|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:In Biden time, Abbott becomes 'PM' DateJuly 21, 2012 TONY Abbott found himself in pride of place when Labor ministers and opposition frontbenchers attending the Australian American Leadership Dialogue met Vice-President Joe Biden. The Opposition Leader was placed opposite Mr Biden, who made the slip of calling him ''prime minister''. Others attending the meeting, in the Vice-President's residence, were Trade Minister Craig Emerson, Workplace Relations Minister Bill Shorten and former foreign minister Kevin Rudd, plus Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop. It was Ms Bishop's birthday and Mr Biden produced a cake and sang Happy Birthday. Speaking after talks in New York about the international economic situation, Mr Abbott said the world economy ''is quite fragile, confidence is not strong''. ''That just makes me more determined than ever to do what we can in Australia to put our economy in the best possible shape. Fundamentally, that means government living within its means.'' Australia had so many natural advantages and ''we don't want to miss out on all of the success which is potentially ours through political and economic complacency''. He had not been in the US ''to fight the political battles of back home on the streets of New York but, nevertheless, that's always part of the general discussion''. Mr Abbott was careful not to comment on US politics. Asked whether he was endorsing Mitt Romney, he said: ''I'm not here to get involved in US politics. I'm here to learn and I'm here to remind America, to the extent that I can, of the fundamental strengths that they have as a nation and as an inspiration to the rest of the world.'' Mr Abbott will visit Beijing on his way home. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/in-biden-time-abbott-becomes-pm-20120720-22g13.html#ixzz21AlWNnXu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor say any new bid to dump Julia Gillard will mean an early election by: Ben Packham From: The Australian July 20, 2012 KEY independents Rob Oakeshott and Tony Windsor have warned they will force an early election if a fresh challenge is mounted against Julia Gillard. Mr Windsor this afternoon followed Mr Oakeshott in placing Kevin Rudd supporters on notice, threatening an early poll unless manoeuvring against Ms Gillard ceased. “A change of leaders would be a high risk strategy that would open up the option of an early election,” said Mr Windsor, the Member for New England. Hours earlier, Mr Oakeshott called on Labor to stop focusing on its political future and get on with governing the country. The warnings will focus the minds of many Labor MPs who know the party is not ready for an election under either Ms Gillard or Mr Rudd. Mr Oakeshott made specific reference to a statement early this week by Labor whip Joel Fitzgibbon, who warned Ms Gillard that “populism matters” in politics, and leaders who remained unpopular would inevitably be replaced. .Mr Oakeshott told The Australian: “I believe strongly in the maxim that the best policy is the best politics. And that, when we get down to it, is why the Prime Minister is the current prime minister. “But if her team seems to follow the Fitzgibbon maxim, that the most popular is the best at politics, then let's have a popularity contest. Let's have the election.” Labor relies on the support of Mr Oakeshott and Mr Windsor to govern. They could force an election at any time by siding with the opposition in a no-confidence motion. Mr Oakeshott's seat is considered the most vulnerable of the independents when an election is called, with the Nationals confident of winning back Lyne, based around Port Macquarie in NSW. “I'll cross that bridge when I get to it,” Mr Oakeshott said of the threat to his parliamentary career. “I don't fear the ballot box.” Rudd supporters say leadership tensions are likely to come to a head when parliament returns next month if Ms Gillard has not lifted the party's primary vote to at least 38 per cent. But the Gillard camp says the leadership question was settled in February, when Ms Gillard won a resounding victory over Mr Rudd in a caucus ballot. Mr Windsor said his position on the leadership had been consistent - that his agreement with Ms Gillard and Deputy Prime Minister Wayne Swan was “not transferrable”. He said “all bets would be off” in his agreement with Labor should Julia Gillard be replaced as Prime Minister. Ms Gillard is under pressure to lift Labor's primary vote in the opinion polls, with some critics predicting a showdown if she fails to make inroads by the resumption of parliament next month. Labor has thrown hundreds of millions of dollars at voters in carbon tax compensation, but the money had so far failed to make an impact on the party's support levels. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/get-on-with-the-job-rob-oakeshott-warns-alp-or-face-an-early-election/story-fn59niix-1226430876206
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Gillard leadership reaches tattered stage DateJuly 19, 2012 - 2:18PM Julia Gillard’s leadership has reached that tattered stage where she is victim to random stirrings. This week, government whip Joel Fitzgibbon set off a new round of speculation when he said, in effect, that unpopular leaders eventually get their come-uppance. Then came a report in The Australian Financial Review that the heavy hitters of the union movement at a meeting on Tuesday canvassed the prospect of Kevin Rudd returning to the leadership. The fact that ACTU secretary Dave Oliver contested the report makes little difference; anything that feeds into leadership talk stirs things along, regardless of the nuances. The central issue at the meeting was getting together a union battle plan -— the plan is for a $2 a head levy on union members. The unions leaders were not primarily concentrated on the leadership, but rather recognising reality. They can read the polls as well as anyone else. It is not so much a matter of actively backing a change — some would be very much against — as knowing that it might well happen. They realise that in the present volatile climate, if things don’t turn up (and few think they will), momentum will gather for the switch. People present did make the point that they don’t want to see an early election. Aware there almost certainly will be a Liberal government, they would like to delay its arrival as long as possible. While they realise a move to Rudd may well occur, they also know that Rudd’s becoming leader would make a premature poll more likely than if Gillard hung on. Key union figures, most notably the Australian Workers’ Union’s Paul Howes, had a prominent role in the coup against Rudd. In February, union support for Gillard was important in ensuring she overwhelmingly trounced Rudd. But in the likely turmoil ahead, Gillard can’t rely on such strong backing from the industrial base. Not that the unions would welcome a return to Rudd. Apart from the prospect that he could have to, or choose to, go to the polls early, they are fully aware that he is less sympathetic to them and their agendas than is Gillard. But though Gillard will have her diehard backers in the union movement, others will take the view that if there is a tide, there is a limit to what can be done to hold it back. While the unions are thinking ahead to the election campaign, their eyes are also scanning the horizon beyond that — how to cope with an Abbott prime ministership. But at least, many of them expect, they may well then have one of their own in the opposition leadership, with Bill Shorten an early favourite for the job. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/gillard-leadership-reaches-tattered-stage-20120719-22bz0.html#ixzz2144EeOHA
|
|
|
|
|
KenGooner_GCU
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Joffa wrote:Quote:
The social welfare lobby rightly claims that the present level of the dole is not enough to survive on – missing the point that it isn't meant to be.
