Australian Politics General...

[sptrawler]

Let's see, those tax breaks are where the main drain is.
Let's see how serious they are about hitting the really wealthy, the ones with the McMansion overlooking Sydney harbour, driving the AMG Merc and pulling a full Govt pension.
Lets get properties over $3m assessable for the pension, why have caps on what someone can have in super(which I agree with).
When they can just transfer a lot into a zillion dollar McMansion, as a PPR and Bob's your uncle, just wealth transfer from 15% super tax, to 0%.CGT on PPR.
Will Albo plug that hole? Or is it just a populist vote catcher?

What did Olivia sing, lets get serious, serious.

Well this is what makes me always feel that politics is just a game of musical chairs, they are always tinkering with things that affect middle Australians, but never play with things that affect them.
How many ex P.M's end up living in a downsized house in the outer suburbs, when they retire? despite their humble beginnings.

Dutton vows to repeal super tax hike as PM rules out capital gains tax change

Peter Dutton vowed to repeal the government’s change to superannuation tax while Anthony Albanese ruled out any future changes to another expensive tax concession.

www.smh.com.au

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese ruled out any future changes to capital gains tax concessions on the family home and vowed there would be no more changes to superannuation this term of government, after unveiling plans to increase tax on super earnings over $3 million earlier this week.
“We are not going to impact the family home, full stop exclamation mark. Because it’s a bad idea,” Albanese said on ABC’s RN Breakfast on Wednesday morning.

 

[mullokintyre]

I recall there was much discussion about the roting of grants under the previous coalition, aka "Sports Rorts Saga", where the majority of grants went to coalition seats.
It would seem that rorting may not be confined to the coalition.
From The Australian

The Albanese government stands accused of funnelling money to improve mobile phone coverage in regional areas in its own electorates, with 40 out of the 54 funding allocations awarded to Labor-held seats.
The Improving Mobile Coverage Round’s $40m in funding, formalised earlier this month, has been directed to 40 Labor electorates, three seats held by independents and 11 by Coalition MPs. Of the 11 Coalition electorates, seven of those are in marginal seats, including Leichhardt, Bass and Flynn.

Perhaps its just a politician thing.
Mick

 

[basilio]

I recall there was much discussion about the roting of grants under the previous coalition, aka "Sports Rorts Saga", where the majority of grants went to coalition seats.
It would seem that rorting may not be confined to the coalition.
From The Australian

Perhaps its just a politician thing.
Mick

The Australian is well known for it's fair and impartial political coverage ...not.
Did the article attempt to breakdown the criteria for selection of successful grants ? Was it open and above board ? Is there any evidence that Ministers intervened to change Department advice ? The sports rorts saga was notorious because the Minister flagrantly intervened.

Is it possible that the reason Labour electorates figured so prominently is because the previous Government basically ignored these areas in favour of Liberal and National Party holdings ? Lets face it The Libs had a ton of proven form in redirecting grants to their own constituency. It would be no surprise to discover that the biggest holes in National BB coverage were in areas that had not voted Lib/National

Sports rorts affair (2020)​

The "sports rorts" affair, also called the McKenzie scandal,[1] is a scandal involving the Sport Australia's Community Sport Infrastructure Program that engulfed Senator Bridget McKenzie, the then Minister for Sport in the Morrison Government commencing in February 2019.
On 15 January 2020, the Australian National Audit Office published a report into the Community Sport Infrastructure Program titled 'Award of Funding under the Community Sport Infrastructure Program'. The report had two main conclusions: the award of grant funding was not informed by an appropriate assessment process and sound advice and the successful applications were not those that had been assessed as the most meritorious in terms of the published program guidelines.[2] The outcomes of the report resulted in extensive media coverage due to Minister McKenzie using her ministerial discretion to favour marginal or targeted electorates in the allocation of grants in the lead up to 2019 Australian federal election.[3][4][5][6]

Sports rorts affair (2020) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[mullokintyre]

The Australian is well known for it's fair and impartial political coverage ...not.
Did the article attempt to breakdown the criteria for selection of successful grants ? Was it open and above board ? Is there any evidence that Ministers intervened to change Department advice ? The sports rorts saga was notorious because the Minister flagrantly intervened.

