by comparison to Nth Korea and Iran. I used those two as examples because they are rogue countries. I was getting to the point of 'what if' Australia wasn't under the umbrella of the US & UK alliance, and hadn't been for all these years? We would be more vulnerable and alot less secure.
25% of Indonesia's population could paddle across with spears and bow & arrows to captulate half of Australia. Up against a modern army like Iran and Korea, what chance would we have? Just a thought, not a possible I know.....
Do you think every member of the defence force carries a gun? I would say the "rebuild troops" (lets just call them engineers to keep it simple) would have many hammers and nails instead of guns. There are also "fixxy-hurty" troops (sometimes referred to as medics) who are armed with bandaids, and even other types of troops who don't actually go around trying to shoot the enemy. Hard to believe but true!
Also, I love the way a Howard supporter could ever accuse another politician of changing his tune. CLASSIC!!! :rolf:
But don't worry about the Indonesians, they don't have enough sea-worthy boats to get here, otherwise they would have come over a long time ago, and we'd all be wearing $2 boardshorts and eating nasi-goreng! :)
Do you think every member of the defence force carries a gun? I would say the "rebuild troops" (lets just call them engineers to keep it simple) would have many hammers and nails instead of guns. There are also "fixxy-hurty" troops (sometimes referred to as medics) who are armed with bandaids, and even other types of troops who don't actually go around trying to shoot the enemy. Hard to believe but true!
What are 'rebuild troops', medics and engineers gonna do when a trucks full of diesel and fertiliser keep driving through the worksites? - Throw hammers, first aid kits and building plans at them?
But don't worry about the Indonesians, they don't have enough sea-worthy boats to get here, otherwise they would have come over a long time ago, and we'd all be wearing $2 boardshorts and eating nasi-goreng! :)
Haven't you seen border security?
I watched our navy destroyer, armed with a 20mm machine gun on the bow and a boat full of personel with shot guns and rifles, be stood off by an Indonesian fishing boat armed with spears carved out of sticks. Why? - because boarding the boat was 'too dangerous', those stupid bastards let them get away with a boat load of my reef fish! (I'm gonna look for this particular episode on youtube)
Oh, and we do wear $2 board shorts from Indoneisa, we just pay $30-$50 for them ;)
Steelers
08-09-07, 11:58 AM
What are 'rebuild troops', medics and engineers gonna do when a trucks full of diesel and fertiliser keep driving through the worksites? - Throw hammers, first aid kits and building plans at them?
Remember when our troops were protecting chinese engineers or whoever they were? I am sure that the Americans or another country would show some good faith and deploy a few troops to protect our guys. If they wouldn't, then there is no point having a military alliance with them, is there?
Remember when our troops were protecting chinese engineers or whoever they were? I am sure that the Americans or another country would show some good faith and deploy a few troops to protect our guys. If they wouldn't, then there is no point having a military alliance with them, is there?
They were Janpanese engineers we were protecting.
America has 160,000 troops in Iraq, Australia has 1500.
American's have almost 4000 Iraq casualties, the only Australian soldier to die in Iraq was an 'unfortunate accident'.
You do the sums, who do you think is carrying out the dangerous role?
They were Janpanese engineers we were protecting.
America has 160,000 troops in Iraq, Australia has 1500.
American's have almost 4000 Iraq casualties, the only Australian soldier to die in Iraq was an 'unfortunate accident'.
You do the sums, who do you think is carrying out the danderous role?
On the 7:30 report on Thursday it said we have only 500 troops in Iraq
On the 7:30 report on Thursday it said we have only 500 troops in Iraq
I don't watch the 7:30 report, but I'd say the 500 personel they would be refering to are only one part of the operation.
There are approx 1500 Australian personel involved in the operation but not all are on the battle field or even in Iraq.
Operation Catalyst (http://www.defence.gov.au/opcatalyst/) is the Australian Defence Force (ADF) contribution to the rehabilitation and reconstruction of Iraq.
Working with the Iraqi Government, the ADF continues to contribute to Multi-National Force efforts to develop a secure and stable environment in Iraq, assist national recovery programs and facilitate the transition to Iraq self-government.
Operation Catalyst currently comprises up to 1575 Australian Defence Force personnel..........
......The Overwatch Battle Group-West (OBG-W) based in the southern Iraqi province of Dhi Qar comprises approximately 515 personnel and consists of a headquarters, a cavalry squadron, an infantry company, ASLAVs and Bushmaster vehicles. The Battle Group is based at Tallil Air Base and from where it undertakes a security overwatch role for Al Muthanna and Dhi Qar Provinces as part of a larger Coalition Force.
[QUOTE]What are 'rebuild troops', medics and engineers gonna do when a trucks full of diesel and fertiliser keep driving through the worksites? - Throw hammers, first aid kits and building plans at them?
Well, surely the logical conclusion to your argument is if there is NO ONE there, then all the insurgency will stop if they have no one to drive their trucks into. So you are now supporting a FULL WITHDRAWL ?????
Haven't you seen border security?
I watched our navy destroyer, armed with a 20mm machine gun on the bow and a boat full of personel with shot guns and rifles, be stood off by an Indonesian fishing boat armed with spears carved out of sticks.
Oh, maybe you should be getting your "real world" information from "Sea Patrol". Those guys are always getting involved in something, every week, and they'll board any vessel, even without approval from Canberra! Maybe we need more ships like that?
Oh, and we do wear $2 board shorts from Indoneisa, we just pay $30-$50 for them ;)
Sort of makes up for all that natural gas we are stealing from Timor! ;)
Well, surely the logical conclusion to your argument is if there is NO ONE there, then all the insurgency will stop if they have no one to drive their trucks into. So you are now supporting a FULL WITHDRAWL ?????
I'm not sure how you managed to put the word 'logical' in that answer. No insurgency in a country without government or security, in the Middle East? :laugh:
I'm sure the Sunni's and the Sh'ites will respect each others own spin on Islam and get along like one big happy family, that is ofcourse if Iran can resist it's captulation of a defenceless Iraq. And what would terrorists want with control of a country, surely all those insurgents will just go back to their huts in the Paki mountains and leave Iraq alone?
I thats what you want to believe will happen with a FULL WITHDRAWL! :der:
Oh, maybe you should be getting your "real world" information from "Sea Patrol". Those guys are always getting involved in something, every week, and they'll board any vessel, even without approval from Canberra! Maybe we need more ships like that?
Ofcourse, a Blue Heelers style reality show that covers all bases! Why not? Don't even know why they changed her name from Maggie Doyle :nope:
DIEHARD
08-09-07, 07:59 PM
Labor wants to withdraw our troops and focus on our own region.
Which I think is a good thing.
They reckon Rudd's polls are up to 60% now.
He really hijacked Lil Johnny's little APEC Party. :rolf:
HodgoBerro
08-09-07, 09:09 PM
if you want to vote in the federal election but havent enrolled do so asap as it closes as soon as its announced as the rumour is it going to be announced after the apec meetings
I'm sure the Sunni's and the Sh'ites will respect each others own spin on Islam and get along like one big happy family, that is ofcourse if Iran can resist it's captulation of a defenceless Iraq. And what would terrorists want with control of a country, surely all those insurgents will just go back to their huts in the Paki mountains and leave Iraq alone?
Maybe you don't realise it, but you are agreeing that Iraq is worse off now than it was before we invaded! At least Saddam had control.
Anyway, there must be a thread going about the Iraq war somewhere, and if not, start one if you want to keep arguing about it.
Either way, I'm still supporting K-Rudd. Being mates with the Chinese PM sounds like a good idea for regional security to me! :)
DIEHARD
09-09-07, 08:05 AM
That reminds me, thanks John Howard for changing the enrolement rules giving people even less time to register.
We should be trying to encourage as many to vote as possible...
Thanks another serving of his brand of democracy.
I finally put my Kevin07 bumper sticker on my car. It has been raining so often, it was the first chance I got. I have also ordered some Rights at Work stickers.
http://www.rightsatwork.com.au/campaigns/smallbina4
Maybe you don't realise it, but you are agreeing that Iraq is worse off now than it was before we invaded! At least Saddam had control.
Saddam was a Sunni, so the Sunni's were looked after under Saddam's control. The Sh'ite's, well the Sh'ites were up 'Sh'ite Creek' on the wrong end of the Genocide. If Saddam's Genocide is what you call control, then yes, the Sunni's may be worse off now but the Sh'ites ain't ;)
As least now they have hope for eventual democracy and freedom. Untill A FULL WITHDRAWL of course. Keep trying to put words in my mouth though, it's a good sign of you running out of points to argue :)
Anyway, there must be a thread going about the Iraq war somewhere, and if not, start one if you want to keep arguing about it.
Yes there is, and thats good advice from the person who brought the argument up in this thread.
Either way, I'm still supporting K-Rudd. Being mates with the Chinese PM sounds like a good idea for regional security to me! :)
So now you wanna credit Rudd for developing relations with China?
Saddam was a Sunni, so the Sunni's were looked after under Saddam's control. The Sh'ite's, well the Sh'ites were up 'Sh'ite Creek' on the wrong end of the Genocide. If Saddam's Genocide is what you call control, then yes, the Sunni's may be worse off now but the Sh'ites ain't ;)
As least now they have hope for eventual democracy and freedom. Untill A FULL WITHDRAWL of course. Keep trying to put words in my mouth though, it's a good sign of you running out of points to argue :)
Yes there is, and thats good advice from the person who brought the argument up in this thread.
So now you wanna credit Rudd for developing relations with China?
Yeah, you must be right. Let's keep doing what we've been doing in Iraq, clearly it must be working. Even G.W. Bush knows it was "Mission Accomplished" in May 2003. I should just listen to the media and believe what they tell me. Finding out the facts is over-rated! :duh:
Yeah, you must be right. Let's keep doing what we've been doing in Iraq, clearly it must be working. Even G.W. Bush knows it was "Mission Accomplished" in May 2003. I should just listen to the media and believe what they tell me. Finding out the facts is over-rated! :duh:
Yes, facts like how long it takes to recover from captulation and the transfer from dictatorship through anarchy to Democracy. Countries like Germany, Russia and Vietnam are examples of how long it takes to recover from war, haven't you learnt anything from history? Might be time to turn the radio off and give the newspapers a rest.
Saddam being caught in 2003 was "Mission Accomplished", no-one said a revolution was gonna happen overnight.
Steelers
09-09-07, 03:59 PM
Saddam being caught in 2003 was "Mission Accomplished"
Wrong!
'Mission Accomplished' was declared about 6 months before Saddam was caught.
Wrong!
'Mission Accomplished' was declared about 6 months before Saddam was caught.
When Saddam was de-throned? When they captulated Bahgdag? The point of removing Saddam from power was successful whether he was in custody or not.
Yes, facts like how long it takes to recover from captulation,
I've noticed you have captulated the word captulated into most of your captulating posts. Is it your own word of the week?
haven't you learnt anything from history? Might be time to turn the radio off and give the newspapers a rest.
I've learnt something from modern history ie. you don't have a clue what you are talking about. But maybe I should just make up my own history as you seem happy to do. Someone must have photoshopped the big "Mission Accomplished" sign hanging on the aircraft carrier behind GWB in May 2003. And the lying radio must have put the words into GWB's mouth. Or was that me too?
Saddam being caught in 2003 was "Mission Accomplished", no-one said a revolution was gonna happen overnight.
Please feel free to post more ill-informed comment. :der:
,
I've noticed you have captulated the word captulated into most of your captulating posts. Is it your own word of the week?
I've learnt something from modern history ie. you don't have a clue what you are talking about. But maybe I should just make up my own history as you seem happy to do. Someone must have photoshopped the big "Mission Accomplished" sign hanging on the aircraft carrier behind GWB in May 2003. And the lying radio must have put the words into GWB's mouth. Or was that me too?
Please feel free to post more ill-informed comment. :der:
Sorry, I misspelled it - Capitualation.
Maybe I should have linked it to wiki or something so you could understand the meaning in this context?
Just what do you expect should happen after one country takes over another and removes it's government?
After decades of being rulled under Tyranny, how quick should a civilization respond to Democracy?
Mabey in your 'modern history wisdom' you could actually answer some questions and provide some sort of back-up - you seem to be good at avoiding that for some reason......
Then again, it is alot easier to deem the other person ill-informed and change the subject rather than find some credential for your own argument......
If your basing your argument on what you've heard on the 'lying radio', then it's no-wonder why your struggling to come up answers or reason.
Social Loafer
09-09-07, 08:19 PM
Shouldn't an Election poll thread have something like a poll.. Just a though :p
Capital_Shark
09-09-07, 08:30 PM
Shouldn't an Election poll thread have something like a poll.. Just a though :p
Your thinking logically now. Piss off outta here, clearly your thought process is not inline with politics.
P.S. Is it true if you get a conviction you don't have to vote? Like just a guilty of assault and no more forced freedom to vote?
Shouldn't an Election poll thread have something like a poll.. Just a though :p
Since when does thread-jacking bother you?
Shouldn't you be in another thread defending AIS like a good Canberra resident?
*Contribute to the Hi-jack or piss-off :laugh:
DIEHARD
09-09-07, 08:38 PM
Shouldn't an Election poll thread have something like a poll.. Just a though :p
It was original thread for posting the latest polls.
Do you reckon we should have a poll for political support? I'm not sure if we should. We could make it private, so it was just statistics and not names.
It was original thread for posting the latest polls.
Do you reckon we should have a poll for political support? I'm not sure if we should. We could make it private, so it was just statistics and not names.
Go on, do it! I dare you not to make it private! :surprise:
The off season is going to be borring, let the political brawl begin :D
Make sure you put Warrick Cappa in there just for some popularity relevance :laugh:
DIEHARD
09-09-07, 08:52 PM
Go on, do it! I dare you not to make it private! :surprise:
The off season is going to be borring, let the political brawl begin :D
Make sure you put Warrick Cappa in there just for some popularity relevance :laugh:
Hahahaha.
DIEHARD
09-09-07, 09:39 PM
You read far to much into things. But I guess it keeps you entertained.
I was laughing because I found your post funny.
You read far to much into things. But I guess it keeps you entertained.
I was laughing because I found your post funny.
Your right, it does keep me entertained. But only to an extent, that's why I have to 'spice it up' abit sometimes.
Mabey I was reading into your avatar too much, thinking your taking on the Bruce Willis character and showing no emotion. Couldn't tell whether that laugh was dry or not :rolleyes:
Sorry, I misspelled it - Capitualation.
Maybe I should have linked it to wiki or something so you could understand the meaning in this context?
I know you misspelled it 'cause I kept seeing it misspelled. That doesn't bother me at all, but if you want to challenge me over it's context.
that is ofcourse if Iran can resist it's captulation of a defenceless Iraq Do you need more? Take your own advice and go to Wiki. Apology accepted! :)
Just what do you expect should happen after one country takes over another and removes it's government? Again, your words, not mine, suggest America has invaded and removed its govt, thus "taken over" another country. Would you call that an invasion? Isn't that what you are worried Iran might do?
After decades of being rulled under Tyranny, how quick should a civilization respond to Democracy? If they were happy about it, I would think pretty bloody quickly! We'll know as soon as Johnny the Tyrant Dictator is voted out how quickly the workers of Australia will respond with glee!
Mabey in your 'modern history wisdom' you could actually answer some questions and provide some sort of back-up - you seem to be good at avoiding that for some reason...... Give me the question again. I fear I lost it in all your waffle.
I said,
Either way, I'm still supporting K-Rudd. Being mates with the Chinese PM sounds like a good idea for regional security to me! You replied,
So now you wanna credit Rudd for developing relations with China?
Who's putting words in who's mouth?
If your basing your argument on what you've heard on the 'lying radio', Hmmm, I wonder which one might be a better source of information.... you or the radio. According to you, "Mission Accomplished" refers to the
When Saddam was de-throned? When they captulated Bahgdag? The point of removing Saddam from power was successful whether he was in custody or not. Or am i putting words into your mouth again? And "captulated" is out of context again. Wiki says so! Or do I need to provide more back-up to this claim?
I know you misspelled it 'cause I kept seeing it misspelled. That doesn't bother me at all, but if you want to challenge me over it's context. Do you need more? Take your own advice and go to Wiki. Apology accepted! :)
Again, your words, not mine, suggest America has invaded and removed its govt, thus "taken over" another country. Would you call that an invasion? Isn't that what you are worried Iran might do?
?
My understanding of 'capitulate' is 'To give up resistance'. (I didn't actually refer to wiki)
Saddam fled his Capital city to hide, and alot of his army (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2003/iraq-030418-army-surrender3id.htm) surrended (http://www.militaryconnections.com/news_story.cfm?textnewsid=310) west of Iraq. Thats why I say he capitulated to the US.
"that is ofcourse if Iran can resist it's captulation of a defenceless Iraq"
Thats my bad, poor wording, ****-about-face if you will :?)
I take it you understood what I meant though. That a defenceless Iraq would have to capitulate to Iran. I am worried about Iran gaining more power by taking control of Iraq.
If they were happy about it, I would think pretty bloody quickly! We'll know as soon as Johnny the Tyrant Dictator is voted out how quickly the workers of Australia will respond with glee!
In good spirit, I will pay that remark ;)
Give me the question again. I fear I lost it in all your waffle.
What do you think will happen in Iraq if all troops are immediately withdrawn?
How long do you think it will take Iraq to recover from International war and Civil War?
How long do you think the revolution of government in Iraq will take?
I said,
Quote:
Either way, I'm still supporting K-Rudd. Being mates with the Chinese PM sounds like a good idea for regional security to me!
You replied,
Quote:
So now you wanna credit Rudd for developing relations with China?
Who's putting words in who's mouth?
Take note of the question mark - It was a question.
Your statement could have been taken in different ways.
Hmmm, I wonder which one might be a better source of information.... you or the radio. According to you, "Mission Accomplished" refers to the Or am i putting words into your mouth again? And "captulated" is out of context again. Wiki says so! Or do I need to provide more back-up to this claim?
I'll happily reference any statement I make, without the use of wiki or anything less like the radio.
The Original Mission was to dethrone Saddams Regime:
"Our forces have been given a clear mission -- to end a regime that threatened its neighbors and the world with weapons of mass destruction, and to free a people that had suffered far too long." (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030414-3.html)
Saddam's Regime no longer has control, and despite the Civil War between the Muslims and still not having their own effective government, technically - they are free!
So thats what I'm refering to when I say "Mission Accomplished".
The actual term 'capitulated' wasn't totally out of context, because troops did surrender. But my wording was piss-poor, and there is probably is a better definition being that not all troop surrendered.
"When they captulated Bahgdag?" - Meaning "When Saddams Army (they) capitulated (gave up resistance of) Bahgdag."
Geting back to the original argument, this is where I stand:
Iraq is currently in Anarchy, there is no effective government that has control of the country. Armed troops need to stay in Iraq to provide security so an effective government can be established. You can not give a time frame on how long this will take. Full withdrawl troops out of Iraq will only make the situation worse and allow for Iran to take control - It is the most powerful military in the region.
Australian should continue it's support for the US like we committed to from the start. Thats why I condemn Rudd for taking the easy way out and advertising pulling troops out of Iraq for election pruposes.
My understanding of 'capitulate' is 'To give up resistance'. I am worried about Iran gaining more power by taking control of Iraq.
Your understanding is correct, your context was poor.
What do you think will happen in Iraq if all troops are immediately withdrawn?I think it would fall in a heap big time! but it would eventually sort itself out. But I HAVE NEVER said I supported a FULL IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWL. I support a planned, staged withdrawl, not an open-ended occupation with no exit strategy. I certainly, 100% oppose the notion we have to stay as long as America does simply because we have an alliance with them.
How long do you think it will take Iraq to recover from International war and Civil War?Interesting you call it "International War", again not really conveying the warm and fuzzy feeling of "liberation" the mission statement below lied about to seek public approval in the first place. And before I answer this question, would you like me to give you next weeks winning lotto numbers too? Might as well make it worthwhile starting up my crystal ball! ;)
How long do you think the revolution of government in Iraq will take?
I guess that would depend on how long it takes America to find someone THEY want to lead the country, who is actually stupid/brave enough to do it, and doesn't get shot/blown up withing a few months. Alternatively they could let the place have it's civil war and eventually it will sort itself out.
For the record, even America had a civil war once. Apparently they are getting along pretty well now, albeit with a moron in charge.
The Original Mission was to dethrone Saddams Regime:
[URL="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030414-3.html"]"Our forces have been given a clear mission -- to end a regime that threatened its neighbors and the world with weapons of mass destruction, and to free a people that had suffered far too long."
technically - they are free!
Now, let's analyze this "mission statement". Firstly, your concern is that Iran could threaten to overtake Iraq. So now we have to do the same thing to Iraq? (For the record, I have always thought Iran was a much higher risk than just about any other country in the world, certainly more so than iraq). So they have only moved the problem to a much higher rouge state, that we know is trying to develop nuclear weapons! Added tot his, America now has a lot of resources tied up in Iraq which limits its ability to fight a real war (if needed) against Iran. This is the basic premise of bringing our troops home, for our own regional security (just in case the guys and girls from "Sea Patrol" miss a boat! ;))
Also, while the majority of the people of Iraq may have rejoiced at the downfall of Saddam, I don't think they are still high-fiving each other on being "technically free" Those car bombs still hurt.
Secondly, and thank God it's finally come back to having reference to this thread..... the WMD's! This was the lie that the whole "liberation" hung on, one repeated and purported by little Johnny, as the reason we had to be involved. As you have shown, the whole "mission staement" was based on lies and misinformation. Some people who supported the war at the start as a just and right humanitarian act have since come to see it as what it really is, or has turned out to be, which is an occupation based on the lie of WMD, and appears to be more oil related. This is one of the main reasons Australians don't want to be part of it anymore, one of the main reasons they want our troops out and home, and one of the many reasons I will be trying to vote Johnny out!
P.S. IMO, wiki is a source of opinion, not information.Agreed, but it was your reference, not mine! :)
ps, if you want me to explain why the whole "children overboard" incident didn't actually involve any children overboard, or any of the other lies Howard has readily told us, just let me know. ;)
DIEHARD
10-09-07, 08:14 AM
Remind me to never argue with you online C-Whiz.
Hoppy2007Dragons
10-09-07, 10:44 AM
That is really hilarious.
Australia has what 700 troops in Iraq. Italy, Ukraine, Denmark, the Netherlands, Spain, Japan, Thailand as well as about a dozen other nations with deployments of 100-450 troops have all successfully withdrawn....and let me say it didn't take three decades to achieve!
And they all withdrew safely.