Errm, no, that's exactly the point of social welfare. This article is simply one of the Murdoch tabloids it mocks in pretty clothing. Who wrote this, Judge Judy?
Hello
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Abbott's seeing stars and stripes all right DateJuly 18, 2012 - 3:34PM There is no explanation for it. It must have been a bump on the head, or drugs. How else to explain the speech the Opposition Leader Tony Abbott made to the Heritage Foundation in Washington? Admittedly Abbott was speaking to the converted in his outpouring of conservative love – the Heritage Foundation is a leading thinktank of the right in America – but there are parts of his effusion that simply don't add up either in the sum total of Abbott the politician, or Abbott the interpreter of history and social affairs. First, (and it's hard to select which should be first), there is this, taken from a transcript of his speech on his website: "English-speaking countries have beckoned to people everywhere, especially in troubled times, harkening to the immortal words inscribed on the Statue of Liberty: give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free." The remarks were presaged in the context of the quest for freedom, which is fair enough, and Australia is an ideal and example of multiculturalism at work, but the sting in the tale is the speaker. Tony Abbott cites one of the most famous phrases in history about refugees as a beacon to which to aspire for a country? Make sure all the asylum seekers heading our way for a better life get a copy. Advertisement And then there's this: "The United States and Australia are separate legal entities but few Australians would regard America as a foreign country. We are more than allies, we're family. Around the world we seek no privileges, ask no favours, crave no territory." Few Australians would regard America as a foreign country? Let's give him the benefit of the doubt, and say that he has only clumsily articulated the view that there are close similarities in our way of life. Again, that would be fair enough. We're both democracies. We can understand each other when we speak, Australia imports most of its popular culture from there. We help them out when they get in a fight. We copy their trends because if they do it it must be good and great. Thus we will become good and great. But in the alternative then lies the question, which has just a touch of fear-of-aliens shading to it, of quantity. Few Australians? Forty-nine percent? Thirty percent? The No. 96 tram when it's full? Maybe Abbott is just being all warm and fuzzy for his host's benefit. No harm in that, if it were done privately. But now the world knows - via perhaps this country's next Prime Minister - that we don't think of America as a foreign country. Well done. Also it is a huge mistake for this country's well-being, and self-worth, to view America as anything but a foreign country. We have similar interests. We have alliances. But if they weren't of benefit to both parties, they wouldn't exist. For Abbott to bring in the image of familial connections evokes Tolstoy's aphorism from Anna Karenina: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." This is particularly relevant in relation to this: "Around the world we seek no privileges, ask no favours, crave no territory." Which folds into this line: "Not since the war with Mexico, has America used force to extend its territory." This is breathtaking in its simplification, and obscuring of history. The Mexican-American War was 170 years ago. It ended with America victorious and gave it California and Texas. Fifty years later, in 1898, America was at war with Spain, in which it got Puerto Rica, Guam and the Philippines. There was also the long conflict known as the Indian Wars, where the Native American nations came off the worst. Throughout the 20th century and into this century America may not have demonstrated a craving for territory to invade, but ipso facto, it has used its military force to increase and bolster its sphere of influences to safeguard its interests. A Middle East royal family anyone? Abbott said that if the United States had been motivated purely by "narrow self-interest" it would not have invaded Iraq. This was absolutely the right to thing to say to the audience and the wrong thing to say to history. The invasion was based on a lie, and we, being all part of the family, went along with it. No doubt the Opposition Leader was warmly applauded after his speech. There's nothing as comforting as being among like-minded friends. Why he may even have felt he wasn't in a foreign country. As to those of in the 51st state, we're seeing stars and stripes all right. And it isn't from a bump to the head or drugs. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/abbotts-seeing-stars-and-stripes-all-right-20120718-229y8.html#ixzz20yXu0hbX
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Abbott trashing Australia's credentials: Gillard July 18, 2012 - 5:15PM Prime Minister Julia Gillard has accused Opposition Leader Tony Abbott of trashing Australia's security credentials during his visit to Washington. Ms Gillard said Mr Abbott had reached a new low in negativity in his criticism of Defence spending cuts. Defending Labor's record, she said Defence spending exceeded $100 billion over the four-year forward estimates period for the first time ever under Labor and remained at that level. "Mr Abbott has reached a new low in negativity by going overseas and criticising this nation's national security credentials in front of an overseas audience," she told reporters, adding that he had voted in favour of the Defence budget he was now attacking. Mr Abbott told the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, that Labor should not be cutting Defence spending in a way that compromised Defence capability, given that Australia's military capabilities were not vast. "Certainly the last thing we want to do is dismay our friends and allies at what is for everyone a difficult time," he said. Mr Abbott said a Coalition government would seek efficiencies in Defence spending. But in an interview on Sky News, he declined to commit to restoring Defence spending to former levels. "I would want to get the advice of the Defence chiefs as to what the impact of this will be on our military capability," he said. In the May budget, the government slashed $5.45 billion from Defence spending over the next four years. The opposition was highly critical, saying the move would reduce Defence spending to 1.6 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP), a level not seen since 1938. Some US figures have also criticised the cuts. Former US deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage said the Australian Defence budget was inadequate and spending of 2 per cent of GDP would be appropriate. He suggested Australia was taking a free ride on the US and risking its credibility as an ally. Opposition Defence spokesman David Johnston said this was a timely warning. "The superficially expedient nature of these cuts means Australia is left without a credible Defence administrative or strategic plan," he said in a statement. AAP Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/abbott-trashing-australias-credentials-gillard-20120718-229zy.html#ixzz20yWi0OVd
