Is the Labor Party ready to govern?

[SirRumpole]

Looks like Shorten is getting his way on refugee policy

ALP national conference: Labor delegates vote down ban on asylum seeker boat turn-backs

Labor's national conference has voted down a motion to ban the policy of turning back asylum seeker boats from the party's platform.

Federal Labor MP Andrew Giles moved the amendment to "reject turning away boats of people seeking asylum".

After about an hour of debate, the motion was voted down by delegates without a count.

Ahead of the vote, Opposition immigration spokesman Richard Marles told conference delegates Labor could not return to policies of the past and must have access to a full suite of measures, which "does mean turn-backs".

He said the Labor leadership proposed a policy which would also allow for the removal of children from immigration detention "as soon as humanly possible".

"This is a hard decision but it is the right decision because we cannot escape the responsibility of tomorrow by avoiding the hard decisions today," he said.
Protestors on stage at the 2015 Australian Labor Party conference
Photo: Protestors briefly disrupted the ALP conference debate on asylum seeker policy. (ABC News: Sabra Lane)

Frontbencher Tony Burke, Labor's last immigration minister before leaving office in 2013, gave an emotional speech in support of boat turn-backs, reflecting on the 33 people who died on his watch.

"I want us to help more people than we've ever helped before but I want everyone to get here safely," he said.

"I have no doubt whatsoever if we give hope to the trade we will end up helping fewer people... and hundreds will start the journey but never complete it."

Protestors briefly interrupted the debate, taking to the stage holding a banner saying "no refugee tow-backs".

Once they left the stage, Mr Giles told delegates he was hopeful, but not confident, that his motion would succeed.

"I am unconvinced by their [boat turn-backs] effectiveness, I regard them as inherently unsafe, in my view they are clearly contrary to our international obligations," he said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-...-ban-on-asylum-seeker-boat-turn-backs/6647944

 

[Smurf1976]

Is Labor ready to govern? Probably not.

But the real question is for how much longer can the Coalition continue to govern?

Sooner or later, Labor will indeed be governing for the simple reason that the Coalition will lose an election. That seems like stating the obvious, but the key point there is the Coalition being kicked out rather than Labor gaining mass support and "winning" as such. Once voters collectively decide to remove Abbott and co, Labor is the only realistic alternative to form government.

That's my guess as to how it will happen if the status quo remains in terms of leadership and policy direction of both parties. People don't seem to really like Labor as such and I can't see that changing soon, none of the parties is offering truly inspiring leadership or policies, but the Coalition is on a collision course with rather a lot of people and in due course that will be reflected at the polls. All Labor needs to do is convince voters that they are less bad rather than being good as such.

 

[sydboy007]

They seem to be copying Abbott. Saying no to anything they don't propose.

Note if they could back about on few bits of meaningful reform he's proposed, and build it up with their correspondingly paltry level of reform, they might actually start sounding realistic.

That's also need to start telling the truth that we will suffer a decline in living standards and the only way forward is via productivity growth. We have to rebuild our competitiveness. Bring out an energy policy, gas reservation for new exploration licenses, stamp duty reform via land tax, how to help the unemployed youth gain a foothold on getting into the workforce, follow infrastructure Australia above on where to invest, sit down with the states and help then gain the revenue required to supply the services we demand. Hopefully they quarantine NG to the income of the asset and only for new builds. Get rid of the CGT discount and go back to using indexation.

 

[SirRumpole]

They seem to be copying Abbott. Saying no to anything they don't propose.

Note if they could back about on few bits of meaningful reform he's proposed, and build it up with their correspondingly paltry level of reform, they might actually start sounding realistic.

That's also need to start telling the truth that we will suffer a decline in living standards and the only way forward is via productivity growth. We have to rebuild our competitiveness. Bring out an energy policy, gas reservation for new exploration licenses, stamp duty reform via land tax, how to help the unemployed youth gain a foothold on getting into the workforce, follow infrastructure Australia above on where to invest, sit down with the states and help then gain the revenue required to supply the services we demand. Hopefully they quarantine NG to the income of the asset and only for new builds. Get rid of the CGT discount and go back to using indexation.

If any Party had the guts, they would be asking whether the country can afford Family Tax Benefits into the future. This is the second largest welfare expenditure after the OAP and was introduced in a mining boom which has long since passed.

How about the taxpayers part fund the first two children, then parents are on their own after that ?

 

[SirRumpole]

All Labor needs to do is convince voters that they are less bad rather than being good as such.

It's pretty much always the case that Governments lose elections, Oppositions don't win them, although there have been exceptions.

How many people really wanted to vote for Tony Abbott in 2013 because they thought he was an inspiring leader with good policies ? Not very many I think, but they saw the chaos in Labor at the time and thought that anything would be better.

That's what we always get, the least worst. Very sad.

 

[dutchie]

After the pathetic and chaotic years of the Rudd, Gillard , Rudd Labor governments and the wanton wasting of public money the Labor party should not be allowed anywhere near the reins of government.

