Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Abbott Government

Jump to new
drsmith said:
Also of interest, Ben Oquist is involved with Clive Palmer and PUP.
Click to expand...
Ben Oquist was deeply involved in the action today,

He drew around him his little band of senators, instructing them on their duty. Glenn Lazarus, Jacqui Lambie, Dio Wang. And his outrider, Ricky Muir.

He cocked an ear towards Ben Oquist, once a power within the Australian Greens and now a strategy director at the Australia Institute think tank and, seated at Clive's left hand, an unlikely but well-informed well of advice on how to drive the Senate mad.
Click to expand...

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...er-makes-tony-abbott-wait-20140710-3bpq7.html
 
AAA said:
The Govt will just chip away geting bills through one at a time. They will get most of what they want through before the end of their first term. Once they are about six months out from the next election they can threaten to go to a DD on anything they are being obstructed on. I don't see the cross benchers risking an early end to their pariamentary career and being close to having to go to the polls the govt doesn't have anything to lose by going a few months early.
Click to expand...
It's a sound strategy but the politics is such that its foundation is the repeal of the carbon tax.

With the political friends Clive Palmer and at least two of his flock of 4 are keeping (Jacqui Lambie and Ricky Muir), PUP's ultimate genuineness in repealing this tax is very questionable in my view.

In addition to Clive above, Ricky Muir has former New South Wales politician Peter Breen (Breenie the Greenie) as his policy advisor,

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/f...27364&page=157&p=831652&viewfull=1#post831652

and Jacqui Lambie has palled up to Penny Wong.
 
At that quantum I'm not surprised it is being classed as a tax. Plus taxes have to be in separate Bills so they'll need to pass that separately through the House.
 
drsmith said:
It's a sound strategy but the politics is such that its foundation is the repeal of the carbon tax.

With the political friends Clive Palmer and at least two of his flock of 4 are keeping (Jacqui Lambie and Ricky Muir), PUP's ultimate genuineness in repeal this tax is very questionable in my view.
Click to expand...

I am sure that windbag Palmer will eventually pass it as it cost him $6 million last year....He is just showing his strong arm tactics and is like a cat playing with a mouse.......He is getting a lot of publicity from it all and has left the Greens in the back ground.......Palmer has taken over the limelight.
 
noco said:
I am sure that windbag Palmer will eventually pass it as it cost him $6 million last year....He is just showing his strong arm tactics and is like a cat playing with a mouse.......He is getting a lot of publicity from it all and has left the Greens in the back ground.......Palmer has taken over the limelight.
Click to expand...
I hope you're right but between Labor and Green tentacles penetrating PUP and Clive Palmer and Tony Abbott falling out in 2012, it may run deeper than that.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3533614.htm
 
On matters Clive, he's walked out during an interview with Sarah Ferguson for the ABC's 7:30 program.

With the carbon tax repeal where it is, there hopefully won't be any loose cannon from the Libs in response.
 
drsmith said:
On matters Clive, he's walked out during an interview with Sarah Ferguson for the ABC's 7:30 program.

With the carbon tax repeal where it is, there hopefully won't be any loose cannon from the Libs in response.
Click to expand...
Sarah Ferguson did a very good job of persisting against Mr Palmer's obfuscation, to the point where he walked out on her. The contrast with the subsequent interview with Greg Hunt was marked, the latter being polite and remarkably restrained in his comments.

Noco's observation about Palmer angling for a DD might well be correct. Depends, I suppose, on whether people are starting to see through him yet.

It's absolutely in his own interests to see the carbon tax abolished, so all this stuffing about is pure theatre on his part. So childish and silly.
 
Julia said:
Sarah Ferguson did a very good job of persisting against Mr Palmer's obfuscation, to the point where he walked out on her. The contrast with the subsequent interview with Greg Hunt was marked, the latter being polite and remarkably restrained in his comments.
Click to expand...
Isn't it ironic Clive's associated with something called Media Circus.

Clive's interview helped fill in some of the gaps as to what happened. He claimed the government's approach was pass the carbon tax and move his amendment later as it had to pass through the reps which he baulked at.