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Gillard stuck in rut as Rudd battle looms large again DateJuly 18, 2012 THE Labor Party is again battling leadership speculation as it languishes in the opinion polls and struggles to reach an agreement with the Greens to break the damaging deadlock on asylum policy. The chief government whip, Joel Fitzgibbon, insisted yesterday he had just been ''stating the obvious'' when he said on the Q&A program on Monday night that leaders who remained unpopular for a long time ''inevitably stop leading the party''. But Labor sources say Kevin Rudd's support has grown significantly since he won only 31 of the 102 caucus votes when he challenged Julia Gillard in February, and it will increase further if Labor's primary vote remains stuck in the low 30 per cent range recorded in most published polls. The government also fears its ''expert panel'' may fail to break the political impasse on asylum policy, given the Greens' insistence they will not countenance offshore processing as part of a policy solution. After the first meeting between the three-person expert panel and a cross-party committee yesterday, the Greens leader, Christine Milne, promised her party would ''take [the] outcomes very seriously, take them back to our party room and discuss them''. But she was also clear the Greens would not support offshore processing because it was ''inconsistent with Australia's international obligations'' and in the Greens' view, did not work as a deterrent to other asylum seekers considering the risk of getting on a boat. With the Coalition refusing to take part in the process, the government sees the Greens as the only hope of reaching a policy agreement, and the Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen, said yesterday that ''with people's lives at stake … we all might need to move away from positions we've held quite dearly in the past''. But senior Labor figures also believe some kind of deterrent such as offshore processing is essential as part of a policy package that could include increased funding for regional processing centres and a higher annual refugee intake. The DLP senator John Madigan, who was at yesterday's meeting, said he was ''disappointed the Coalition is not involved''. ''I don't see a huge difference between the policies of the Coalition and the ALP,'' he said. Mr Fitzgibbon, one of a number of NSW Right MPs understood to be backing Mr Rudd, said he had simply been stating facts when talking about the longevity of unpopular leaders. ''People aren't mugs. It's a historical fact that political leaders who poll badly long enough don't remain political leaders,'' he said. Ms Gillard insisted the party had ''dealt with'' the leadership issue in February and neither she nor her office spoke to Mr Fitzgibbon about his remarks yesterday. But most Labor MPs concede Ms Gillard will come under increasing pressure unless Labor's polling begins to improve. Any leadership change would be fraught with uncertainties, including how it would occur, given that Mr Rudd has made it clear the party would have to turn to him and that he would not launch another challenge. The reaction of the Greens and the independents upon whom Labor relies to govern would also have to be considered. Independent Tony Windsor said he would consider his position if there were a change of leader ''but you couldn't rule out a quick election either''. Mr Rudd's backers argue neither the independents nor the Greens would want to refuse to form government with a Rudd-led Labor Party if it meant going to the polls while the Coalition was still in a position to win a landslide victory. However, the Greens are angry at recent attacks on them by Labor figures. Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/opinion/political-news/gillard-stuck-in-rut-as-rudd-battle-looms-large-again-20120717-228h5.html#ixzz20xziyBII
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
marconi101 wrote:batfink wrote:marconi101 wrote:>People of Australia want better leadership and government
>Votes Liberal
Logic! better logic than apathy.....your very very easily pleased if you endorse the mess we have at the moment..... Which I don't, both parties would be criticised if they were in leadership regardless yes i agree
|
|
|
|
|
marconi101
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 16K,
Visits: 0
|
batfink wrote:marconi101 wrote:>People of Australia want better leadership and government
>Votes Liberal
Logic! better logic than apathy.....your very very easily pleased if you endorse the mess we have at the moment..... Which I don't, both parties would be criticised if they were in leadership regardless
He was a man of specific quirks. He believed that all meals should be earned through physical effort. He also contended, zealously like a drunk with a political point, that the third dimension would not be possible if it werent for the existence of water.
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
notorganic wrote:I didn't read the entire article, but does it talk about the fact that the current generation of jobseekers were drilled from a very young age by their parents not to accept second best and to look down on cleaners/burger flippers/petrol pumpers etc? LOL.....you make me laugh....:roll:
|
|
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
I didn't read the entire article, but does it talk about the fact that the current generation of jobseekers were drilled from a very young age by their parents not to accept second best and to look down on cleaners/burger flippers/petrol pumpers etc?
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Job snobs are holding us back DateJuly 17, 2012 - 4:41PM The contradictions roll on: we're supposed to be concerned about rising unemployment, especially in non-mining regional centres, but we have to rely on backpackers to pick our crops and pour our beer; the dole is so low as to be unliveable, a social welfare disaster, but there's a plea to admit a new underclass of migrants to perform menial tasks. The rise of job snobs and the unemployable means our labour market is not capable of realising its potential - and that's before getting into the usual employer whinge of wanting to pay lower wages while hopefully selling goods and services to people who receive high wages everywhere else. Sometimes the contradictions are closely juxtaposed. On the one hand is an economist's (brave) forecast that our unemployment rate is heading above 6 per cent next year, while another features the need to let backpackers extend their working holidays so beer can still be poured in country pubs. Meanwhile the tourism industry, taking a break from complaining about its imminent demise because Australians are finding better offerings overseas, is asking where the bloody hell are the workers needed to handle those who do come. The Murdoch tabloids feature a poorly sourced version of earlier reports about young Australians shunning hospitality, forcing the industry to seek more temporary workers. Today's tabloid version beats up the story thus: “Tens of thousands of low-paid migrants could be allowed into Australia to work as waiters, kitchenhands and cooks. Foreigners on cheap wages are a better option than unemployed Australians, industry experts say.” Hordes So the feared Asian hordes will now invade through the kitchens instead of those leaky boats… The balance between humanity and hard stick in providing social welfare is nowhere sharper than in setting unemployment benefits. The social welfare lobby rightly claims that the present level of the dole is not enough to survive on – missing the point that it isn't meant to be. A proportion of the community already chooses social welfare payments over lowly-paid hard work. That the transition between the two is made all the harder by infamously high effective marginal tax rates is another matter. For some people at the meeting point of policy and the real world, it really isn't worth working, at least in the short term. The unemployment rate seems to run second only to mortgage rates as the figure of most fear and media fixation. Never mind that a proportion of the workforce is always in flux, that a rate somewhere near 5 per cent has come to represent a good outcome in the developed world, just the threat of a rise in the unemployment rate is sure to grab a headline. What should be a more important figure from a business point of view, the number of jobs, tends to be pushed into the background. At the worst of our mild slowdown during the GFC when the unemployment rate peaked at 5.8 per cent, there were still more people employed (10,772,500) than when Wayne Swan was bringing down his first budget in May, 2008, and the unemployment rate was 4.2 per cent (10,705,300 employed). Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/job-snobs-are-holding-us-back-20120717-2282p.html#ixzz20sia0vli
