Australian Politics General...

[farmerge]

Surely not. Snouts ina dar trough again and again.

Hard to stop or hold back corruption once it is started. Those brown paper bags cetainly have more than one use.

 

[Smurf1976]

Just my broad observation but the way it's looking to me, the present federal government has finally brought the 1980's to an end.

The 1980's yes. An extremely persistent period in time both politically and culturally that has until now refused to die. It's influence being defined not so much by the chronological dates but, in practice, the period ~1982-83 to 2022-23 basically has been all very similar. Let's call it The NeverEnding Story - that's a 1980's movie for anyone who didn't get the reference.

Politically well I'm seeing Labor's bust up with Keating as symbolic there and much the same could be said for Bob Brown's bust up with the Australian Conservation Foundation. Others are finally moving on, leaving those 1980's icons and anyone else who refuses to change behind.

Just my observation but I think we're living through a major paradigm shift right at this very moment, one that'll dominate the next 30+ years realistically.

Economic rationalism. China. Globalisation. No dams, mills or other development anywhere near anyone. "There is no such thing as society". All looking rather dated at this point and that others are, finally, moving on and leaving that behind. There seems to be a lot of issues now where there's at least some rumblings that what's prevailed for the past four decades has reached it's end.

Just an observation.

 

[SirRumpole]

All looking rather dated at this point and that others are, finally, moving on and leaving that behind.

Maybe , but there was Reagnism and Thathcherism in the 80's and there is Trumpism today.

I hope we have moved on, but the ghosts of the past seem to keep popping up to haunt today's world.

 

[sptrawler]

Maybe , but there was Reagnism and Thathcherism in the 80's and there is Trumpism today.

I hope we have moved on, but the ghosts of the past seem to keep popping up to haunt today's world.

As do our own ghosts, but to create change the status quo has to be shaken, if it isn't the inbuilt corruption and poor systems just become more ingrained, politics and policies can only be measured in hindsight.
Take Thatcher for example, a lot of what she did, the Hawke/ Keating Govt's copied, removing protectionism, driving globalisation and reducing Government subsidies.
Interestingly Thatcher caused a huge amount of unrest at the time especially with the coal miners dispute, yet she was elected into office in 1979, re elected in 1983 and then re elected yet again in 1987, so it wasn't as though people didn't have an opportunity to remove her.
Also today she would be cheered by the media for closing down the coal industry, the amount of pollution in the air when everyone living so close together was burning coal all through winter and the industries were burning it, was astronomical. I can still remember walking to school coughing with the smog blanket and I left there 60 years ago as a kid.
So was it so bad closing down a loss making, inefficient industry, that now we are saying has to be closed down, history says no it wasn't bad in hindsight.

Funnily enough Hawke employed a similar style in handling the Australian pilots dispute and yet Hawke is remembered fondly, maybe the Australian media was more forgiving of Hawke, than the British media was of Thatcher?

IMO Trump is in a similar situation, he got the ball rolling, in pushing back against China and globalisation yet he is only remembered for his very unpleasant manner. Again driven by the media in my humble opinion.

Two years ago Dutton was lambasted up hill and down dale, for being a warmonger and beating the war drum, obviously two years is a long time in the media. Now the media is leading the chorus.
Like I've said before flipping Governments on a regular basis, IMO is the best way forward for Australia, otherwise we would stagnate as happens when conservatives are in.
But they usually get in because the rate of change under Labor, ends up getting the public out of their comfort zone, e.g Gough, Hawke/Keating, Rudd/Gillard.

 

[SirRumpole]

As do our own ghosts, but to create change the status quo has to be shaken, if it isn't the inbuilt corruption and poor systems just become more ingrained, politics and policies can only be measured in hindsight.
Take Thatcher for example, a lot of what she did, the Hawke/ Keating Govt's copied, removing protectionism, driving globalisation and reducing Government subsidies.
Interestingly Thatcher caused a huge amount of unrest at the time especially with the coal miners dispute, yet she was elected into office in 1979, re elected in 1983 and then re elected yet again in 1987, so it wasn't as though people didn't have an opportunity to remove her.
Also today she would be cheered by the media for closing down the coal industry, the amount of pollution in the air when everyone living so close together was burning coal all through winter and the industries were burning it, was astronomical. I can still remember walking to school coughing with the smog blanket and I left there 60 years ago as a kid.
So was it so bad closing down a loss making, inefficient industry, that now we are saying has to be closed down, history says no it wasn't bad in hindsight.

