Oh look everybody Joffy crying about the Murdoch bias posting yet another Fairfax spook campaign. Utter hypocrite.

Millionaire entrepreneur and Internet plan key in Australian election

Jane Wardell, Reuters
Updated at 3:29 pm

SYDNEY (Reuters) - A popular millionaire technology entrepreneur behind the Australian opposition's flagship revised plan for a national high-speed internet service is a not-so-secret weapon in Saturday's federal election.

Malcolm Turnbull, former Liberal Party leader and the communications spokesman for the Liberal-led coalition, which is expected to be the runaway winner in the vote, is well-liked by both business and the public.

A former lawyer, Turnbull earned his technology stripes as a major investor and chairman of OzEmail, an internet service provider that became the first Australian tech stock to list on the Nasdaq in 1996.

He was ranked 197 on a Business Review Weekly (BRW) list of Australia's rich, with A$186 million, in 2010, though Turnbull denied the BRW figures.

More left-leaning than his successor as party leader, Tony Abbott, Turnbull is consistently chosen in opinion polls as the country's preferred leader over his right-wing boss, with his appeal extending to swing voters.

Turnbull's cheaper, slower alternative to the current government's A$34 billion National Broadband Network (NBN), however, is significantly less popular.

"What they are trying to do is offer us a bag of lollies (sweets) by saying we can do it cheaper and faster, but what we are really being sold is a lemon," said Mike Gregory, a telecommunications lecturer at Melbourne's RMIT university.

Turnbull's plan would halt the current rollout of the fiber-to-the-premises network that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has promised will deliver internet speeds of up to 100 megabits per second (Mbps) to 93 percent of Australian premises, 8.5 million of them, by 2021.

By June this year, delays meant just 163,500 premises had been hooked up to the network, which takes a fiber-optic cable direct to households and businesses. If completed, the network would be one of the most advanced in the world.

Turnbull has instead proposed a A$30 billion fiber-to-the-node network. Under this plan, high-speed fiber would be laid to street side "nodes", but the final connection to homes and businesses would rely on Telstra Corp Ltd's ageing copper wires, with much slower download speeds than fiber.

This method, the Liberal Party says, would provide 25 Mbps minimum by 2016 and 50 Mbps for the "vast majority of households" by 2019.

Both parties plan to serve remaining remote locations by satellite and fixed wireless.

Critics, including ISP iiNet, Australia's second-largest service provider, say the Liberal-led coalition's plan would create a two-tier system, require costly, ongoing upgrading and still be outdated within a few years.

Robin Braun, a computing and communications professor at the University of Technology in Sydney, said the speeds of the coalition's network would be good enough only for internet browsing.

"Internet browsing was the service of the 90s and 2000s," he said. "The services of today and the next decade are telemedicine, telecollaboration, telecommunicating, blended education etc."

Turnbull said it made little sense to invest in a system for the future when technology may improve.

"You don't want to be saying 'I'm going to invest huge amounts of money in the technology of today for 20 years hence', if, on the other hand, you can meet the needs of today and the foreseeable future, and then meet the needs of 20 years hence with the technology of 20 years hence," he told Reuters after launching a fiber-to-the-node service at a Sydney apartment complex.

"BIG POSITIVE"

Turnbull argued that his method entailed a cost of A$200 per apartment for download speeds of up to 100 Mbps and upload speeds of up to 40Mbps, compared with an estimated A$5,000 bill per apartment for Labor's fiber-to-the-premises.

The opposition coalition has committed to confirming cost savings, both in dollars and time, from its planned changes within the first 100 days of a new government.

But Turnbull faces a hard slog, with a likely expensive, and possibly lengthy, financial renegotiation with Telstra to use its copper wires to replace a A$11 billion deal the company struck with the government to switch over its network.

He also faces opposition within his own party. Ousted as leader by Abbott, Turnbull's left-leaning views on subjects ranging from same-sex marriage to a republic are at odds with the controlling hard-right.

Still, Turnbull is credited by many with getting a version of the NBN, even a truncated one, back on the table after his boss last year pledged to ditch "a white elephant".

"We detected in our focus group research mid-campaign that the NBN was starting to come through as a bit of a positive equity for Labor in this campaign," said pollster John Scales of JWS Research. "The Liberals have picked up on this and you've seen more of Turnbull in the recent weeks of the campaign, trying to negative some of that positive equity."