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Farrand93 wrote:notorganic wrote:f1worldchamp wrote:marconi101 wrote:>People of Australia want better leadership and government
>Votes Liberal
Logic! Actually it is logical, you statement is 'People of Australia want better leadership and government' I think few people would deny a Liberal government would be better, even if it's not by much. They could hardly do any worse. The LNP have done nothing to give any reassurance that they won't be any worse. This... i mean, Tony has called for the mass murder of refugees. LOL.....what an absurd comment......so the policy now that has seen hundreds of refugee's die at sea is acceptable to you?? ](*,) ](*,)
|
|
|
|
|
thupercoach
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Joffa wrote:Quote:ALP's fatal self-indulgence DateJuly 17, 2012 With the party fracturing, the NSW Right's pyrrhic victory on Green preferences leaves the way open for the Coalition The first great Labor split occurred on September 15, 1916. Billy Hughes was a prime minister in the middle of a world war that was consuming soldiers like a mincing-machine every time the whistles blew. He wanted to conscript more Australians so the ranks would be replenished in time for the next futile assault. Others, particularly the Irish Catholics who made up much of Labor's base, didn't want to see their children fed uselessly into the maw of the living hell that was the Western Front. The party allowed one referendum on the issue. But when it failed, Hughes continued fighting and the split deepened. Finally he'd had enough. Realising he was being frustrated, Hughes stormed out of a party meeting shouting, ''those that think like me, follow me''. Labor was out of office for the next 13 years. The party regained power in 1929, just in time to be in office during the Great Depression. The question then (as today) was how best to reinvigorate the economy. Was it best to cut spending and slash debt; stimulate the economy with government programs; or embark on a truly radical program and simply repudiate repayments to the ''wealthy British capitalists'' who'd provided investment funds in the past? Joseph Lyons was an acting treasurer who had no time for radicals, and he soon fell foul of a party that couldn't unite behind his ideas. As soon as his fingers were prised from the levers of power, he walked from cabinet and soon afterwards crossed the floor of Parliament, leaving Labor behind. This time the party remained out of office for just a few months less than a decade. The third major split occurred in 1955. Again, it began as a dispute over a policy issue: should the government provide assistance to private (and particularly Roman Catholic) schools? The ''Groupers'', a collection of anti-communist, conservative Labor supporters disagreed with opposition leader Bert Evatt, who was steadfastly against the provision of state aid. When he attempted to shovel responsibility for his defeat the previous year onto the Groupers, they broke away and formed the Democratic Labor Party. A Labor leader didn't see what the inside of The Lodge looked like for another 17 years. The art of politics is defined by both persuasion and compromise. On the assumption that the party leader actually believes in something - by no means a given in the current political scene - their aim is firstly to persuade their own differing constituencies of members to agree on a policy and then negotiate to implement it. This was the conceptual breakthrough that allowed Gough Whitlam to finally bring the party back from the political wilderness. He elevated himself above the sectional interests and presented ''the leader'' as the figure who could broker the deals to achieve the best outcomes for the party and the country. He acted like Moses, holding the engraved stone tablets of the party platform above his head like a talisman that would unite people who actually possessed very different ideas about the right way to go forward. When he became PM, Bob Hawke created a similar mythology. ''Consensus'' was the buzzword and it worked, too. He used ideas as a means of keeping his own personal project, living in The Lodge, on track. But Hawke was always very careful to ensure he sold the policies he'd brokered to the public as the best, or even the only, possible response to whatever conundrum he was facing. This allowed the party not just to occupy one section of the field, but also to possess the best alternatives to resolve any problem. He owned all the ideas, because he kept searching for the best ones. And so to today. Over the weekend the clever people in NSW Labor who earlier steered that branch of the party to such an overwhelming defeat at the last state election decided they'd finally worked out who is preventing the party from regaining power. As it turns out, it appears it isn't the Coalition at all. It's the Greens. The entire party conference - the one opportunity that was guaranteed to give Labor a bit of free publicity so it could present itself as a united and dynamic force for good - was squandered with infighting and blame. And do you think the one person who could have reached above the squabble to offer a united path forward did so? Do you think the Prime Minister was capable of addressing these concerns and bringing the different sections of her own party together so they could approach the future with a confident and united front? Hardly. She didn't even seriously address her problem. Although none was present, it was the Greens who overshadowed the conference proceedings. They-who-must-not-be-named. If her government were functioning properly, if Gillard could offer the scintilla of a suggestion that she might be able to recover, this debate would not be occurring. Labor appears to have abandoned any effort to form its own coalition that could advance a broad agenda. It's unfair, however, to blame Gillard alone for this. The Greens have never had a better chance to get some of their policies implemented. But instead of using their crucial numbers to bargain with Labor, many are simply fixated on blocking compromise. The inevitable result will be a Liberal government. The Green agenda will be consigned to the margins as they lose any ability to ameliorate policy settings. That's why their expected victory next Saturday in the state seat of Melbourne will be the worst outcome possible for the Greens. It will strengthen the arm of those opposed to working with the government: the non-politicians who see purity as a substitute for compromise and stridency as a replacement for persuasion. As the broad left has fractured. Tony Abbott is surging forward to occupy the uncontested middle. In the past, no government's been able to secure a commanding majority without at least pretending they're representing the centre. Labor appears willing to let him. Nicholas Stuart is a Canberra writer. Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/alps-fatal-selfindulgence-20120716-2267n.html#ixzz20pGx0aWW Well it looks like this Nicholas Stuart guy has his colours nailed to the Green mast... hardly an unbiased view of things is it? The fact is that the Greens have burnt their bridges with the Australian people who now realise what they really stand for - a carbon tax and income redistribution. "Scratch a green and you'll see a red..." I don't think Labor will win many elections in the next 5 years or so - at state or Federal level. But they clearly understand that the Greens are an election millstone around their necks. Let that also be a lesson the Greens - Labor have used them up and spat them out. And a lesson for Labor - get into bed with extremists and pay the price.