Funnily enough Hawke employed a similar style in handling the Australian pilots dispute and yet Hawke is remembered fondly, maybe the Australian media was more forgiving of Hawke, than the British media was of Thatcher?

IMO Trump is in a similar situation, he got the ball rolling, in pushing back against China and globalisation yet he is only remembered for his very unpleasant manner. Again driven by the media in my humble opinion.

Two years ago Dutton was lambasted up hill and down dale, for being a warmonger and beating the war drum, obviously two years is a long time in the media. Now the media is leading the chorus.
Like I've said before flipping Governments on a regular basis, IMO is the best way forward for Australia, otherwise we would stagnate as happens when conservatives are in.
But they usually get in because the rate of change under Labor, ends up getting the public out of their comfort zone, e.g Gough, Hawke/Keating, Rudd/Gillard.

All true, but I wonder if Thatcher's shutting down the coal industry was based on an ideological hatred of unions rather than any environmental reason.

 

[sptrawler]

All true, but I wonder if Thatcher's shutting down the coal industry was based on an ideological hatred of unions rather than any environmental reason.

Not really, from what I've read on it since growing up it was all about the advent of North Sea gas and nuclear power, the fact that a lot of the mines were deep mines also made them very uneconomical to run.
This was due to the fact they had been running since the industrial revolution and being deep mines extraction costs were high, as opposed to the open pit mining we have now.
Also industry was changing over to gas and globalisation was starting out, as was happening in most Western economies.

The coal mines were heavily unionised and the job for life had been in operation for generations, it was just a sad moment in history for a lot of people, but back then it was devastating for the whole of the North of England, which was heavily reliant on coal mine jobs.

It was portrayed as a hate campaign, but in reality it was just times had overtaken a century old industry, as usual it was 30 years ahead of us.
It was one of the reasons my parents emigrated to Australia, my father saw the writing on the wall in the early 1960's. He owned his own house in England and worked for ICI as an instrument fitter, so it wasnt as though he had to leave, he just realised there was a lot better future for us three kids in Australia.

The demise of UK deep coal mining: decades of decline

As Kellingley, the last deep mine colliery in Britain, closes, we chart the decline of the industry from 1960

www.theguardian.com

 

[wayneL]

Just my broad observation but the way it's looking to me, the present federal government has finally brought the 1980's to an end.

The 1980's yes. An extremely persistent period in time both politically and culturally that has until now refused to die. It's influence being defined not so much by the chronological dates but, in practice, the period ~1982-83 to 2022-23 basically has been all very similar. Let's call it The NeverEnding Story - that's a 1980's movie for anyone who didn't get the reference.

Politically well I'm seeing Labor's bust up with Keating as symbolic there and much the same could be said for Bob Brown's bust up with the Australian Conservation Foundation. Others are finally moving on, leaving those 1980's icons and anyone else who refuses to change behind.

Just my observation but I think we're living through a major paradigm shift right at this very moment, one that'll dominate the next 30+ years realistically.

Economic rationalism. China. Globalisation. No dams, mills or other development anywhere near anyone. "There is no such thing as society". All looking rather dated at this point and that others are, finally, moving on and leaving that behind. There seems to be a lot of issues now where there's at least some rumblings that what's prevailed for the past four decades has reached it's end.

Just an observation.

What are we replacing it with though? What direction or we heading?

The Great Reset?
A "Brave New World"?
An Idiocracy?
Sovietization of the West, or at least technocratic authoritarianism?
A nuclear winter?

I don't disagree, but I don't like any of the possibilities, except for possibly loading up on Brawndo shares.

 

[sptrawler]

What are we replacing it with though? What direction or we heading?

The Great Reset?
A "Brave New World"?
An Idiocracy?
Sovietization of the West, or at least technocratic authoritarianism?
A nuclear winter?

I don't disagree, but I don't like any of the possibilities, except for possibly loading up on Brawndo shares.

