Factually correct....:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Not getting into each one individually but they're all anti-Lib. Many are no more than opinion pieces and all are picked out from the Guardian and Fairfax media which are anti-Lib.

I'm ok with you posting exclusively anti-Lib articles in this thread - its a free country - but don't then expect to be viewed as being objective, something you used to be.

I realise you see what I'm doing as bias, but I can assure you if the situations were reversed I'd be doing the same thing, for me the bug bear with the election was not the result, but the lack of scrutiny. This govt will be no different to most, it will back away from promises and will act for ideological reasons in many cases....if you look back through the thread I have been just as critical if not more so of the recent Labour govt.

If you want my opinion on whether the Abbott govt is a good or bad govt, ask me in 12-18 months.

Abbott gets busy backing away from pledges made during election

New prime minister appears to have shelved stance taken in opposition

Sat, Sep 21, 2013, 01:00
First published:
Sat, Sep 21, 2013, 01:00


Australia’s new prime minister Tony Abbott spent the last past three years destabilising the Labor administration at every opportunity, saying it was the country’s “worst government ever”.

He was helped in this task by Labor’s internecine feuding which enabled Julia Gillard replace Kevin Rudd as prime minister and then Rudd in turn replace her. With enemies like those, Abbott probably didn’t need his friends in the Murdoch press and talkback radio to back him, but they did anyway.
For a thousand days there was no respite from the Abbott attacks, which made it seem like the longest election campaign to date. But when the actual campaign began, Abbott suddenly shifted gear.
The tough campaigner who said the Labor carbon tax would ruin the economy (it didn’t), and whose scare tactics warned of Labor’s “debt and deficit”, accused Rudd of being “so negative”.
The Australian public could have been forgiven for saying, “Mr Pot, let me introduce you to Mr Kettle”. But they didn’t notice, or were way past caring.
Days before the election, the “budget crisis” Abbott said was Labor’s legacy was forgotten. Knowing the election was in the bag, he backed away from his promise to balance the budget within one term.

Policy shift
Now it was “within
10 years” (by which time the Liberal-National coalition will be on its fourth term of government if it is still in power).
Having secured victory with a 32-seat majority, Abbott and his cabinet were not sworn in until 11 days after the election. The supposed budget crisis was now just a memory and the asylum-seeker boats he had pledged to stop from day one of winning power kept on coming. Seven of them in fact, containing more than 500 men, women and children from Iran, Afghanistan and other troubled regions of Asia.
But the Liberal Party chief has been true to his view that climate change is “crap”. The climate commission, an independent body set up by the previous government “to provide reliable and authoritative” information has been abolished.
Former chief commissioner Prof Tim Flannery is disillusioned: “We’ve just seen one of the earliest ever starts to the bush-fire season in Sydney following the hottest 12 months on record,” he said.

Coalition agenda
“[The climate commission] stayed out of the politics and stuck to the facts . . . I believe that Australians have a right to
. . . accurate information on climate change.”
Though the coalition won in a landslide in the lower house, in the upper house it will need votes from independents or other parties to pass legislation, even when the newly elected senators take their seats next July. With this in mind, Abbott has promised to go back to the polls if Labor votes against scrapping the carbon tax.
The motley crew of incoming minor party senate members is more likely to provide the climate-sceptic votes Abbott needs to end the carbon tax.
One of the new senators for New South Wales is David Leyonhjelm of the Liberal Democrats. His party is no relation to Abbott’s, but benefitted from voter confusion. The senate paper for New South Wales was a metre wide, with writing so small that a magnifying glass was provided for voters.
The Liberal Democrats’ name was drawn in position A on the ballot paper. The Liberals got position Y. The Lib Dems, who believe in the right to carry concealed weapons, increased its vote eight-fold from the last election. Leyonhjelm, along with his eclectic mix of colleagues, will hold the balance of power nine months from now.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/asia-pacific/abbott-gets-busy-backing-away-from-pledges-made-during-election-1.1535209?

Just one other point thuper, instead of saying the articles are anti-lib, why not read each article on its merits....both sides have bad/poor policy

Irish Times has a clear anti-Liberal agenda.

I'm not offended

I'm offended.

When was the last time I posted an article?

No offence intended. It's just that unlike some of us (me included) you've presented yourself as not taking sides whilst at the same time posting articles that almost exclusively support one side.

Again, I'm fine with that, just don't present yourself as being objective.