It couldn't happen that way though as a consequence of advice from the clerk. Interestingly in the interview that followed, Greg Hunt didn't mention this aspect either. The Libs I'd suggest are going soft on Clive at the moment in the hope the carbon tax repeal passes next week.

I also suggest he's not endearing himself to other parts of the business community with his commentary, either about them or China.

He was clearly not a happy camper as he walked out.
 
A former advisor to Tony Windsor is involved in this as well.

Oquist, the former chief of staff to Greens leaders Bob Brown and Christine Milne, helped engineer events yesterday that led Clive Palmer to keep the carbon tax *despite a public vow to repeal it.

Another player is John Clements, a former adviser to independent Tony Windsor and a key negotiator in the dispute over how to ensure consumers get the savings if the tax is scrapped.
Click to expand...

The government suspects Oquist of trying to kill off the carbon tax repeal one step at a time. He has been advising Palmer in meetings, copied on emails and was in the background at yesterday’s press conference. “Ben’s endgame is clear,” says one source.

Oquist, who left the Greens after the last election and is now the Strategy Director at The Australia Institute, says yesterday’s political decisions were not his work.
Click to expand...

I'd be suspicious too.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...bon-tax-backflip/story-e6frg6xf-1226984998447

My bolds.
 
Why does Tony Abbott really want to kill the price on Carbon ?

Clearly he made it an clarion call in the last election. His argument was that this was going to strangle the economy, throw thousand out people out of work, destroy towns, make the curtains bleach ..(any argument would do)

Two years later one can't point to any clear indication of economic woe caused by carbon price. It seems to have been absorbed into the economy with suitable compensation given to some affected people. Billions of dollars in compensation have also been given to companies. It only has a short time to run before it becomes morphed into an international carbon pricing scheme where the price will come down.

It has clearly had an effect on CO2 emissions. Electricity suppliers are using less coal and more gas/hydro/wind/solar power


The theory that cutting the tax will result in cheaper prices for consumers is pretty fanciful. Clive Palmer is attempting to actually make sure that happens. I believe many businesses are concerned about such a zealous approach to making sure consumers get the benefit of any tax cut. Far better in their pockets they would imagine.

It's also interesting to see the effect of two very capable parliamentary advisors on the PUP team. Parliament is about process. Without having advisors who understand the way to get bills analysed, drafted and negotiated the new PUP Senators would be dead pups. From Abbotts point of view it's a shame he didn't have the foresight to encourage a more government friendly advisor.:D
 
This government is in or running complete chaos


Now it's Tony Abbott's turn to do 'dodgy deals' with minor parties

The chaotic last-minute bargaining in the Senate corridors made the government look like a flock of geese




Tony Abbott used to tell us that he would not lead a government “depending upon dodgy deals … or wayward independents”.

“There is no point in basing government on dishonest deals behind closed doors,” he said.
Click to expand...

Do they have any idea what they are doing? Apparently sheer arrogance wont work with Clive.

Thursday when the Senate leader, Eric Abetz, the environment minister, Greg Hunt, manager of government business in the Senate, Mitch Fifield, and their advisers were hammering out the fate of the carbon tax repeal bills with Clive Palmer, his senators and the other crossbenchers in a corridor with a posse of journalists watching.
Click to expand...


And this

But the whole chaotic day would have been less embarrassing if:

• the prime minister had not already done a pre-emptive media conference hailing the imminent economic unburdening of the nation from the “axing” of the tax.

• the government had not itself forced through a “gag” motion, which then robbed it of the chance to let the debate continue while the amendment was negotiated.

• the prime minister had not told voters before the election that they were choosing between the “strong Coalition team” and “more of the same chaos and confusion under Labor”.

• if he hadn’t been so derisive of the Labor’s governments negotiations with minor parties.
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...tts-turn-to-do-dodgy-deals-with-minor-parties
 
What a mess Labor teaching the Coalition how to behave as adults talk about bizarre.