On a World stage, I wouldn't have a clue and from my opinion it is way out of my scope of interests, as I don't know how the rest of the World is going other than what the media want to tell me.
On the home front, I tend to think there is a bit of an awakening, there are a hell of a lot of young people who are getting a large dose of reality and the first taste of what belt tightening is, even though it can go a lot further yet.

I think while the economy was awash with money, a cavalier attitude developed, that is starting to fade.

I'm seeing those who didn't care how much a beer cost, are starting to suggest we do our Saturday happy hour in a cheaper pub, which 12 months ago wouldn't have been heard of.

I'm seeing my daughters question the need for so many streaming services and actually saying no to the grandkids, which is a novel experience for them. ?
It's usually only grumpy grandad that said that word.

So I think those who are feeling the pinch, will start and question Government fiscal decisions at State and Federal levels, whereas cost of living really hasn't been a talking point for several years.
Cost of housing has been, ICAC's and bushfires and floods, now the focus of conversation is cost of living.
So the electorate will be much more attuned to Govt spending and what it is on, I expect to see the cost of energy and what the Govt are going to do about it become a real political hot potato @Smurf1976 alluded to with the no dams etc.

We could see the loony left and the loony right, actually shouted down by the center majority very soon IMO.
In a lot of ways we are already starting to see it, with the current Govt actually following on where the previous Govt left off, whereas a couple of years ago the Govt was being told to kiss butt and keep quiet, that sentiment has turned.
The Melbourne comedy festival is now saying it didn't cancel Dame Edna, which would indicate that cancelling wasn't the thing to do, yet a lot were doing it a couple of years ago and being applauded for doing so.
A certain highly opinionated bandana wearer, was extremely vocal and seemed to be a bit of a champion of the left, now his flame seems to be waning.
Only personal observations.

 

[wayneL]

We could see the loony left and the loony right, actually shouted down by the center majority very soon IMO.

"could"... I'm not seeing the testicular fortitude from the centre at this stage, yet.

The problem I see is that the centre is probably not really politically involved in enough numbers to counter the radical fringes. And if and when they do become involved they will bring in a naivete which will be easily countered by well-trained arguement, especially from the left.... After all, they have all read Saul Alinsky's work... We see that here even on ASF.

 

[sptrawler]

"could"... I'm not seeing the testicular fortitude from the centre at this stage, yet.

The problem I see is that the centre is probably not really politically involved in enough numbers to counter the radical fringes. And if and when they do become involved they will bring in a naivete which will be easily countered by well-trained arguement, especially from the left.... After all, they have all read Saul Alinsky's work... We see that here even on ASF.

Let's see after the budget, a big balancing act going on, Debt up, Spending up, Tax cuts for the rich up, Military spending up, Carbon reduction spending (hv transmission etc) up.
Where are the reductions coming from ?
It will be interesting.

 

[SirRumpole]

What are we replacing it with though? What direction or we heading?

The Great Reset?
A "Brave New World"?
An Idiocracy?
Sovietization of the West, or at least technocratic authoritarianism?
A nuclear winter?

I don't disagree, but I don't like any of the possibilities, except for possibly loading up on Brawndo shares.

Government by evidence not ideology would be nice.

 

[wayneL]

Government by evidence not ideology would be nice.

I think government needs some sort of ideology, but agree it should be based on evidence.

Human nature would be a good start.

 

[Smurf1976]

Not really, from what I've read on it since growing up it was all about the advent of North Sea gas and nuclear power, the fact that a lot of the mines were deep mines also made them very uneconomical to run.

Resource economics is an interesting field and one very relevant to the forum given the number of resource stocks on the ASX.

It's entirely possible to have a resource, something that's valuable in itself, but it's actually worthless in practice indeed there are countless such examples.

As a local one well the northern end of the Adelaide CBD is sitting on coal. Dig down under the Royal Adelaide Hospital, anywhere under Hindley St or the western half of North Terrace (both CBD streets as such), or under the Adelaide Oval or the North Adelaide Golf course and you'll find coal. Even better, the largest power station in SA a century ago was in fact in the CBD, operating during the 1901 - 1925 period, just one Mile from the center of the coal deposits.