If Rudd gets in, our troops will be home as soon as practically possible. At least Labor has a policy on Iraq, unlike Howard who is on Bush's leash giving him the old golden handshake and the wink wink
The troops of Iraq, Ukraine, Denmark etc etc ranged from 50-200 troops and withdrew from American protected areas, of course it isn't hard to do a withdraw like that.
My refrence to the 30 years is, even if Rudd says all the troops will be withdrawn, their will always still be 100+ troops in Baghdad protectign the embassy, they will never leave till it is stable, which could take 10, 20,30 years til lthose troops are withdrawn. I personally don't like the idea of leavingthose 100+ defence personal in Iraq without our own companies in support ie. our 1500 troops in Iraq.
For the record engineers that do the rebuilding, are actually combat engineers ie the can also blow up bridges etc etc and are heavily armed.
Medics are just riflemen in sections trained in first aid, my mate is seving in east timor and is the medic in his section. Got some good photos of him helpi9ng a timor boy with 3rd degree burns.
Thought i would clear that up.
At least Labor has a policy on Iraq, unlike Howard who is on Bush's leash giving him the old golden handshake and the wink wink.
howard has a policy on Iraq, staying as long as is necessary.
Seriously if any labour politican was in power, they would have committed troops to iraq.
Hoppy2007Dragons
10-09-07, 12:41 PM
I guess that would depend on how long it takes America to find someone THEY want to lead the country, who is actually stupid/brave enough to do it, and doesn't get shot/blown up withing a few months. Alternatively they could let the place have it's civil war and eventually it will sort itself out.
And then we will have to send troops in again because of the massive genocide occuring in Iraq, then America/Britian/Australia will be blamed for not doing something, yet are blamed for doing something.
On another note, i suggest we split the country in two. Have Nationalist Iraq and Republic of Iraq, have each country run by the two major sects and that why they have their own country and won't be at each others throats. The other forms of arab nationalities cna just choose which govt won't persecut them. Thats my exit policy. Maybe a big concrete wall between the two of them, works in Israel.
APEC can't stop punt plunge on Rudd
PUNTERS continue to strongly back a Labor win in the federal election with Prime Minister John Howard gaining nothing from hosting the APEC summit in Sydney.
Sportingbet Australia has slashed their odds to $1.40, by far the shortest odds to date, saying punters across Australia are stumbling over each other to put their money on Labor leader Kevin Rudd and his party.
The odds of Mr Howard and the coalition clawing their way back to a fifth term have drifted out to $2.85.
"It's clear that APEC hasn't given the Prime Minister the boost in the polls he was hoping for - quite the opposite," Sportingbet Australia CEO Michael Sullivan said.
"(Mr) Howard is now the clear underdog in this race.
"To be honest, we were expecting some money for the coalition at this price, but it seems that punters just can't get enough of (Mr) Rudd."
Sportingbet expects to hold nearly $2 million on the federal election.
In the past fortnight, 88 per cent of money bet on the election with Sportingbet has been for Labor.
AAP
Your understanding is correct, your context was poor.
I think it would fall in a heap big time! but it would eventually sort itself out. But I HAVE NEVER said I supported a FULL IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWL. I support a planned, staged withdrawl, not an open-ended occupation with no exit strategy. I certainly, 100% oppose the notion we have to stay as long as America does simply because we have an alliance with them.
Interesting you call it "International War", again not really conveying the warm and fuzzy feeling of "liberation" the mission statement below lied about to seek public approval in the first place. And before I answer this question, would you like me to give you next weeks winning lotto numbers too? Might as well make it worthwhile starting up my crystal ball! ;)
I guess that would depend on how long it takes America to find someone THEY want to lead the country, who is actually stupid/brave enough to do it, and doesn't get shot/blown up withing a few months. Alternatively they could let the place have it's civil war and eventually it will sort itself out.
For the record, even America had a civil war once. Apparently they are getting along pretty well now, albeit with a moron in charge.
Now, let's analyze this "mission statement". Firstly, your concern is that Iran could threaten to overtake Iraq. So now we have to do the same thing to Iraq? (For the record, I have always thought Iran was a much higher risk than just about any other country in the world, certainly more so than iraq). So they have only moved the problem to a much higher rouge state, that we know is trying to develop nuclear weapons! Added tot his, America now has a lot of resources tied up in Iraq which limits its ability to fight a real war (if needed) against Iran. This is the basic premise of bringing our troops home, for our own regional security (just in case the guys and girls from "Sea Patrol" miss a boat! ;))
Also, while the majority of the people of Iraq may have rejoiced at the downfall of Saddam, I don't think they are still high-fiving each other on being "technically free" Those car bombs still hurt.
Secondly, and thank God it's finally come back to having reference to this thread..... the WMD's! This was the lie that the whole "liberation" hung on, one repeated and purported by little Johnny, as the reason we had to be involved. As you have shown, the whole "mission staement" was based on lies and misinformation. Some people who supported the war at the start as a just and right humanitarian act have since come to see it as what it really is, or has turned out to be, which is an occupation based on the lie of WMD, and appears to be more oil related. This is one of the main reasons Australians don't want to be part of it anymore, one of the main reasons they want our troops out and home, and one of the many reasons I will be trying to vote Johnny out!
Agreed, but it was your reference, not mine! :)
ps, if you want me to explain why the whole "children overboard" incident didn't actually involve any children overboard, or any of the other lies Howard has readily told us, just let me know. ;)
So how can you plan a staged withdrawl if you can't determine how long the country is gonna be in civil war? You can't put a timeline on it like the Labour party has been asking Johny to, mabey the Labour party has a crystal ball too?
I called it an 'International War' because as many as 34 foreign countries were contributing troops to the Coalition in Iraq.
As for WMD, it's not a closed case like your making out. I've had a lengthy debate about it with Aspher in another thread. I recall Hoppy referencing documents from the UN website where UN inspectors did find laboratories where Saddam was growing illegal bacteria. Is that right Hoppy? My point was that just because they haven't found any yet, that does not prove they don't\didn't exist. I also recall an interview with a US agent who found bunkers underneath river systems where there was evidence to suggest weapons had been stored. (http://www.titans.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=9924) - only an article though, not proof.
And I still mantained regardless of whether they did exist or not, the war is still justified IMO by the removal of Saddam. And, even if the original reasons were blatent lies - withdrawl now is not the answer. I can't believe you think this situation will resolve itself. The American civil war was not based on religious beliefs and is not comparable. Remember these fools in Iraq believe eating bacon and drinking beer is a sin :rolleyes:
America's army has 4x the numbers of Irans and 10x the power. I can't see them hesitating at the chance for a shot at Iran, despite commitment to Iraq. Half of the US forces in Iraq could probably shoot Iran from where they are now :)
Alot of the car bombings in Iraq now are a result of religious clashes, religion is the main reason why that whole region is so unstable, not just Iraq.
Bring on the "children overboard" incident, I wanna here it all. Start an anti-John howard thread :D
And I still mantained regardless of whether they did exist or not, the war is still justified IMO by the removal of Saddam. And, even if the original reasons were blatent lies - withdrawl now is not the answer. I can't believe you think this situation will resolve itself. The American civil war was not based on religious beliefs and is not comparable. Remember these fools in Iraq believe eating bacon and drinking beer is a sin :rolleyes:
The war WAS justified, except they told us all sorts of lies to try to get us on board, and when we all said no, Johnny said "i'm gonna do it anyway". I say again, i don't really have a problem with going and "liberating" Iraq. It was a good way to test a whole lot of military hardware for when they have to take out Iran, if nothing else. :)
Look mate, IMO all we are doing over there at the moment is being a token force to keep up Johnny's appearances, to please his mate GWB. We didn't find any WMD, Saddam is dead, his sons are dead, is there anything we are doing that the Yanks can't do without us?
I am ex-military, I was training in USA during the first Gulf War, I support our troops ANYWHERE they are sent to fight and I personally don't mind seeing the Yanks kick a bit of Tyrant ****! But I just don't see any progress being made by staying and interfering any longer. No, I'm not saying cut and run, I am saying, "let's start thinking about how we are going to get out of this mess!"
I think Hoppy2007Dragons has come up with the best argument about this whole thing. Yes Hoppy, they are called "Sappers", and yes, splitting the country in 2 hasn't worked too badly for Korea, so it is certainly a good idea. Maybe they could have a de-militarised zone in the middle where anyone could go to eat bacon and wash it down with a 6 pack with no fear of retribution! ;) Then everyone would be happy! :)
Anyway, my whole point about this ongoing debate is this: if we live in a democracy, and the poeple of this country say "no", then our elected leader should say, "Sorry George, but the Aussie people think you are a buffoon and don't want to get sucked into one of your ill-concieved ideas". Yes, I know that is a ridiculous comment. We all know Howard doesn't know how to say sorry! ;)
I support our troops ANYWHERE they are sent to fight and I personally don't mind seeing the Yanks kick a bit of Tyrant ****!
Thats the way Whiz
If people dont stand behind our troops
They should stand in FRONT of them
Hoppy2007Dragons
10-09-07, 09:41 PM
I recall Hoppy referencing documents from the UN website where UN inspectors did find laboratories where Saddam was growing illegal bacteria. Is that right Hoppy
Yeah some bacteria thingy, not entirely end of the world stuff, i can't find the document now though.
Look mate, IMO all we are doing over there at the moment is being a token force to keep up Johnny's appearances, to please his mate GWB. We didn't find any WMD, Saddam is dead, his sons are dead, is there anything we are doing that the Yanks can't do without us?
Actually i'm studying this at uni, and by rights if america want to run a succesfull counter insurgency they should adopt the british/asussie approach of Hearts and Minds. Sir Robert Thomson was the architect of the successful COIN(counter insurgency) in Malaya in the 1950’s
He said you win COIN by securing the hearts and minds of the people in your favour by:
Provide justice
Social services
Improve lifestyle
Provided a vested interest in success of the COIN
Basically show that ur better than the insurgents by treating the people right and not using violence like the insurgents do.
The main reason the country is up **** creek is the british and us are using this approach whilst the americans are only sorta using this and more interested in trying to kill insurgents, we should be investing in the country to stop bored,disgruntled unemployed young men joing insurgencys. This however will take years.
I think Hoppy2007Dragons has come up with the best argument about this whole thing. Yes Hoppy, they are called "Sappers", and yes, splitting the country in 2 hasn't worked too badly for Korea, so it is certainly a good idea. Maybe they could have a de-militarised zone in the middle where anyone could go to eat bacon and wash it down with a 6 pack with no fear of retribution! Then everyone would be happy!
Yeah that sappers argument was directed at someone else i think, going on about engineers throwing tools or something, just trying to point out they like to blow **** up as well. Yeah well it works quite well in korea, and the hatred they have for each other is pretty close to whats happening in Iraq. I think if thier left to thier own devices they might all settle down.
Ay if only the thought like us and enjoyed bacon on a sunday morning and a beer in the arvo.
Anyway, my whole point about this ongoing debate is this: if we live in a democracy, and the poeple of this country say "no", then our elected leader should say, "Sorry George, but the Aussie people think you are a buffoon and don't want to get sucked into one of your ill-concieved ideas". Yes, I know that is a ridiculous comment. We all know Howard doesn't know how to say sorry!
Perhaps we should host a referundum next time (even though it would cost more finically than out actual combat commitments)
Yeah some bacteria thingy, not entirely end of the world stuff, i can't find the document now though.
http://www.forbes.com/technology/2005/08/02/iraq-war-infection-bacteria-cx_mh_0802iraqinfect.html
Is it like this one Hoppy?
The war WAS justified, except they told us all sorts of lies to try to get us on board, and when we all said no, Johnny said "i'm gonna do it anyway". I say again, i don't really have a problem with going and "liberating" Iraq. It was a good way to test a whole lot of military hardware for when they have to take out Iran, if nothing else. :)
Look mate, IMO all we are doing over there at the moment is being a token force to keep up Johnny's appearances, to please his mate GWB. We didn't find any WMD, Saddam is dead, his sons are dead, is there anything we are doing that the Yanks can't do without us?
I am ex-military, I was training in USA during the first Gulf War, I support our troops ANYWHERE they are sent to fight and I personally don't mind seeing the Yanks kick a bit of Tyrant ****! But I just don't see any progress being made by staying and interfering any longer. No, I'm not saying cut and run, I am saying, "let's start thinking about how we are going to get out of this mess!"
I think Hoppy2007Dragons has come up with the best argument about this whole thing. Yes Hoppy, they are called "Sappers", and yes, splitting the country in 2 hasn't worked too badly for Korea, so it is certainly a good idea. Maybe they could have a de-militarised zone in the middle where anyone could go to eat bacon and wash it down with a 6 pack with no fear of retribution! ;) Then everyone would be happy! :)
Anyway, my whole point about this ongoing debate is this: if we live in a democracy, and the poeple of this country say "no", then our elected leader should say, "Sorry George, but the Aussie people think you are a buffoon and don't want to get sucked into one of your ill-concieved ideas". Yes, I know that is a ridiculous comment. We all know Howard doesn't know how to say sorry! ;)
I know Johnny is being a suck-hole to GWB. But I believe it's for good reason and worth it. Not just for economic benefit, but let's say 50yrs down the track Australia ends up in the sh!t with another country for some reason, any reason. The loyalty we show now, will benefit us later on, possibly save our asses from 'captulation' :D
There are always gonna be lies told in politics, some for good reason too. Although the Idea of Democracy is letting the majority rule through voting, the majority won't always know whats best for their country. John Howard is in the best position to make the big calls. He would hold information that not many people would, I dare say including Kevin Rudd, on sensitive issues like the real reason behind Iraq war. If the majority of Autralians really decided our countries direction, then lets face it, we'd be up sh!t creek.
If it takes a lie from our Prime Minister in order for our country to benefit the greatest, then I can swallow that. You can argue black and blue, but Howard has been one of Australia's greatest leaders. Second longest running PM atm, for good reason - You can't fluke 11yrs at the top job. He has set up trade relations with all the super-powers in the world. We are selling Uranium to America, Russia, China, India. All these countries have been each others enemies for years, yet he's managed to set up Nuclear trade with all of them.
He has made alot of good decisions in the past and I believe his AWA's will be the next one our country will benefit from.
TBH honest I haven't been keeping up with progress in Iraq recently but hasn't there been progress made in installing a government and holding an election? Even if it wasn't successful first time around, still one foot forward right?
Hoppy's idea sounds good and it has had success overseas. But the Middle East is just too different. Three of the most prominent religions came from the same sand pit, and for aslong as their mentality is "Believe in my god or suffer", then there never will be full peace. Just look at the surrounding countries who are at war, they have borders between them too. Splitting the country might settle the civil war to an extent, providing an agreement can be made on sharring 'that' resource. Once civil war has settled with or without division and Democracy successfully installed, then I reckon pull the troops out when Iraq's military(ies) is(are) strong enough to defend itself(themselves) again.
I believe Howard is alot smarter than you give him credit for, I'd rather him make the big decisions than the majority of our population.
I will not run from fight - Howard
By staff writers:?)
September 11, 2007
PRIME Minister John Howard, under renewed pressure over his leadership, said today he had never run from a fight and never would.
At a joint press conference with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper today, Mr Howard took just one question from the Australian media, and it was about a Sky News report today which said senior ministers had withdrawn their support for the Prime Minister as Liberal Party leader.
Mr Howard said it was not in the ?best interests? of the Liberal Party to speculate over his leadership but vowed to ?not run from the fight?.
Speaking for the first time since the report surfaced today that Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull had told Mr Howard it was in the Government's interests that he step down before the federal election, Mr Howard said the matter had already been dealt with.
?That matter was resolved last year,? Mr Howard said.
?It is not in the party?s best interests to revisit it, that?s my position,:" he said.
"I believe that the next election will be difficult for the coalition, but we can win it and I hope people understand from observing me in 30-odd years of public life that I have never run from a fight before and I don't intend to do so now."
Both Mr Turnbull's and Mr Downer's offices have denied the minister tapped Mr Howard on the shoulder but that did not answer the Sky reports that they had made clear that they wanted him to stand down, a difference in wording that Sky was at pains to point out.
TELEGRAPH
DIEHARD
12-09-07, 06:48 AM
An ACNielsen poll published yesterday gave Labor a 57-43 lead two-party preferred over the Government and Labor leader Kevin Rudd was preferred prime minister by 52 per cent to Mr Howard's 39 per cent.
Australia?s conservative government has fallen further behind the centre-left Labor Party opposition as Prime Minister John Howard considers when to call national elections and whether he should remain leader, the latest Reuters Poll Trend has found.
Howard can call an election any time from Wednesday after hosting the weekend Asia-Pacific leaders summit and hosting Canada?s Prime Minister Stephen Harper on a state visit on Tuesday.
But after 11 years in office, Howard?s government trailed Labor by 14.7 points in September on a two-party basis, where minority votes are distributed to the two main parties to decide an election.
Liberal/National Party coalition government support was down by three points over the month to 42.6 percent, compared with 57.4 percent for Labor, up three points.
If the result was carried through to polling day, the government would overwhelmingly lose office and Howard and several ministers could lose their seats.
The results came as Howard, 68, promised to stay leader to fight the election, despite growing concern from his lawmakers that he should contemplate retirement and hand power to his deputy and Treasurer, Peter Costello, 50.
Howard has won four consecutive elections since 1996. He must call the election before mid November. Labor needs to win 16 more seats to win power.
Roll on!
DIEHARD
18-09-07, 07:21 PM
Check out this picture that has graced the front of newspapers around Australia.
Just fixing his glasses...or a deeper message?
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5659945,00.jpg
Coaster
18-09-07, 07:24 PM
Haha thats gold!!
I heard today Howard was up in the polls, they must have asked the other classroom, he must be stoked.
DIEHARD
25-09-07, 01:41 PM
Hot for Rudd, cool on Costello
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/09/24/gr_pollhoward_wideweb__470x330,0.jpg
THE boisterous events of recent weeks have done nothing to alter voter perceptions with a new Herald/Nielsen online poll showing Labor would trounce the Coalition if an election were held now.
The poll is the first online national survey of voters conducted before the federal election.
It finds Labor leading the Coalition on a two-party preferred basis by 58 per cent to 42 per cent.
Labor is leading on the primary vote by a strong 13 percentage points, besting the Government by 50 per cent to 37 per cent.
Both Kevin Rudd and John Howard have vastly more support as preferred prime minister than their respective deputies.
Mr Rudd was preferred by 37 per cent compared with Mr Howard on 26 per cent. Labor's deputy, Julia Gillard, rated only 7 per cent but still beat Peter Costello, who scored 5 per cent.
The Environment Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, fancies himself as leadership material but was only preferred as prime minister by 2 per cent of voters.
Yesterday he pointedly declined to endorse Mr Costello as the next Liberal leader, as Mr Howard has done.
While Mr Costello was "by far the most likely successor", Mr Turnbull said "it's up to the men and women in the Liberal party room at the time and it's their decision and that decision has to be respected".
Last night he sought to clarify his position. Asked on ABC TV whether he would rule out standing for the leadership after Mr Howard departed, he said: "Of course. I have no doubt Peter Costello will take over the leadership of the Liberal Party after the Prime Minister retires."
The online poll finds that Mr Costello is preferred by 26 per cent of voters as the replacement for Mr Howard while Mr Turnbull rates 11 per cent. Among Liberal voters, Mr Costello has 41 per cent support as Mr Howard's replacement while Mr Turnbull still only has 11 per cent support.
The online poll was taken from Tuesday to Thursday last week, encompassing the last sitting of Parliament, which ended in rancorous debate and both parties accusing each other of smear tactics and a lack of courage. It involved 1425 enrolled voters selected from Nielsen's "Your Voice" database of 90,000 people which the company uses for its market research. Those sampled were selected to represent a broad cross-section of the nation.
Nielsen Poll director John Stirton said the results of the first online poll were consistent with the findings of all national polls taken over the past six months which were conducted by telephone or face-to-face. "Labor remains well ahead of the Coalition going into the campaign," he said.
The six-month average of Herald/Nielsen, Newspoll, Morgan and Galaxy shows Labor with a two-party lead of 57 per cent to 43 per cent, virtually identical to the online poll findings.
In a direct match-up, the online poll shows Mr Rudd leading Mr Howard by 55 per cent to 37 per cent as preferred prime minister. The last monthly Herald poll, involving 1400 people surveyed by telephone and published on September 10, found Mr Rudd leading as preferred prime minister by 52 per cent to 29 per cent.
Mr Rudd campaigned in Hobart yesterday, while Mr Howard spent the day in his seat of Bennelong, as he had on Saturday. His increased presence there coincides with suggestions that internal party polling shows the Labor candidate, Maxine McKew, stands a good chance of winning Bennelong.
Senior Liberals said it was frustrating that Mr Howard was having to spend so much time in Bennelong.
The Herald revealed yesterday that Mr Howard and ministers had been lobbying a cluster of retiring Coalition MPs in key seats to stay on amid fears their seats will be lost without the incumbent.
http://www.smh.com.au/
DIEHARD
26-09-07, 03:02 AM
Coalition gaining ground in WA
THE Coalition is gaining ground in Western Australia while Labor's favouritism with voters has slipped, a new poll shows.
The Newspoll, conducted for The Australian, shows the state Labor government's lead over the opposition has evaporated from the period of July to September.
When asked if a state election for the lower house was held this month, 44 percent of polled voters chose Labor to the Coalition's 43 percent in the primary vote.
Labor's numbers are unchanged since the last poll in June, but the Coalition has surged five points from 38 percent.
On the two-party preferred basis, Labor slipped three points to 51 percent while the Coalition jumped three points to 49 percent since the previous poll in June.
WA Premier Alan Carpenter still holds a commanding lead as the preferred leader of the state government.
NEWS.COM.AU
Steel Dragon
26-09-07, 11:30 AM
It never ceases to amaze me how much stock people place in polls. The reality is that we will never see a 58-42 two party preferred vote in this country at a general election. Even in individual seats, only the safest of safe seats get in the 58-42 split territory. Even 54-46 is highly unlikely. Basically, a close election will give figures in the 50.5-49.5 ballpark, possibly even with the winning side having the slightly lower vote overall (as happened in 1998). A landslide may get into 52-48, maybe even 53-47 if we are talking a major landslide. 54-46 would be the absolute ceiling, and an absolutely demoralising flogging for the losing party. The reason is simply that a high percentage of the population's voting mind is made up before they reach voting age, and is highly unlikely to change at any future point. I personally have only ever met one person who admitted to being a swinging voter. Everyone else I know is very definitely one way or the other (including myself - Christian conservative, if anyone cares).
So we have maybe 10% of the population who actually decide elections, the only other factor being the difference between new voters coming in and old voters (not necessarily in age) who drop off the other end. This would give us something in the vicinity of a 60-40 theoretical maximum. The only thing that can really be drawn from the current crop of polls is that Labor are more likely to win than Coalition. But given the history lesson of the last 3 elections, where Labor led the polls each time but still lost, I don't think you can take it any further and start predicitng landslides.