|
|
|
|
|
Eastern Glory
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 20K,
Visits: 0
|
notorganic wrote:f1worldchamp wrote:marconi101 wrote:>People of Australia want better leadership and government
>Votes Liberal
Logic! Actually it is logical, you statement is 'People of Australia want better leadership and government' I think few people would deny a Liberal government would be better, even if it's not by much. They could hardly do any worse. The LNP have done nothing to give any reassurance that they won't be any worse. This... i mean, Tony has called for the mass murder of refugees.
|
|
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
f1worldchamp wrote:marconi101 wrote:>People of Australia want better leadership and government
>Votes Liberal
Logic! Actually it is logical, you statement is 'People of Australia want better leadership and government' I think few people would deny a Liberal government would be better, even if it's not by much. They could hardly do any worse. The LNP have done nothing to give any reassurance that they won't be any worse.
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:ALP's fatal self-indulgence DateJuly 17, 2012 With the party fracturing, the NSW Right's pyrrhic victory on Green preferences leaves the way open for the Coalition The first great Labor split occurred on September 15, 1916. Billy Hughes was a prime minister in the middle of a world war that was consuming soldiers like a mincing-machine every time the whistles blew. He wanted to conscript more Australians so the ranks would be replenished in time for the next futile assault. Others, particularly the Irish Catholics who made up much of Labor's base, didn't want to see their children fed uselessly into the maw of the living hell that was the Western Front. The party allowed one referendum on the issue. But when it failed, Hughes continued fighting and the split deepened. Finally he'd had enough. Realising he was being frustrated, Hughes stormed out of a party meeting shouting, ''those that think like me, follow me''. Labor was out of office for the next 13 years. The party regained power in 1929, just in time to be in office during the Great Depression. The question then (as today) was how best to reinvigorate the economy. Was it best to cut spending and slash debt; stimulate the economy with government programs; or embark on a truly radical program and simply repudiate repayments to the ''wealthy British capitalists'' who'd provided investment funds in the past? Joseph Lyons was an acting treasurer who had no time for radicals, and he soon fell foul of a party that couldn't unite behind his ideas. As soon as his fingers were prised from the levers of power, he walked from cabinet and soon afterwards crossed the floor of Parliament, leaving Labor behind. This time the party remained out of office for just a few months less than a decade. The third major split occurred in 1955. Again, it began as a dispute over a policy issue: should the government provide assistance to private (and particularly Roman Catholic) schools? The ''Groupers'', a collection of anti-communist, conservative Labor supporters disagreed with opposition leader Bert Evatt, who was steadfastly against the provision of state aid. When he attempted to shovel responsibility for his defeat the previous year onto the Groupers, they broke away and formed the Democratic Labor Party. A Labor leader didn't see what the inside of The Lodge looked like for another 17 years. The art of politics is defined by both persuasion and compromise. On the assumption that the party leader actually believes in something - by no means a given in the current political scene - their aim is firstly to persuade their own differing constituencies of members to agree on a policy and then negotiate to implement it. This was the conceptual breakthrough that allowed Gough Whitlam to finally bring the party back from the political wilderness. He elevated himself above the sectional interests and presented ''the leader'' as the figure who could broker the deals to achieve the best outcomes for the party and the country. He acted like Moses, holding the engraved stone tablets of the party platform above his head like a talisman that would unite people who actually possessed very different ideas about the right way to go forward. When he became PM, Bob Hawke created a similar mythology. ''Consensus'' was the buzzword and it worked, too. He used ideas as a means of keeping his own personal project, living in The Lodge, on track. But Hawke was always very careful to ensure he sold the policies he'd brokered to the public as the best, or even the only, possible response to whatever conundrum he was facing. This allowed the party not just to occupy one section of the field, but also to possess the best alternatives to resolve any problem. He owned all the ideas, because he kept searching for the best ones. And so to today. Over the weekend the clever people in NSW Labor who earlier steered that branch of the party to such an overwhelming defeat at the last state election decided they'd finally worked out who is preventing the party from regaining power. As it turns out, it appears it isn't the Coalition at all. It's the Greens. The entire party conference - the one opportunity that was guaranteed to give Labor a bit of free publicity so it could present itself as a united and dynamic force for good - was squandered with infighting and blame. And do you think the one person who could have reached above the squabble to offer a united path forward did so? Do you think the Prime Minister was capable of addressing these concerns and bringing the different sections of her own party together so they could approach the future with a confident and united front? Hardly. She didn't even seriously address her problem. Although none was present, it was the Greens who overshadowed the conference proceedings. They-who-must-not-be-named. If her government were functioning properly, if Gillard could offer the scintilla of a suggestion that she might be able to recover, this debate would not be occurring. Labor appears to have abandoned any effort to form its own coalition that could advance a broad agenda. It's unfair, however, to blame Gillard alone for this. The Greens have never had a better chance to get some of their policies implemented. But instead of using their crucial numbers to bargain with Labor, many are simply fixated on blocking compromise. The inevitable result will be a Liberal government. The Green agenda will be consigned to the margins as they lose any ability to ameliorate policy settings. That's why their expected victory next Saturday in the state seat of Melbourne will be the worst outcome possible for the Greens. It will strengthen the arm of those opposed to working with the government: the non-politicians who see purity as a substitute for compromise and stridency as a replacement for persuasion. As the broad left has fractured. Tony Abbott is surging forward to occupy the uncontested middle. In the past, no government's been able to secure a commanding majority without at least pretending they're representing the centre. Labor appears willing to let him. Nicholas Stuart is a Canberra writer. Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/alps-fatal-selfindulgence-20120716-2267n.html#ixzz20pGx0aWW
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
marconi101 wrote:>People of Australia want better leadership and government
>Votes Liberal
Logic! better logic than apathy.....your very very easily pleased if you endorse the mess we have at the moment.....
|
|
|
|
|
f1worldchamp
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 0
|
marconi101 wrote:>People of Australia want better leadership and government
>Votes Liberal
Logic! Actually it is logical, you statement is 'People of Australia want better leadership and government' I think few people would deny a Liberal government would be better, even if it's not by much. They could hardly do any worse.
|
|
|
|
|
marconi101
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 16K,
Visits: 0
|
>People of Australia want better leadership and government >Votes Liberal Logic!