What do you guys expect? The Coalition are the fucking Government now, why the fuck shouldn't people post articles or talk about them? They aren't the opposition any more. They are supposed to be running this country, and have made promised over the last 6 years that they are 'ready to govern' that they are 'adult government' leaders and made constant promises that they are backing away from after being in the job a week.

Well, you're accusing someone of doing something to pander to a pre-conceived idea by using a pre-conceived idea of what that person does.

You don't see the problem with that.

Australia's defence forces to be maintained at battle-ready status
Date
September 21, 2013
5 reading nowRead later

David Wroe
Defence correspondent

Australia's new Defence Minister, David Johnston, says he wants to keep the military battle-ready for further possible conflicts in the unstable Middle East and south Asia.

Senator Johnston said that after 14 years of involvement in overseas conflicts from East Timor to Afghanistan, the Australian Defence Force had a strong fighting momentum that should not be lost as troops return from Afghanistan.

In an interview with Fairfax Media, he said he plans to maintain and ''augment our readiness'' for future fights, which will most likely be in the unstable region stretching from Pakistan to the Levant, including even fresh trouble in Afghanistan.

''It will be Pakistan across to Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan. That's the area where there will be instability and that's the area that we might need to go back into at some point in the future.

Advertisement
''I can't foresee that right now, but … if you were to look at where the next area of instability is likely to be - and we're seeing it unfolding in Syria today - a contribution from Australia is most likely to be in that part of the world in the future. I think Pakistan is also highly problematic.''

The West Australian Senator (pictured), a former justice and customs minister in the Howard government and Tony Abbott's defence spokesman, stressed he did not see Australians fighting in Syria.

He said he was not preparing for any particular conflict ''in an alarmist sense'' but was determined to build on the knowledge and skills the Australian Defence Force had gained running counterinsurgency operations in Afghanistan. That included exposure to enemy tactics such as the use of improvised explosive devices and fighting in urban areas among a civilian population ''against a very, very resourceful and callous enemy.

These are experiences that we've lived and breathed for 10 years and we've become quite expert in those things. And we've got to make sure those lessons are passed on to our soldiers in the future.

''Operationally, we're starting to come down [in Afghanistan], so we've got to maintain some interest for the troops. They've got to keep training, got to keep a level of readiness.''

The bulk of Australian troops are set to withdraw from Afghanistan by the end of the year. However, in a reminder of the continuing danger, three special forces soldiers were wounded last week in a battle with insurgents.

A Defence statement issued on Friday said the three elite soldiers had received ''minor fragmentation wounds'' while helping Afghan forces fight off insurgents.

Senator Johnston's remarks come amid a continuing international standoff over the response to Syria's suspected use of chemical weapons.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/australias-defence-forces-to-be-maintained-at-battleready-status-20130920-2u5he.html#ixzz2fVYmvIZJ

Queensland renews call for GST on online purchases

Summary: Queensland Treasurer Tim Nicholls has said that the new federal Coalition government should reduce the threshold for the GST on goods purchased from overseas online retailers.


By Josh Taylor |    September 20, 2013 -- 00:17 GMT (10:17 AEST)

The Queensland Treasurer Tim Nicholls has called for new Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott to consider lowering the Goods and Services Tax (GST) threshold for online purchases to well below the current AU$1,000 rate.

The states have been pushing for the threshold to be lowered since at least 2010, with major retailers such as Harvey Norman particularly concerned that the lack of GST on overseas online purchases below AU$1,000 has been damaging their bricks-and-mortar retail businesses.

The former Labor government conducted a GST review in 2012, with the report recommending in December that the GST threshold for online purchases be brought down from AU$1,000 to AU$500.

But the difficulty with reducing the threshold is that with a reported 58 million parcels entering Australia under the AU$1,000 threshold in 2011, the cost of setting up a system to process so many more parcels would negate the potential gains that the government could extract from the added GST, according to former Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury.

Nevertheless, the former Labor government had been looking at a way to lower the threshold by the end of this year, but with a change of government, the potential change could now be sidelined. While some states, such as Western Australia — which just had its AAA credit rating stripped — have called for the GST to be increased from 10 percent to 12.5 percent, Nicholls remains set on adding GST to overseas online purchases.

"Let's address that low-value threshold which actually disadvantages some of our traders and business people here in Australia. Let's do that first because we think that's an achievable outcome. As far as the rate is concerned, at this stage, we're not advocating for that, and that would be something that would need to be led at the federal level," he told the ABC.

Abbott's office has already indicated that there will be no change in the base or rate of the GST. In the course of the election campaign, Abbott was forced to rule out any changes to the GST several times after Labor launched several ads suggesting that the then-opposition leader would make chances to the tax when in office.

http://www.zdnet.com/au/queensland-renews-call-for-gst-on-online-purchases-7000020925/?