Mind you, if the polls prove unusually accurate and Labor does win in a landslide, I won't be losing too much sleep. I lived through Hawke and Keating and came out unscathed (though my parents might tell a slightly different story about high interest rates at the time), and at leats it's Kevin Rudd, not Simon Crean, Mark Latham, or (going back a bit) Gareth Evans.
Jason
Steel Dragon
26-09-07, 11:38 AM
Hmmm..., perhaps the polls are more accurate this time than previously. The reason I say that is that the far more reliable indicator of election outcomes, election betting, has Rudd clearly in front of Howard (1.43 to 2.85 from Centrebet). Betting is far more accurate because the punters who bet are risking their own hard earned to provide the feedback on voting intentions that sets the odds, rather than being interrupted in the middle of dinner by a pollster, who they may well say anything to to get rid of them and return to dinner.
Jason
DIEHARD
29-09-07, 04:49 PM
ALP Primary Vote (54%) At Highest Level Under Rudd
On September 22/23, the weekend that Al Gore ? the world?s best known climate change activist ? openly endorsed Labor?s environmental policies the ALP primary vote reached its highest level (54%, up 4.5%) since Kevin Rudd took over the Labor leadership late last year, while Coalition support fell 3.5% to 36% during the same period.
With preferences distributed as they were at the 2004 Federal election, the two-party preferred vote is ALP 60.5% (up 4%), L-NP 39.5% (down 4%). If the Federal election had been held last weekend the ALP would have won in a landslide, the latest ?face-to-face? Morgan Poll finds.
Among the minor parties, support for The Greens is 5.5% (down 0.5%), Family First 1% (down 0.5%), One Nation 0.5% (down 0.5%); Australian Democrats 0.5% (unchanged), and Other Parties and Independent Candidates 2.5% (up 0.5%).
However, despite the swing to Labor, Fewer electors now think the ALP will win the next Federal election (56.5%, down 6.5%), while 30.5% (up 4.5%) think the L-NP will win and 13% (up 2%) can?t say.
A majority of electors (52%, down 0.5%) think Australia is heading in the ?right direction?, while 32% (unchanged) think Australia is heading in the ?wrong direction? ? 16% (up 0.5%) are undecided.
Currently, 20% (up 1%) of all electors say Australia is ?heading in the right direction? yet say they would vote Labor if an election were held today. The Morgan Poll considers these electors to be ?Soft ALP voters? and believe they are the key to the Federal election.
Gary Morgan says:
?Support for Kevin Rudd and the ALP was given a boost last weekend following a raucous last day in Federal Parliament, which largely focused on Kevin Rudd?s gaffe about tax thresholds. In addition, the Labor Party was given a ringing endorsement from high-profile climate change activist and ex-US Vice President Al Gore.
?Despite the increase in support for the ALP, the number of electors who think Labor will win the upcoming election has fallen 6.5% to 56.5%, while now 30.5% (up 4.5%) think the Coalition will be retained.
?The two-party preferred result of this Morgan Poll (60.5% cf. 39.5%) is almost a replication of the result in early September (60% cf. 40%). In that time the Greens vote has dropped 3.5%, while the ALP vote has increased by 4.5%, which suggests some ?left-leaning? electors have decided to give their vote to the ALP.?
Electors were asked: ?If a Federal election for the House of Representatives were being held today - which party would receive your first preference??
Of all electors surveyed, a low 4.5% (down 0.5%) did not name a party.
This latest face-to-face Morgan Poll on Federal voting intention was conducted on the weekend of September 22/23, 2007, with an Australia-wide cross-section of 972 electors.
http://www.roymorgan.com
MORE -> http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2007/4217/
DIEHARD
29-09-07, 04:59 PM
Football is no longer a politics-free zone.
As fans of two codes gear up for this weekend's grand finals, Labor has enlisted the rugby league great Tommy Raudonikis and the colourful AFL ruckman Peter "Crackers" Keenan to take on the Federal Government.
In radio commercials to be aired this weekend the two ex-players criticise the Government for using taxpayers' funds to advertise Work Choices and other Government policies, including during the telecasts of the finals.
"There's something going on right now that's just wrong," the two men say in the Labor ads before claiming the Government ads to be aired during the football telecasts will cost about $100,000 each. They conclude: "Grand finals are about playing footy, not playing politics."
Labor said the Raudonikis/Keenan ads would go to air nationally during radio sports programs broadcast this weekend.
The Labor leader, Kevin Rudd, said taxpayer-funded television advertisements were now so prevalent that they were starting to corrupt Australian democracy.
"On top of that, I would say it's also starting to become really irritating for people who are just watching television," Mr Rudd said at a news conference at the Melbourne Cricket Ground.
"You can't turn your TV set on at the moment without seeing a taxpayer-funded advertisement."
He suspected the Prime Minister, John Howard, was delaying calling the election to give the Government more time to continue running advertisements for its policies.
http://www.SMH.com.au
I agree with this campaign, I am sick and tired of seeing these tax payer funded propaganda for Coalition policy. Hurry up and call the election!
DIEHARD
30-09-07, 02:20 AM
Costello lets cat out of bag ? poll on Nov 24
THE probing of Kerry O'Brien, Michelle Grattan, Laurie Oakes and Tony Jones has not prised it out of the Government leaders ? instead it was comic Dave Hughes who got the answer to the burning political question: when is the election to be held?
The Essendon-loving Federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, top-table guest at the TAC grand final breakfast alongside Prime Minister John Howard and Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd, indicated that the last Saturday in November ? the 24th ? was the date, under subtle grilling by the former ABC Glass House presenter.
Hughes had asked the Treasurer how he was feeling. Costello replied that he was "very toey indeed", with butterflies in the stomach.
Hughes: "What are you talking about, the election or the grand final?"
Costello: "They all culminate together this time of year, of course, the last day of September, and the last day of November, isn't it?"
Hughes sensed a scoop. "Is it? You've just called it, have you?" he asked. "You've taken over already, have you?"
The Treasurer quickly corrected himself. "Some time between now and Christmas ? and it won't be Christmas Day."
http://www.theage.com.au
PM leaves Sydney, likely to call election :woot: :woot:
October 13, 2007
PRIME Minister John Howard has left Kirribilli House for Canberra, where he could finally head to Government House tomorrow morning to call the election.
A spokesman for Mr Howard said the prime minister had left his Sydney residence a short time ago for Sydney airport and flight to Canberra.
With politicians scheduled to return to Canberra for parliament on Monday, speculation was peaking that Mr Howard would call the election tomorrow.
That would point to a poll on November 17 or 24.
Governor-General Major General Michael Jeffery returned to Canberra last night after a long trip abroad.
Calling the election tomorrow morning would allow politicians to abandon plans to travel to Canberra for a parliamentary sitting with little in the way of important legislation to debate.
AAP
DIEHARD
13-10-07, 09:45 PM
Great news for Labor with a poll to be released in tomorrow's Sun Herald that has Labor 1% up to 59% TTP in VIC and NSW. Especially great news to see such renewed support in Victoria.
Grimmace
13-10-07, 09:48 PM
horray no more annoying ads on t.v, seriously. well done liberals spending so much money on advertising when the hospitals are in great shape.
DIEHARD
13-10-07, 09:55 PM
horray no more annoying ads on t.v, seriously. well done liberals spending so much money on advertising when the hospitals are in great shape.
Well we won't see the disappearance of annoying ads on TV and a 6 week campaign will be a political marathon which will drive many crazy.
But at least we will see a different type of Liberal ad now, their own.
And Labor have been pretty silent, so at least their message will be fresh and we won't be sick of the ads just yet.
I think many have switched off to the Coalition's message but Labor haven't tried their hand just yet, that should work in their favour.
Grimmace
13-10-07, 10:00 PM
wonder what surpries the liberals have their sleeves if they win the next election. i wonder had they unvieled their work choices before they were re-elected if they would have won
If anyone just watched the sideshow they would have seen a song about Howard and rudd.
So true it was... no time to explain :P
DIEHARD
13-10-07, 10:55 PM
If anyone just watched the sideshow they would have seen a song about Howard and rudd.
So true it was... no time to explain :P
I missed that, maybe we can download it off the ABC website.
Social Loafer
13-10-07, 11:31 PM
wonder what surpries the liberals have their sleeves if they win the next election.
I'm guessing a campaign which blames Kevin Rudd for the drought. . .
"Who do you trust to bring rain back to the country"
DIEHARD
14-10-07, 01:55 AM
Howard's enemies: The young and the restless
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/10/13/lf_johnhoward.jpg
YOUNG voters, fearful about jobs, are poised to deliver a savage blow to John Howard's fifth-term election prospects, an exclusive Sun-Herald/Taverner poll has found.
The Prime Minister will visit Yarralumla today to advise Governor-General Michael Jeffery of his wish to dissolve Parliament and call a federal election for either November 24 or December 1.
He will do so as the devastating poll reveals his long-time critical support among older voters has also eroded dramatically.
The poll, conducted in NSW and Victoria, revealed Mr Howard entering the election campaign a whopping 18 per cent behind Labor on a two-party preferred basis - 59 per cent to 41 per cent.
Across nearly all demographics and among men and women Labor has leapt ahead, pointing to a landslide victory for the Opposition.
If mirrored on polling day, it would mean a loss to the Government of more than 20 seats.
Hatred of Mr Howard's workplace laws emerged as the critical factor in the dramatic shift in support away from the Government.
First-time voters and the under 29s cited fears about jobs and employment security as the reason they would not vote for the Government.
Almost three-quarters of voters under 29 said they would vote Labor, compared with 60 per cent in 2004. Only 27 per cent would vote for the Coalition.
As dramatic was the defection of cashed-up over 55s, on whom the Government has always relied to form its bedrock support base.
In 2004, 59 per cent of over 55s voted for the Coalition compared with 41 per cent for Labor. The gap has been narrowed dramatically to 51 per cent support for the Coalition, compared with 49 per cent for Labor.
Dismal news also emerged from family voters, those aged between 30 and 54, whom Mr Howard has wooed assiduously for a decade. In 2004 marginally more (51 per cent) chose Labor. But fears about job conditions, disillusionment with the Coalition and the "it's time" factor have swung the group solidly behind Labor by 60 per cent to 40 per cent.
The majority support that Mr Howard drew from female voters has shifted profoundly Labor's way (56 per cent Labor, 44 per cent Coalition). Men are also shunning the Coalition, with an emphatic 62 per cent across all ages saying they would vote Labor. Respondents in every age group cited anger and concern about the industrial relations changes as a primary vote-changer. Two-thirds said the laws would have a strong impact on their voting intentions.
"This is a highly emotional issue that has had a hugely negative impact on the Coalition's reputation," Philip Mitchell-Taverner, managing director of Taverner Research, said. "The new laws are seen as ill-considered, irrelevant, counterproductive and anti-worker . . . These findings are calamitous for the Liberals."
Another mantra was the "it's time" factor, with many respondents saying Mr Howard has been in power too long. A slight majority - 51 per cent - said Mr Howard had been right to stay on as prime minister. The downside for the incumbent was that Mr Rudd was seen in both states as the preferred prime minister (52 per cent to 42 per cent, 6 per cent undecided).
Health was rated as the second most important area of concern with climate change and the environment lagging behind trustworthiness and economic management.
If either side advocated a timetable for a republic it would curry favour with most voters (53 per cent).
The poll is further good news for Mr Rudd, who yesterday pledged $50million to a cancer centre at Sydney's Royal Prince Alfred Hospital if Labor wins. He said the centre would be a world-class facility.
http://www.smh.com.au
HodgoBerro
14-10-07, 06:46 AM
im curious
if john howard calls the election for november 24 what are my options?
my dad and i will be in sydney for various reasons and are unable to vote in our electorate.
are we able to go to town hall and vote or do we have to do an absentee vote?
DIEHARD
14-10-07, 11:14 AM
Howard is at Government House, we are going to see an election called any second.
It's on!
DIEHARD
14-10-07, 11:20 AM
Howard has left government house. News conference any minute.
Kevin Rudd will be so pleased it's happened, he has been crouched at the starting blocks for weeks.
And it really pisses me off how Howard has played silly and pathetic games giggling about his election date games. What a waste of everyones time.
He's on now. "Breaking news" 24th, Nov. Like we didn't know. Hughsey got the scoop.
Queenslander
14-10-07, 12:10 PM
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,5701149,00.jpg
PM's D-Day: November 24
By Glenn Milne
October 14, 2007 11:21am
PRIME Minister John Howard will hold a noon press conference to formally announce a Federal election scheduled for November 24.
Mr Howard this morning met with Governor-General Michael Jeffery to formally request he dissolve Parliament to enable the election process to commence.
The PM's visit will ignite a gruelling six-week campaign aimed at wearing down Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd.
Parliament, which was due to resume tomorrow, is not likely to return as Mr Howard embarks on a bid to win an historic fifth term.
A Coalition victory after 11.5 years in office will be against the odds, with 68-year-old Mr Howard battling an "it's time" factor.
The opinion polls give Mr Rudd a commanding lead of about 10 percentage points on a two-party preferred basis in his first election as Opposition Leader.
But the task facing Labor is still substantial. The Opposition needs to win 16 seats nationwide to take office, with a uniform two-party preferred swing of 4.8 per cent.
Mr Howard yesterday again refused to confirm the election date, saying it would be some time between now and early December. But it is understood he will visit the Governor-General's residence at Yarralumla this morning.
With the phony election campaign under way since Mr Rudd became Labor leader in December, the Prime Minister faced increasing accusations from the Opposition that he was delaying the poll to extend the Government's $1 million-a-day advertising blitz. All taxpayer-funded advertising must cease once the election is called.
Mr Rudd was on the attack yesterday: "If we go back to Parliament next week, that's another $6 million on top of the $21 million over the last weeks that have been spent on taxpayer-funded advertising."
Unveiling an initiative to combat cancer, Mr Rudd declared: "My challenge to Mr Howard is: Stop the taxpayer-funded advertising and invest the money instead in much-needed medical equipment around the country."
Mr Howard goes into the campaign with the economy in good shape, growth at around 3 per cent and unemployment at a three-decade low.
But with the economy facing capacity constraints due to skills shortages, there's continuing upward pressure on interest rates.
Another rate rise looms as the main threat to the Government's re-election, with the next inflation figure out on October 24, followed by a Reserve Bank Board meeting on November 6.
That raises the prospect of a possible rate rise in the middle of the campaign - a decision Reserve Bank Governor Glenn Stevens has warned he won't shy away from.
This would come on top of five consecutive hikes since Mr Howard's 2004 election victory.
Mr Howard campaigned specifically in 2004 on a pledge to keep interest rates low.
Mr Rudd is pinning his hopes of victory on a backlash against the Coalition's WorkChoices reforms and his commitment to signing the Kyoto Protocol and implementing a 60 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2050. Mr Howard, too, has pledged to cut greenhouse gases but has so far set no long-term target.
Mr Rudd has been careful to embrace Mr Howard's overall Budget settings, describing himself as an "economic conservative".
But with the Opposition Leader never having held office federally, the Government is likely to launch a major scare campaign, warning that Mr Rudd is too great a risk to the economy.
Both leaders unveiled virtual dress rehearsals for their campaign launches last week.
With Mr Howard battling to combat Mr Rudd's claim that only he offers so-called "fresh leadership" for the future, the Prime Minister nominated "five forward agenda items" as the basis for his re-election pitch: economic growth and opportunity, stronger communities, a secure Australia, national unity, and the creation of a sustainable country by addressing climate change.
Mr Rudd declared "Australia needs new leadership for the future".
He said the country needed leadership that was not just about keeping the economy strong, but one that "also understands that our economy must also work for working families; an economy that delivers to the household economy as well".
Mr Rudd has nominated the policy areas he'll be pressing during the campaign as provision of broadband, and investment in infrastructure, skills and education, as well as increased provision of child care.
www.news.com.au
DIEHARD
14-10-07, 01:28 PM
Kevin Rudd press conference at 2:15pm but until then enjoy the Test footy.
Queenslander
14-10-07, 06:08 PM
Kevin Rudd press conference at 2:15pm but until then enjoy the Test footy.
How many times did Kevin Rudd have to say "new leadership" in his press conference.......probably as many times as "new leadership" was written on the wall behind him. Maybe "new leadership" is a subliminal message ;)
DIEHARD
14-10-07, 09:36 PM
PM proposes debate next Sunday
PRIME Minister John Howard wants to debate Labor leader Kevin Rudd just one week into the election campaign.
He is proposing the live audience debate take place in the Great Hall of Parliament House next Sunday, moderated by Sky New's political editor David Speers.
In a letter to ALP national secretary Tim Gartrell, Liberal Party federal director Brian Loughnane queried Mr Rudd's availability for the debate and set out the terms under which it would occur.
A panel of five senior journalists, chosen by both parties and the National Press Club, would take part but there was no indication audience participation would be involved.
http://www.news.com.au
DIEHARD
15-10-07, 01:21 AM
Coalition faces poll 'annihilation'By Dennis Shanahan
LABOR goes into the election campaign with a crushing lead that leaves the Coalition facing the "annihilation" foreshadowed by John Howard.
Despite the widespread expectation of an election being called, the latest Newspoll survey shows no change in the parties' standings in the past two weeks.
But there appears to have been a negative reaction to Kevin Rudd after Labor's internal confusion over the death penalty for the Bali bombers, and a positive reaction for the Prime Minister after his promise of constitutional recognition for indigenous Australians.
According to the Newspoll survey, conducted over the weekend exclusively for The Australian, Labor's primary vote remained on 48 per cent and the Coalition's was unchanged on 39 per cent, giving Labor a lead on a two-party preferred basis of 56 per cent to 44 per cent.
Up to 75 per cent of the Newspoll survey was conducted before Mr Howard called the election and named November 24 as the poll date.
Although the Coalition's standings did not change, Mr Howard's personal support lifted to a 12-month high of 47 per cent, a three-point rise in satisfaction in two weeks, and dissatisfaction was virtually unchanged on 44 per cent. Mr Howard built on his popular intervention into Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory with his announcement on Thursday of a "new reconciliation" with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Dissatisfaction with Kevin Rudd's performance as Opposition Leader rose four points to 24 per cent, its highest since he was elected leader in December.
Satisfaction with Mr Rudd remains extremely high at 60 per cent, but has declined three surveys in a row since reaching 66 per cent at the end of August.
Mr Rudd was criticised last week after he slapped down his spokesman on foreign affairs, Robert McClelland, and dumped his proposed campaign against the death penalty in Asia after an outcry from the families of the victims of the Bali bombers.
The relative position on preferred prime minister did not change, with Mr Rudd continuing his domination over Mr Howard at 48 per cent to 39 per cent.
In May, after the Newspoll showed Labor ahead on primary votes by 47 per cent to 39 per cent and a two-party preferred basis of 57 per cent to 43 per cent, Mr Howard said the Coalition faced electoral annihilation and warned Coalition MPs the polls might not change before the election.
Mr Howard has also pointed to Paul Keating's victory in 1993, in which Labor started in the same position on primary vote as the Coalition is now. Yesterday, the Prime Minister avoided talking about the opinion polls, and indicated he wouldn't be commenting on them in the coming six weeks of the campaign.
Asked about the continuing gap between the Coalition and Labor in the polls, Mr Howard said: "We're going to have the real thing in six weeks time, and I have no intention of spending even a nanosecond between now and election day in commenting on opinion polls." Mr Rudd, who has said winning the election will be as hard as climbing Mount Everest, also played down Labor's overwhelming lead in the polls this year.
"To win this election, we are going to have to make history," he said yesterday as he responded to the Prime Minister's official announcement of the election date.
The Opposition Leader pointed to Labor's only two victories from Opposition since World War II -- 1972 and 1983.
"I believe that this is going to be the fight of our lives," he said. "We have 16 seats to win and we are up against a really clever politician and I believe that this will go down to the wire."
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer also played down the effect of the opinion polls on the election outcome.
"I don't think the opinion polls are going to be what people vote on," Mr Downer told the Nine Network.
http://www.news.com.au
DIEHARD
15-10-07, 01:25 AM
Some good news for Kevin and the Labor party on the 2nd day of the Election campaign. Great to see Kevin hold on, if polls continue a status quo, Howard runs the risk of being either drowned by the polls or always having to address them. Not good for his campaign.
DIEHARD
15-10-07, 01:28 AM
Galaxy poll shows Rudd in trouble at home
KEVIN Rudd's home state has delivered the prime ministerial hopeful a sobering blow at the start of a gruelling six-week federal election campaign.
Prime Minister John Howard yesterday announced a November 24 election that both sides agreed would be framed around leadership.
But Mr Rudd is struggling to win the support he needs in key Queensland marginal electorates.
An exclusive Courier-Mail/Galaxy poll of voters in four marginal seats has Labor on track to win just two seats in the Sunshine State ? although it is within striking distance of a host of others.
While voters in the four marginal seats of Bonner, Moreton, Longman and Herbert had a strong opinion of Mr Rudd's performance, Labor was holding only a slim 2 per cent lead on the two-party preferred vote.
This translates to a healthy swing of 5.6 per cent towards Labor since the 2004 election, but it is dramatically less than the 9 per cent swing to Labor suggested in last month's national Galaxy poll.
Mr Rudd was yesterday playing down Labor's chances of sweeping to victory, despite national polls that assume a uniform swing still suggesting he is headed for victory.
"We are up against a really clever politician and I believe that this will go down to the wire," Mr Rudd said at his first campaign press conference, at the Convention Centre in Brisbane.
At Parliament House in Canberra, the Prime Minister warned Australian voters they faced a clear choice between an experienced team with a proven track record and an unknown quantity in Mr Rudd.
"I am facing my day of accountability, as is the Leader of the Opposition," Mr Howard said.
He said only the Coalition had the experience to run the economy.
He also said he would hand over mid-term to Treasurer Peter Costello in a "sensible transition". Mr Rudd said support for Mr Howard was a vote for uncertainty because of Mr Howard's plans to retire mid-term and pass the leadership to Mr Costello.
"If I'm elected to become the next prime minister of Australia, I will serve a full three-year term," he said. "I'm offering new leadership, a plan for Australia's future, a clear-cut commitment to work for that future."
Mr Rudd has previously said Labor needs to win at least six extra seats in Queensland as it strives to grab 16 nationally to force a change of Government.
However, Labor strategists have said Labor is doing so well in NSW it could afford to win fewer in Queensland.
Mr Costello said he and Mr Howard would work together.
"I have been very much part of the team and I will be very much part of the team in the future," he said.