 

[qldfrog]

After the pathetic and chaotic years of the Rudd, Gillard , Rudd Labor governments and the wanton wasting of public money the Labor party should not be allowed anywhere near the reins of government.

Agree but nor should the pathetic current government in charge be allowed anywhere near the reins of government;
In a dire need for a third party or someone with balls....
Everyday passing is another hole in the Australia boat;
I am actively pushing my son to get a worldwide usable education as I do not see much future for him here in the next 15 to 20 years;
I am too old myself to start again elsewhere.

 

[SirRumpole]

After the pathetic and chaotic years of the Rudd, Gillard , Rudd Labor governments and the wanton wasting of public money the Labor party should not be allowed anywhere near the reins of government.

Do you really think that had there been no GFC the Labor Party would have been giving $900 cheques to keep the economy going ?

It would have been much better to invest the money in long term infrastructure, but they had a short term problem to fix, which they did. They may have gone a bit far, but at least they recognised that there was an urgent situation that needed to be addressed.

 

[drsmith]

We've heard it all before from Labor and seen the results.



Like then, their heart today isn't in it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI1iAOUW7zg

 

[SirRumpole]

We've heard it all before from Labor and seen the results.

Yes, well do we really believe the noise that Hockey made about corporate tax avoidance before he quietly dropped the whole idea of doing anything about it ?

 

[drsmith]

Yes, well do we really believe the noise that Hockey made about corporate tax avoidance before he quietly dropped the whole idea of doing anything about it ?

You started the thread but it hasn't taken long for you to want to change the subject.

 

[SirRumpole]

You started the thread but it hasn't taken long for you to want to change the subject.

Struck a nerve did I ?

Shorten has got up in front of a televised conference and argued a position which he believed was in the national interest and which involved a reversal of his Party's previous policy and got his view passed by the party.

Hockey on the other hand has never explained publicly why he dropped his pursual of corporate tax avoidance or why it was in the national interest that he did so. One Party seems more interested in having an open debate about issues, the other seems to listen more to and be persuaded by 'faceless men'.

 

[drsmith]

Shorten has got up in front of a televised conference and argued a position which he believed was in the national interest and which involved a reversal of his Party's previous policy and got his view passed by the party.

And it was even less convincing than Kevin Rudd in the lead up to the 2007 election and we know what followed after that. Bill could barely get the words out of his mouth yesterday. It was even less convincing than his words at the back of Julia Gillard and we know how he turned there.

Then there's the senior sisterhood who voted by proxy to ban turn backs. That's what was rejected at the national conference yesterday. It wasn't a vote to endorse turn backs.

 

[dutchie]

You started the thread but it hasn't taken long for you to want to change the subject.

Struck a nerve did I ?

I think it's drsmith who struck a nerve.

 

[SirRumpole]

I think it's drsmith who struck a nerve.

No nerves here.

Labor seems to have learned a lesson. Hockey is either a blatant liar about corporate tax avoidance or he's been slapped down by his bosses in the company donor schemes.

 

[Smurf1976]

In a dire need for a third party or someone with balls....

We've had good leaders on all sides of politics in the past but that doesn't seem to be the case today unfortunately.

The last one with any "balls" was Keating in my opinion. I didn't like him in many ways at the time but at least he got on and did things for the good of the country, rather than just trying to be popular, both as Treasurer and then PM.

John Hewson never made it to become PM but he had some good points as leader of the opposition. He recognised the need for change that seems reasonably clear, even if he failed to explain it well enough to the masses at the time. Here we are over 20 years later finally talking about some of the same ideas for tax reform that Hewson proposed almost a generation ago.

Another one from the past I'll mention is Bob Brown. I don't agree with many of his ideas, but I absolutely respect him for standing up for what he believes in despite being well and truly at odds with mainstream thinking at the time. Never a contender to lead the country, but he nonetheless managed to change the way Australians think about the various environmental and social issues he pursued.

Sadly, we don't seem to have anyone of comparable abilities and passion in politics today on any side.

 

[drsmith]

This thread should be merged with the useless Labor Party thread.

Two attempts by the thread author to change the subject from the thread title within its first 24 hours shows how useless Labor still is.

 

[drsmith]

On matters topic at hand, Joel Fitzgibbon on Bolt's show was quiet entertaining today if little else.

Perhaps he's rehearsing for a particular political comedy skit on the ABC.

 

[Ijustnewit]

No nerves here.

Labor seems to have learned a lesson. Hockey is either a blatant liar about corporate tax avoidance or he's been slapped down by his bosses in the company donor schemes.

" Labor seems to have learned a lesson " absolute comedy gold.

 

[SirRumpole]

This thread should be merged with the useless Labor Party thread.

Two attempts by the thread author to change the subject from the thread title within its first 24 hours shows how useless Labor still is.

The title "Useless Labor Party" is biased and inflammatory, which is why I started this thread so (some) people can sensibly discuss the policies of the alternative government. Of course if some want to continue to deride one Party, they can expect to get something back in return.