Carbon trade seen losing globally in Aussie vote
Article tools

   PRINT ARTICLE
    SEND TO FRIEND
   SUBSCRIBE TO NEWSLETTERS
   FEEDS


Australia is at risk of breaching a global agreement to cut greenhouse gases.

Australia is at risk of breaching a global agreement to cut greenhouse gases as power markets signal Prime Minister Tony Abbott will exploit the widest election victory in nine years to repeal the nation’s carbon system.

Electricity futures prices show the implied costs of emitting a metric ton of carbon in Australia plunged 18 percent in the two days following the Sept. 7 election, bringing its monthly decline to 55 percent, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. At their lowest, prices indicated an 80 percent probability that Abbott will overturn the law that charges the nation’s polluters for their CO2 emissions, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

The failure of Australia, the biggest emitter per capita among the world’s richest nations, to entrench its carbon price is emboldening opponents of fledgling emissions markets from South Africa to California and dimming prospects for a new global climate treaty. About 200 negotiators are set to meet in Warsaw this year to discuss how to ratify promises from the U.S. and China, the world’s largest economies, to reduce greenhouse gases linked to climate change.

“People who want a reason not to implement some form of emissions reduction would be able to point to Australia and say: they haven’t, why should we?” said Grant Anderson, a Melbourne- based partner specializing in carbon regulations for electricity, LNG and coal at Allens, a global law firm. “That’s the whole thing about international agreements. Once one party decides not to put forward a stronger commitment that was expected, it’s an excuse for others.”

Trading Alternatives

Abbott proposes spending A$2.9 billion ($2.75 billion) as an alternative to carbon trading. While he is “confident” it can achieve the 5 percent emissions cut Australia promised last year when it signed an extension of the Kyoto Protocol, RepuTex and the Climate Institute are among skeptics. They estimate he needs at least another A$4 billion to make the 2020 target.

While Australia’s Labor and Greens parties have vowed to fight Abbott in the upper house, he probably will be able to negotiate an agreement with independents and minor party lawmakers in the second half of 2014, according to Tony Wood, the energy program director at the Melbourne-based Grattan Institute. The prime minister told his staff yesterday to prepare a repeal bill for the first day of the new parliament.

Greg Hunt, the new environment minister, said Australia’s Climate Commission will be dissolved today, saving A$580,000 this year. The Environment Department will take over the job of providing advice on climate change, Hunt said in the statement.

Abbott’s victory has strengthened the case against a carbon tax set to start in 2015 in South Africa, Nazrien Kader, head of Deloitte LLP’s local taxation practice, said in an e-mail. The country delayed the plan in April after metals companies such as ArcelorMittal South Africa Ltd. and Gold Fields Ltd. objected.

‘No Support’

“We can only hope that it strongly influences the South African government’s stance,” Kader said. “A carbon tax has virtually no support from business.”

The American Energy Alliance, a Washington-based group that promotes fossil fuels, posted a note on Facebook on Sept. 11 saying “poor energy policies won’t get you re-elected” above a map of Australia. Senator David Vitter of Louisiana, the top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a Sept. 5 statement that U.S. lawmakers should learn from Australia’s “carbon tax failure.”

Since last year’s summit in Doha, carbon markets have started in California, the largest U.S. state, and the Chinese city of Shenzhen. Six other pilot programs are set to begin over the coming year in Shanghai, Beijing, Guangdong, and other manufacturing centers in China, the world’s biggest emitter.

EU Link

Abbott’s victory jeopardizes Australia’s agreement to link its carbon market starting in 2015 with the world’s largest emissions-trading system in the European Union. The EU continues to strive for a robust international carbon market, Isaac Valero-Ladron, spokesman for the EU Climate Action Commissioner, said when asked about prospects for the EU-Australia link.

The price of EU permits has recovered from a record low of 2.46 euros ($3.33) a metric ton on April 17 on speculation that Brussels will pass a proposal to temporarily reduce its surplus of allowances. EU permits declined 3.1 percent to settle at 5.35 euros on London’s ICE Futures Europe exchange.

The outlook for carbon in Australia remains unpredictable, with 2014 electricity futures vacillating, said Mike McKensey, head of carbon trading at Westpac Banking Corp. in Sydney. The price, as high as $A10 in August, fell as low as A$4.50 in the days following the election from A$5.50 just before, he said. The figure has since risen to A$6, he said.