Mr Costello said voters would soon see Mr Rudd's true colours and turn against him. "I think that he regards himself as a front-runner. He, I think, is now beginning to take people for granted," he said.
Mr Howard said yesterday if he won the election, he intended to stay in the top job for at least 18 months to oversee the Aboriginal reconciliation referendum.
The Prime Minister also indicated he would roll out a series of big-spending announcements to win back battlers who have been feeling the financial pressure of rising petrol, grocery and housing prices.
He said the Australian economy was thriving and unemployment was at a 33-year low but admitted some people were not sharing the prosperity.
"There are individuals and groups of individuals in various sections of society who miss out," Mr Howard said.
Mr Rudd said Australia could not afford another three years of a Government that had been in power 11 years and lost touch with working families.
Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile said yesterday hospitals would be top of the Nationals' campaign agenda. "We want a local takeover of hospitals, not more Labor bureaucratic mismanagement," he said.
Australian Democrats senator Andrew Bartlett, meanwhile, warned voters against handing control of the Senate to extremist or untested candidates.
Family First senator Steve Fielding accused the Coalition of having abused its control of the Senate ? and that was partially the reason behind Labor's recent resurgence.
http://www.thecouriermail.com.au
DIEHARD
15-10-07, 02:55 PM
More tax cuts promised for all
THE Government has unleashed its first big hit of the federal election campaign, announcing a plan to restructure the tax system to lower tax rates and raise the tax-free threshold.
Prime Minister John Howard and Treausurer Peter Costello have made their first joint appearance of the campaign to announce the plan, which would take effect over five years - well into a second term if Mr Costello became prime minister.
The plan would see the tax-free threshold raised to $14,000 next year, while the lowest tax rate would kick in on earnings over $34,000. Taxpayers would pay 30 cents in the dollar once they earn $80,000 a year and 40 cents at $180,000.
In following years, the top tax rates would be lowered while the tax-free threshold would be lifted again.
Mr Costello has said the goal of the restructure was to arrive at a tax-free threshold of $20,000 and for there to be only four marginal tax rates, with the top rate set at 40 cents in the dollar. However the Treasurer has only outlined precise numbers for the first three years.
Mr Costello has said the plan would see all Australians playing less tax, but would also keep the Budget in surplus. He said the tax cuts would cost about $34 billion over three years.
Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd, who stumbled over the precise details of the marginal tax rates in a press conference before the official campaign began, has said Labor's tax policy will be released later in the campaign.
Questioned about the timing of the announcement - one day into a federal election campaign, Mr Howard said: "It's a very sensible, conservative, logical thing to do."
He said that by staggering the tax changes over several years, they would not place upwards pressure on interest rates. And he said the cuts would help working mothers. "By the year 2010, 65 per cent of women with children in the part time work force will face a top marginal tax rate of no more than 15 per cent."
Mr Costello has said the Coalition's goal was to have 98 per cent of taxpayers paying no more than 35 cents in the dollar.
He made the announcement after releasing updated Budget figures which showed better than expected jobs growth.
CommSec senior economist Craig James said the policy was designed to get more people working.
"Anything that increases labour force participation has to be a positive thing. Whether it achieves that remains to be seen," he said.
http://www.news.com.au
Hoppy2007Dragons
15-10-07, 04:22 PM
Here is a more detailed article on the tax cuts.
Source: ninemsn.com.au
Govt proposing $34 billion in tax cuts
Monday Oct 15 15:40 AEST
The federal government has offered $34 billion in tax cuts as part of a five-year plan, throwing down the gauntlet on tax policy on day one of the election campaign.
Treasurer Peter Costello unexpectedly released the mid-year budget review, upgrading growth forecasts and employment growth from previous forecasts, that will generate revenue which will pay for the tax cuts.
The tax cuts would be through increases in the tax free threshold and the 15 per cent threshold, and cuts in the top two tax rates, he said.
Within five years the top rate would be 40 cents in the dollar.
Mr Costello said his proposed revamp of the tax system would maintain a healthy budget surplus.
"The announcement that I make today in relation to the tax plan keeps the budget in surplus above one per cent of GDP over the whole of the forward estimates - that is this year, next year, 2008-09, and the two projection years out to 2010-11," he said.
"This puts Australia in a much stronger position than comparable developed economies in the world - all of whom, on average, in the OECD or the Euro area ... are in deficit, including the United Kingdom, the United States and Japan."
The tax cuts will deliver a cut of around $20 per week to a person currently on average weekly earnings - around $50,000 - from July 1, 2008, rising to around $35 per week from July 1, 2010.
For a family where the principal earner is on average weekly earnings and the second income earner is in part-time work - earning 40 per cent of average earnings - the income tax cut would be around $30 per week, rising to $50 per week in 2010.
These tax cuts are in addition to the tax cuts that took effect on July 1, 2007
Under the new plan, low income earners from the 2008-09 tax year would see their tax free threshold rise from $11,000 to $14,000.
The 30 per cent threshold would increase from $30,001 to $34,001 and the 40 per cent threshold would increase to $80,001.
The 45 per cent threshold would increase to $180,001 as previously announced in the budget.
From July 1, 2009, low income earners would be tax free up to $15,000, the 30 per cent threshold would increase to $35,001, the second top marginal rate would be cut from 40 per cent to 38 per cent and the top marginal rate would be cut from 45 per cent to 43 per cent.
From July 1, 2010 ,low income earners would be tax free to $16,000, the 30 per cent threshold would increase to $37,001, the second top marginal rate would be cut from 38 to 37 per cent and the top marginal rate would be cut from 43 per cent to 42 per cent.
"This plan is all to work towards the goal of tax reform which we now set ourselves," the treasurer said.
"Within five years - by 2012/13 - (we'll have) four tax rates - 15, 30, 35 and 40 (cents in the dollar).
"That's why we keep reducing those top two tax rates."
Releasing the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook 2007-08, Mr Costello said economic growth is now expected to grow by 4.25 per cent in the 2007-08 financial year compared with 3.75 per cent as estimated in the May budget.
Employment growth is now forecast to rise to 2.25 per cent in 2007-08 instead of 1.5 per cent.
"The consequence of that is that we now forecast in 2007-8 we will have, on average, 100,000 additional people in the workforce, higher than we forecast in the May budget."
Mr Costello said the additional workers would lead to a growth in revenue for PAYG along with an increase in superannuation receipts.
Mr Costello said the tax restructure would help grow Australia's economy by encouraging more people into work.
"The reason we are doing this is to encourage more people to join the workforce and to boost the capacity of the Australian economy," he said.
"This is part of our 'go for growth' strategy."
Treasury modelling showed federal government tax reforms since 2000 had boosted the number of people in the workforce by 300,000.
"The changes which we announce today will boost the estimated workforce by around 65,000 people," Mr Costello said.
"Encouraging more people into the workforce, particularly by reducing their effective tax-free threshold and particularly by lifting the threshold up until which you pay 15 cents in the dollar, is boosting the number of people joining Australia's workforce."
Prime Minister John Howard said the across-the-board tax relief was a better way to relieve cost-of-living pressures on families than targeted housing affordability policies or cutting petrol tax.
Meanwhile, Labor leader Kevin Rudd says the opposition's tax policy will be released later in the election campaign.
Visiting Ipswich Hospital in south-east Queensland prior to the government's announcement, Mr Rudd told reporters several elements of Labor's tax policy had already been outlined.
Mr Rudd said Labor's policy would include halving the withholding tax to "turn Australia into the funds management capital of east Asia".
The policy also included a package of more than $600 million worth of federal tax credits to encourage investors to invest in affordable rental accommodation, he said.
"As for the rest of the policy, we will have further to say during the course of the campaign," Mr Rudd said.
I personally like the bolded parts whilst i'm at uni and a low income earner, once i'm in full time work for the first time, tax cuts hsould be a good thing to combat petrol prices and rising living costs, even if only a little.
Jeez i'm excited my first federal election, i can't wait to partake in my civic duty.
DIEHARD
15-10-07, 04:35 PM
I am sure Labor's tax plan also includes tax cuts but I am wary of them, just giving people extra money doesn't solve much because it will drive inflation and interest rates even higher.
I'd prefer this money to mainly put into infrastructure. Roads, hospitals, education, railways, broadband and skills. All of these things we can really reap the benefits from and these things are essential for Australia to reach and maintain its true economic potential and improve Australians quality of life.
Hoppy2007Dragons
15-10-07, 04:45 PM
am sure Labor's tax plan also includes tax cuts but I am wary of them, just giving people extra money doesn't solve much because it will drive inflation and interest rates even higher.
I'd prefer this money to mainly put into infrastructure. Roads, hospitals, education, railways, broadband and skills. All of these things we can really reap the benefits from and these things are essential for Australia to reach and maintain its true economic potential and improve Australians quality of life.
Yes i look forward to what rudd will offer me. Also tax rates given over a length of time rather than all at once, will combat infaltion and interest rises.
But lets have a look at your infastructure.
Road-State responsibility
Health-State responsibility
Railways-state responsibility
Now the federal government can pay for certain things in regards to these issues, and can top up projects etc etc. But it falls in to the court of the state government to maintain the project and to provide adequate funding. They state coffers get the gst as well as other relevant taxes, so they should have more than enough cash with good economic managment to provide adequate funding for services.
I can't comment on other states, but the health, road and railway system in queensland needs a good shake, chuck in our water problems and id say that labour in queensland has doen a poor job.
Wit hregards to skills and broadband, i coudn't agree with you more, money does need to go to these services and the federal government needs to address these. The current government incentives for apprecntrices and skills is not good enough atm, but ive yet to see rudd come up with a more effective policy, so i'll have to keep my eyes out for that.
Capital_Shark
15-10-07, 05:10 PM
Jeez i'm excited my first federal election, i can't wait to partake in my civic duty.
I hate the fact we HAVE to vote. They call it 'the right to vote' but where is the right not to vote?
Social Loafer
15-10-07, 05:24 PM
I hate the fact we HAVE to vote. They call it 'the right to vote' but where is the right not to vote?
If you feel that strongly about it just void your form by writing something like "Shane Warne" and tick his name.
Anyway I for one am glad it's compulsory voting, had they had this in the US there might have been enough people to cancel out the Dumb****s that ticked "Republican" :duh:
Capital_Shark
15-10-07, 05:41 PM
That doesn't void your vote completely, does it?
I think the US system is better. Only people who want to vote do so, so it can be assumed only people who pay attention to the campaigns have a say, and the people who don't know or care don't have a say. Their system is easier too in that you vote for this bloke, or the other bloke.
I hate the fact we HAVE to vote. They call it 'the right to vote' but where is the right not to vote?
I agree 100%. If it is a true democracy, why do we have to vote?
It is a ridiculous state of affairs when you HAVE TO VOTE for someone, even if you don't like any of them. If the options were better, we'd actually be wanting to vote for someone. I'm voting to get rid of someone. I think last federal election illustrates this point. If you didn't like Howard, the next option was Latham. Not a very attractive option, and certainly not a choice ANYONE should be forced to make against their will!
I understand Social Loafer's point too. Making it compulsory does force people to get involved, but if they aren't interested enough to want to vote, they certainly aren't going to be interested enough to make an INFORMED vote. IF you are going to donkey vote, it's just a waste of everyones time and money going through the motions.
Capital_Shark
15-10-07, 06:05 PM
I agree 100%. If it is a true democracy, why do we have to vote?
It is a ridiculous state of affairs when you HAVE TO VOTE for someone, even if you don't like any of them. If the options were better, we'd actually be wanting to vote for someone. I'm voting to get rid of someone. I think last federal election illustrates this point. If you didn't like Howard, the next option was Latham. Not a very attractive option, and certainly not a choice ANYONE should be forced to make against their will!
I understand Social Loafer's point too. Making it compulsory does force people to get involved, but if they aren't interested enough to want to vote, they certainly aren't going to be interested enough to make an INFORMED vote. IF you are going to donkey vote, it's just a waste of everyones time and money going through the motions.
Thankyou!
I have no interest in politics, but once every 4 years I'm forced to pretend to be interested and act like a give a toss and have a half a clue, when I don't. But I figure if I'm gonna be forced to get up on a Saturday and go line up like a moron and give my opinion, I might as well have one to give. Whether its right, wrong, makes sense or if I even believe in it. To this day I have no idea who I voted for last election thanks to the over complication of the voting system. I attempted to vote for Howard, but who knows. Why can't we just have a 2 man ballot. Tick the Rudd box or the Howard box. So simple ... So simple that people might actually be able to get who they want elected.
If voting actually had an effect on how the country was run it'd be illegal.
To this day I have no idea who I voted for last election thanks to the over complication of the voting system. I attempted to vote for Howard, but who knows. Why can't we just have a 2 man ballot. Tick the Rudd box or the Howard box. So simple ... So simple that people might actually be able to get who they want elected.
Very good points.
If they do all the polling on 2 party preferred, and preferred leader, then let us vote the same way!
The only thing harder to understand than preferential voting is the Duckworth-Lewis system!
Hoppy2007Dragons
15-10-07, 06:35 PM
hate the fact we HAVE to vote. They call it 'the right to vote' but where is the right not to vote
if thats the case and u don't vote this year, your not allowed to whinge about the government on this forum for the next 4 years, if i catch ya on here, there will be hell to pay. :p
seriously though, i understand your point, i think australia should have voluntary voting, because unlike america, i think 85% of australia would turn up to vote.
But the whole voting system in australia is a social contract theory, you give up certain rights so the government has the responsibility to protect you, provide services etc etc, in turn your duties are to vote and jury duty if required.
Capital_Shark
15-10-07, 06:57 PM
if thats the case and u don't vote this year, your not allowed to whinge about the government on this forum for the next 4 years, if i catch ya on here, there will be hell to pay. :p
That argument is redundant. Its like saying if you vote for Rudd, you can't complain about anything he screws up. If anything I'd have more right to complain. I could start each sentence with "This is a reason why I didn't vote for either of these.."
The only thing harder to understand than preferential voting is the Duckworth-Lewis system!
True. But at least I'm interested in cricket, so learning to understand the Duckworth-Lewis system wouldn't be as painful. I reckon if I put my mind to it I could get a half an idea about it in 6 weeks too. Can't say the same for the election. Oh, and I'm not forced to watch cricket so my understanding of all the ins and outs isn't as important.
Hoppy2007Dragons
15-10-07, 07:00 PM
That argument is redundant. Its like saying if you vote for Rudd, you can't complain about anything he screws up. If anything I'd have more right to complain. I could start each sentence with "This is a reason why I didn't vote for either of these.."
I hear ya loud and clear. :p :p
Hoppy2007Dragons
15-10-07, 10:06 PM
Nats accuse Labor of intimidation
The Labor Party is trying to intimidate people into casting postal votes in its favour, a senior Nationals official claims.
The Nationals' federal director Brad Henderson said his party had received complaints from voters who had been visited by Labor representatives wearing "angry red" shirts who claimed to be offering help with postal voting.
Others had received phone calls offering a home visit to help with postal voting, he said.
The complaints had come from "a number of areas", including the new electorate of Flynn and the Nationals-held seat of Hinkler, both in Queensland.
Mr Henderson said the "thuggish union tactics" were straight out of the ACTU's election manual and an ominous sign that Labor was planning a dirty election campaign.
"(Opposition Leader) Kevin Rudd should call his hounds off," Mr Henderson said.
"The Labor Party is using the tactics of duress to intimidate voters.
"It's particularly intimidating for elderly ladies, when they are confronted at their front door by Labor apparatchiks in angry red shirts."
Mr Henderson said the move was an invasion of privacy.
"Those who have contacted our offices are upset by Labor's practice, but very fearful of retribution," he said.
"It just shows the extent of Labor and union intimidation - right down to the local community level."
PM stumbles
Prime Minister John Howard — the man fighting an election campaign on the strength of his economic record — got the official interest rate wrong in an interview with A Current Affair's Tracy Grimshaw tonight.
In a "quick pop quiz" at the end of the interview, Grimshaw asked Mr Howard two questions.
The first was: "What is the current average weekly wage in Australia?"
Mr Howard stumbled initially, but recovered to give Grimshaw the annual, rather than weekly, figure.
"Well it's … at an annual level, it's about … it's just over $50,000 a year," he said.
"What is the official Reserve Bank interest rate?" Grimshaw asked next.
"Well, it's 6.25," Mr Howard replied.
"It's actually 6.5," said Grimshaw.
There was no change in Mr Howard's expression. He only grunted "hmmm" in reply.
Mr Howard's opponent, Labor leader Kevin Rudd, fared better in his quiz.
Although he too side-stepped the question of the average weekly wage by offering an annual figure of "um … about $58,000", he got the current interest rate correct.
Source:www.ninemsn.com.au
DIEHARD
15-10-07, 10:20 PM
I was actually watching ACA when Rudd was on and was pleased he got through the pop quiz.
I think it is cheap and amatuer journalism to do that to our leaders, it's pretty disrespectful in my opinion.
Hoppy2007Dragons
15-10-07, 10:30 PM
yeah i fully agree.
I tell ya what though, whoever wrote the briefing note for the PM, is gonna be up **** creek tomrrow morning, obviously didn't give the pm full and frank advice about the current interest rate. :p
Also loved how grimshaw threw in the "state labor, has allowed the hospital system to fall into its current state, how will a federal labour government fix that"
How do u respond to a question like that.
I suppose tracy becasue i'm not a state polititican!!!!:p
I'm trying to figure out exactly what an "angry red shirt" is.
I have a red shirt, it seems quite placid, maybe I got lucky.
Perhaps the Nationals could talk to the press about some policies instead of beginning a smear campaign.
DIEHARD
16-10-07, 08:02 AM
Perhaps the Nationals could talk at all, they are a joke.
DIEHARD
16-10-07, 08:08 AM
Howard's money back guarantee
JOHN Howard has seized the election campaign initiative and caught Kevin Rudd flat-footed by offering a $34 billion election tax sweetener - the biggest in Australia's history - but you would have to re-elect Peter Costello as prime minister to get all of it.
Mr Howard, ridiculed by Labor as stale and bereft of plans for the future, swept into stride for the November 24 federal election yesterday, promising to cut tax rates and lift the tax-free threshold in each of the next three years.
The plan also included a "goal" of slashing Australia's top tax rate from 45 per cent to 40 per cent and taking the tax-free theshold to $20,000 within five years, but that would depend on the economic circumstances of the time.
Mr Howard and Peter Costello promised a tax cut for all, including by $26 a week by 2011 for workers earning $60,000 a year, as they revealed the Government's Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO). The update showed economic growth for 2007-08 on target for 4.25 per cent - up from 3.75 per cent forecast in the May budget.
Labor left lagging
The Coalition's campaign blow came as the Opposition Leader toured a hospital in Ipswich, west of Brisbane, only to have his media event shut down by doctors needing space to treat an emergency case.
It left Labor on the back foot, with Treasury spokesman Wayne Swan calling for more time to absorb the economic figures, despite Labor having spent the past month demanding Mr Howard bring on the election campaign.
The tax plan also intensified interest around a standoff between the parties over Mr Howard's proposal for a one-off, televised leader's debate on Sunday. Labor wants multiple confrontations between Mr Howard and Mr Rudd spread throughout the campaign.
A Sunday debate will place intense pressure on Mr Swan to counter the Coalition tax plan with its own by the weekend.
The announcement also put the focus firmly on marginal tax rates, a subject on which Mr Rudd stumbled in the lead-up to the official campaign.
Howard stumble
But the day was not stumble-free for the Government. Asked on the Nine Network's A Current Affair to name the Reserve Bank's official interest rate, Mr Howard said 6.25 per cent. The rate is 6.5 per cent.
Mr Rudd answered the same question correctly.
Yesterday's campaigning began slowly, with both leaders conducting morning radio and television interviews to follow up the speeches they made when Mr Howard announced the election on Sunday.
But when Mr Rudd failed to announce a new policy in his morning press conference, instead accusing Mr Howard of planning new industrial relations changes, the Prime Minister pounced.
Standing in front of the slogan "Go for Growth", Mr Howard and Mr Costello presented MYEFO forecasts for greater jobs growth and plans for tax cuts they said would deliver genuine relief for families struggling with high costs of fuel, food and housing.
And they contrasted their tax cut approach with Mr Rudd's proposals for inquiries into food and fuel prices.
"Rather than try and fiddle with a committee on prices, isn't it better to give people additional purchasing power via a tax cut?" Mr Howard said.
"Isn't it better to say, well here is additional tax relief, particularly for low-income people, let them decide how they spend it rather then the Government fiddling with a housing affordability policy, which might add to the cost of buying the first home?"
The tax cuts would be delivered in line with the Government's practice over recent years to reduce both tax rates and the thresholds at which they apply.
Workers earning $100,000 a year would be $41.35 a week better off by 2011, excluding the tax cuts already delivered this financial year, while those on $200,000 a year would gain $128 a week.
Under the Government's plan, about 98 per cent of taxpayers will pay no more than 35 per cent tax by 2011, and 65 per cent of women working part-time to help support their families would pay only 15per cent.
Mr Howard said that because a typical family included a father on average wages and a mother working part-time to augment family income, the relief would be "terrific".
"That is an amazing reform and it is a contemporary modern reform that recognises that nature of family arrangements," he said.
The threshold at which low-income earners will pay tax will be progressively increased from the current level of $11,000 a year to $20,000 a year by 2012-13.
Mr Howard said his proposals were fairer than Labor's because they would give average taxpayers the wherewithal to deal with the cost-of-living pressures in the way in which they saw fit.
Mr Costello said the tax cuts would not be inflationary and were designed to increase workforce participation by giving people greater rewards for work.
"By getting more people into the workforce you will be taking pressure off inflation because you will be adding to the number of workers, getting one of the big capacity constraints out of the way," Mr Costello said on Sydney radio 2UE.
"One of the problems that business has at the moment ... is they are reporting, in some parts of the country, not enough workers."
Mr Swan, speaking in Brisbane, said he would not be rushed into producing Labor's tax policy.
"I think what the Australian public would like is their politicians to responsibly study the detail," Mr Swan said.
"We have not had any time to study the detail or the estimates in that document. We are very serious about being responsible economic managers and we will take our time to study the detail."
The Coalition's strong performance in yesterday's campaigning came after more bad news in opinion polls. The Australian's Newspoll showed Labor ahead in two-party-preferred terms by 56 per cent to 44 per cent - unchanged from a poll two weeks earlier.
But the Government had some good news with a poll published in Brisbane newspaper The Courier-Mail showing Labor poised to claim only two of four marginal seats surveyed.
The Australian
Mr Howard and Peter Costello promised a tax cut for all, including by $26 a week by 2011 for workers earning $60,000 a year
When it comes down to it, $26 a week is nothing, and for low income earners, whatever benefit they get will be useless.