But the Adelaide CBD coal has never been mined. Unlike Sydney and Hobart both of which have historically mined coal within walking distance of the CBD, and Brisbane which did it at the western edge of the urban area.

Not mined because despite proximity to a workforce and historically to demand, it just wasn't a viable resource economically and that's without even considering the point that the land has other uses which are incompatible with coal mining. A classic case of a resource that's physically there, technically usable, but useless in practice. The closest actual coal mining historically being almost 500km away at Leigh Creek.

Plenty more examples like that.

For UK coal the basic issue is that they haven't run out of coal but they have indeed run out of coal that's worth mining.

UK coal production in terms of physical volume peaked way back in 1913 at 292 million tonnes. By the time Thatcher rose to power, it had fallen to 122 million tonnes in 1979 so already a 58% decline from the peak. Indeed the UK had actually commenced importing coal in 1970 due to faltering local production.

Much the same for the workforce. That peaked in 1920 at 1.19 million according to official records, continuing to rise from 1.11 million in 1913 when production peaked. By 1979 employment had dwindled to 0.24 million so already an almost 80% decline from the peak.

In 1913 the UK had 3024 coal mines.

In 1979 there were 219 coal mines operating.

On the consumption side I'll let this chart do the talking:

So by 1979 the UK coal industry was already well and truly doomed simply because it was following the classic pattern of resource depletion.

The mines were mostly already shut at that point. Production had long ago peaked, employment had already been slashed, exports had ceased and with the exception of steel and electricity generation, coal had already been largely phased out by consumers.

Thatcher put it out of its misery but it was well on the way to being dead anyway. Not because they ran out of coal, there's still plenty left today, but because they ran out of coal that was economically usable.

There is of course a lesson here for Australia in that a peak and decline of Australian coal production is at some point inevitable. That's got nothing to do with the environment and is simply about economics - as the best coal is mined first, in due course investors and workers need to accept progressively lower incomes and at some point they walk away.

Noting that coal mining is already dead in SA and is clearly on its last legs in WA indeed it already pretty much is finished so far as an actually profitable enterprise is concerned. In due course it's inevitable that other states go the same way and that Australia's second largest export ceases.

Now what's the plan for a replacement industry? That's what government really needs to be answering.

 

[Smurf1976]

Off topic but less than one human lifetime ago UK households burnt, at home, more coal than either power stations or steelworks.

It's still possible to find buildings today that are completely black when viewed from the outside and you'd never know the bricks are actually a much lighter colour. That is quite literally soot, that's how polluted the air in the cities used to be.

Example here before and after cleaning: https://i2-prod.manchestereveningne...8010.ece/ALTERNATES/s810/before-and-after.jpg

I know some do consider that environmentalism goes too far at times, and I agree with that, but on the other hand there most certainly was a need to clean things up. Just imagine what that must've done to the lungs of people just walking down the street?

 

[farmerge]

On a World stage, I wouldn't have a clue and from my opinion it is way out of my scope of interests, as I don't know how the rest of the World is going other than what the media want to tell me.
On the home front, I tend to think there is a bit of an awakening, there are a hell of a lot of young people who are getting a large dose of reality and the first taste of what belt tightening is, even though it can go a lot further yet.

I think while the economy was awash with money, a cavalier attitude developed, that is starting to fade.

I'm seeing those who didn't care how much a beer cost, are starting to suggest we do our Saturday happy hour in a cheaper pub, which 12 months ago wouldn't have been heard of.

I'm seeing my daughters question the need for so many streaming services and actually saying no to the grandkids, which is a novel experience for them. ?
It's usually only grumpy grandad that said that word.

So I think those who are feeling the pinch, will start and question Government fiscal decisions at State and Federal levels, whereas cost of living really hasn't been a talking point for several years.
Cost of housing has been, ICAC's and bushfires and floods, now the focus of conversation is cost of living.
So the electorate will be much more attuned to Govt spending and what it is on, I expect to see the cost of energy and what the Govt are going to do about it become a real political hot potato @Smurf1976 alluded to with the no dams etc.