New Senators

“Whilst the probability of repeal is now higher, uncertainty remains around both the timing for repeal of the carbon price mechanism and the detail around what Direct Action will look like,” he said.

Abbott will be bolstered when new senators take their seats in July 2014, said Kobad Bhavnagri, the head of carbon analysis for New Energy Finance in Sydney. “The repeal of the scheme is not a foregone conclusion, as Abbott is likely to encounter resistance from the current Senate.”

When power futures indicated last month that 2014 carbon costs would be A$10 last month, New Energy Finance, Westpac and Deutsche Bank AG forecast some form of pricing was likely to survive Australia’s election. The price is computed by comparing contracts that include carbon costs with those that don’t in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland.

Repeal of Australia’s carbon price would discourage cap- and-trade programs worldwide, Frank Jotzo, director at the Australian National University’s Center for Climate Economics and Policy in Canberra, said in an interview. The nation, the biggest emitter per person among developed countries, produces about 1.5 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases.

‘Negative Signal’

“Australia is much more important internationally in these matters than its share of global emissions might suggest,” Jotzo said. “For Australia to ditch all of this sends a very negative signal about market mechanisms. It could be a further impediment to efficient climate-change policy.’

Australia renewed its pledge last December to cut emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. Former Prime Minister and Labor Party leader Kevin Rudd ratified the Kyoto treaty in 2007.

‘‘The fact that we ratified Kyoto and then went forward in implementing a carbon price had a positive impact at the international level,’’ Elisa de Wit, head of the Australian climate change practice at law firm Norton Rose Fulbright in Melbourne, said in an interview. ‘‘So a reversal of that policy will also have an impact.’’

The coalition’s alternative policy, known as Direct Action, will achieve the 5 percent goal, Hunt’s office wrote in a Sept. 16 e-mail. Abbott plans to curb emissions with ‘‘sensible, targeted incentives and not with a great, big tax.”

‘Obvious Conclusion’

The coalition has said it will commit A$1.55 billion over the first three years to an emissions-reduction fund. Abbott’s comment earlier this month that he won’t devote more money to the program prompted speculation that it will fall short.

If more money is needed to achieve the necessary emissions cuts, “the obvious conclusion is they don’t reach the 5 percent target,” de Wit said.

The coalition would need at least A$4 billion of additional funds to reach the 2020 target, the Climate Institute said last month. Abbott’s plan at best would achieve a 9 percent increase in emissions by the end of the decade, according to the Climate Institute, an independent research organization.

The Climate Change Authority, which advises on Australia’s emission targets, was due to release recommendations next month for 2020. The government has committed to cutting emissions by at least 5 percent and as much as 25 percent by the end of the decade, according to the department’s website.

Because Direct Action doesn’t set a cap on emissions, any reductions could be offset or exceeded by other polluters, said Anderson of the law firm Allens.

“Even if Direct Action were to make substantial inroads in terms of buying emissions reductions, in the absence of a cap on overall emissions, I can’t see Australia meeting its target,” he said.

©2013 Bloomberg News


http://www.moneyweb.co.za/moneyweb-international/carbon-trade-seen-losing-globally-in-aussie-vote?sn=2009+Detail

not long enough ago....:d ;)

Fantastic. Canada's already got off the carbon needless expense, glad it's our turn now. We're taking the lead in moving away from funding the world climate change gravy train.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/tim-flannery-sacked-climate-commission-dismantled-by-coalition/story-fni0xqrb-1226722779566




Good. No need for a separate Department of Climate Change, Department of Environment can deal with this.

And Flannery's fan club (ABC, Fairfax, GetUP) may have made him appear authoritative, despite his regular overstating of any problems, but Flannery was far from presenting independent opinion. How often did he get things wrong to suit his own agenda?

We should have empty dams by now if we believed this fool, instead they are all almost full.

Oh and isn't it fantastic to see the Greens' nose out of joint?

"The struggle against global warming"... they're always in a "struggle" of one or another kind...rebels without a clue.

Edited by thupercoach: 22/9/2013 08:57:59 AM

Navy ready for Abbott's boat policy
Date
September 22, 2013

The head of the Royal Australian Navy is ready to enforce Prime Minister Tony Abbott's pledge to ''turn back the boats'' saying procedures are well developed to execute the policy.

In his first interview since Mr Abbott was elected prime minister, Vice-Admiral Ray Griggs said no one underestimated the challenge of the policy.

''It's something that we have done before, in 2001, we had to learn as we went and that brings in a whole set of challenges,'' he said.