Australians as a whole would benefit from money being put into health, education and basic infrastructure. I think medicare and private health cover needs revisiting. Even though you get most of your money back from a GP visit, you still need the cash up front ($80 on my last visit), which can be a struggle for families and low income earners.
Even with the top level of private health cover you can end up paying thousands for a hospital stay.
I don't think there's any government money going into dental, also a very important part of keeping people healthy.
Hoppy2007Dragons
16-10-07, 11:37 AM
When it comes down to it, $26 a week is nothing, and for low income earners, whatever benefit they get will be useless.
$26 covers my weekly cost of petrol.
health, education and basic infrastructure
All state responsibilities, the federal government can only put so much money into things, if that money isn't effectivly used by state governments its a waste.
I think medicare and private health cover needs revisiting
Spot on!!!!!
Social Loafer
16-10-07, 11:54 AM
A lot more needs to be put into Mental Health.
All state responsibilities, the federal government can only put so much money into things, if that money isn't effectivly used by state governments its a waste.
I consider Medicare a part of health, and that's federal.
Personally I'd like to see health and education coming under one federal banner. Get education standardised across the country, and do away with the institutionalised corruption we see in departments such as Queensland Health.
The money for these things is filtered down from the federal government anyhow, we don't need extra bureaucracy getting in the way.
Hoppy2007Dragons
16-10-07, 12:47 PM
I consider Medicare a part of health, and that's federal.
I have a question, does the federal government fund the medicare 100% or does state through in some, if its 100% federal then i agree with you, more funding is required.
Personally I'd like to see health and education coming under one federal banner. Get education standardised across the country, and do away with the institutionalised corruption we see in departments such as Queensland Health.
Coudn't agree more, i think health, water and education should be federal responsibilities, but that will more likely than not never happen, because the federal government will then require the gst to fund and maintain this key services, which takes away from the coffers of the state governments and they won't like that regardless of which party is in power.
Look at the trouble the federal government went through just to get federal control of the murray-darling basin. (i'm not even sure if they have it yet)
The money for these things is filtered down from the federal government anyhow, we don't need extra bureaucracy getting in the way
Some of the money is funded down by the federal government.
eg goodna bypass and other road projects, federal puts in 1 billion, state puts in 2 billion and arangments liek that etc etc.
DIEHARD
16-10-07, 03:11 PM
The Federal government needs to put alot more funding into health and education, they need to give the states more money.
They have bucket loads sitting around at commonwealth level yet they do not give it to what is needed. Federal funding of health is falling behind growing state investment, it is just not good enough.
People are suffering out there with our health systems and our education system is screaming for more funding. What two things are more important?
Tax cuts are all well and good and Labor will cut tax but alot of that money should be put into infrastructure. And there is an incredibily high risk of greater inflation and interest rates, which both work to take money away from us.
We all need to think a lot bigger than just a couple extra blue notes in the wallet.
DIEHARD
16-10-07, 03:13 PM
Coudn't agree more, i think health, water and education should be federal responsibilities, but that will more likely than not never happen, because the federal government will then require the gst to fund and maintain this key services, which takes away from the coffers of the state governments and they won't like that regardless of which party is in power..
Or maybe they can just invest our national surplus into those areas instead of trying to buy votes with it.
DIEHARD
16-10-07, 03:30 PM
Election odds move in Coalition's favour
NEARLY three-quarters of the money bet on the election since Sunday has been for the coalition, bucking the trend of recent months when the majority of money consistently flowed to Labor, Sportingbet Australia has said.
The Coalition's election odds for a fifth term of Government have narrowed to $2.75 from $2.90 since Prime Minister John Howard announced the November 24 election date on Sunday.
Labor's odds have widened to $1.45 from $1.40.
Sportingbet Australia CEO Michael Sullivan said punters had also reacted favourably to yesterday's tax cut announcement.
The Government announced $34 billion of proposed tax cuts yesterday when it released its midyear Budget review.
"We have definitely seen a shift towards the Government in the past 24 hours with 73 per cent of all bets going to the Coalition," Mr Sullivan said.
"It will be very interesting to see how long the punters new-found enthusiasm for the Coalition lasts, but at this stage we're seeing them make a bit of a comeback.
"I expect both the contest and the odds to get closer as the campaign enters full swing, and by the looks of things, so do Australian punters."
http://www.news.com.au
I am going to put a bet on Labor just to add to the tension.
DIEHARD
16-10-07, 03:57 PM
Mr Howard has also insisted that the ?worm? - a graph that tracks the audience?s reaction as the debate progresses - would not be used.
?And why punish the worm?? Mr Rudd said.
?Everyone in Australia likes the worm. Let?s be friends of the worm.?
:rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf:
Hoppy2007Dragons
16-10-07, 04:15 PM
The Federal government needs to put alot more funding into health and education, they need to give the states more money.
They have bucket loads sitting around at commonwealth level yet they do not give it to what is needed. Federal funding of health is falling behind growing state investment, it is just not good enough.
People are suffering out there with our health systems and our education system is screaming for more funding. What two things are more important?
Tax cuts are all well and good and Labor will cut tax but alot of that money should be put into infrastructure. And there is an incredibily high risk of greater inflation and interest rates, which both work to take money away from us.
We all need to think a lot bigger than just a couple extra blue notes in the wallet.
Or maybe they can just invest our national surplus into those areas instead of trying to buy votes with it.
as ive stated before whats the point of putting massive amounts of money into projects when its clear that the state governments have failed to properly maintain and run the system.
I mean seriously u put say an extra 5 billion in the health system from the federal government and what happens, the state government wastes the money on buying equipment that won't be used, services that are rarely used and consulting peopel u don't need.
My mum's a nurse and the amount of money that queensland health has wasted on consultaion agencies to help fix problems, or beds that are crap, machines that don't work, doctors that aren't fully trained, repairs that don't repair the problem. Mum told me of one machine they bought in the rbwh, its some brilliant diagonois machine really brilliant, the catch, it costs to much to run, one patient in it is like 25,000 dollars or osmething.
I'm assuming that given all the health systems around the country are currently ****ed beyond recongnition is because of poor managment on behalf of the departments of health.
Lets just throw a huge surplus at a bunch of corrupt and poorly run departments and see if that fixes the problem.
The state governments need to fix up their act and then the federal government can really use the money to make a differenc, til lthen its wasted money.
My mum's a nurse and the amount of money that queensland health has wasted on consultaion agencies to help fix problems, or beds that are crap, machines that don't work, doctors that aren't fully trained, repairs that don't repair the problem. Mum told me of one machine they bought in the rbwh, its some brilliant diagonois machine really brilliant, the catch, it costs to much to run, one patient in it is like 25,000 dollars or osmething.
I'm assuming that given all the health systems around the country are currently ****ed beyond recongnition is because of poor managment on behalf of the departments of health.
Lets just throw a huge surplus at a bunch of corrupt and poorly run departments and see if that fixes the problem.
The state governments need to fix up their act and then the federal government can really use the money to make a differenc, til lthen its wasted money.
It's the same as any Govt dept, federal, state, local. Its full of bureaucrats! And most of them have no life experience, no real job/work experience, no real clue on the things they are making decisions about, so they spend all of their time creating work for themselves. If they solved problems and systems ran efficiently and effectively, there would be no further need for them, so it is in their interest to keep being stumbling blocks. It's the same old story, that even though you do a job 40,50,60 hours a week, with 20 years experience, some bloke/sheila sitting in an office 500k's away will still tell you how you should be doing it.
Coaster
16-10-07, 06:00 PM
While talking about Hospitals, Premier Wayne Goss established 13 regional health authorities with up to 30 employees in each. In other words, it was the Goss Labor government which established this new and totally unnecessary layer of bureaucracy, loading up the system with another 300 to 400 professionals and administrators.
Anyone remember who his Key man was? Yep Rudd.
It might sound like im dissing this bloke, but i find it strange that people are so hell bent on Labor, and they havent even released any decent policies.
People need to be more like CS imo, and wait until all the cards are on the table before deciding who to vote for, some people here sound like religious nuts, who dont even want to look at the other party, becuase there grandparents, and there parents all voted this way...
Ill be waiting and seeing who will offer me the best package, who i think will get the job done, and who i think will keep this country the way i like it. And I dont care if that person is a Green.
People need to be more like CS imo, and wait until all the cards are on the table before deciding who to vote for, some people here sound like religious nuts, who dont even want to look at the other party, becuase there grandparents, and there parents all voted this way...
Ill be waiting and seeing who will offer me the best package, who i think will get the job done, and who i think will keep this country the way i like it. And I dont care if that person is a Green.
I agree, but I've said it before, a lot of people are voting Howard out, not voting Rudd in. It's just a case of finding the best substitute. I doubt it will be a Green ;)
Coaster
16-10-07, 06:17 PM
I agree, but I've said it before, a lot of people are voting Howard out, not voting Rudd in. It's just a case of finding the best substitute. I doubt it will be a Green ;)
NP thats a valid reason IMO. And i agree i doubt it will be a green.
I personally dont think Rudd is any better, him and Goss completely screwed up the Queensland health system, and they will completely screw up this nation IMO.
If he wants my vote, he better come up with something better than a myspace page and the correct order at my local chinese Takeout.
Im in business, and Howard has done a lot of good for me personally
DIEHARD
17-10-07, 12:27 AM
1. Labor will rip up Workchoices.
2. Labor will bring our troops home.
3. Labor will ratify the Koyoto Protocol.
4. Labor will focus on education and health.
Four very important reasons why I am voting Labor.
some people here sound like religious nuts, who dont even want to look at the other party, becuase there grandparents, and there parents all voted this way...
There's a LOT of people like this, I've known them on both sides of the political fence. I even knew people who thought Sir Joe was good.
I've taken the time to look, and Labor have plenty of policies I agree with. The Liberal party seems to be rolling out the election day promises that will have little or no real impact to people (and if the past is to go by, they're all lies anyhow), and the obligatory smear campaign.
Hoppy2007Dragons
17-10-07, 09:11 AM
Labor will bring our troops home
Not all of them.
Capital_Shark
17-10-07, 11:08 AM
People need to be more like CS imo
Amen!
HodgoBerro
17-10-07, 01:28 PM
here is the link for the pdf file you have to download to apply for a postal vote.
http://www.aec.gov.au/pdf/elections/2007/postal_vote/EF048w_0807_f.pdf
You then send it to
Australian Electoral Commission
Reply Paid 9867
In your Capital City
DIEHARD
17-10-07, 01:41 PM
Not all of them.
Yes all of them.
Capital_Shark
17-10-07, 01:44 PM
Not all at once, surely?
Queenslander
17-10-07, 01:47 PM
Not all at once, surely?
I heard it Labor was supporting a "phased" withdraw
Capital_Shark
17-10-07, 01:50 PM
I heard it Labor was supporting a "phased" withdraw
Well I'm sure Liberal supports a 'phased' withdrawal too. Wouldn't be much of an election policy to support leaving them stranded in Iraq for good.
Coaster
17-10-07, 04:21 PM
Amen!
Haha i see that quote in your sig now too, LOL good one:clap: :clap: :clap:
Social Loafer
17-10-07, 06:16 PM
1. Labor will rip up Workchoices.
2. Labor will bring our troops home.
3. Labor will ratify the Koyoto Protocol.
4. Labor will focus on education and health.
Four very important reasons why I am voting Labor.
Add to that
* Improve Boardband
* The investment in the New Australian Solar Institution.
The last point is very important in regards to Climate Change.. Potential in that is enormous. We are the country that should be leading the way in regards to Solar Technology.
Capital_Shark
17-10-07, 06:26 PM
But WorkChoices for the most part are a good thing. Everyone I know who has an AWA loves it.
The troops will be coming home no matter who is in power. I'm yet to hear a decent exit strategy from either party.
From what I understand the Kyoto Protocol verges on useless. Without ratification by the majority of major greenhouse gas emitters, it'll be lucky to reduce global emissions by 1%.
Broadband improves is on both parties lists.
Hoppy2007Dragons
17-10-07, 06:38 PM
Yes all of them.
no he won't, ur under a serious illusion in regards to this.
ive read reports that he will increase troop numbers in afghanastain. (can't fidn the report i posted it on here somewhere)
We have troops in east timor, solomon islands, somalia, israel, he won't be bringing them all home.:p (taking the mickey here)
Seriously though in regards to Iraq which is what u are refering to, we will always have a least 150 troops to protect our embassy, as long as iraq is in a conflict, which will be many years to come.
Capital_Shark
17-10-07, 06:43 PM
Rudd also sent a letter of support to Howard when he committed troops to Iraq. But I don't think he meant that to come out later.
Coaster
17-10-07, 06:49 PM
Just for fun lets look at each individualy
1. Labor will rip up Workchoices.
You bet they will, they will bring in Unions again, 70% of the front bench of Labor is made up from trade Unions, the mining industry will be brought to its knees, the construction industry to its knees, and most small business's like my own will be bought down on to there knees. Jobs will be lost, becuase Small Business like mine will not be able to take the risk of employing someone, and the red tape will increase ,Yay
2. Labor will bring our troops home.
This is a political stunt, since when does the government of Australia determine our countries armed forces deployment due to public opinion?
3. Labor will ratify the Koyoto Protocol
I would like to see a policy outlining this.
Personaly i think the koyoto protocol is fundamentaly flawed, but i would look at any strategy put forth.
4. Labor will focus on education and health.
Well we have seen how Labor has focused on education and health in all the states and territories they currently have under control, to me they are failing, maybe they need more money, well if Labor hold the federal seat then they can have some, they must not have enough from all the GST generated in each state, and all the other sources of income for the state, which brings up another strong point, with labor holding all 9 seats of office all states and federal they can increase the GST, wouldn't that be great for us citizens.
5. Improve Boardband
Gotta love fast porn:)
6. The investment in the New Australian Solar Institution.
More red tape?
You do relise that there are more then one institute government funded that are already researching this don't you?
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,21654603-5001028,00.html?from=public_rss
Im pretty sure we dont need a central government agency controlling this, otherwise nothing will be done.
DIEHARD
17-10-07, 07:54 PM
Of course I am taking about all the troops in Iraq, not other deployments.
We need to focus on our region and other missions of true and genuine importance.
Coaster, nice to see you being quickly brainwashed by the Liberals ads and they have only been on the air for a few hours. The sky isn't falling chicken little. The way people carry on its like Howard invented the economy and commerce. You are even parrotting Costello in his press conference today on having 9 Labor governments and them wanting to increase the GST.
OOooo the unions...better hide under your bed....give me a break. :rolf:
Both Howard yesterday and today Costello have admitted that WorkChoices is a tool to control wages.
Hoppy2007Dragons
17-10-07, 08:57 PM
Of course I am taking about all the troops in Iraq
u don't discredit that some troops will need to remain in Iraq to protect australian citizens working in the embassy, as well as Australian Diplomats working in Iraq. As sure as hell would not like to see Australians left out to dry in a war-zone for the purpose of pulling some votes in a federal election.
Thats all this is by Rudd, a vote puller and political stunt that he can't complete anyway, i guess you could say its rudds version of howards gst, telling us what we want to hear but knowing dam well whats really going on :rolf:
Coaster
17-10-07, 09:03 PM
Coaster, nice to see you being quickly brainwashed by the Liberals ads and they have only been on the air for a few hours. The sky isn't falling chicken little. The way people carry on its like Howard invented the economy and commerce. You are even parrotting Costello in his press conference today on having 9 Labor governments and them wanting to increase the GST.
OOooo the unions...better hide under your bed....give me a break. :rolf:
Both Howard yesterday and today Costello have admitted that WorkChoices is a tool to control wages.
Your right i repeated some of what i am seen today at the press conference.
I would gladly quote Rudd, but lets face it, there is nothing to talk about, he has not come out with any policies at all.
OOooo the unions...better hide under your bed....give me a break
Umm yeah they are that bad, if you like handing over a part of your salary for no reason to a body of thugs that do nothing for the economy, then so be it.
As an owner of a small business, i dont want the control of that business handed over to them
You bet they will, they will bring in Unions again, 70% of the front bench of Labor is made up from trade Unions, the mining industry will be brought to its knees, the construction industry to its knees, and most small business's like my own will be bought down on to there knees. Jobs will be lost, becuase Small Business like mine will not be able to take the risk of employing someone, and the red tape will increase ,Yay
It's good to see all that money Howard is wasting on advertising is being effective somewhere.
This is a political stunt, since when does the government of Australia determine our countries armed forces deployment due to public opinion?
I don't think for one minute Rudd is just going to take office and say, "Righto boys, jobs done, come on home, the lot of you!". However, maybe he feels the same as the majority of Australians and will look at other options. This buii**** from Howard about "staying until the job is done".... well, what is the job we are trying to do? WMD's? Overthrow Saddam? Liberate Iraq? Oh yes, stabilty etc. How do you know when that job is done? I assume Howard waits until GWB tells him he can take his troops home?
I would like to see a policy outlining this.
Personaly i think the koyoto protocol is fundamentaly flawed, but i would look at any strategy put forth.
I would assume anything is better than nothing. Funny how Howard backfilps on climate changing when he realises people actually care.
which brings up another strong point, with labor holding all 9 seats of office all states and federal they can increase the GST, wouldn't that be great for us citizens.
Tell me Coaster, would it be any worse than the original 10% GST forced upon us from the "never-ever" Howard government? Talk about myopic viewpoints!
Gotta love fast porn:)
It's not a bad thing.
Btw, I was watching 7.30 report last night, Bob Brown was on. Vote for him, and give your preferances to Labour. It's double value voting! Then we might get a green voice in the Senate.
Also, has anyone else noticed this new thing where whenever Howard or Rudd give an interview they have some knob in the background nodding and laughing on cue. Clearly it must be some psychological move to give weight to their point to the viewer, but to me it moves between annoying to outright hilarious, depending on their effort.
Old Diehard
18-10-07, 11:37 AM
I'll admit the IR laws scare me...It's fine now because the economy is on such high due to mining exports. But economies have cycles and once China's demand from our resources dies off , our economy will take a dive.
And yes I work a hell of a lot of paid overtime. public holidays and week-ends , so while I am currently on a EBA (enterprise bargaining agreement that locks these penalties in until the new year, it was a 2 year agreement,- I'm scared of seeing my pay take an effective cut in the future!).
My wife has no sick leave, no annual leave, and her pay is only a a dollar off the minimum!
I'll admit I one of the swinging voters- last 2 elections I have voted Liberal, but John Howard never mentioned he had these IR changes in mind prior to the last election (it was not in his policies going to the polls) but when he was handed the senate as well he dropped them on us like a bomb!
Their is a difference between Unfair Dismissal Legisilation and the removing of penalities etc. By all means keep the Unfair Dismissal Legislation that John Howard introduced- that is if someone isn't performing they get the boot. Small business can then be guaranteed that if for some reason like a fall off in business , a lazy worker etc then Staff can be let go!
But a fair days pay for a fair days works is a must and unsurpullous employers can not use the IR laws to effectivley cut pay. Reason why Penalties were introduced is that people like me who work-ends don't get to be with our family or miss out on socialising with friends and that is why we get compensated!
Being a swinging voter means that I ulimately will help decide on the future government. core Liberal or Labour voters don't change governments , swinging voters do!
My other worry is - the cost of housing (how will my kids ever afford to buy their own place ) When I brought my place 20years ago , the cost was about 3 times my gross income! It would now cost over 7 times to buy my place!
2nd Education- i pity students leaving Uni owing greater than $20,000 debt. by God are they behind the 8 ball, but if you are lucky enough to have parents who can afford fees up front it is so much cheaper! WHY?
3rd - I appreciate tax cuts are important but why not use the money on vital infrastructure first.
Their has been no major water storage dams built in South east Qld since Joh but we are getting over 1500 people moving here a week. Cars on the roads but we aren't buiding train lines (Forestlake over 20,000 new residents and no public transport! North Lakes , Springfield all the same and then we complain about the traffic! Get Real !) Invest in the future before it is to late!
4th- Health..If you don't have private health insurance you are buggered! Dental care just about nil! I don't want blame games between Federal Government and State. Just fix it AND FIX IT NOW! We are a wealthy country and yet our health sytem is going down the same route as the yanks (that is you have better have health insurance or forget it!)
FOOD FOR THOUGHT!!!!!
Coaster
18-10-07, 06:50 PM
Before i quote you guys, this is just s discussion, all your points aare valid, i am just giving my opinion on them:)
It's good to see all that money Howard is wasting on advertising is being effective somewhere.
To be honest i seen the interview with Costello, but i notice that you and Diehard do not dismiss the facts of this statement, so why does it matter where i get my information if it is True? In fact i have not seen any commercials from Howard i dont think, i have seen a bucket load from Rudd, in fact every time i turn on the TV at 6am and watch 'Sun-lies' to late at night. Not that i care, they are trying to get the gig.
I don't think for one minute Rudd is just going to take office and say, "Righto boys, jobs done, come on home, the lot of you!". However, maybe he feels the same as the majority of Australians and will look at other options. This buii**** from Howard about "staying until the job is done".... well, what is the job we are trying to do? WMD's? Overthrow Saddam? Liberate Iraq? Oh yes, stabilty etc. How do you know when that job is done? I assume Howard waits until GWB tells him he can take his troops home?
I dont want our troops there, it is not our war, but even if they are there to keep the americans happy, then is that such a bad thing? We may need some help over here at some stage, and i would prefer Nations such as England and USA to be right by our side. Do you think by telling the to pi*soff, it would be a better policy?
Tell me Coaster, would it be any worse than the original 10% GST forced upon us from the "never-ever" Howard government? Im not sure what you mean by this one mate, are you asking me if they increase the 10%, would it be any worse then it is now?
My other worry is - the cost of housing (how will my kids ever afford to buy their own place ) When I brought my place 20years ago , the cost was about 3 times my gross income! It would now cost over 7 times to buy my place!
I agree, but even the most converted Labor supporter, can not explain how opening up land in places where nobody wants to live will bring those prices down. Last time i looked Australia was a fairly large chunk of land, and not very poulated, but nobody wants to live anywhere but the beach.
2nd Education- i pity students leaving Uni owing greater than $20,000 debt. by God are they behind the 8 ball, but if you are lucky enough to have parents who can afford fees up front it is so much cheaper! WHY?IMO this country is full of educated idiots, some are professional students, that could take for hours about each degree they have tucked away in the closet, but dont know how to change a tyre. This country needs more skilled labour, Business's are screaming out for tradesmen and women, but for some reason nobody wants to get dirty any more.
The other points you made Old Diehard are both valid, but are problems created by a Labor run government, old Sir Joe at least gave us Dams ect, but ever since Goss and Rudd pulled apart the health system, it has gone to sh*t, and Beatie never did a damn thing for the long term (except Robina:) )
I agree these things should be fixed and immediatly, but i dont think that Howard should be the one that should be punished becuase they are so bad.