A June AFR/Nielsen poll, 62 percent of voters preferred Turnbull, whose densely populated Sydney electorate includes some of the city's most exclusive harbor side suburbs, as leader, compared with 32 percent for Abbott.

A recent chat with Reuters during a train journey on the campaign trail in Sydney was interrupted by a number of well-wishers and photo-seeking fans.

In business circles, his name crops up repeatedly, particularly in the technology sector, an area pegged to pick up some of the slack from Australia's fading mining boom.

"Turnbull is a big positive," Niki Scevac, the director of technology start-up venture firm Blackbird Ventures said in a recent interview.

But his real test - coming up with a final NBN plan that's palatable to business and his peers - is still to come.

(Editing by Robert Birsel)
http://touch.baltimoresun.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-77293608/

Politician: Australians Should Support 'Hometown Hero' Rupert Murdoch

3:31 AM PDT 9/6/2013 by Georg Szalai
2 25 0 0 0 Email Print Comments

"Whether you like his papers or don't like his papers, he's one of the most influential Australians of all time," says Tony Abbott who is expected to become the country's next prime minister.

LONDON – Conservative Australian politician Tony Abbott, who is likely to become the country's next prime minister following an election on Saturday, on Friday lauded News Corp and 21st Century Fox chairman Rupert Murdoch.

In one of his clearest endorsements of the media moguls, whose papers have supported him over current Labour Party prime minister Kevin Rudd, Abbott called Murdoch a hometown hero.
"Aussies should support our hometown heroes, that's what I think in his own way Rupert Murdoch is," Abbott said in a radio interview, the Guardian reported.
Asked about Murdoch, he also said: "I've got a lot of time for Rupert Murdoch, because whether you like his papers or don't like his papers, he's one of the most influential Australians of all time." Murdoch was born in Australia, but now has U.S. citizenship.
News Corp''s Australian papers have criticized Rudd since the first day of the election campaign. Its Sydney Daily Telegraph ran a picture of the current prime minister on its front page with the headline: "Kick This Mob Out!"
Critics have spoken out about the role Murdoch's papers have played in the campaign.
Abbott, however, earlier in the week, said there was no need to worry that if he wins the election, he would owe the media mogul anything. "Absolutely not, absolutely not," he said in a TV interview.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/politician-australians-should-support-murdoch-623127?

Labor gains ground on Coalition, says new mobile-only poll

Guardian Lonergan poll points to Coalition win but two-party preferred vote narrows to 50.8% to 49.2%

Lenore Taylor political editor
theguardian.com, Friday 6 September 2013 15.52 AEST

Labor has gained ground in the final week of the campaign but the Coalition remains set to win Saturday’s election with 50.8% of the two party preferred vote to Labor’s 49.2%.

A Guardian Lonergan mobile-only poll, taken primarily on Thursday night as the Coalition finally released its policy costings and was forced to backflip on its originally-released internet-filter policy, showed a higher vote for the Greens and “others” flowing through to the Labor party’s two party preferred vote after the distribution of preferences.

The poll of 862 voters found the Coalition’s primary vote had fallen from its early campaign high to 42%, the Labor party’s rising slightly to 34%, a rise in the Greens’ House of Representatives vote to 14% and “others” to 10%.

The poll indicated a potentially higher vote for the Greens (at 16%) in the Senate, where “others” polled at 8%, Labor at 29% and the Coalition at 40%.

Lonergan research chief executive Chris Lonergan cautioned that in previous elections “the actual Senate vote has tended to differ from the self-reported voting intention figures in polling, possibly because it is very difficult to convey the complexity of a Senate voting form over the telephone”.

But he said based on these poll results he expected to see a strong result for the Greens and the minor parties in the Senate.

The poll shows a slightly better lower house result for Labor in two party preferred terms than three other final-week polls already released, largely due to the higher recorded primary vote for the Greens. Both Galaxy and Reachtel polls showed the Coalition leading 53% to 47% in two party preferred terms and an Essential poll showed the Coalition with a 52% to 48% lead.

“The fact that this is a mobile-only poll is very significant,” Lonergan said.