He was a man of specific quirks. He believed that all meals should be earned through physical effort. He also contended, zealously like a drunk with a political point, that the third dimension would not be possible if it werent for the existence of water.
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
notorganic wrote:Labor is done. not yet, there is still plenty more damage they can inflict on australia and it's population....#-o
|
|
|
|
|
batfink
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Joffa wrote:Quote:Gillard: Labor 'not done yet' DateJuly 15, 2012 - 12:20PM The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has declared she will not "lay down and die" and that next year's federal election will be fought on Labor's entire record, not just the carbon price. Addressing the NSW Labor conference at Sydney Town Hall this morning, Ms Gillard said federal Labor was "not done yet". I will stand and fight because I know you will stand and fight just like you did in 2007 and 2010. Julia Gillard at NSW Labor conference "I will stand and fight because I know you will stand and fight just like you did in 2007 and 2010," Ms Gillard told the conference. "I know you will amaze us with your efforts in the 2013 campaign". Ms Gillard attacked comments by the federal opposition leader, Tony Abbott, last week about the need for more flexibility in trading hours, signalling a fresh battle over industrial relations policy. "Delegates, when he said 'more flexibility', something tells me he didn’t mean making it easier to get time off when your kids are sick," Ms Gillard said. "So the fight’s on and we will fight it and win it." She said Labor's review of the Fair Work Act would "lock in fairness, to lock in bargaining in good faith, to lock them in for the future". Ms Gillard attacked the NSW Liberals as "a lazy party with small ideas" and renewed her challenged to the Premier, Barry O'Farrell, to accept her offer of infrastructure funding. Ms Gillard has offered $2.1 billion to fund construction of the Parramatta to Epping rail link but Mr O'Farrell has said the money should be directed to his preferred option, the north-west rail link.
The Prime Minister said to Mr O'Farrell: "The cheque is signed, the money's in the account ready for the State Liberals to take up as soon as they wake up."
"Barry, you don't even have to come into the office for a meeting," Ms Gillard said. "Just get on the phone, say yes and get on with the job."Ms Gillard announced the federal government would pledge an extra $1 billion towards funding the landmark equal pay case decision in February by Fair Work Australia to low paid community service workers. The Australian Services Union secretary, Sally McManus, applauded the decision and said it "put the heat on" the O'Farrell government which has committed in principle but has yet to put a figure on its contribution. "The NSW Premier has been ducking and weaving on this issue for two years," Ms McManus said. "The time for excuses is now over." Ms Gillard also announced extra berthing space would be created at Garden Island to accomodate the largest cruise ships. The announcement comes only four months after a federal government-comissioned review found the Garden Island solution was "impractical". Ms Gillard also appeared to make reference to the decision taken yesterday at the conference to no longer favour the Greens in preferencing decisions. She said 120 years after its founding, Labor was "still a unique force in the politics of Australia". "Only one party in the history of our democracy has ever stood and fought for working people – for progress and for the responsibility of governing Australia." Ms Gillard said that while "other parties come and go – often promising more, always delivering less ... we endure – not a brand, a cause." Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/gillard-labor-not-done-yet-20120715-223rh.html#ixzz20fCGPxWv Gillard is such a low life....the NSW labor party when in office, halted the epping to parramatta rail link. The preferred rail project that will have the greatest impact for NSW commuters is the northwest rail link....this is gillard playing low level politics. prior to o'farrell being elected the funding arrangement for transport projects was a 50/50 split between federal and state, as soon as O'Farrell gets in the funding was reduced to 80/20 state/federal and now she wants to dictate what projects are undertaken in a low level political act so she can hand the moron John Robertson some ammo..... if she was a real leader she would honour the funding that was available to the previous government, and LET them get on with the job instead of hindering their plans.......O'farrell could get on with the job IF NSW wasn't bankrupted by the previous Labor government.......
|
|
|
|
|
notorganic
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 21K,
Visits: 0
|
Labor is done.
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Gillard: Labor 'not done yet' DateJuly 15, 2012 - 12:20PM The Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has declared she will not "lay down and die" and that next year's federal election will be fought on Labor's entire record, not just the carbon price. Addressing the NSW Labor conference at Sydney Town Hall this morning, Ms Gillard said federal Labor was "not done yet". I will stand and fight because I know you will stand and fight just like you did in 2007 and 2010. Julia Gillard at NSW Labor conference "I will stand and fight because I know you will stand and fight just like you did in 2007 and 2010," Ms Gillard told the conference. "I know you will amaze us with your efforts in the 2013 campaign". Ms Gillard attacked comments by the federal opposition leader, Tony Abbott, last week about the need for more flexibility in trading hours, signalling a fresh battle over industrial relations policy. "Delegates, when he said 'more flexibility', something tells me he didn’t mean making it easier to get time off when your kids are sick," Ms Gillard said. "So the fight’s on and we will fight it and win it." She said Labor's review of the Fair Work Act would "lock in fairness, to lock in bargaining in good faith, to lock them in for the future". Ms Gillard attacked the NSW Liberals as "a lazy party with small ideas" and renewed her challenged to the Premier, Barry O'Farrell, to accept her offer of infrastructure funding. Ms Gillard has offered $2.1 billion to fund construction of the Parramatta to Epping rail link but Mr O'Farrell has said the money should be directed to his preferred option, the north-west rail link. The Prime Minister said to Mr O'Farrell: "The cheque is signed, the money's in the account ready for the State Liberals to take up as soon as they wake up." "Barry, you don't even have to come into the office for a meeting," Ms Gillard said. "Just get on the phone, say yes and get on with the job." Ms Gillard announced the federal government would pledge an extra $1 billion towards funding the landmark equal pay case decision in February by Fair Work Australia to low paid community service workers. The Australian Services Union secretary, Sally McManus, applauded the decision and said it "put the heat on" the O'Farrell government which has committed in principle but has yet to put a figure on its contribution. "The NSW Premier has been ducking and weaving on this issue for two years," Ms McManus said. "The time for excuses is now over." Ms Gillard also announced extra berthing space would be created at Garden Island to accomodate the largest cruise ships. The announcement comes only four months after a federal government-comissioned review found the Garden Island solution was "impractical". Ms Gillard also appeared to make reference to the decision taken yesterday at the conference to no longer favour the Greens in preferencing decisions. She said 120 years after its founding, Labor was "still a unique force in the politics of Australia". "Only one party in the history of our democracy has ever stood and fought for working people – for progress and for the responsibility of governing Australia." Ms Gillard said that while "other parties come and go – often promising more, always delivering less ... we endure – not a brand, a cause." Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/gillard-labor-not-done-yet-20120715-223rh.html#ixzz20fCGPxWv