Is it possible that the reason Labour electorates figured so prominently is because the previous Government basically ignored these areas in favour of Liberal and National Party holdings ? Lets face it The Libs had a ton of proven form in redirecting grants to their own constituency. It would be no surprise to discover that the biggest holes in National BB coverage were in areas that had not voted Lib/National

Sports rorts affair (2020)​

The "sports rorts" affair, also called the McKenzie scandal,[1] is a scandal involving the Sport Australia's Community Sport Infrastructure Program that engulfed Senator Bridget McKenzie, the then Minister for Sport in the Morrison Government commencing in February 2019.
On 15 January 2020, the Australian National Audit Office published a report into the Community Sport Infrastructure Program titled 'Award of Funding under the Community Sport Infrastructure Program'. The report had two main conclusions: the award of grant funding was not informed by an appropriate assessment process and sound advice and the successful applications were not those that had been assessed as the most meritorious in terms of the published program guidelines.[2] The outcomes of the report resulted in extensive media coverage due to Minister McKenzie using her ministerial discretion to favour marginal or targeted electorates in the allocation of grants in the lead up to 2019 Australian federal election.[3][4][5][6]

Sports rorts affair (2020) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Of course, The Australian does not provide fair and impartial coverage, but of course anything you provide is.
Of course none of the reasons that you provide to absolve the labour party of favouring its constituents could ever possibly apply to the coalition and its favouring its own constituents.
The fact that no other media org has reported it shows how poor our own media are at reporting on wght happens impartially.
C'mon Bas, take your left wing rose glasses off and look at both of the incidents for what they are - politicians looking after their own to ensure their reelection.
Mick

 

[basilio]

Of course, The Australian does not provide fair and impartial coverage, but of course anything you provide is.
Of course none of the reasons that you provide to absolve the labour party of favouring its constituents could ever possibly apply to the coalition and its favouring its own constituents.
The fact that no other media org has reported it shows how poor our own media are at reporting on wght happens impartially.
C'mon Bas, take your left wing rose glasses off and look at both of the incidents for what they are - politicians looking after their own to ensure their reelection.
Mick

Nope Mick. I asked what evidence there was that Labour politicians were deliberately tilting the grants system to favour their constituency. I pointed out that the Libs had a well proven history of rorting supposedly independently approved public grants.

So where is the evidence of Ministerial interference ?

 

[SirRumpole]

Nope Mick. I asked what evidence there was that Labour politicians were deliberately tilting the grants system to favour their constituency. I pointed out that the Libs had a well proven history of rorting supposedly independently approved public grants.

So where is the evidence of Ministerial interference ?

Even if Labor does favour their own electorates they could reasonably argue that they were neglected under the previous government.

 

[PZ99]

Even if Labor does favour their own electorates they could reasonably argue that they were neglected under the previous government.

That's exactly what happened. The vast majority of the new/upgraded mobile towers went to LNP electorates under the Abbott/Turnbull Govts as part of the so-called Mobile Black Spot Program.

Naturally that article from The Australian is just one-sided garbage and best ignored.

The Govt is merely correcting the imbalance and they took it to the election so we can add that to the list

 

[macca]

IMO Both sides look after the people who voted them in, personally I think it is the right thing to do.

In the runup to the election IF Labor says we will do this for you and they win then they Should fulfil their promise.

IF the Libs offers are not as good as Labor then people vote Labor because they want what was promised by them.

Of course, there are always the the dumb electorates that stick solid to either party, they always get nothing, why waste good funding on a seat you always win (Like some in the Lower Hunter)

 

[Sean K]

I recall there was much discussion about the roting of grants under the previous coalition, aka "Sports Rorts Saga", where the majority of grants went to coalition seats.
It would seem that rorting may not be confined to the coalition.
From The Australian

Perhaps its just a politician thing.
Mick

It's definitely a full spectrum political thing. Oink oink. Labor started pretty well but they're falling off a cliff with the broken promises now, particularly with the no new taxes promise. They've tried it on and received so much blow back that they've had to adjust dramatically. They will feel us out for a death tax soon. They are counting on the population having a short memory and being mostly dumb. It's how they got in. It's how the pigs took over the farm.

 

[Sean K]

IMO Both sides look after the people who voted them in, personally I think it is the right thing to do.

In the runup to the election IF Labor says we will do this for you and they win then they Should fulfil their promise.

IF the Libs offers are not as good as Labor then people vote Labor because they want what was promised by them.