We could see the loony left and the loony right, actually shouted down by the center majority very soon IMO.
In a lot of ways we are already starting to see it, with the current Govt actually following on where the previous Govt left off, whereas a couple of years ago the Govt was being told to kiss butt and keep quiet, that sentiment has turned.
The Melbourne comedy festival is now saying it didn't cancel Dame Edna, which would indicate that cancelling wasn't the thing to do, yet a lot were doing it a couple of years ago and being applauded for doing so.
A certain highly opinionated bandana wearer, was extremely vocal and seemed to be a bit of a champion of the left, now his flame seems to be waning.
Only personal observations.

With hammer in hand this really hits on the head. great post.

 

[sptrawler]

As I've said all along, IMO these corruption commissions are just a passenger on the gravy train, that the taxpayer has to fund.
If the Governments were serious about eradicating government corruption, they would give the corruption commissions some teeth, where people can be at least sacked.

Surely not. Snouts ina dar trough again and again.

I see the ombudsman has the same opinion as us @farmerge, yet the outrage we had to hear from the loonies about how an ICAC was the most important issue facing Australia.
The reporters must sit in a room and brain storm what issues they can wind the pitch fork crew up with next.?

You have to love this part of the report:
After Operation Daintree was handed down last week, Premier Daniel Andrews labelled the report "educational" and said the ministers and advisers named no longer worked in the government.

He noted there was no finding of corrupt conduct and rejected the report's finding that power in the government had become centralised in his private office.

Wasn't that what one of the issues the crew got up in arms with Morrison for. ?
Australia, you've just got to love the tribal irony.

Ombudsman says Premier Daniel Andrews's IBAC response 'speaks volumes for his views on integrity and corruption'

Victoria's ombudsman says the premier's response to a damning report from the state's anti-corruption watchdog "speaks volumes" about his views on corruption, as she calls for urgent action to improve integrity in politics.

www.abc.net.au

Victoria's ombudsman says the Premier's response to a damning report from the state's anti-corruption watchdog "speaks volumes" about his views on corruption, as she renewed calls for urgent action to improve integrity in politics.
Ombudsman Deborah Glass today said the report's findings were "disturbing".

"Well there were no findings of corruption, but that has everything to do with the very high threshold for corruption findings that we have here in Victoria," she told ABC Radio Melbourne.

"It painted a very disturbing picture of the way a contract was entirely improperly signed up when it shouldn't have been.

"Procurement processes were not followed, there was clearly pressure coming from ministerial advisers and the ministers responsible for those advisers seem to be missing in action."

She compared IBAC's report with findings she made in relation to the Labor Party's "red shirts rorts" last year and the results of Operation Watts, a joint Ombudsman-IBAC probe that uncovered "extensive misconduct" by Victorian Labor MPs.

"There are multiple findings that we have seen in previous reports where conduct falls short of criminal but is wrong, it is unethical, it is improper, it breaches codes," Ms Glass said.
"The problem for me is not so much about the threshold or definition as what happens when behaviour falls short of that very high criminal threshold but is unethical, is wrong and there are no consequences."

Ms Glass said setting up a a non-government-controlled parliamentary ethics committee and appointing an independent parliamentary commissioner, as recommended by Operation Watts, would go some way to addressing integrity issues.

 

[sptrawler]

At Last, the Greens come up with something intelligent IMO.
Hopefully they stand their ground, it is the only pro working class thing I've heard from them, in a long time.

Greens vow to sink federal government's $10b housing fund, threatening first major defeat for Albanese

The federal government wants to establish a $10 billion housing fund to increase affordable supply, but Greens leader Adam Bandt says his party will sink it in the Senate unless the government does more for renters and ends tax discounts for some investment properties.

www.abc.net.au

To earn their support, the Greens have called for a fund to support a two-year rental price freeze, direct building of 225,000 publicly owned properties over the decade and a doubling of Commonwealth Rent Assistance, unless income support payments such as JobSeeker and Youth Allowance are increased.

Under the Greens' proposal, the "negative gearing" tax scheme that allows investors to deduct net rental losses from their income tax would be phased out over five years on multiple properties, and investors instead would be required to choose just one they could apply the discount to.
"We're calling for an end to the tax breaks that the government is currently giving to people who own three, four, 12, or 25 properties. It's about the 20,000 wealthy moguls who own more than six properties each."

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said the Greens' position was "completely illogical".