''What we have got this time is a set of procedures that are well developed. We'll have to modify them, obviously, for the particular circumstances, as you do for anything.''

Advertisement
Stepping carefully around the political controversy of asylum-seeker policy, Admiral Griggs said the navy would ''crack on with it'' and execute the policy.

''Our job is pretty simple, it is to safely execute the lawful direction of government,'' he said.

The navy chief was speaking before the International Fleet Review, in 12 days time, which celebrates the centenary of the arrival of Australia's first naval fleet into Sydney harbour, on October 4, 1913.

Events over several days include a 21-gun salute, air displays, tall ships open to the public, and a fireworks and light show spectacular, expected to attract thousands of people.

There will be warships from about 18 nations, including a large contingent of Australia's own navy which will sail from Jervis Bay and through the heads on the Friday morning.

Alongside the pageantry, there will also be naval operations with Association of South-East Asian Nations involved in search and rescue, boarding and communications exercises.

Political tensions in Syria have thrown a question mark over whether the Russians will withdraw the cruiser RFS Varyag equipped with long-range surface to air missiles and the RFS Boris Butoma, a massive fleet replenishment ship.

Admiral Griggs said: ''[Russia] have moved a number of their forces from the Black Sea down into the Mediterranean, and I expect they are re-looking at their entire fleet posture but that is supposition on my part.

Their arrival would be the first presence of Russian naval ships in Australian waters since May 1901.

''The message [100 years on] is that it's about us as a nation commemorating what was really a significant event,'' he said.

About 25 per cent of the Australian fleet will be absent on deployment.

The Fleet Review is expected to bring about $50 million to $60 million to the economy.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/navy-ready-for-abbotts-boat-policy-20130921-2u6j9.html#ixzz2fZXPZ8Tr

Carbon emission target easier than thought: Hunt
Date
September 22, 2013
Read later

Tom Arup
Environment editor, The Age

Reaching the nation's 2020 carbon emissions target will be easier than previously estimated, according to informal departmental advice provided to Australia's new Environment Minister.

Greg Hunt said the advice backed up what he had been saying in opposition and he was confident Australia would meet its target easily.

The Coalition supports an unconditional 5 per cent emissions cut by 2020 on 2000 levels. It would increase that to 15 or 25 per cent depending on international climate action.

Mr Hunt said falling international demand for some electricity-intense manufacturing, such as aluminum, and a carry-over allowance of carbon permits under the Kyoto Protocol had reduced the gap between Australia's emissions and the target stated by the previous government.

Advertisement
''So our real target is only about 60 per cent of what it was, what the [Labor] government had been saying it was. And that fits almost exactly with what I was saying from the opposition benches,'' he said.

Some independent modelling has questioned the ability of the Coalition's direct action policy - the government's replacement for the carbon tax - to meet targets.

Under direct action, a $2.55 billion fund will be set up to buy emissions reductions from companies and farmers. Companies will also be given an emissions intensity baseline and will face penalties if they breach it.

One analysis commissioned by the Climate Institute found direct action was $4 billion short of meeting the 5 per cent cut.

Last Friday Mr Hunt ordered the department to begin drawing up plans for a new Great Barrier Reef trust to draw together public and private money for projects to tackle crown-of-thorns and water quality problems.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/carbon-emission-target-easier-than-thought-hunt-20130921-2u6w8.html#ixzz2fZYVwjV0

The global party of stupid

by JOHN QUIGGIN on SEPTEMBER 21, 2013

Australia’s new conservative ministry has just been sworn in, and while it includes Ministers for Border Protection (that is, stopping refugees) and Sport, and even a minister for the centenary of the Anzac landings on Gallipoli in 1915, there are no longer ministers for science or higher education1.

This is part of a fairly consistent pattern. The US Republican Party recently vetoed the creation of an unpaid position of National Science Laureate. In Canada, the Harper government eliminated the position of National Science Advisor, among many other anti-science moves. All of this reflects the fact that scientific research on topics like climate change and evolution regularly reaches conclusions that conflict with the policy preferences or religious beliefs of rightwingers. It’s striking in this context to recall that, only 20 years ago, the phrase “Science Wars” was used by the right in relation to generally leftish postmodernists in the humanities, who were seen as rejecting science and/or promoting pseudoscience (while it was easy to poke fun at some rather silly stuff, and to point out that it was a distraction from the real political needs of the left, there’s no evidence that it ever did any actual harm to science). These days postmodernist and related “science studies” critiques of science are part of the rightwing arsenal used by Steven Fuller to defend creationism and by Daniel Sarewitz to argue that climate science is inherently political. The routine assumption that the analyses put forward of innumerate bloggers are just as valid as (in fact more valid than) as those of scientists who have devoted their life to the relevant field is one aspect of this, as is the constant demand to “teach the controversy” on evolution, climate science, wind turbine health scares and so on.