“We know a growing proportion of Australians do not have a landline at all, and many more Australians rarely or never answer a landline call – yet almost all Australians carry a mobile phone. We believe that a mobile-only poll is the most accurate means of measuring the views of Australians in 2013.”

The slight narrowing in the Coalition’s lead and the better polling results for the Greens and minor parties comes as Coalition leader Tony Abbott made voting for the Coalition, and not for minor parties, a central theme of his final day’s campaigning.

“I say to people today, please if you don’t want another three years like the last six, you have got to vote for your Liberal candidate – House and Senate – because if you don’t we might get stuck with another bad Labor Green government, Green dominated Senate, and that is the last thing we want … no ifs, no buts, vote for the Liberal party House and Senate,” Abbott said on Friday during a last-minute blizzard of campaign stops and interviews.

In another interview, Abbott said it was like being ahead five minutes from the final hooter in a football grand final and having “these minor parties and independents who are trying to invade the pitch and muck up the way the game concludes”.

Kevin Rudd, who has finished the election campaign strongly after a faltering start, was also on the hustings to the end.

He appealed to undecided voters and repeated his allegation that the Coalition would make big spending cuts, despite the release of its costings on Thursday showing no net cuts to either health or education.

“You know something, we have still got a day before this election happens. What we know is there’s still a large number of undecided people. Your poll says there is a three percentage point gap, well let’s just wait and see.

“I'm pretty confident in the good sense of the Australian people who will make judgments in the future about their schools, their hospitals, whether they will get decent broadband in the future which is affordable, reliable and high-speed, and whether their jobs are secure as well.

“I think these are the big questions, and the other side of the coin is Mr Abbott's massive cuts which he has kept under wraps right until election day. No details out there at all,” Rudd said in one of his many final campaign interviews.

Labor is now focusing its allegations about Coalition cuts to come on Tony Abbott’s planned commission of audit, which Abbott has said will cover all portfolios.

The Greens, meanwhile, were continuing their campaign theme of appealing to voters to take out insurance in the Senate against total Coalition control.

"With polls showing Tony Abbott is likely to be Australia's prime minister, it is essential to Abbott-proof the Senate so that he does not get total control of the parliament," the Greens leader, Senator Christine Milne, said.

Rudd’s last-minute return to the Labor leadership just weeks before calling the election had narrowed Abbott’s polling lead, but over the course of the campaign the Coalition has pulled away to a clear election-winning margin in every published poll.

Apart from the Age and Guardian Australia, all other newspapers editorialised in favour of the Coalition. Guardian Australia’s editorial can be read here.

The Guardian Lonergan poll was taken primarily on 5 September, with some interviews on 4 September, using voice-automated telephone interviewing. The margin of error is 3%.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/06/two-party-preferred-vote-narrows

Murdoch a hometown hero :lol: Now that is fucking hilarious.

Wow is just me or are liberal cuts worse than Labour's fear campaign?
Whats more, according to crikey cash tracker they are still six billion worse of than labour. Not that I mind that part so much. I believe spend in bad times and save in good. Since we are somewhere in between status quo deficits do fine by me.
Depressed about the cuts to foreign aid refugees low wage super climate change initiatives and legal aid for aboriginals. Apparently liberal definition of waste in the budget means anything that doesn't help rich white people who are climate skeptics... :(

The state was instrumental in bringing Julia Gillard to power, but it's unlikely to do the same for Kevin Rudd

Oliver Milman in Melbourne
theguardian.com, Friday 6 September 2013 18.57 AEST

Victoria was the Labor bulwark in the 2010 election that allowed Julia Gillard to manoeuvre to a position of power, helped by deals with independent and Greens MPs.

But it appears that the state is unlikely to save Labor this time around, with current polling suggesting that the Coalition will seize at least three seats south of the Murray.

In 2010, a decent Labor showing in Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania offset a plunge in the government's popularity in NSW, Queensland and Western Australia. Labor suffered a 1.88% swing against it in Victoria but actually managed to pick up an extra seat in the state, while the Coalition lost two.

The main reason for this was that the Greens were the main beneficiaries, experiencing a 4.49% swing, rather than the Liberals, which saw its share of the vote decline by 1.64%. Labor secured a two party preferred vote of 55.3% against the Liberals, up from 54.3% in 2007.