"They want more investment in social and affordable housing and their strategy to do that is to block $10 billion to create a fund for investment in social and affordable housing," Mr Albanese said.

"If the Greens vote against the $10 billion housing Australia Future Fund they are voting against $10 billion of investment into social and affordable housing.

"They will be held to account for it, and any of their rhetoric about housing issues will be regarded as just farcical if they vote against this fund."

Mr Albanese said the housing fund was in addition to other housing supports the government had already introduced, including an agreement with the states and territories to build 1 million new homes over five years, accompanied by an additional $350 million over that time.

 

[farmerge]

I see the ombudsman has the same opinion as us @farmerge, yet the outrage we had to hear from the loonies about how an ICAC was the most important issue facing Australia.
The reporters must sit in a room and brain storm what issues they can wind the pitch fork crew up with next.?

You have to love this part of the report:
After Operation Daintree was handed down last week, Premier Daniel Andrews labelled the report "educational" and said the ministers and advisers named no longer worked in the government.

He noted there was no finding of corrupt conduct and rejected the report's finding that power in the government had become centralised in his private office.

Wasn't that what one of the issues the crew got up in arms with Morrison for. ?
Australia, you've just got to love the tribal irony.

Ombudsman says Premier Daniel Andrews's IBAC response 'speaks volumes for his views on integrity and corruption'

Victoria's ombudsman says the premier's response to a damning report from the state's anti-corruption watchdog "speaks volumes" about his views on corruption, as she calls for urgent action to improve integrity in politics.

www.abc.net.au

Victoria's ombudsman says the Premier's response to a damning report from the state's anti-corruption watchdog "speaks volumes" about his views on corruption, as she renewed calls for urgent action to improve integrity in politics.
Ombudsman Deborah Glass today said the report's findings were "disturbing".

"Well there were no findings of corruption, but that has everything to do with the very high threshold for corruption findings that we have here in Victoria," she told ABC Radio Melbourne.

"It painted a very disturbing picture of the way a contract was entirely improperly signed up when it shouldn't have been.

"Procurement processes were not followed, there was clearly pressure coming from ministerial advisers and the ministers responsible for those advisers seem to be missing in action."

She compared IBAC's report with findings she made in relation to the Labor Party's "red shirts rorts" last year and the results of Operation Watts, a joint Ombudsman-IBAC probe that uncovered "extensive misconduct" by Victorian Labor MPs.

"There are multiple findings that we have seen in previous reports where conduct falls short of criminal but is wrong, it is unethical, it is improper, it breaches codes," Ms Glass said.
"The problem for me is not so much about the threshold or definition as what happens when behaviour falls short of that very high criminal threshold but is unethical, is wrong and there are no consequences."

Ms Glass said setting up a a non-government-controlled parliamentary ethics committee and appointing an independent parliamentary commissioner, as recommended by Operation Watts, would go some way to addressing integrity issues.

Hmm Mr sptrawler I think I will pigs fly past before any accountable action is commissioned.

 

[Smurf1976]

We could see the loony left and the loony right, actually shouted down by the center majority very soon IMO.
In a lot of ways we are already starting to see it, with the current Govt actually following on where the previous Govt left off, whereas a couple of years ago the Govt was being told to kiss butt and keep quiet, that sentiment has turned.
The Melbourne comedy festival is now saying it didn't cancel Dame Edna, which would indicate that cancelling wasn't the thing to do, yet a lot were doing it a couple of years ago and being applauded for doing so.
A certain highly opinionated bandana wearer, was extremely vocal and seemed to be a bit of a champion of the left, now his flame seems to be waning.
Only personal observations.

One rule of investing is identify crowd behaviour. The mainstream media narrative and political group think rushes toward one thing, then realises it's a dud and rushes toward something else.

I still recall during the depths of the pandemic reading the opinion of a certain newspaper economics reporter who noted that one thing we thankfully had no reason to worry about was inflation. That says it all really - the mainstream media narrative, and the politics around it, doesn't tell you want to do but it does tell you very loudly what not to go along with.

 

[sptrawler]

This could get very ugly for Labor IMO, 400,000 migrants is beyond the joke, by any measure.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...-000-to-arrive-this-year-20230428-p5d437.html