In the short run, the costs of attacking science are small. Scientists aren’t that numerous, so their conversion into one of the most solidly anti-Republican voting blocs in the US has’t had much electoral impact. But, eventually the fact that conservatives are the “stupid party” gets noticed, even by rightwingers themselves2

One person who has just noticed is Frank Furedi, a leading figure in the former Revolutionary Communist Party which, over the course of the 1990s, morphed into the (rightwing libertarian) Spiked group. In retrospect, Furedi jumped ship at the high water mark of right wing intellectual confidence, symbolised by Tom Friedman’s bloviations in The Lexus and the Olive Tree. Then came the Asian crisis, successive financial crises in the US and the intellectual debacle of climate delusionism, to which Furedi and the Spiked Group contributed actively. So, having joined what seemed to be the smart set, Furedi has finally realised that he is inescapably enmeshed in stupid. The result is this cri de coeur, lamenting the way in which rightwingers are called out for saying stupid things (he name-checks Tony Abbott and Sarah Palin, along with an Australian candidate for the racist One Nation party). Furedi doesn’t deny that rightwingers embrace stupidity, in fact he concedes it, observing

Not surprisingly, many conservatives become defensive when confronted with the put-downs of their intellectual superiors. Consequently, in many societies, particularly the US, they have become self-consciously anti-intellectual and hostile to the ethos of university life. Anti-intellectualism works as the kind of counterpart to the pathologisation of conservatism. And of course, the bitter anti-intellectual reaction of the right, which sometimes seems to affirm ignorance, only reinforces the smug prejudices of the intellectuals who see themselves as being morally superior. (emphasis added)
A couple of things are interesting about Furedi’s piece. First, he erases from history the period of rightwing intellectual dominance that began with the rise of market liberalism in the mid-1970s, and reached its apogee in the mid-1990s, before declining catastrophically in the Bush era. Second, he fails to recognise the way in which the silly-clever pointscoring of rightwing apologists like himself has contributed to the anti-intellectualism he deplores on his own side.

Even now, the intellectual collapse of the right has not had much effect on political outcomes. The dead ideas of the right shamble on in zombie form, and still dominate the thinking of the political class, particularly at the level of unconscious reflex. And, even to the extent that rightwing claims about, say, climate delusionism the beneficence of the financial sector, are discredited, the political power of the interests they represent makes it difficult, if not impossible to change things. Winning the battle of ideas is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for progress.

There are also very few women, but that needs another post. I’m also planning a post with a bit more detail on Abbott’s environmental policies.

Even more embarrassing is this TownHall list of “the top 25 most influential conservatives” in which the top 3 places are filled by Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge and Sarah Palin. According to this list, the right’s leading “intellectual” is Mark Levin, a marginally more literate version of Limbaugh. You have to go to the “also-rans”, to find Thomas Sowell, the only person on the list who could reasonably count as a serious intellectual.

http://crookedtimber.org/2013/09/21/the-global-party-of-stupid/?

Hockey cautious on Indonesia cattle plan

Karlis Salna, AAP
Updated September 20, 2013, 4:53 pm


AFP © Treasurer Joe Hockey says any decisions on foreign investment will be made on a case-by-case basis.

Treasurer Joe Hockey says any decisions on foreign investment will be made on a case-by-case basis, amid growing tension in the coalition over the issue, highlighted by Indonesia's plan to buy up Australian cattle farms.

Speaking on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation finance ministers meeting in Nusa Dua, Bali, Mr Hockey insisted questions of foreign investment in Australia would be worked through in a methodical fashion.

The comments come after Nationals deputy leader Barnaby Joyce last week slammed a proposal by Indonesia to buy a million hectares of Australian cattle land as part of its efforts to reduce its reliance on imported beef.

Mr Joyce has also voiced concerns about a $3 billon bid by US company Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) for Australia's largest agribusiness, GrainCorp.

On Thursday, Mr Joyce told a gathering of farmers in Townsville that the Nationals still had major concerns about the proposed ADM takeover of GrainCorp.

The GrainCorp decision, expected within the next three months, looms as the first big test for the new government on foreign investment as well as its relationship with its junior coalition partner, the Nationals.