The 22 seats won by Labor in Victoria were crucial in handing power to Gillard and bolstered Victoria's claims of being the most left-leaning state in Australia.

However, the chances of Kevin Rudd pulling off a similar Victorian escape route appear remote.

The fact that Gillard, a Western Bulldogs supporter and MP for the west Melbourne seat of Lalor, is no longer prime minister doesn't help, but Labor's problems appear to run deeper. The sheer unpopularity of the party elsewhere in the country means that Victoria no longer denies the force of electoral gravity.

Polling shows that Labor is set to suffer a negative swing of about 4% in Victoria, spelling doom for its chances in its marginal seats of Corangamite, Deakin and La Trobe.

Labor has only fallen behind the Liberals in two party preferred stakes in Victoria twice since 1977. But the swing against it could buck history.

Darren Cheeseman, MP for Corangamite, looks certain to lose to the Coalition's Sarah Henderson, given that he presides over the most marginal seat in the country, at a 0.3% margin.

Labor's Laura Smyth, who won the normally conservative La Trobe in 2010, appears set for defeat against her predecessor Jason Wood, while Michael Sukkar, who had the dubious pleasure of having his campaign rally the stage for Tony Abbott's unfortunate "suppository" gaffe, is on course to unseat Labor MP Mike Symon in Deakin.

Should it be a particularly bad night for Labor, straight-talking former speaker Anna Burke could also be in trouble. She holds the seat of Chisholm by 5.8% and is up against Liberal John Nguyen, who hasn't let his family's history of being Vietnamese refugees hinder his campaign against boat arrivals.

Alan Griffin, who was reported to be packing up his Canberra office in anticipation of defeat prior to Rudd's return, holds Bruce with a 7.9% and could be in peril. Labor will also have to hold off a challenge in Bendigo, where veteran MP Steve Gibbons is retiring.

On the other side of the ledger, the most marginal Liberal seat is that of Aston, held by Alan Tudge by 0.7%. Given current polling, however, it appears unlikely that Tudge will not be returned.

The biggest threat to the Liberals could be in the unlikely form of first-time independent challenger Cathy McGowan, who is running a strong campaign against Sophie Mirabella in the rural electorate of Indi.

Meanwhile, many eyes will be on the seat of Melbourne, where Adam Bandt, the Greens' only lower house MP, faces a tough fight to retain his seat from Labor's Cath Bowtell.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/06/australian-election-2013-labor-victoria

Labor is broken, the Coalition is hiding. But they are not the same

Australian voters face an uninspiring choice. We won't try to tell you how to vote, but there is much at risk from an Abbott victory

Editorial
theguardian.com, Friday 6 September 2013 10.37 AEST

What a dispiriting election campaign it has been. Over five weeks, voters have been ignored, patronised and taken for granted. It’s always a mistake to say that “all politicians are the same” – they never are. But there can be few elections where the choice is as uninspiring as this.

The opposition leader, Tony Abbott, and the Coalition have chosen to treat the democratic process with contempt, presumably because the polls, clearly pointing to their victory, make them believe they can. They have comprehensively evaded scrutiny, with no policy costings until 48 hours before the ballot. For months, there has been a blank space where their policies should be; candidates have been discouraged from speaking to the media and even from attending forums in their own communities; access has been denied to journalists who don’t toe the party line.

The Coalition has been steadied by a new Tony Abbott whose ruthless focus is in contrast to his past reputation for ill-discipline. His paid parental leave scheme, which rewards the wealthiest most, is at least an attempt to rectify his poor record when it comes to women. But really the Coalition has been relying on the exhausted electorate’s distrust of Labor after their self-obsessed infighting, and the view that it’s time someone else had a go. But do those voting for Tony Abbott really prefer Christopher Pyne to Bill Shorten, Andrew Robb to Penny Wong, Peter Dutton to Tanya Plibersek? Are they really happy to lay waste to Australia’s unique environment, just because it feels like someone else’s turn? Are they not alarmed by hints at spending cuts that go as far as austerity, which has wreaked such devastation in Europe?