My old coach always said "never pass the ball to someone standing still" And i am yet to see Rudd, doing anything better then Howard, except for marketing. If Rudd wants my vote, he needs to blow that old man Howard out of the water with fantasic policies, and real solutions to problems, becuase his word means squat to me.
Capital_Shark
18-10-07, 07:26 PM
In fact i have not seen any commercials from Howard i dont think, i have seen a bucket load from Rudd, in fact every time i turn on the TV at 6am and watch 'Sun-lies' to late at night. Not that i care, they are trying to get the gig.
I was thinking this before when I seen a Rudd commercial 3 times during the 1 half hour show. I've only seen 2 different Rudd ads, but they both say the same bloody thing, only difference is one he is indoors, the other he has hills and grass behind him. I haven't seen a single Howard ad yet.
DIEHARD
18-10-07, 08:07 PM
It's on: Rudd to take on Howard
LABOR leader Kevin Rudd has confirmed he will debate Prime Minister John Howard on Sunday night.
Mr Rudd lost the first battle of the six-week election campaign, giving in to demands to debate Mr Howard in Parliament House's Great Hall.
The Labor leader is standing by his call for at least two more debates before the November 24 election, but confirmed he would take part in the 90-minute televised event.
A more embarrassing blow for Mr Rudd came with the news that Gavan O'Connor, who was dumped as a Labor MP to make way for a union official, launched a scathing attack as he quit the party to stand as an independent.
Mr Howard today seized on Mr O'Connor's decision to quit Labor and contest his Victorian seat of Corio as evidence that a Labor government would be dominated by unionists.
Mr O'Connor accused Labor of being out of touch as he announced his decision to run against the endorsed Labor candidate, ACTU official Richard Marles.
"You all get the spin, you get that beautiful spin that it was all about renewal in Victoria,'' Mr O'Connor, a former farmer and high school teacher, said.
"There ain't no renewal if they're all male, they're all union officials-cum-lawyers-cum-factional hacks.''
Mr Howard said Mr O'Connor was the only person in the parliamentary Labor Party with a farming background.
"And for his pains he's been kicked out and replaced by somebody who holds a senior position in the ACTU,'' Mr Howard said.
"This is the latest example of how former trade union officials have muscled aside long-serving Labor Party members.''
Campaigning in the marginal Adelaide seat of Kingston, Mr Rudd backed Mr Marles.
"Gavan, I've known him a long time. I like him a lot but I disagree with his decision,'' Mr Rudd said.
"Richard Marles I think will be a first-class candidate and member for the seat. I support him 100 per cent.''
Mr Rudd's attack on the Howard Government's campaign tactics suffered a second blow when he was forced to order the pulping of an anti-Liberal pamphlet that personally targeted a government backbencher.
Labor has bombarded the marginal Liberal seat of Wakefield, won by David Fawcett by a slim 0.7 per cent margin in 2004, with leaflets portraying him as a champagne-sipping outsider.
Featuring a 2001 photograph of Mr Fawcett in black-tie with a bottle of wine at a hospital fundraiser, the leaflet said the Liberal MP was not a local as he did not live in the seat.
After days of criticising the Government for negative attacks and scare campaigns, Mr Rudd said the brochure was inappropriate and he had ordered it be withdrawn it from circulation.
"I've asked that the production of that pamphlet cease,'' he said.
"When it comes to individual literature, there's a process involving state and national secretaries that should be tightened up to ensure that ... this doesn't happen again. And I've issued that directive this morning.''
A second pamphlet was put through letterboxes in Foreign Minister Alexander Downer's seat of Mayo, featuring an infamous photo of Mr Downer wearing fishnets and stilettos.
Federal Finance Minister Nick Minchin described the Wakefield leaflet as one of the worst examples of dirty tricks campaigning he had ever seen and said it exposed Mr Rudd as a hypocrite.
"He squeals like a stuck pig whenever we point out that 70 per cent of his front bench are former trade union officials, but Labor people on the ground are issuing these dirty tricks brochures,'' Senator Minchin said.
But Mr Howard also made a slip-up today as he took the campaign fight to Mr Rudd's electorate of Griffith, calling Liberal candidate Craig Thomas "Scott Thomas''.
It is the second time Mr Howard has forgotten a candidate's name this year.
Mr Howard will campaign in Sydney tomorrow while Mr Rudd will be in Canberra.
http://www.news.com.au
DIEHARD
18-10-07, 08:08 PM
Nine to use 'the worm" during debate
LABOR Leader Kevin Rudd has given in to pressure and agreed to debate Prime Minister John Howard this Sunday night.
Mr Rudd had been holding out for a prime ministerial commitment to two more debates before the November 24 poll.
Late today, he agreed to Mr Howard's 90-minute debate in Parliament's Great Hall on Sunday night, but said he would continue to press for more events during the six-week election campaign.
"Consistent with my position that there should be ongoing scrutiny during this campaign, I will be attending this Sunday's debate at the Great Hall," Mr Rudd said in a statement.
"Working families want to see their political leaders spell out their plans for Australia's future on issues like fairness in the workplace, cost of living, climate change, health and education.
"Federal Labor has asked for three debates during this campaign. Our position on this remains unchanged."
The debate will be hosted by the National Press Club and moderated by David Speers from Sky News, with a panel of five senior Canberra press gallery journalists firing questions at the leaders.
Radio journalist Chris Uhlmann will represent the ABC, Nine Network veteran Laurie Oakes is the television representative and 2UE's Alison Carabine has won the radio spot.
The two newspaper representatives are Peter Hartcher from Fairfax and Paul Kelly from News Ltd, while David Speers from Sky News will moderate the discussion.
Sky News, the ABC and the Nine Network will broadcast the debate, with Nine using "the worm", an interactive tracker of viewer responses.
Mr Howard is opposed to the worm, saying viewers focus on it rather than the substance of the debate.
Australian Greens leader Bob Brown, who will hold his own forum during the debate, said it would be more interesting for viewers if the Prime Minister took him on instead of Mr Rudd.
"It will be much more exciting, I can tell you, if the Greens are up against Mr Howard than the look-a-like Labor alternative," Senator Brown said.
The Greens will hold a question-and-answer forum at Parliament House following the leaders' debate and hope to live-stream the entire event, complete with worm, over the internet.
"We'll watch the leaders' debate and our plan is to have the worm in action," Senator Brown said.
"The worm is organic, it's very green, it means there's no pesticides."
http://www.news.com.au
Old Diehard
18-10-07, 08:11 PM
Before i quote you guys, this is just s discussion, all your points aare valid, i am just giving my opinion on them:)
I agree, but even the most converted Labor supporter, can not explain how opening up land in places where nobody wants to live will bring those prices down. Last time i looked Australia was a fairly large chunk of land, and not very poulated, but nobody wants to live anywhere but the beach.
One thing that needs to be done to cut housing prices is look at the Negative Gearing benefit that is occuring now in the property market! Cut that and the speculation part of the market will withdraw quickly and the youngsters coming though will have a better chance to become owner occupiers (I'll admit this will impact on me adversely because I have negatively geared property!
IMO this country is full of educated idiots, some are professional students, that could take for hours about each degree they have tucked away in the closet, but dont know how to change a tyre. This country needs more skilled labour, Business's are screaming out for tradesmen and women, but for some reason nobody wants to get dirty any more.
Another home truth is that without a good education or trade behind a worker then their chances of a good future are all the more difficult! When I left school - Uni was free and most of the current politicians got their law degrees etc then (including Peter Costello and Kevin Rudd).. Trades - when I was a Kid you could put in for apprenticeships with Qld Rail, SEQEB, City Council , Housing Commission by the hundred (all State Govt admittly but the numbers now are nothing compared to 30 years ago- and the Commonwealth Govt is the senior rank of government and the taxing governemt ie.income tax. Promote trades again- offer greater incentives!
[QUOTE]The other points you made Old Diehard are both valid, but are problems created by a Labor run government, old Sir Joe at least gave us Dams ect,
Old Joe didn't built the last major dams - Wivenhoe was built by the City Council after the 74 flood and Brisbane Coucil built North Pine!!! Joh took them over (same as the Qld Labour Govt is doing with water assets now!).
That doesn't mean the federal Govt should be leaving the state Govt to build all the neccessary infrastructure...After all the constitution gave the Commonwealth Govt powers of taxation years ago - it's up to the Commonwealt Govt to see that money is spent where it's needed (Commonwealth powers override the State constitutionally also)
but ever since Goss and Rudd pulled apart the health system, it has gone to sh*t, and Beatie never did a damn thing for the long term (except Robina:) )
credit where credit due when Joh was in power Queensland was only state with free hospitals (financed by the Golden Casket) since then it all gone down hill...But as I said I want it fixed not blame games! If the State can't fixed it I expect the Commonwealt Govt to step up to the plate!
I agree these things should be fixed and immediatly, but i dont think that Howard should be the one that should be punished becuase they are so bad.
No I not going to punish him for the health system or the education system or the lack of major Infrastructure being built in the last decade but ultimately his IR legistation is the main reason I won't be voting for him this time (as I said previously)...It was sneaky and mean spirited!! I repeat do not confuse the IR legislation that cuts out overtime, shift,and week-end rates with the Unfair Dismissal Legislation. Their is a difference in paying a person extra to work the week-end and being able to get rid of someone that isn't performing! As I said this impacts on me personally! I have to work week-ends , nights & public holidays because people need ambulances! I'm willing to cut my tax benefits on negative gearing my rental property also, so that youngsters have a better chance of owning their roof over their heads!
I'm afraid Howard has lost my vote!!!
Before i quote you guys, this is just s discussion, all your points aare valid, i am just giving my opinion on them:)
Absolutely mate, np.
Do you think by telling the to pi*soff, it would be a better policy?
I don't think having a plan for withdrawl is the same as telling allies to p1ss off. If there is ANYONE who thinks the US or UK wouldn't pull out if they had the right opportunity, you are kidding yourself. They are stuck there because they are stuck there! They went in without the right plan, and now they are stuck there without an exit plan. They are not there because they want to be. Accept it is a sh1tfight and go to plan B.
Im not sure what you mean by this one mate, are you asking me if they increase the 10%, would it be any worse then it is now?
What I am saying is how could it be any worse than the GST Howard forced upon us in the first place? Not that I think for 1 minute it would happen with Rudd, but it certainly happened with Howard, even though he said "never, ever".
I agree, but even the most converted Labor supporter, can not explain how opening up land in places where nobody wants to live will bring those prices down. Last time i looked Australia was a fairly large chunk of land, and not very poulated, but nobody wants to live anywhere but the beach.
mate there is miles of Hinterland they could open up. People live out at Beaudesert, jimboomba, etc so anywhere between the coast and there is good land. Maybe in your elitist panel beating world ;) you've never heard of community housing! Nobody WANTS to live in NSW, but sometimes you just have to accept what life dishes up!
IMO this country is full of educated idiots, some are professional students, that could take for hours about each degree they have tucked away in the closet, but dont know how to change a tyre. This country needs more skilled labour, Business's are screaming out for tradesmen and women, but for some reason nobody wants to get dirty any more.:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
My old coach always said "never pass the ball to someone standing still" And i am yet to see Rudd, doing anything better then Howard, except for marketing.
Well, Costello is sitting on the bench! At least Rudd is a player.
If Rudd wants my vote, he needs to blow that old man Howard out of the water with fantasic policies, and real solutions to problems, becuase his word means squat to me.
I always laugh when Howard supporters talk about the value of honesty. Cracks me up! Good old Honest John..... Classic. :rolf:
But mate, I don't take any of this personally, and I don't literally mean "you" when I talk about Howard supporters etc. Please don't think i am targeting you.
Cheers mate!
Coaster
18-10-07, 08:30 PM
Fair enough Old Diehard, I understand where you are coming from, in fact i, like you am a swing voter, i used to vote for Labor, but changed to the Libs, and dont think i will change back this year.
I understand your fustration regarding your situation with the IR laws, i am in a different situation to you, and luckily dont have to deal with them. But it is interesting hearing someone elses trouble with them. But that is why we all get 1 vote each, so in the end the majority rules.
I will deal with what ever we are left with, but to me both sides have major downfalls and i will pick the lesser of two evils.
Coaster
18-10-07, 08:48 PM
What I am saying is how could it be any worse than the GST Howard forced upon us in the first place? Not that I think for 1 minute it would happen with Rudd, but it certainly happened with Howard, even though he said "never, ever".Mate the GST is one of the best things that has ever happened to this country, sure it was a pain when it first came in, but now i couldnt imagine with out it, please tell me why you hate it so much?
mate there is miles of Hinterland they could open up. People live out at Beaudesert, jimboomba, etc so anywhere between the coast and there is good land.
There are plenty of houses and land available right now, why does more have to be opened up?
Maybe in your elitist panel beating world ;) you've never heard of community housing! Nobody WANTS to live in NSW, but sometimes you just have to accept what life dishes up!LOL I grew up with a single mum, in housing commisions, when i first started my business at 18, i couldnt even afford a phone, and had to borrow my mates car to get to my first job (true story). I now own a global business, that has taken me around the world about 6 times, own multiple properties, and investments that i could cash in and nearly retire right now, and i am 34. I never accept what life dishes up
I always laugh when Howard supporters talk about the value of honestyI never mention honesty and politician in the same breath.
LOL I grew up with a single mum, in housing commisions, when i first started my business at 18, i couldnt even afford a phone, and had to borrow my mates car to get to my first job (true story). I now own a global business, that has taken me around the world about 6 times, own multiple properties, and investments that i could cash in and nearly retire right now, and i am 34. I never accept what life dishes up
Good On You Coaster....How proud your MUM would be of you...You are what our Country is all about....Hard work can take you places.....Your a great Aussie :clap: :clap: Well Done!
Coaster
18-10-07, 08:54 PM
Good On You Coaster....How proud your MUM would be of you...You are what our Country is all about....Hard work can take you places.....Your a great Aussie :clap: :clap: Well Done!
Dont be fooled Jenny, i am a Bast*rd, just ask my misses hehe, and i hate working hard, but i hated being broke more
Mate the GST is one of the best things that has ever happened to this country, sure it was a pain when it first came in, but now i couldnt imagine with out it, please tell me why you hate it so much?
mate, you're getting it twisted. You mentioned something about Rudd increasing GST once he has Labour in all the States and Federal. I simply stated that Howard introduced it after saying he "never,ever" would. I am just addressing a point you made. I don't hate it, but it is just another tax, called by any other name. I hate the fact it has been applied across the board, even though it's meant to be a GOODS and SERVICES tax. Tax on a tax, if you like.
There are plenty of houses and land available right now, why does more have to be opened up?
I think this point was originally made in relation to affordability, so to answer your question, to make housing and land more affordable. Not everyone owns multiple properties, some cannot afford rent. It is a serious crisis for some, something that a few tax breaks is not going to solve. At least Rudd is addressing it.
DIEHARD
19-10-07, 02:07 AM
Lazarus stirs: Howard cuts into Rudd lead
THE Coalition's blistering start to the election campaign has put a dent in Labor's lead and caused John Howard to surge strongly against Kevin Rudd as the preferred prime minister.
A Herald/Nielsen poll, taken between Monday night and Wednesday - after Mr Howard promised $34 billion in tax cuts - shows Labor still in a strong election-winning position and its primary vote staying solid.
But the Coalition will be encouraged by its strongest set of figures since Mr Rudd became Labor's leader last December.
Compared with the last Herald poll, published 12 days ago, Labor's two-party-preferred vote fell 2 percentage points to 54 per cent, while the Coalition's rose 2 points to 46 per cent. It is the first time in a year that Labor's two-party vote has slipped below 55 per cent.
Labor's all-important primary vote rose by 1 point to 48 per cent, while the Coalition's rose 2 points to 42 per cent, its highest in 12 months. The most spectacular gains for the Government came in the personal match-up between Mr Howard and Mr Rudd, with Mr Rudd's lead as preferred prime minister cut by 9 points.
Mr Rudd was preferred by 47 per cent as prime minister, a 5-point drop, while Mr Howard scored 43 per cent, a 4-point increase. Mr Rudd's personal approval rating fell 5 points to a still-lofty 60 per cent, while Mr Howard's rose 2 points to 52 per cent, healthy for a prime minister who has been in office so long.
Both leaders have long warned that the polls would narrow once the election was called, and both have predicted a close result.
Labor is taking nothing for granted. The Prime Minister is renowned for coming from behind. After losing the Liberal leadership to Andrew Pea**** in 1989, he likened his chances of a resurgence to "Lazarus with a triple bypass".
The Nielsen Poll director, John Stirton, cautioned it was too early to say whether the poll signalled a move towards the Government. All the movements in the two-party and primary votes were within the poll's margin of error and, statistically, it could be argued that there had been no real change, he said. "It's not enough to say there's movement, but it might be the precursor of some movement," Mr Stirton said.
Labor and Mr Rudd were in a similar position to Mr Howard and the Coalition opposition in the first week of the 1996 election campaign, in which Mr Howard deposed Paul Keating.
Betting agencies continued to rate Labor as the favourite yesterday. However, they were narrowing the odds because of a continued surge of money towards the Coalition.
The polling of the 1126 voters began after Mr Howard stole the early campaign momentum by announcing the $34 billion in tax cuts on Monday.
On Tuesday Mr Rudd steered the debate back towards housing affordability. The polling ended at 8pm on Wednesday after the Government launched a strong campaign of attack ads against Labor's union links and Mr Rudd accused the Government of negativity.
Of those polled, 53 per cent said the tax cuts would not change their vote, while 32 per cent said their vote probably would not change. But a crucial 8 per cent, enough to swing the election, said they probably would change their vote. These swingers were divided evenly between Labor and Liberal voters.
Significantly for Labor, Mr Rudd's opening message for the campaign of new leadership resonated better with voters than did Mr Howard's opening salvo of Labor being a risk to the economy.
More than 60 per cent agreed that Australia needed new leadership, while 36 per cent disagreed.
Almost 60 per cent agreed with Mr Rudd that Mr Howard had lost touch with working families, while 37 per cent disagreed.
More voters disagreed than agreed with Mr Howard that the ALP would pose a risk to the economy. Voters were evenly divided as to whether Labor being in power federally and in every state and territory was a good or bad thing.
http://www.smh.com.au
DIEHARD
19-10-07, 02:34 AM
The latest Galaxy Poll is out and it proves interesting reading for both parties with a strong come back from the Coalition but also bringing with it the fact that the tax cuts hasn’t seemed to have the effect the Coalition would have wanted.
Those polled illustrated an awesome desire to see that $34billion spent on education and hospitals other than merely tax cuts, opening the door for the Labor Party to deliver a significantly different, social investment based tax policy. Could be a massive winner with the voters on both sides of the landscape.
PRIMARY VOTE
COALITION - 43%
LABOR - 45%
TWO PARTY PREFERRED
COALITION - 47%
LABOR - 53%
PREFERRED PRIME MINISTER
JOHN HOWARD - 43
KEVIN RUDD - 51
MORE OR LESS LIKELY TO VOTE COALITION DUE TO TAX CUTS.
MORE LIKELY - 12%
LESS LIKELY - 9%
NO DIFFERENCE - 78%
UNCOMMITTED - 1%
WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING WOULD YOU PREFER TO SPEND $34 BILLION ON?
GIVE TAX CUTS - 12%
SPEND ON HOSPITALS AND SCHOOLS - 71%
GIVE MORE MONEY TO THE STATES - 3%
INVEST IN MORE MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS - 13%
UNCOMMITTED - 1%
LINK TO MORE INDEPTH INFO - http://media01.couriermail.com.au/multimedia/2007/10/071019poll/poll.swf
Rudd reveals $31bn tax cut, education rebate
October 19, 2007
KEVIN Rudd has revealed Labor will match John Howard's tax cuts - except for those on $180,000 a year or more. He'll use most of the $3bn saving on tax breaks to families for education costs.
Mr Rudd said the rebate would help families buy items such as computers for kids - the "toolbox of the 21st Century".
"Labor will introduce a 50 per cent education tax refund for working families for their investment in their kids' education," he said.
"We believe this is important."
Mr Rudd said a family could save up to $1150 a year through his proposal.
"The eligibility for this would extend to all those kids in Australia whose parents currently receive family tax benefit A and that's more than two million Australian kids," he said.
"And I'm advised about two-thirds of the nation's kids in total."
AAP
Hanson beating Greens
David Crawshaw
October 19, 2007
RIGHT wing firebrand Pauline Hanson is attracting about half the support from voters she needs to win a Queensland Senate seat, a poll shows.
The latest Morgan poll of Senate voting intentions shows Ms Hanson, who is running under the banner of Pauline's United Australia Party, with 7.5 per cent support - more than the Greens on six per cent.
Candidates for the upper house need a quota - about 14.3 per cent - to win a seat, but the system is heavily dependent on preferences.
In 2004, Family First's Steve Fielding received just 1.9 per cent of the primary vote in the Victorian Senate race but was elected on preferences from other candidates.
Despite attracting more than half of a quota Ms Hanson will struggle to win a Senate seat because the major parties will almost certainly direct preferences away from her.
The Morgan poll shows the coalition's vote has collapsed in Tasmania and South Australia, with just 28 and 29.5 per cent support respectively, and in NSW it's marginally better at 32 per cent.
Western Australia remains the government's strongest state, where the Liberals are polling 44 per cent and the Nationals one per cent, compared with Labor's 34.5 per cent.
However, the Greens are polling 14 per cent in the resource-rich state and most of their preferences are likely to flow to Labor.
In NSW, Labor was receiving 50 per cent support, the poll showed.
The ALP was well placed in Victoria (48) and South Australia (54) but less so in Queensland (40.5).
In Tasmania, the Greens are polling 20 per cent - giving the party a slim chance of getting Iraq war whistleblower Andrew Wilkie elected alongside leader Bob Brown.
The Greens were receiving 10.5 per cent support in Victoria and nine per cent in NSW, where Senator Kerry Nettle faces a battle to be re-elected.peThe Australian Democrats were polling 4.5 per cent in Queensland, the minor party's best state where former leader Andrew Bartlett is hoping to retain his place in the Senate.
Family First's strongest support is coming from South Australia (4 per cent) but it was receiving just 1.5 per cent in Victoria and NSW.
The Morgan poll was conducted in September and involved face-to-face interviews with 3,662 voters throughout Australia.
This Senate election is shaping as an intriguing contest as the minor parties seek to regain the balance of power from the coalition, which enjoys a 39-37 majority.
The race was further enlivened late last week when anti-pokies campaigner Nick Xenophon threw his hat in the ring for South Australia.