Mr Hockey gave a cautious response when asked about GrainCorp.

"We will have a methodical process for evaluating individual proposals and you can be rest assured that my decision will not be contrary to the national interest," he said.

Mr Hockey, the first minister of the new government to hold bilateral talks on the international stage, said he had also discussed broader issues around the cattle trade with his Indonesian counterpart, Chatib Basri.

An Indonesian plan to buy large swathes Australian cattle country was not raised.

But Mr Hockey said both sides had spoken of a commitment to boosting the cattle trade, which has never recovered from a temporary ban on exports imposed by the Gillard government in reaction to evidence of animal cruelty in Indonesian abattoirs.

"I was very encouraged in my discussions with the Indonesian finance minister, that it was recognised there is mutual benefit in expanding the cattle trade between Australia and Indonesia," Mr Hockey said on Friday.

"We want to work closely together to expand and facilitate the export of food from Australia to Indonesia to meet Indonesia's growing needs."

Mr Hockey said the Indonesian finance minister had expressed a desire for his country to "forge deeper ties with Australia".

"There is great warmth towards Australia and the new government from the Indonesian government. There is no doubt about that," Mr Hockey said.

"The fact that the first bilateral meeting had by an Australian minister (in the new government) was with the finance minister of Indonesia is a good indication."

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/19026494/?

lease it to them, but we should NEVER sell our sovereign rights....fuck the US, fuck Indonesia,fuck anyone who want s to but our country....lease or fuck off....we should be developing markets to supply the demand these countries have, and we should be doing it on our terms..... the previous Government fucked live export, now it's this Governments responsibility to set up the appropriate industries to cater to Asia...

Asylum-seeker boat seen coming ashore as Coalition tries to keep it quiet

JESSICA MARSZALEK FEDERAL POLITICS REPORTER NEWS LIMITED NETWORK SEPTEMBER 22, 2013 6:58PM

THE first asylum seeker boat to arrive under the Abbott Government's blackout protocol has landed at Christmas Island with up to 30 people on board.

As Immigration Minister Scott Morrison stood by his refusal to follow Labor and alert the media each time a boat arrives, people smugglers delivered the latest load of asylum seekers to the Australian-controlled territory.

The arrival came ahead of Monday's first weekly media briefing due to be given by Mr Morrison and deputy chief of army Angus Campbell on Operation Sovereign Borders.

Although photographs show the boat arriving, Customs and Border Protection declined to provide official confirmation to AAP under the Coaltion blackout.

Mr Morrison said the Government was taking control of how information was released to deny people smugglers to opportunity to exploit it.

"People smugglers use information as a tactic to ply their trade," he said.

"Labor was impotent in response to arrivals, all they could do was announce them and run a water taxi service."

He said briefings would be weekly initially but this could change "based on operational considerations".

Extra briefings would be given when necessary about specific events and this could include instances of boats sinking, he said.

Asked why Coalition was changing a policy it had used from opposition to frequently highlight asylum seeker arrivals, Mr Morrison said the Coalition, in opposition, had simply been responding to Government process.

"The Government of the day sets the rules for how information is treated," he said.

"The Coalition Government has a different view about how this should be handled, based on a review of these matters by our operations command."

The changes were to ensure the success of the operation, he said.

Labor leadership hopeful Bill Shorten accused the Government of planning to keep secret details of drownings and urged a rethink of the new secretive policy.

"I can't imagine who dreamed that up, not telling anyone about deaths at sea," he told Channel Ten's Meet the Press.

"If a boat sinks ... and people drown, I don't think the government has a right to not tell people that this tragedy has occurred."


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/asylumseeker-boat-seen-coming-ashore-as-coalition-tries-to-keep-it-quiet/story-fni0xqrb-1226724710113

it pisses me off that the coalition is now saying the media have no right to no when a boat comes. Hell the media always posted about boats under the previous labor government .

What are you, a socialist? :roll:

Free market reigns supreme!

Commonwealth agencies to be cut by Abbott Government

STEVE LEWIS NEWS LIMITED NETWORK SEPTEMBER 22, 2013 10:00PM

AGENCIES responsible for tackling obesity, city planning and security advice on asylum seekers are to be slashed as Tony Abbott takes the axe to Labor's reform agenda.

Less than a week after taking office, the Coalition Government has scrapped plans to build a multimillion-dollar embassy in Africa, and will also wipe $100 million off research funding.

The Prime Minister has also pulled the pin on a key Kevin Rudd initiative - Community Cabinet - as he instructs his new ministry team to put the broom through the bureaucracy.