Labor, meanwhile, has been in chaos, with unworkable policies apparently made up on the spot, from low tax zones in the north to an expressed “unease” about foreign investment in the land. Its “PNG solution”, which effectively bans refugees from arriving in Australia by boat, shocked the world and, rather than winning Labor the election, as some claimed at the time, instead shifted discourse on the subject dramatically to the right. It is a nasty and deeply shaming policy which would make any progressive voter hesitate before voting for Labor. Kevin Rudd himself is no longer loved by the population, but his later-life conversion to the cause of gay marriage is welcome. And on most policies Labor is stronger: the NBN (what kind of news organisation wouldn’t support the fastest possible internet?), Gillard’s gains in education and disability, and the globally-admired economy, with 22 years of uninterrupted growth.

Inequality and poverty have barely been discussed; no one is talking about the disadvantaged, such as the unemployed, whose benefits even the Business Council considers too low, or single mothers, or Indigenous equality. There has been near-silence, too, on climate, even though Australia has more than most to lose from rising temperatures. Mr Abbott’s Direct Action policy is next to useless; Labor has failed to make the case for its emissions trading scheme. The Greens have at least attempted some kind of vision in this area, and also on asylum – Christine Milne’s barely-controlled fury at the closing of Australia to refugees arriving by boat was a big moment, a rare expression of genuine political passion.

But among many voters, quite reasonably, there is a feeling of apathy and exhaustion. The parliament doesn’t look like Australia – the Coalition front bench has hardly any women, there is only one Indigenous Australian in parliament, very few Asian Australians, very few openly gay MPs. And when no one offers a vision for a better society, you’re left with a “what can you do for me?” kind of politics, which leads to atomisation and anger. Democratic argument has been reduced to a series of gaffes, “daggy dad” sexist moments (some probably carefully planned in advance), no-shows and banality. What will it take to rediscover a more inspiring politics for Australia?

Depressing though it is, this is nevertheless a vote that must be taken seriously, as much is at stake. Labor is broken; the Liberals are hiding – but they are not the same. Mr Abbott has asked the Australian people to trust him, but he doesn’t trust them enough to give them the facts they need to make an informed decision. Those who choose the Coalition because they think Labor don’t deserve it might soon feel regret; those who vote on Saturday for change may be surprised what that change entails.

But we are not going to try to tell you how to vote. Guardian Australia believes in encouraging many different voices, never just one. We are a truly independent news organisation – without a proprietor seeking political influence, without shareholders expecting quick returns, without chairmen with political axes to grind. In a digital age, news organisations which pronounce from on high the way their readers should vote are an anachronism. Digital media is more of a conversation with our readers, an ongoing dialogue, a collaboration. So tell us: who do you think has a better vision for Australian society? Who do you trust to govern the country over the next three years? How will you vote on Saturday?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/06/australian-election-editorial

Says it all really

Those costings are just estimates mate. The most reliable costings we have are $3,100 per premise passed and don't include the equally expensive customer connect bit which can add $2,400 per premise. If we total everything up the costs are about $66 billion and that' doesn't include opex, transit, fixed, satelittle or Telstra compensation. When you factor in the roll out days, labour shortages, contractor pay disputes, duct issues and the seemingly infinite stream of problems this thing has the potential to blow out waaaaay beyond on the $3 billion contingency. Projects of this magnitude and scale have the potential to blow out by factors of 10x or 15x.

You have to consider the corporate plan is not a formal parliamentary document but a sales pitch designed to sell Labors plan to the public and encourage private investment.
If they are being so honest and detailed with the costings why is there no mention of the threats they are facing and their respective costs . The truth is only a total fool would take the corporate plan on face value, until we can see detailed costings (no the corporate plan does NOT provide detailed costings) and the balance sheet we are all in the dark here.

Also continuing to blame Telstra for the delays is a weak excuse. Maybe you got away with it the first time but NBN release a fresh corporate plan they are constantly missing their targets by huge margins or pathetically watering them down to achievable levels and then changing the definitions of certain terms to give the impression everything is on track. Like I said this thing DEPENDS on investor confidence so they HAVE to fudge the truth as much as possible just to keep it breathing. Would be really interesting to see that corporate plan sitting on Albo's desk to find out where this thing is really at.

They might be pleasantly surprised. The only way is up.

Seriously? In that case I should never care about who I ever vote for again if it can't get any worse than this, because really it's hard to complain at the moment.