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:A byelection defeat for Labor will cause shock waves in Canberra DateJuly 15, 2012 Julia Gillard will feel the pressure if state voters go Green. WHEN a government is in trouble, there is nothing like a byelection to send shivers up its spine and a frisson of excitement through the political system. Bass in 1975 heralded the end of the Whitlam government. Canberra in 1995 shouted that Paul Keating was doomed. The Liberals' loss of the ''safe'' Queensland seat of Ryan in 2001 appeared to toll the bell for John Howard. When, in midyear, the Liberals retained the Victorian seat of Aston, that become another turning point, signifying that the PM was pulling his team out of the massive trough into which it had fallen. These were all federal polls. But sometimes even state byelections can have a ripple effect federally. That's why many Canberra eyes will be on how voters decide in Labor's state seat of Melbourne next Saturday. This contest, caused by the resignation of former Labor minister Bronwyn Pike, is out of the ordinary for what has turned into such an important clash, because it is a battle royal between Labor and Greens, rather than ALP v Liberal. Each has a female candidate, Cathy Oke (Greens) and Jennifer Kanis (ALP), both Melbourne City councillors, and there is a large field of 16. With the stakes exceptionally high for both ALP and Greens, old faces are being brought back to add grunt. Bob Brown had scarcely had time to savour being a political retiree before he was on the hustings again (with his answering service still calling him ''senator''). Former premier Steve Bracks was doing service for Labor on Friday. As things stand, the Greens are in a strong position to take the seat, with Labor's support in the doldrums. The Greens are confident their vote will be above that of the ALP, but insert the caveat that unless they are sufficiently ahead on primaries, the preferences of the minor candidates could make the outcome unpredictable. The Labor-Greens face-off comes at a particularly significant time, given the national warfare that's broken out between the two parties. Greens leader Christine Milne declared in an email to supporters on Thursday that it was ''no coincidence that Labor's aggressive tactics have ramped up in the crucial last days of the byelection campaign''. If the Greens win their first Victorian state lower house seat, that will intensify the debate about the broad threat they pose to Labor and fuel its anti-Green push. Greens deputy leader Adam Bandt holds the federal seat of Melbourne; a state victory would hearten him about his chances of survival, regardless of how the major parties allocate preferences. A state defeat on Saturday would be an existential moment for the deeply depressed federal Labor Party. There has already been a leak reporting Labor polling is finding many voters say they won't vote ALP because they are put off by the Gillard government. While the byelection is being fought around issues of TAFE funding and cuts, jobs, public transport, public housing and the like, serious federal implications would be read into a Labor loss. This is the first vote since the carbon tax began. Tony Abbott would be making merry with that. A dismal ALP result would invite federal caucus members to turn their minds again to their own futures and the party's leadership. Gillard is emphasising that this is all about state politics. She has had some backing in this from Victorian Opposition Leader Daniel Andrews, who declared: ''This is a state election and we're fighting it on state issues.'' Asked whether he would welcome Gillard on the campaign trail, Andrews said she was very busy. ''She's got very much a full-time job to do,'' he said. Let's have a reality check here. Does anyone think that if Gillard was riding high, Andrews would be suggesting she was too busy to be in Melbourne? Andrews' thinking is no doubt just like that of West Australian Labor leader Mark McGowan and the Northern Territory Chief Minister Paul Henderson, who indicated last week that Gillard would not be flooded with invitations to campaign in their coming elections. There are three elections, incidentally, before the due date of the next federal election - the NT and ACT this year and Western Australia early next year - and all could be vicarious tests for federal Labor. But most immediately, Gillard will be focused on what fallout there might be from Melbourne. With an edgy caucus and Labor's national vote 31 per cent in last week's Newspoll, a humiliating Labor loss on Saturday could be a federal grenade. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/a-byelection-defeat-for-labor-will-cause-shock-waves-in-canberra-20120714-222v4.html#ixzz20ejLJsgW
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Government faces 'mass action' to compensate refugees held at detention centres DateJuly 14, 2012 THE federal government faces a wave of costly litigation for compensation over its treatment of refugees in immigration detention centres, including Villawood, as lawyers examine the cases of scores of former inmates. The Social Justice Network, an advocacy group based in western Sydney, has referred more than 40 cases to the law firm Slater & Gordon to assess their eligibility to sue the Commonwealth for allegedly breaching its duty of care towards asylum seekers who developed mental illnesses while in detention. ''This could cost Australia hundreds of millions of dollars,'' said the network's spokesman, Jamal Daoud, who describes it as a ''mass action''. ''We want to see these people compensated because they have suffered a lot. A lot of them immediately after they were released into the community were granted disability pensions and were very young people,'' Mr Daoud said. Advertisement One of the cases being considered is Charif Asaad, 35, who came to Australia 12 years ago on a visitor's visa from Syria in fear for his life. After working illegally in the construction industry until 2005, he was held at Villawood for three years. There, he claims he was handcuffed during epileptic seizures. A serious lung condition which left him short of breath and prone to collapse was left untreated. Since being released he has been unable to work and has been taking medication for depression. "I always feel angry all the time. Anything stresses me out. I feel short of breath." "I feel very bad that a country such as Australia treat a refugee as an animal or less than an animal. Whatever they give me is not enough because they have taken the best of me. Now if I walk for 15 minutes I feel like I am going to fall down in the road", Mr Asaad said. Ben Phi, the practice group leader for Slater & Gordon, which has already successfully pursued several compensation cases for former detainees, said people who come out of detention with psychiatric injuries after having been found to be refugees enter the community "already at a serious disadvantage rather than being able to go out to work and contribute''. The time people are spending in detention has increased, which contributes to mental illness, he added. In a legal caution which has implications for federal and opposition plans to process asylum seekers offshore, including Malaysia, Mr Phi said the federal government owes the duty of care to provide adequate medical and psychiatric services to detainees found to be refugees wherever they are held. By late last year, the federal government had paid $18 million in compensation to asylum seekers for unlawful detention and $5 million for negligence to former detainees. Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/government-faces-mass-action-to-compensate-refugees-held-at-detention-centres-20120713-2219u.html#ixzz20bOXPtOB