Key elements of Labor's reform agenda are being dismantled.

The Major Cities Unit - which provided advice on developing Australia's 18 biggest cities - and the Social Inclusion Unit in Mr Abbott's own Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet will be dismantled.

The Coalition will also begin unwinding key "nanny state'' agencies such as the Australian National Preventative Health Agency, established to lead the national fight against obesity, alcohol abuse and tobacco use.

Health Minister Peter Dutton has been critical of ANPHA's decision to spend $500,000 on a study into a potential "fat tax" despite neither side of politics supporting such a move.

Senior ministers are now searching for big savings from departments with a raft of back office operations and smaller agencies on the chopping block.

"It's out of control,'' one senior minister said, of the rapid growth in Commonwealth agencies.

Even the Australian Institute of Criminology, established by Gough Whitlam in 1973, is under review and could be merged with a major university. in a bid to save millions of taxpayer dollars.

Two major health agencies - the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and the year-old National Health Performance Authority - are under review and could have their combined budgets - of around $40 million a year - slashed.

One micro agency likely to be scrapped is the Independent Reviewer of Adverse Security Assessments.

It was established in 2012 last year and reviews assessments by ASIO into people in detention.

But with a $1 million a year price tag, the Government will likely scrap the organisation.

The future is also uncertain for key agencies such as the Human Rights Commission.

Some senior Coalition figures are keen to scrap the Commission altogether - but that would provoke a serious political brawl that Mr Abbott is not keen to have.

Attorney-General George Brandis has signalled his intention to challenge what he sees as a Left-controlled human rights agenda, and the role of issue-specific commissioners - such as Disability - could be broadened as part of an overhaul of the HRC.

The future of the national Children's Commissioner - announced by former PM Julia Gillard in February - is also in doubt. Its role could be radically reshaped to focus on cyber bullying.

Around $100 million will be cut from Australian Research Council grants with the Government determined to wipe out costly academic indulgences., such as a $443,000 study into the "God of Hegel's Post-Kantian idealism''.

Senior Coalition figures say the Australian Institute of Criminology will be reviewed to see whether it should remain a stand-alone agency.

The Institute produces academic-style research papers and there is a view that its operations should be taken over by a big university, saving taxpayers a considerable sum of money.

Climate Change Minister Greg Hunt has already taken the knife to key agencies, including the Climate Commission.

And another of Kevin Rudd's pet initiatives, Community Cabinet, will be scrapped with a saving of around $13 million over the four year forward estimates.

Other key Rudd reforms - including the expensive bid for a seat on the United Nations Security Council - are being wound back with a planned new Australian embassy in Senegal to be abandoned.

Scrapping ANPHA will leave the Government open to criticism that it's not taking seriously a raft of key health challenges - including the growing obesity challenge and tobacco and alcohol control.

But Mr Dutton is determined to slash hundreds of millions of dollars in bureaucratic expenses and is reviewing the ongoing role of the AIHW - which provides a national service on health and welfare statistics.

The National Health Performance Authority - established in 2011 to provide uniform statistics on the performance of hospitals and other health facilities - could also be absorbed back into the health department.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/commonwealth-agencies-to-be-cut-by-abbott-government/story-fni0xqrb-1226724733088

Good to see.

I guess the "cut, cut, cut" line wasn't "fibs" as described by Abbott afterall. I expect the appropriate levels of Alan Jones rage will be forthcoming.

"Removing the Nanny State" is just right wing code for allowing corporations (or in some cases, people) to do whatever the hell they want at the expense of citizens, neighbours, themselves and their families.

Stopping kids drowning in pools by forcing people to build fences? Nanny state.
Making people use seat belts? Nanny state.
Requiring companies to actually tell us what is in their food? Nanny state.
Stop companies dumping waste into creeks? Nanny state.
Making sure that childrens clothing won't burst into flames? Nanny state.
Requiring safety glass in showers so people don't get sliced up when the inherent stresses of cold-hot-cold transfer states inevitably cause a shower screen to break? Nanny state.
Anything to do with asbestos? Nanny state.
Ditto lead in paint. Nanny state.

I could go on.

Edited by macktheknife: 23/9/2013 12:52:18 AM

The 'nanny state' quote in the article seems like it was used by the author, rather than quoting the government.
I'm pretty sure this is the kind of thing that gets as agency axed:


The way i see it:
tackling obesity - Dept. of Health
city planning - States's responsibility
security advice on asylum seekers - Customs and Border Protection.
Why do these need to be seperate agencies?