We're a great country because we hold our governments to high standards. We've been lied to and pissed on by the current one and it's time to teach Labor a hard lesson. Hopefully a resounding defeat will result in a thorough clean out and bring stability and accountability back into the Labor party.

:lol:

You don't think Abbott has the potential to do huge damage to the nation?

Remember the Liberals haven't got much federal property left to sell off this time around. Howard sold it all already.

Eight things the Coalition is cutting in its costings document

by: ANTHONY SHARWOOD
From:
news.com.au
September 05, 2013

DON'T have time to plough through the Coalition's costings document? We did.

The Coalition has today announced it will spend around $33 billion and cut approximately $40 billion in spending to achieve an overall improvement of just over $6 billion in the budget bottom line. But what is it going to axe?

We've picked out eight things of interest, some of which are attracting a whole bunch of attention this afternoon, and some of which aren't.

THE DEPARTMENT OF CLIMATE CHANGE

As temperatures increase, the department whose brief was to address the issue will be decreased to the tune of $45 million.


PUBLIC SERVANTS

The Coalition will axe 12,000 public servants at a saving of $5.2 billion through what it calls "natural attrition". There is no word yet on whether these public servants will be uniformed officials like cops and fire-fighters or whether they'll be Canberra pen-pushers.

Once thing for sure is that the Canberra economy will suffer hugely if the local public service cuts are big.

It's also interesting to note that while the Coalition has factored in a $1.1 billion "growth dividend" from the abolition of the carbon tax, it has failed to calculate a possible drop in economic activity in Canberra or elsewhere caused by major public service cuts.

TRAINS

Maybe Tony Abbott's not sure what a train is, as his electorate of Warringah is one of the few Sydney electorates with no rail services. Whatever the reason, the Coalition is abandoning at least five public rail projects, including Brisbane's Cross River Rail - a proposed new 18 kilometre north-south rail line in Brisbane's inner city which would have cost $453 million.

THE FAMILY COURT

The Coalition will cut $30 million from the Family Court to "streamline processes". Streamline is the word economists use when they really just mean "cut".

THE AUTOMOTIVE TRANSFORMATION SCHEME

$500 million will be cut from the $3.3 billion Automotive Transformation Scheme which was set up to help car manufacturers and suppliers with innovation and cleaner, greener cars.

THE SENEGAL DIPLOMATIC POST

The what now? The Senegal Diplomatic post, that's what. Just one year ago, Foreign Minister Bob Carr announced the opening of a new Australian embassy in the small West African nation.

"Australia has substantial and growing interests in the mining and resources sector in Africa. "At least six ASX-listed companies have projects in Senegal, largely in gold and mineral sands," Senator Carr said.

At a saving of $14 million, those companies will pretty much have to fend for themselves over there now.

FOREIGN AID

This is the biggie everyone's talking about today. A total of $4.5 billion will be cut from Australia's foreign aid budget over four years. The current foreign aid budget of $5.7 billion is 0.37 per cent of Australia's Gross National Income.

COMMUNITY CABINETS

This costly method of bringing democracy to the people in far flung towns will be done away with, at a saving of $13 million. The government's website currently says "the next meeting will be announced shortly". We're tipping it won't be.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/eight-things-the-coalition-is-cutting-in-its-costings-document/story-e6frfku0-1226712124181#ixzz2e7QS3XLY

Besides the ceerrrrrbeeerrrrrn teeerrrrx, what else?

Abbott's most dangerous pledge

September 6, 2013 - 11:43AM
Michael Pascoe

“When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?” John Maynard Keynes famously asked. Tony Abbott is promising not to change his mind, to charge on regardless. And that is dangerous.

The next Prime Minister’s pledge to let the deficit blow out rather than break a spending promise remains true to the spirit of the carbon tax attack that worked so well for him as opposition leader, never mind that it also runs contrary to a concurrent pledge to “reduce the debt”.

It’s a pledge that seems to appeal to the Sydney Morning Herald’s editorial writer, who opines that “Australia is crying out for a stable government that can be trusted to deliver what it promises”. But it is also a silly denial of the reality of government.

It’s easy for opposition leaders to berate governments that have to deal with evolving facts and restraints. You can get away with all sorts of wild accusations and claims in opposition – talk down the economy, scare the horses, pretend there’s a budget crisis - but it’s more than a little different when you actually have a duty to act responsibly for the good of the nation.