The coalition has warned voters against handing the balance of power to the Greens.
AAP
Old Diehard
19-10-07, 05:55 PM
Ah as I said it the swinging voters that change government - and the ALP only needs greater than 4 percent . Well I'm 1 person that will be part of that 4 percent.
I don't gamble- but in a 2 horse race , I think the labour party is going to canter in because of people like me changing over to them!
And they are doing it by mimicing the Liberals and putting in a few policies only to offer the distinction. See now the tax Policy virtually the same except for those that earn greater than 180,000....Well that ain't effect too many people!
Environmental issues is another that has come up as bigger issue than the last election too (witness the popularity of Al Gore) and Labour will be more popular with the younger voters on that front!
Hell- I'm starting to think about having a bet after all - 1 . South Africa to win the World Rugby Cup.....Nah to risky the pommies could overpower them in the forwards or 2. Labour to win on a backlash to the Howard Government's sneaky introduction of IR when they never publized their intention in any policy leading up to the last election! Aussies don't like sneaks !!! Think I bet on option 2 !
Giving Aussie children the tools of 21st century
By Malcolm Farr and Sue Dunlevy
October 20, 2007
KEVIN Rudd wants working families to get the tax cuts offered by the Coalition - plus the chance to buy computers for children.
The Labor leader yesterday released a $31 billion tax plan which was almost the same as the one released by Prime Minister John Howard this week.
The chief difference was that $2.9 billion in tax cuts proposed to those earning $180,000 and above would be deferred.
Some $2.3 billion of that saving would be used in a Labor plan to help working families buy computers, software, internet connections, printers and other related equipment for school-aged children.
Parents receiving Family Tax Benefit A - which covers about two-thirds of Australian children, about 2.3 million - would get a 50 per cent tax rebate on the purchases.
For primary school children, the education rebate would be a maximum of $750, while for a high school student the rebate would be $1500.
Mr Rudd said the rebate would not extend to a subsidy for private school tuition because that could encourage fees to rise.
However, he said computer suppliers would be encouraged to give bargains to families wanting to use the scheme to cross what he called "the digital divide".
Mr Rudd said computer literacy was the bridge between children who were doing well at school and those slipping behind.
"Because we're widening the gap of opportunities for kids by not wiring them. We want to make sure that every Australian kid has an opportunity to get themselves wired and computer literate, information revolution literate," he said.
"Because, let me tell you, in the future in the digital economy, this is going to be fundamental business."
Shadow treasurer Wayne Swan said there would be a system to extend the rebate to families which did not pay tax, but did not elaborate.
The Rudd plan also contained an "aspirational" change to the tax system from 2012 which would reduce the current tax rates from four to three.
The current rates of 15 per cent, 30 per cent, 40 per cent and 45 per cent would be cut to 15, 30 and 40 per cent.
And $600 million from deferring high income tax cuts would go towards ending waiting lists for elective surgery at Australia's public hospitals.
Mr Rudd's immediate problem arose from claims that, not only did he borrow the Coalition's tax schemes, he might have taken the computer rebate from an episode of popular US drama The West Wing.
"I haven't seen all the episodes of West Wing that you've obviously seen, I've obviously missed that one," he said.
And the 2012 tax rate trimming proposal was first raised in public by the Australian Industry Group of manufacturing employers in September.
Mr Rudd said he and Mr Swan had been working on the computer rebate "for the better part of four or five months", and had to wait for the release of mid-year economic figures this week before finalising it.
Treasurer Peter Costello wasn't flattered by the imitation, saying of Mr Rudd: "He never had a tax policy. He hadn't done the work.
"Five days after our tax policy, his great contribution to the tax debate in this country is to say, 'Me too, but'.
"The trouble with 'Me too, but' is, it's OK for Mr Rudd to say "Me too, I'll be like Howard and Costello and adopt their policies', but if he gets in Howard and Costello won't be there writing the policies.
"So who is going to say 'Me to, but' to them? I think the union movement will be giving him a few ideas."
Mr Rudd's announcement dovetails with the $4.7 billion broadband revolution.
"We need to equip our young people with the skills necessary to participate in the digital economy of the 21st century," he said.
TELEGRAPH
DIEHARD
20-10-07, 04:29 PM
Australia in 'digital stone age'
AUSTRALIA has slipped into the "electronic dark age" with the Government's failure to build a high-speed broadband fibre network, Labor claims.
An American study has revealed that Australia is ranked 26th out of 30 countries for its broadband internet transfer speeds.
Damning report
The study by the Washington-based independent think tank Information Technology and Innovation Foundation found Australia pays nine times more for broadband than most other western nations.
The study also revealed Australian broadband is 35 times slower.
"Federal Labor (has) released maps showing the Howard Government's $958 million broadband scheme has so many black spots; it looks like Swiss cheese with up to 50 per cent less coverage outside the five capital cities," Labor's communications and information technology spokesman Stephen Conroy said.
"John Howard has let Australia slip into the digital Dark Age," he said.
Labor's broadband plan
Mr Conroy said a Rudd Labor government would use the $2 billion Communications Fund to build - in partnership with the private sector - an $8 billion national broadband network that will deliver improved broadband access for 100 per cent of Australian homes and small businesses.
Communications and Information Technology Minister Helen Coonan said the US report was out of date.
"What Labor fails to reveal is that this ITIF report is eight months out of date, released in April 2007, and based on figures from December 2006," Senator Coonan said.
"A report from the same US think-tank released this month ranks Australia fifth out of 30 OECD countries by price of the fastest generally available broadband."
She said Australia is ahead of the US, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, Ireland, Switzerland and many other developed countries.
Internet costs 'competitive'
Internet prices are competitive because the Coalition Government's telecommunications policy has licensed 167 internet carriers, more than the three licensed carriers under the previous Labor government, she said.
"The Government's new high speed broadband network will deliver fast, affordable broadband to 99 per cent of Australians within two years at a retail cost between $35 and $60 per month," Senator Coonan said.
She said Labor's broadband proposal will cost upwards of $100 per month and won't start until 2013.
"One in four Australians won't even receive Labor's broadband network leaving regional Australia stranded because they have only picked one technology which is no good if you live more than 1.5km from your local telephone exchange or node," she said.
http://www.news.com.au
DIEHARD
20-10-07, 04:30 PM
Community festival turns nasty
A normally subdued Sydney community festival today turned into a rowdy - and somewhat nasty - political rally when swamped by hundreds of supporters of Prime Minister John Howard and Labor challenger Maxine McKew.
Mr Howard and Ms McKew both turned up today at the Granny Smith Festival in Eastwood, in Mr Howard's marginal seat of Bennelong, which Ms McKew hopes to steal from him at the November 24 election.
Brandishing placards and branded balloons the pair's supporters turned the normally innocuous event about apples, into a spirited, vocal battle of political creeds.
Anti-war protesters, unionists, and advocates of other assorted causes also turned up to be heard.
When Mr Howard took his seat on stage to watch the festival parade, anti-war protester Ray Osburn, from a nearby electorate, pushed towards the front, holding a sign which read: "Unseat Warmongerer Howard".
"People are dying and you are just sitting there! You disgusting little man!" Mr Osburn called.
"I'm a veteran! Come and suck up to me, come and shake my hand!"
Howard supporters heckled Mr Osburn in turn: "Get a life!" "You're an idiot!"
Parading unionists stopped and turned towards Mr Howard, brandishing signs with a picture of an apple and the words: "Your Rights At Work: The Core Issue."
Mr Howard did not wave to them as they glared at him.
When the parade finished Mr Howard took to the streets to press the flesh.
It took almost an hour for Mr Howard to walk the two-blocks down the central drag of Eastwood, as he was mobbed by supporters and gawkers wanting to shake his hand and get a picture taken.
"Ten more years!" supporters called.
"Go home, ya slimy old bastard," opponents responded.
Mr Howard later said it was good to get out in his electorate.
"Bennelong is always tough, it's a marginal seat, I expect to win but I don't take it for granted," he told reporters.
Ms McKew, a former ABC television presenter, also worked the crowd today, wearing her Kevin07 shirt and surrounded by supporters, but did receive anything like the ecstatic response for the man she wants to unseat.
Ms McKew said Mr Howard had still not made a clear, unequivocal statement about his intentions for Bennelong, given his plans to retire in his next term, if he re-wins office.
"People here have loyally backed John Howard for over thirty years in Bennelong and now he is not being clear ... about his future plans," she said.
http://www.smh.com.au
DIEHARD
20-10-07, 04:32 PM
I can't wait for Sunday's debate. Too bad there is only one, pretty ridiculous, one week into a six week campaign, but that is Howard just trying to make people play by his rules.
Hoppy2007Dragons
20-10-07, 05:35 PM
arn't there 3 debates, this is just the first one, the other two will be down the track.???????????????????
DIEHARD
20-10-07, 05:42 PM
arn't there 3 debates, this is just the first one, the other two will be down the track.???????????????????
Rudd wants three, Howard is only offering one, one week into a six week campaign.
DIEHARD
20-10-07, 05:53 PM
Dave Hughs: In a spin over Election 2007
By Dave Hughes
UP until last Sunday I thought John Howard was going to be Prime Minister forever.
Not because he deserves to be, I just didn't think he was ever going to call an election.
He'd been building the tension like a game show host. "Just tell us when it's gonna be, Johnny," we cried, "so we know when the bloody thing will be over."
Honestly, he was carrying on like he was a beautiful virgin princess, and we, the Australian people, were the lustful suitor, to be teased and flirted with, til we burst with excitement.
OK, I'm getting carried away with analogies.
Maybe he was waiting for the polls to turn?
Until yesterday they'd been stuck deep into the ground and and didn't look like budging.
But if anyone can shift em, it's Johnny.
George Bush called him "the man of steel". (Then again, George also called the Iraq War "over" in 2003...)
There is one thing I'll miss about the pre-election campaign - the Government's wonderfully informative Work Choices ads.
Masterpieces!
The two blokes at the barbecue discussing the benefits of Work Choices was so realistic I thought the Government had actually used one of their spy satellites to surreptitiously film a working-man's shindig in Cranbourne.
It was uncanny the way it captured the blue-collar Aussie battlers' deep and unabiding love of longer hours and fewer days off, for lower pay.
I'm not so convinced about the Liberal Party's campaign ads.
They claim 70 per cent of Labor's Cabinet will be former trade union officials.
Surely not? Most of 'em haven't got the look. I've seen what union officials look like from those other Work Choices ads.
Union officials are all massive fat blokes with goatees and faces that would scare Ben Cousins into giving up drugs.
Actually, whack a bit of fuzz on Joe Hockey and steal his doughnuts and he could look like a union official.
Another ad the Liberals have got on claims that Labor's Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan are anti-business.
That must make their lives very tough.
What do they do with their money?
They wouldn't be able to spend it because that would be pro-business.
Geez, our budget surplus is going to be massive if these dudes get in.
Still, at least the Liberals have ads on.
The only Labor ad I've seen consists of Kevin Rudd watching a Liberal ad and calling it crap.
It looks like a political commercial edition of The Movie Show. (How many stars Kev? None? That's a bit harsh. It's very easy to be a critic.)
In the ad he says that John Howard's always claiming the sky will fall in if Labor wins.
Well actually, Kev, you're the one banging on about global warming and the sky falling in if the Libs stay in.
Johnny couldn't care less about the sky. Never has, never will.
It's all about the economy for Johnny. And it's doing very, very well.
Apparently, collectively our wealth has doubled over the past five years.
And that's why no one can afford to buy a house any more.
God I'm confused. Maybe they could push the election back a few weeks so I can try and figure it out...
Dave Hughes is a Melbourne comedian
http://www.news.com.au
DIEHARD
20-10-07, 05:57 PM
Greens slam tax cuts
Greens leader Bob Brown says the Liberal and Labor parties would be squandering money through $30 billion-plus tax cuts that should be spent elsewhere.
Senator Brown said the tax-cut was an interest rate and inflation raising measure which Australians would live to regret.
"It is a squandered opportunity by Mr Howard and Mr Rudd in nation-building," Senator Brown told reporters in Brisbane.
"This money should have been going into housing, fast and efficient public transport, pensions, schools and hospitals."
Senator Brown said the Greens were acting as the responsible party while the major parties had not given long-term thought to their actions.
"We are the nation-building party," he said.
"Mr Howard and Mr Rudd are gambling on people being greedy and making a big mistake I think because Australians are much more sensible and caring than that."
Senator Brown said Australians would prefer to see their children have quality schools or adequate health care when they get sick.
"They like to be assured if they get sick and go down to the local emergency ward then they'll be looked to," he said.
"That is what gives people security and they're not going to get it."
Senator Brown said the Greens health policy of putting $3.5 billion into hospitals Australia-wide would solve many problems.
He said it would solve problems such as those at Brisbane's Princess Alexandra Hospital which has been told to cut the number of beds available and postpone operations because of budget pressures.
"The PA hospital is a good example of where this money should be going rather than into tax cuts," he said.
Senator Brown has also appealed for a $30 week pay increase to pensioners.
"There's two million pensioners in this country living in poverty who have not shared in the wealth boom and we'd like to take one tenth of the tax cuts to give to our senior citizens who helped this country become what it is a better go.""
Senator Brown said the Greens, traditionally known for their environmental policies, were now being taken seriously for other policies including economic.
"We have policies for everybody and education and health you can't adequately fund them if you are giving $30 billion tax cut."
http://www.news.com.au
I actually think the Greens will get a good few votes this year and I'm rating Bob Brown's performance lately. I tend to agree with the Greens on tax cuts.
DIEHARD
20-10-07, 07:16 PM
Labor and the Greens should have a preferences deal within a week according to Greens leader Bob Brown.
Should be a big help to Labor with so many people going to vote Greens this election.
Old Diehard
20-10-07, 08:19 PM
NWon't bother with the debate or the worm! Some of the best talkers I heard have been salesman! so ain't interested in TV debate ! (changed the text- thought the debate was on Sat night!)
Actually preetty much made up my mind anyway and I prefer the print media ( Newspapers) as I like to read what's being said as you can double check anyway!
DIEHARD
21-10-07, 05:08 PM
Rudd childcare rebate plan unveiled
LABOR leader Kevin Rudd has fired another shot in his battle to outflank the Coalition on family issues, unveiling a $1.5 billion plan to boost the childcare tax rebate.
Just hours ahead of his face to face Sky News debate with Prime Minister John Howard, Mr Rudd visited the bellwether seat of Eden-Monaro to announce the new policy in a park filled with families.
A Labor government would lift the rebate from 30 to 50 per cent and pay it quarterly rather than annually.
The cap on the new rebate, which comes into effect on July 1 next year, will rise from $4300 to $7500.
The length of time it takes for families to receive the money has been a major criticism of the government's rebate model.
Mr Rudd said his plan would help working families with the "explosion" in childcare costs.
"There are hundreds of thousands of children across Australia and their parents depending on affordable childcare," he said.
"In the last year alone, childcare costs went up by 12.8 per cent."
Labor's family and community services spokeswoman Jenny Macklin has said modelling shows the initiative could attract up to 34,000 extra mothers back into the workforce.
"We believe this will assist enormously in just making it possible for working families to make ends meet but critically to increase workforce participation," Mr Rudd said.
"We have so many qualified people out there, particularly women, who are effectively prevented from returning to the workplace ... because childcare is either not available or not affordable."
In addition to the latest initiative, Labor has pledged to build up to 260 new child care centres around Australia and has outlined a number of incentives to encourage more people to become child care workers.
"We see this as a practical helping hand for working families," Mr Rudd said.
The rebate will apply to families using long day care, family day care, out of school hours care programs and specified in home care but it does not apply to nannies.
http://www.news.com.au
Boofhead
21-10-07, 08:21 PM
Kevin Rudd gets an ear full!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3aQ8YiIV1AI
DIEHARD
21-10-07, 09:21 PM
Kevin Rudd has convincingly won the debate both with the worm and commentators on Nine and SKY.
Kevin Rudd won the debate, i also think he has it in the bag. I'm happy with that, i'm a swinging voter ( but have a family who was very strong in the Labor party in Sydney) and i will vote Labor!
Cowboy Titan
21-10-07, 09:41 PM
Apparently John Howard has lost every election debate he has been in. It hasn't stopped him winning yet.
Let's just vote next week and save the millions of dollars in annoying ads.
DIEHARD
21-10-07, 10:38 PM
I certainly don't think Kevin has it in the bag. It really will be a pitched battle.
Ray left fuming after Nine's worm silenced
RAY Martin claims that the Nine Network's coverage of tonight's Sky News Debate has been "sabotaged" by someone unhappy with its use of the maligned "worm".
After being ordered to not use the "worm" - which indicates the reactions of undecided voters to arguments and has been a feature of modern televised election debates ? the network broadcast it anyway.
Nine?s feed to the debate was cut while the leaders argued over the big issues, forcing the network to broadcast the feed from Sky News ? with the worm superimposed.
?So much for free speech,? Martin told viewers after the debate had finished.
At least three photographers were stopped from entering Parliament House?s Great Hall, where the debate was held, despite earlier being assured that they could get in.
A spokesman from the Liberal Party said that Nine did not adhere to the agreed rules.
?Nine breached the conditions of the broadcast (agreement),? the spokesman said.
?It?s a matter for the National Press Club.?
http://www.news.com.au/
DIEHARD
21-10-07, 10:50 PM
Anticipation building: The crowd is building ringside in the Great Hall and literally dozens of people around the country are glued to their couches for this bout. Howard?s form guide says he?s won his last four starts and is comfortable sitting off the pace before a late charge to the line.
The challenger, Rudd, is taking his first shot at the title but has clearly been getting under his opponent?s skin. He reckons the champ has been trash talking but fight fans will be looking to see how much he leads with his glass jaw.
7.00pm: Howard?s team has won the toss and will kick to the right of field. Sorry, I?m mixing my metaphors. I mean he?s chosen to bowl first.
The contender will be given the first shot, but that just means the defender gets the last go.
7.30pm: Sky News political editor and tonight?s referee David Speers welcomes everyone to Fight Club. The first rule of Fight Club, he tells them, is that they do NOT have to fight. They?re here to watch, not join in, he tells them. It?s like being told you can?t do the wave at the MCG. They?re gutted.
7.32pm: The challenger takes his first shot. It?s not much different from what he said last week when he announced he was going to fight Howard. Education revolution, Iraq, Work Choices; check, check, check.
7.35pm: The defender starts swinging. He takes a cautious first few jabs too. Then referee Speers interrupts, telling him his time is up. Rudd?s point exactly. Asked a question about his longevity and new ideas, Howard says Rudd has a ?Donald Horne, Lucky Country? view. Anyone under 40 probably doesn?t get the reference, but they?re all watching Idol anyway.
7.41pm: Howard says he?s an optimist. Rudd says he is too.
7.44pm: Howard sends a shout-out to Peter Costello somewhere in the crowd. It?s a little like the end of Rocky.
7.47pm: Rudd looks to land his first hit - throwing Howard?s record as treasurer back at him after Howard mentioned Rudd?s voting against tax measures when he entered Parliament.
7.50pm: Howard has used the phrase ?with great respect? for the first time. And you know when they say just to each other, just how bursting with mutual love and admiration they really, really are.
7.54pm: Now they?re talking tax and relative marginal rates and offsetts and deferments and I think it?s really important to point out that zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz? Oh, sorry.
7.59pm: Referee Speers asks Howard a simple, direct question: will you apologise to homeowners for the rises in interest rates since the last election. He?s still answering. I guess that?s a no.
8.04pm: Did everyone see the worm dip when Howard said the words ?cost of living pressures?? In all of a two- or three-minute spiel on tax cuts - ie $34 billion of cash given back to you - the worm barely got out of neutral. There?s a theory that says all talk on the economy favours Howard because it?s seen as ?his area?. The worm disagrees.
8.07pm: In Rudd?s reply talking about his own tax plan, the worm took a marked turn downwards when he started talking about deferring tax cuts for the rich. Don?t people like that? Or does that say something about the 60 Minutes audience?
8.09pm: Awesome! We just had a first real fight. Talking about that OECD report on education the other day the PM got quite cranky, claiming it was selective and that Rudd knew it and should be embarrassed. Rudd fired back and Howard called him ?pathetic?. And through the whole confrontation, they managed to not actually look at each other even once.
8.12pm: Referee Speers just had to step in and tell the audience to shut up. Rudd reckons he knows the main offender and to protect his identity let?s just call him Peter C.
8.14pm:I didn?t see it on my feed, but apparently the worm just vanished from the Channel Nine coverage. It?s being suggested the Coalition cut the feed. Nine went to a back-up and the worm was back in town. Not a good look if it?s true.
8.19pm: Rudd gets a little narky with the ref about ?getting a word in?, which suggests he hasn?t had a chance to say ?me too? for a few minutes.
8.21pm: It?s interesting to compare the faux ?respect? with which they treat each other with how openly they carve up each other?s crew. They should make it like the wrestling, where Peter ?The Undertaker? Costello or ?Stone Cold? Wayne Swan could step in and throw a chair.
8.26pm: At last! Something new! Howard has just ?announced? that he will create a climate change fund if re-elected which will be used to subsidise rising electricity bills for low income earners. And before that, when he was talking about his position on climate change (sensible measures still protecting the economy etc) the worm was half-way up in positive territory.
8.36pm: Worm still in negative territory with Howard talking about Iraq. However it moves upwards when Howard says terrorists are fanatically opposed to the democratic way of life and that this is a long fight. Does that mean the worm-turners agree or approve?
8.38pm: The comments here are MASSIVELY favouring Rudd, just like the worm seems to be. So here?s a question: is Rudd?s performance tonight actually giving you any real insight into him, his character or his core policy beliefs?
8.45pm: Rudd has been accused of ?Me too, but...? and now Howard has given us ?I?m sorry, but....?. Referee Speers just asked point-blank why he wouldn?t say sorry to indigenous people as part of his new commitment to reconciliation. So he said sorry. But. As in, ?I?m sorry it happened but I didn?t do it so I?m not personally to blame?.
8.49pm: Rudd response has given us a new metaphor: the happy bridge. We?ve had the fork in the road, we?ve had the ladder of opportunity (though we don?t talk about that anymore). And now we have the bridge of reconciliation. The worm wasn?t convinced by this one - swerving all over the road like a drunk driver.
8.52pm: Now they?re asking each other questions. Rudd got a little testy when challenged by Howard and then about 30 seconds later thought a comeback and worked into the answer he was still giving. He seemed to have the demeanour, as he did it, of someone who thought he was on top.
8.59pm: Rudd seemed to not realise he?d have to go first in his closing statement. But the referee blew his whistle and off he went. He must have said ?passionate? about 1 million times. Obviously the strategists have been asking themselves the same question about how ?real? he seems.