Of course, there are always the the dumb electorates that stick solid to either party, they always get nothing, why waste good funding on a seat you always win (Like some in the Lower Hunter)

Agree, but it's less than a year and they've changed policies. Nothing has dramatically changed that you can change policies like this. It looks like a flat out lie to the electorate. Dumb politics. Even PVO is smashing them and he's a red under the bed.

 

[SirRumpole]

Agree, but it's less than a year and they've changed policies. Nothing has dramatically changed that you can change policies like this. It looks like a flat out lie to the electorate. Dumb politics. Even PVO is smashing them and he's a red under the bed.

Because the super changes don't apply until after the next election, they are essentially an election promise, and if people don't like it they don't have to vote for it, same with any election policy.

Personally I think they should have bought it in sooner, the wider electorate don't particularly care about 80,000 fairly well off people who probably live in safe LNP seats anyway.

 

[macca]

Because the super changes don't apply until after the next election, they are essentially an election promise, and if people don't like it they don't have to vote for it, same with any election policy.

Personally I think they should have bought it in sooner, the wider electorate don't particularly care about 80,000 fairly well off people who probably live in safe LNP seats anyway.

I think the Teals might have a higher % in their seats than the LNP

It will be interesting to hear what they think of this "promise" in the election campaign

 

[PZ99]

Because the super changes don't apply until after the next election, they are essentially an election promise, and if people don't like it they don't have to vote for it, same with any election policy.

Personally I think they should have bought it in sooner, the wider electorate don't particularly care about 80,000 fairly well off people who probably live in safe LNP seats anyway.

The ALP proposed it way back around 8 years ago...

Interesting thing about unpopular reforms... they always turn up for another bite of the cherry.. GST, Workchoices, Penalty rates, carbon taxes.. they never go away (let's talk about neg gearing again ya'll !)

Anyway FWIW... here's the original policy from our old Electricity Bill

Labor proposes superannuation tax hikes for high-income, wealthy Australians

Bill Shorten says Labor plans to change super rules would raise more than $14 billion from high-income and wealthy Australians over a 10-year period.

www.abc.net.au

 

[The Triangle]

Clive Palmer to sue Australia for $300 billion over iron ore project

Mining billionaire Clive Palmer seeks $300 billion in damages from the Australian government over an iron ore project in Western Australia's Pilbara region.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Sean K]

Yesterday or the day before the PM was answering questions regarding energy supply to Japan and can we be trusted to continue dealing in oil and gas projects and delivery. He assured us that Japan had no problems and we were a great and reliable friend and there would be not problems with supporting Japan's energy requirements now and into the future. Right. With the Greens pulling the strings with energy now, how can we be trusted in the slightest?

 

[mullokintyre]

Yesterday or the day before the PM was answering questions regarding energy supply to Japan and can we be trusted to continue dealing in oil and gas projects and delivery. He assured us that Japan had no problems and we were a great and reliable friend and there would be not problems with supporting Japan's energy requirements now and into the future. Right. With the Greens pulling the strings with energy now, how can we be trusted in the slightest?

View attachment 155203

As always, look at what Politicians and guvmints do rather than what they say.
Mick

 

[SirRumpole]

Another serious rebuke for the Federal Libs who are really on the nose.

Labor wins Aston by election with a 6% swing.

Where to now for the Libs ? Can Dutton survive ? Who else is there ?

Labor's Mary Doyle snatches formerly safe Liberal seat of Aston in historic by-election win

Labor has claimed victory in the federal seat of Aston, the first time in more than a century that a government has won a seat from the opposition at a by-election.

www.abc.net.au

 

[mullokintyre]

Who are the contenders?
None of the major egos in the party would want the job. They are on a hiding to nothing.
Someone is only going to knock him off if they think there is a chance to become PM.
Think he is safe for a while yet.
Mick

 

[Knobby22]

Internal Newscorp polling at Aston by-election shows that the Liberals are presently perceived as the nasty party.

https://www.news.com.au/national/victoria/once-safe-liberal-seat-of-aston-won-by-labor-in-2023-byelection/news-story/200206a2e187cf1553c7c9f03e977d75

 

[SirRumpole]

Who are the contenders?
None of the major egos in the party would want the job. They are on a hiding to nothing.
Someone is only going to knock him off if they think there is a chance to become PM.
Think he is safe for a while yet.
Mick

Yes, they seem pretty resigned to two terms out of office at least.

Plenty of time to white-ant and sharpen swords.