The new Hawke and Howard governments both broke “promises” upon obtaining the treasury benches. They needed to. It was a serious fault of the initial Rudd government that it didn’t break some of the promises made during an even worse election campaign than this one, when Howard and Rudd competed to tell Australians riding the biggest boom in our history that they were doing it tough and both needed and deserved more handouts from government. Having said “me too plus $1 more” to everything Howard promised, Rudd mistakenly adopted the final Costello budget and proceeded to deliver yet another round of tax cuts when the Reserve Bank was trying to slow the economy with increasingly desperate interest rate hikes.

Of course a promise not to break a promise is only as good as your promise, if you know what I mean. It might not mean much. Hopefully there will be enough backbone in the Coalition government to keep its leader restrained, to prevent a further outbreak of “captain’s call” as economically poor as his maternity leave scheme. Should the facts change, we have to hope the government, if not the prime minister, is prepared to change its mind and appropriately reset its priorities.

Tony Abbott has chosen to make a straightjacket out of keeping promises. He will deserve to be attacked with the same vigour he exercised in opposition if he strays from his pledges, but it would be better for him to suffer political pain than for the nation to pay an economic price.

All that said, there’s a chance that the times will be kind to the new government and “promises” won’t need to be broken. This week’s national accounts and more recent statistics show the Reserve Bank’s central scenario is holding up, that our economic growth is bottoming right about now and will slowly but steadily improve. Some of the myths that have plagued us over the past three years will be allowed to quietly fade away. As Joe Hockey so clearly confirmed yesterday, we don’t have a budget crisis - but we have had a lot of lies told about it.

So despite the quite vicious divisiveness that has marked Australian politics over the past four years (and that’s just within the Labor Party), we should be able to approach tomorrow’s election with good heart. Yes, it’s a miserable choice to be made, but the great thing is that we get to make it.

A federal election is a celebration of our extremely good fortune. In some ways, it is our other national day, travelling once every three years or so at a respectful distance behind Anzac Day. With the exception of the occasional halfwit, the odd zealot from either side, it’s a ritual we do well as a nation. We’re all in it together, after all, respecting our differences, particularly when there aren’t nearly as many differences between the two main parties as they like to pretend. We are only trying to pick the least worst option – both sides are promising to give your money to the Brisbane Broncos, for example. Both sides’ primary concern is getting the keys to the Lodge, not the rigorous best interests of the nation, so you’d be silly to get too wrapped up in either of them.

And tomorrow night offers a great occasion – the Wallabies redeeming themselves by beating the Springboks.

Michael Pascoe is a BusinessDay contributing editor

Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/business/abbotts-most-dangerous-pledge-20130906-2t9br.html#ixzz2e7aQNV4d

Not really. Conservatives aren't really renowned as avid risk takers.

Risk taking =/= damage.

Mandate of change is what Abbott will be elected on so I hope Labor get the hell out of the way.

Labor needs an enema of Olympian proportions.

Edited by thupercoach: 7/9/2013 12:31:48 AM

Sometimes it does

Libs will cause damage without taking (what they perceive to be) risks.

Well have to wait and see. Maybe will do a good job! :-)

Election Day.

Good Luck to everybody, may your votes be valid and the result true, and may the four yearly sausage sizzle live up to its reputation.

Katties for Senate awww yesss.

-PB

We hold our governments to high standards, but want to elect Abbott. ](*,) ](*,)

So your thinking is, 'Rudd (lets forget that it was actually Gillard in charge for most of the reign) has effed up everything. So I think we need to change things around. I got an idea, lets vote for Abbott. He will definitely bring about change. Forget the fact that Liberal governments want to cut down in every sector. Forget the fact a Liberal government in the last year slashed thousands of jobs and then awarded itself a 14% pay increase. Abbott will bring change.'


If Abbott is the high standards you hold for our country, then I weep for this country.

Logic does not play a part in some decision making

Looking at twitter today, I am fearing for our country.

At least at the end of today, all going as expected, Australia will have it's own George W. Bush. Not good for the country, but amazing for satirical comedy (Shaun Micallef's Mad as Hell)...

Assassinate Abbott.