9.08pm: So that?s it then? Was there a killer blow landed by anyone? Didn?t seem to be. It?s often said that just by turning up the challenger looks like he?s won simply because he?s standing on the same stage as the PM, looking all prime ministerial. That?s not been Rudd?s problem up to now - rather his problem is how he takes the goodwill of the polls and translates them into hard votes.
And for that he?ll need to show some of that passion he was talking about at the end - or just stay a small enough target that no-one notices.
9:12pm: Because Howard?s plan is for six weeks of ?me too? (or even better for him, a Latham-like implosion) to finally have voters questioning how much they know about Rudd and where he?d take them if he was doing it all on his own.
9.15pm: But based on tonight?s comments the result is clear: it?s the Worm for the Lodge.
9.19pm: Kevin Rudd won the Sky News debate, compere David Speers has told NEWS.com.au.
http://www.news.com.au
Apparently John Howard has lost every election debate he has been in. It hasn't stopped him winning yet.
Let's just vote next week and save the millions of dollars in annoying ads.
I'm down with that:)
DIEHARD
22-10-07, 05:37 AM
For those that missed it, this picture pretty much sums up the evening....
http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/10/21/svWORM_wideweb__470x159,0.jpg
Unfortunately the result from the debate means very little. However, hopefully it gave a lot of people who think Rudd has no policies a bit more of an insight to where he wants to take the country and how he plans to do it. I was quite happy with what he had to say, but I do agree that there should be another debate closer to election time once ALL policies are out on the table.
DIEHARD
22-10-07, 06:52 AM
Something tells me Howard will be even less likely to want to have a second helping. But I agree we need at least two debates, with one towards the end of the campaign when everything is out in the open.
Coaster
22-10-07, 07:20 AM
I watched the debate last night on the ABC, and thought it was quiet good actually, i found myself drifting away a few times, but that was to be expected.
This whole worm thing is a joke, more designed for people that can not make up the own desision i guess. I think Rudd got the better of the debate, but only just, was not a landslide by any means.
Rudd has some good ideas when it comes to education, but IMO Howard wiped the floor with him about the war, and the economy.
I had to laugh at some of the political advisors on sky, one guy basicly said Rudd won the debate, becuase he had a pink tie on... WTF!
Its going to be close, I think Howard is solely behind because he wont be there for the full term, and most people including myself think Costello is a smug bast*ard.
DIEHARD
22-10-07, 08:22 AM
The SKY political advisor you are talking about is actually supposed to be a body language expert. He got a hell of a lot of air play for a fair bit of BS.
SuperCliffy#01
22-10-07, 01:37 PM
27 people were polled yesterday, they are expected to make a full recovery.
Queenslander
22-10-07, 05:53 PM
For those that missed it, this picture pretty much sums up the evening....
http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/10/21/svWORM_wideweb__470x159,0.jpg
The same thing happened to Howard vs Latham and Beazley........and looked what happened ;)
Capital_Shark
22-10-07, 06:08 PM
The same thing happened to Howard vs Latham and Beazley........and looked what happened ;)
Thats it. Rudd can win every poll, debate and chook raffle the country has to offer, unless he wins in about 5 weeks time I doubt all those positive poll results will be of much solace.
Old Diehard
22-10-07, 06:36 PM
Funny thing about the worm and the impartiality of those participating...Even as Kevin Rudd opened his mouth to make a comment he rated higher on the scale than when John Howard started to say something.and this pattern was obvious.
So what I'm saying is those people that where surposedly swinger voters and uncommitted seem to have pre-determined their opinion on the 2 leaders prior to seeing them talk! I think that makes the worm as a guide pretty pointless!
and if you think I must be biased towards Howard to make that comment then you haven't read my other posts and I'm only stating my observation of what I saw!
Is John Cartwright standing ? I'll vote for him.
I watched the debate last night on the ABC, and thought it was quiet good actually, i found myself drifting away a few times, but that was to be expected.
This whole worm thing is a joke, more designed for people that can not make up the own desision i guess. I think Rudd got the better of the debate, but only just, was not a landslide by any means.
I agree with this part. The whole worm thing is a joke. It's getting more media coverage than the debate. I watched ABC and glad I did. No wonder Howard hates it. Finally something I agree with him on.
Queenslander
25-10-07, 03:05 PM
Is this the man that we want as prime minister?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ipvdBnU8F8
:rolf:
Boofhead
25-10-07, 03:36 PM
Kevin Rudd gets an ear full!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=3aQ8YiIV1AI
Beat you!
But seriously, how could you vote for the guy? :p
DIEHARD
25-10-07, 03:38 PM
Easy when he is running against John Howard and Peter Costello who were busy deceiving the electorate yesterday on the CPI. :mad:
Queenslander
25-10-07, 03:39 PM
Beat you!
But seriously, how could you vote for the guy? :p
:duh: yeah an ear picker and wax eater doesn't really appeal to me.
Beat you!
But seriously, how could you vote for the guy? :p
I think you guys are missing the bigger picture here. ;)
You've got to admire the guy for this. Here he is, stuck in question time, starving, and he just finds sustenance where-ever he can to soldier on. What a trooper!
It also supports his environmental image with the whole recycling thing, and when it comes to the economy it shows nothing will be wasted.
Howard is just pissed off he didn't think of it first! ;)
Coaster
25-10-07, 05:39 PM
WTF!!!
Who the hell eats earwax???
I have never seen anyone do that before.
DIEHARD
25-10-07, 05:46 PM
He obviously didnt eat it and was just scratching around. Otherwise he would have gagged.
Anyway let's get back on topic.
WTF!!!
Who the hell eats earwax???
I have never seen anyone do that before.
The next Prime Minister of Australia! :rolf:
He obviously didnt eat it and was just scratching around. Otherwise he would have gagged.
Anyway let's get back on topic.
Yeah, sure, just scratching around.... yeah, that's what he was doing. :)
Coaster
25-10-07, 06:20 PM
I still can not believe someone eats there own earwax, regardless of who the are, a nose pick i can understand, but earwax, is rank!!
Anyway back on topic!!
Labor in hot water over GST claim
Misha Schubert
October 25, 2007
LABOR has fought to rectify a campaign blunder after a candidate said the party would review the carve-up of GST revenue among the states.
The comments by the candidate for the NSW seat of Robertson, Belinda Neal, sparked Government claims that Labor had a secret plan to cut funds for the election battlegrounds of Western Australia and Queensland ? or raise the GST rate.
Ms Neal retracted her comments last night after saying on radio that Labor treasury spokesman Wayne Swan had promised to review the GST arrangements if Labor won office. She said she would push for a bigger share for NSW.
"Today I gave the impression that Labor plans to review the GST formula," she said. "This is incorrect. Labor opposes any increase in the GST rate, expansion of the GST base or changes to the process for distributing the GST."
Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd insisted: "There will be, under no circumstances, any increase to the GST over my dead body." Mr Swan added: "And mine." He accused the Government of "a desperate scare campaign".
But Prime Minister John Howard said any promise Mr Rudd made on the GST could not be believed. He said that as a former senator Ms Neal was "no rookie candidate", and asked: "What did Wayne Swan tell Belinda Neal?"
Because no premier would agree to take less money, Labor would have to jack up the GST rate from 10 per cent, Mr Howard said.
"Ill be running a campaign demanding to know the secret deals that have been made inside the Labor Party about the GST," he said.
In further bad news for Labor, its former MP for the Queensland seat of Hinkler, Brian Courtice, joined Workplace Relations Minister Joe Hockey in a media conference to decry union and factional influence in Labor. "Kevin Rudd couldn't go three rounds with Winnie the Pooh, so there's no way he's going to be able to stand up to the union bosses," Mr Courtice said.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/federalelection2007news/labor-in-hot-water-over-gst-claim/2007/10/24/1192941153268.html
DIEHARD
25-10-07, 06:22 PM
Wow thanks for bringing up that media beat up, the Labor Party, Rudd and Swan have completely ruled that out.
Coaster
25-10-07, 06:25 PM
Wow thanks for bringing up that media beat up, the Labor Party, Rudd and Swan have completely ruled that out.
Its on topic, maybe you should have said, "only post good things about Rudd"
Coaster
25-10-07, 06:30 PM
Here is another interesting article http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/23/renewableenergy.energy
Looks like the UK are pulling out of the Kyoto agreement, so who exactly will be iin this master stroke for our enviroment?
Its on topic, maybe you should have said, "only post good things about Rudd"
Any post not including ear wax is a good post! ;)
I think the article you posted clears up a lot of questions about whether or not they are planning on raising GST. Too bad Howard didn't say "over his dead body" when he said "never, ever" on GST! :)
Hoppy2007Dragons
25-10-07, 06:55 PM
"Kevin Rudd couldn't go three rounds with Winnie the Pooh"
:rolf:
Thats a very interesting read in regards to Britian and Koyoto.
Here is another interesting article http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/23/renewableenergy.energy
Looks like the UK are pulling out of the Kyoto agreement, so who exactly will be iin this master stroke for our enviroment?
I guess getting the balance between environment and economy won't just happen because it is written into a document, but at least if there are goals in place we can TRY to make a difference. Giving up because it is simply too hard is not a very positive attitude. The whole climate change/global warming thing is relatively new on the whole scheme of things. I expect it will be at least the next generation who will probably start to realize the real need for sacrifice to make a real difference.
Coaster
25-10-07, 07:47 PM
I dont think anyone wants to give up on the enviroment, but this Kyoto agreement has more holes then the Kiwi RL defense line.
This global agreement including China and USA, that was started during the APEC meeting sounds like a better way of doing things IMO. I hope this can get off the ground, as without these 2 nations, everything else is just a waste of trees.
DIEHARD
27-10-07, 03:48 PM
Polls favour Labor
Two new polls show Labor remains on track to win the upcoming election.
A poll conducted by the Canberra Times in Eden Monaro suggests Labor will easily win the Bellwether seat, which has been claimed by the party that holds government at every election since 1972.
Another Nielsen online poll, taken this week shows the Opposition ahead of the Coalition 56 per cent to 44 per cent on a two party preferred basis.
The Nielsen poll also shows Labor leads 48 to 39 per cent in response to the question of which party has better policies for you.
The margin is tighter when it comes to tax, with 36 per cent preferring Labor's tax package ahead of 33 per cent who favour the Coalition plan.
Mr Howard has refused to be drawn on the results.
'I have no intention of commenting on polls. We've got the real thing on the 24th of November and I have absolutely no intention of commenting on polls between now and the election.'
http://www.skynews.com.au
DIEHARD
28-10-07, 12:33 AM
Shaky Libs in internal uproar
LIBERALS expecting a Coalition defeat are already preparing for a post-poll leadership showdown between Peter Costello and Malcolm Turnbull.
Mr Turnbull has been embarrassed by revelations a member of his staff endorsed a profile page touting his leadership ambitions under the heading "Malcolm Turnbull for PM" on internet site Facebook.
The page says: "Show your support for Malcolm, and maybe he will knock Costello off in the race for PM in waiting."
Among the group of five people who claimed to be "members" sponsoring the posting was Tommy Tudehope, an electorate office staffer for Mr Turnbull.
Minutes after The Sunday Mail accessed the posting and tried to contact Mr Tudehope via the site, his name and photograph were taken down.
But the indiscretion is likely to be seized on by Labor as proof that Mr Turnbull is now focused on a looming leadership contest with Mr Costello, anticipating John Howard will lose the election and perhaps even his Sydney seat of Bennelong.
At the same time there are growing suggestions around the country that Coalition candidates are ditching the Prime Minister on their campaign billboards and in their letterbox literature because he's now seen as a vote loser.
That verdict was reinforced by a shock new poll published yesterday in the Canberra Times showing the Liberals trailing Labor in the bellwether New South Wales seat of Eden-Monaro, just outside the national capital, by a whopping 56 per cent to 44 per cent two-party preferred vote. Eden-Monaro has traditionally gone with the government of the day.
Meanwhile Liberal candidates around the country have been stripping Mr Howard out of their campaigns.
Andrew Laming in the marginal Brisbane seat of Bowman simply declares he's "working to get more done locally".
Other Liberal candidates have completely personalised their brochures, failing to mention Mr Howard once. Samantha McIntosh in the key Victorian seat of Ballarat and Karen Chijoff in Lindsay, western Sydney, have adopted this approach.
The Sunday Mail - http://www.news.com.au
Old Diehard
28-10-07, 12:45 AM
It's only a 2 horse race - but fair dinkum, wish I knew of a better cert.
This election is becoming a no brainer and if the Reserve Bank lifts interest rates again next week , then Hayden's drover's dog could lead the ALP and still win (it's a 20 year old pun! - you would have to know your history!)
Are these polls any sort of indication of what will really happen? Didn't Latham have strong numbers compared to Howard? He was miserably beaten, which is just as well because he turned out to be a gronk.
I'm still voting for my avatar either way. I cannot understand why anyone would vote for Howard after all the lies and scandals during his reign.
DIEHARD
30-10-07, 07:49 PM
The difference with opinion polls this time around is that Kevin Rudd's personal satisfaction and preferred PM ratings are so high.
Sorry day for Tony Abbott clouds health message
By Sandra O'Malley, Jane Bunce and Peter Williams
October 31, 2007
HEALTH Minister Tony Abbott was forced into an embarrassing apology - not once, but twice - today as the election focus turned to who would better manage the health of the nation.
He had to say sorry to the heroic face of the campaign against James Hardie, Bernie Banton, and then again for turning up 30 minutes late for a nationally-televised health debate with his Labor counterpart, Nicola Roxon.
And minutes later he was caught out swearing after Ms Roxon took him to task for being tardy.
But the problems didn't end there.
The Commonwealth's plan to take over the Mersey Hospital in Tasmania - hoping it will shore up its vote in the marginal seat of Braddon - has been delayed by administrative bungling which Mr Abbott blames on the state.
All in all, it was a bad day for Tony Abbott, with his bloopers stealing the focus from the Government's big set-piece health announcement - a $310 million package to give patients more access to doctors and nurses.
Mr Abbott was late for the Canberra debate - which had been pencilled in for some time - after running behind in Melbourne, where he and Prime Minister John Howard were unveiling more money for nurse home visits and extra GP training places.
Arriving late at the National Press Club, a sheepish Mr Abbott admitted things had gone "awry" as he apologised for the debacle.
But his absence for half the debate gave Ms Roxon unfettered air time to talk about Labor's plan for health, an area where it is seen to have a natural political advantage.
"Thank you for being so patient, I didn't wish to make such a grand entrance, I really do apologise for it," Mr Abbott told the audience.
Ms Roxon capitalised on Mr Abbott's discomfort, labelling his late arrival "discourteous".
"This is mea culpa month I think for Tony Abbott," she said.
"I'm sorry we didn't invest in public hospitals. I'm sorry we didn't plan for the work force. I'm sorry I offended Bernie Banton. Now I'm sorry I offended a whole national TV audience."
While waiting for Mr Abbott, Ms Roxon even offered to take a question on his behalf.
"I could do an impersonation if it helped - my office says it's quite good," she said, to laughter.
Ms Roxon continued to needle the minister when they posed for the cameras after the debate.
When she told him he could have been on time if he wanted, he muttered in reply: "That's bull****."
Only hours earlier Mr Abbott was forced to publicly apologise to Mr Banton, the terminally-ill asbestos campaigner, after yesterday accusing him of a stunt when he tried to present the minister with a petition.
Mr Banton is trying to have the cost of mesothelioma drug Alimta subsidised by taxpayers and was furious when the minister was not at his Sydney office to receive the petition.
Mr Abbott, who was in Melbourne, responded by saying that just because Mr Banton was sick did not mean he was "necessarily pure of heart".
Today the minister conceded his response was more aggressive than necessary.
"(His is) a thoroughly admirable commitment, obviously I shouldn't have been as dismissive as I was and I've apologised to him," Mr Abbott said of Mr Banton.
Reflecting on his attack on Mr Banton, Mr Abbott later told the Nine Network: "It suggests occasionally I can be guilty of a lapse of judgment."
Meanwhile, campaigning in regional NSW, Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd fleshed out his plan to cut elective surgery waiting lists with a $600 million injection of funds.
The $600 million commitment is part of Labor's already-announced $2.5 billion national hospitals reform plan.
It includes $100 million for states to cut waiting lists, $200 million for improvements to hospitals, and $300 million to reward states that complete surgery within recommended times.
TELEGRAPH
Are these polls any sort of indication of what will really happen? Didn't Latham have strong numbers compared to Howard? He was miserably beaten, which is just as well because he turned out to be a gronk.
I'm still voting for my avatar either way. I cannot understand why anyone would vote for Howard after all the lies and scandals during his reign.
I agree with you 100%.
But i kinda get the feeling that maybe Labour should just let the Libs cruel themselves for a little while longer. Howards plan with a 6 week campaign was to let Labour hang themselves, but it's looking more and more like the Libs are finding new ways to lose this election. :duh:
Shaky Libs in internal uproar
LIBERALS expecting a Coalition defeat are already preparing for a post-poll leadership showdown between Peter Costello and Malcolm Turnbull.
At the same time there are growing suggestions around the country that Coalition candidates are ditching the Prime Minister on their campaign billboards and in their letterbox literature because he's now seen as a vote loser.
h
Meanwhile Liberal candidates around the country have been stripping Mr Howard out of their campaigns.
The Sunday Mail - http://www.news.com.au
This is a classic. I'm loving this. :rolf: I wonder how Howard would spin this away......
I also love to hear the Libs talk about how responsible they have been with the Senate since they gained the majority. One of my favourite knee-slappers! :rolf:
Social Loafer
31-10-07, 08:09 PM
You couldn't script this stuff :laugh:
IF YOU thought John Howard was having a bad election campaign, spare a thought for Andrew Quah, a candidate for the Family First Party. He has been dumped as its candidate for the western Sydney seat of Reid after photos of him parading his private parts appeared on gay websites and were emailed around the country.
Mr Quah, 21, has also admitted to looking at p.orn websites in the past two weeks, which made his position untenable given his party's strong commitment to protect children by making p.orn harder to access on the internet.
Mr Quah told the Herald yesterday he thought it was possible that he had posed for the compromising photographs. "I might have been drunk off my face or my political enemies might have drugged me."
One photo shows him exposing his private parts as he takes a picture of himself in a mirror.
"But that's not my *****," he said. So whose was it?
"Look, maybe somebody photoshopped it, and put another one on the photo," he said. "I can tell you, it's not me. I know these things. But really, I can't remember ? All I know, I have been humiliated."
So too has Family First. Its leader, Steve Fielding, counselled Mr Quah when the news surfaced at the weekend - then disendorsed him, dropped him from the Family First NSW executive and expelled him.
Already Mr Quah is being called "Australia's smallest loser". The Other Cheek blog even put up what it alleged were full-frontal close-ups of him but used Family First stickers for optional modesty.
Senator Fielding would not comment on Mr Quah yesterday, preferring to attack Labor for negotiating preferences with the Greens, given their drug policy. But Family First's spokeswoman, Felicity de Fombelle, confirmed the expulsion: "He does not share the party's values."
Mr Quah, a music teacher of Greystanes, has been lampooned as a bonsai grower who once performed in a school production of Mr Squiggle, and as a Liberal-allied student politician at Sydney University.
"I have been accused of publicly exposing myself to a number of student activist mailing lists. I categorically deny this," Mr Quah said. "I did, however, do something stupid and juvenile. Over two years ago I drunkenly shared, in confidence, photos of myself in what appears to be an inappropriate position, though I completely deny that the third composite image is me or mine. These pictures were then posted in my name to a series of mailing lists with a highly offensive message.
"The incident took place long before my eventual application to join the Family First Party.
"I apologise to anybody who takes offence ? It was a mistake that I would not have committed had I been of right mind. But I hope that this does not reflect on the membership of the Family First Party - decent, hardworking and dedicated people. And I hope that my behaviour will not reflect badly on my colleagues and friends who share the desire to make Australia the best place in the world to raise a family."
When asked about viewing pornography, he confirmed he had done so in the past two weeks. "I don't want to talk about it, but I have a different view to the party because I don't believe that it is possible to block pornography on the internet."
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/10/28/1193555533377.html
:duh: :duh: :duh: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf: :rolf:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/10/28/1193555533377.html
Mr Quah ...IS A ******** rofl
What were Family First thinking :duh:
One photo shows him exposing his private parts as he takes a picture of himself in a mirror.
"But that's not my *****," he said. So whose was it?
"I apologise to anybody who takes offence ? It was a mistake that I would not have committed had I been of right mind. But I hope that this does not reflect on the membership of the Family First Party :duh:
It is Serious though.
BUT, your right SL...you couldn't script it :p
Mr Quah ...IS A ******** rofl
What were Family First thinking :duh:
:duh:
It is Serious though.
BUT, your right SL...you couldn't script it :p
Makes eating ear-wax seem a bit boring. I always love the way they try to justify or explain it away. They should always be holding a shovel when they start telling us "what really happened".
Social Loafer
31-10-07, 08:39 PM
Makes eating ear-wax seem a bit boring. I always love the way they try to justify or explain it away. They should always be holding a shovel when they start telling us "what really happened".
:laugh:
You really have to laugh though, any family first are a cult. The bloke done nothing illegal and having censorship of porn as a policy is just nuts...
p.s. Jenny, everything in my signature is all fact and informing the public :p
:laugh:
You really have to laugh though, any family first are a cult. The bloke done nothing illegal and having censorship of porn as a policy is just nuts...
Maybe he should have said he was on a "fact finding mission". :) Could have had his broadband re-imbursed! LOL
p.s. Jenny, everything in my signature is all fact and informing the public
I know :laugh: :laugh:
Social Loafer
31-10-07, 09:02 PM
Maybe he should have said he was on a "fact finding mission". :) Could have had his broadband re-imbursed! LOL
Can't believe those people in the Slovak Rebpublic can download porn i mean browse the net faster then us.
p.s. Thanks for reminding Jenny sig is due for an updatr
Can't believe those people in the Slovak Rebpublic can download porn i mean browse the net faster then us.
:laugh:
You really have to laugh though, any family first are a cult. The bloke done nothing illegal and having censorship of porn as a policy is just nuts...
:laugh: Errr Pardon the Pun :blink:
DIEHARD
01-11-07, 06:05 AM
Here is a Newspoll treat for all those election watchers out there.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/files/newspoll-1nov.pdf
Coaster
01-11-07, 08:20 AM
From that poll above, this is in the small print for those interested.
The data has been weighted to
reflect the population distribution. This latest
survey is based on a reanalysis of surveys
conducted on October 19-21 and 26-28, 2007,
and is based on a total of 3413 interviews
among voters. Individual state sample bases
range from 655 to 679 voters.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.