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:LNP campaigner Michael O'Dwyer reveals the 18 words that won the the Queensland election by: Koren Helbig From: The Courier-Mail July 13, 2012 EIGHTEEN key words were responsible for the LNP's landslide Queensland election victory, the party's state convention has been told. But the host of first-time MPs have been warned to "stick to their communities like barnacles" as Premier Campbell Newman prepares to make "tough decisions", or risk being one-time wonders. Hundreds of LNP delegates have gathered at Brisbane's Hilton Hotel for the annual convention, where Mr Newman will soon outline the path forward for the coming six months. Michael O'Dwyer, who served as state director during this year's election campaign, told how the LNP drew on a slogan to crush the long-term Labor government. "After 20 years of Labor, it's time for a change, it's time to get Queensland back on track," he said. "These were the 18 words that ultimately won the LNP the state election and also forged a strategy for our television and advertising campaigns." But campaign director James McGrath warned first-time MPs they needed to entrench themselves into their communities to make sure the LNP could hold once-safe Labor seats at the next election, warning of tough times ahead. "We've got to actually take (former ALP premier) Peter Beattie's advice and entrench these people sort of like barnacles," he said. "They've got to be stuck onto their seats and they've got to stay there because there's going to be some very tough decisions made by Campbell and his Government over the coming months." Despite the LNP's historic landslide win, in which it secured an unprecedented 78 seats, Mr McGrath said the election was very tight. Even Mr Newman's Ashgrove seat remained in doubt just days out from the March 24 poll, he said. "No one believes me when I say this but on the Friday, eight days out from polling day, I couldn't find the 14 seats necessary for us to get government," he said. "We did polling across our seats, I could get 11. Ashgrove wasn't in the 11. It was actually quite close." He said voters only started to drift toward the LNP a week and a half out from the election, after former premier Anna Bligh's cruicial admission that she did not have evidence of wrongdoing despite referring Mr Newman to the Crime and Misconduct Commission over his dealings with developers. Mr McGrath, who is contesting preselection for the federal seat of Fisher against former Howard government minister Mal Brough, was given a standing ovation at the conclusion of his speech. The convention continues until Sunday. http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/lnp-campaigner-michael-odwyer-reveals-the-18-words-that-won-the-the-queensland-election/story-e6freon6-1226425185456
|
|
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Jobs data misses the real story DateJuly 12, 2012 - 4:23PM A month ago economists said a 39,000 jump in seasonally adjusted jobs would mean no RBA interest rate cut. Today economists say a 27,000 fall in seasonally adjusted jobs means there will be a rate cut. Oh spare me – the employment market actually continues to do extremely little while the real labour force story is the dramatic fall in working age population growth. Fortunately the Reserve Bank doesn’t operate monetary policy on the yo-yo of volatile seasonally adjusted employment stats - such figures’ main purpose seems to be giving the commentariat something to squawk about. For those who care about those loose headline numbers, the rather too surprising jump in May has been largely tamed by June’s fall, meaning nothing has really happened – and that’s very much what the more reliable ABS trend series tell us. On the trend series, employment grew by 10,600 last month and the unemployment rate and participation rate were steady on 5.1 per cent and 65.3 per cent respectively. What’s more, the unemployment rate has been 5.1 per cent for four months in a row, and 5.2 per cent for seven months before that after another 5.1 last July and 5 per cent in June, 2011. Go back to June, 2010 at it was 5.2 per cent as well. And over the past year, the number of jobs has slowly risen from 11.44 million to 11.52 million while the participation rate (the percentage of the population either working or looking for work) eased from 65.6 per cent to 65.3, which is still fairly high by our historical standards. And what all the numbers say is that our labour market remains soft but hardly weak – subdued rather sick. As usual, the announcements of jobs lost receive plenty of coverage (shock horror! Darrell Lea shops are in trouble!) while the jobs created go unnoticed except by the statistician (no shock or horror, but Haigh’s Chocolates and all the others that have sprung up and do better jobs than Darrell Lea have employed people). The more interesting figure tucked away in the latest labour force numbers with the greater authority of recent census is how much our working age population growth has slowed. On the raw numbers, our civilian population aged 15-plus jumped by very nearly 400,000 in the year to June 2010 to a total of 18.1 million. We then added 271,200 potential workers in the year to June 2011 and just 224,600 in the last financial year. Reduced net migration, an aging population and a rise in the proportion of young people remaining in full-time education have combined to take the pressure off the need for our economy to create jobs to stop unemployment rising. But there’s also some cause-and-effect mucked up in there – slower population growth means less demand growth and therefore lower job creation growth. This financial year may well shake that pattern. As previously speculated, there’s a good chance population growth is on the rise again and could hit 1.6 per cent this year from 2011’s 1.4 per cent. Fortunately, a large whack of that increase will be in the form of skilled labour coming for specific new jobs, adding to national demand and wealth in the process. For now though, nothing much happening here on the scary unemployment headlines front – move along. Michael Pascoe is a BusinessDay contributing editor. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/jobs-data-misses-the-real-story-20120712-21xrc.html#ixzz20PEvJoyI
|
|
|
|
|
thupercoach
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:No12 wrote:Labour sticking to their promise “No work choices” one promise they actually fulfilled.
They cut the work opportunities so there are no choices.
:lol: nice angle :lol: :lol: :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
No12 wrote:Labour sticking to their promise “No work choices” one promise they actually fulfilled.
They cut the work opportunities so there are no choices.
:lol: nice angle
|
|
|
|