Mathias Cormann trying to put lip stick on a real great big pig


Labor closer to axing regulation that weakens financial safeguards

The Abbott government failed in a bid to delay the parliamentary tabling of its changes to financial advice reforms

The Abbott government has failed in a bid to delay the parliamentary tabling of its changes to financial advice reforms, with Labor succeeding in a series of procedural manoeuvres that bring the upper house a step closer to striking down the measures.

The regulation altering elements of Labor’s Future of Financial Advice (Fofa) reforms was registered to begin on 1 July, but the government was entitled to wait until Tuesday next week to formally table it in the Senate.

Opponents of the changes wanted the regulation tabled as soon as possible because the Senate could then vote to disallow it. There is adequate support among senators for striking down the measures amid concerns about the watering down of protections for consumers receiving financial advice.
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-regulation-that-weakens-financial-safeguards
 
basilio said:
It has clearly had an effect on CO2 emissions. Electricity suppliers are using less coal and more gas/hydro/wind/solar power
Click to expand...

The carbon price is causing a reduction in domestic CO2 emissions, but what is the effect of our carbon price on global emissions, which is what matters.

If industries have lost business to overseas companies that do not have the add on effects of a carbon price and that causes an increase in CO2 emissions there, then the effect globally could be negligible and possibly make it worse if they use dirtier supply sources.

This information is missing from the debate and without it we may be hurting our industry for no global benefit.
 
drsmith said:
Isn't it ironic Clive's associated with something called Media Circus.

Clive's interview helped fill in some of the gaps as to what happened. He claimed the government's approach was pass the carbon tax and move his amendment later as it had to pass through the reps which he baulked at.

It couldn't happen that way though as a consequence of advice from the clerk. Interestingly in the interview that followed, Greg Hunt didn't mention this aspect either. The Libs I'd suggest are going soft on Clive at the moment in the hope the carbon tax repeal passes next week.

I also suggest he's not endearing himself to other parts of the business community with his commentary, either about them or China.

He was clearly not a happy camper as he walked out.
Click to expand...
The transcript of last night's interview is now available.

SARAH FERGUSON: Having a look at your actual amendment, to be clear about it - who are you saying, rather - who are you saying it should apply to?

CLIVE PALMER: Well what we're saying in essence is that any generators of gas or electricity in the country that have in their price structure a certain component for carbon, that needs to be reduced and that saving needs to be passed on to - down the line to consumers.

SARAH FERGUSON: Now there is some confusion around tonight because people who've looked at your amendment think that it goes much further than that, that it applies to any business that is - that has had costs incurred through the carbon tax. Is that what you intended: for it to cover any business?

CLIVE PALMER: Well I think it's pretty clear what it covers. There's a definition of an electricity producer and a natural gas producer and it covers anyone that generates or deals with that commodity. It doesn't cover anyone else.

SARAH FERGUSON: So it doesn't cover the airlines, it doesn't cover the supermarkets or anybody else who has carbon tax-associated costs?

CLIVE PALMER: Well, in a reality when - if the cost structure comes down, market forces will bring their costs down by competition. We know that and that's a good and healthy thing. I mean, if Qantas doesn't want to bring down its savings and pass that on to its consumers, well, one of its competitors will and they'll have to bring their prices down to compete.

SARAH FERGUSON: You're not saying that your amendment actually includes those other companies within it?

CLIVE PALMER: No. I don't think it does, actually. But what I am saying is that in the case of electricity and gas producers, they're virtually in a monopoly situation with many of our generators held by state governments. They've got no freedom of choice and there's not a real market. We've seen $45 billion spent in the electricity market, for example. The demand for electricity's come down, the prices have gone up. So, you know, they've got nowhere to go and we're there to help them.
Click to expand...

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s4043773.htm
 

Attachments

  • ac-oquist-main-20140711074406404548-620x349.jpg
    ac-oquist-main-20140711074406404548-620x349.jpg
    51.3 KB · Views: 12
The Libs are used to dealing with career politicians. Clive doesn't care. He wants to create mayhem and cause pain. The Libs will have to suck up to him to get things past, not act haughty like Abbott has been doing. In fact, his statement that day that he would get his way was like a rag to a red bull. Clive wants to set the agenda, not the other way around.

The Senate has a mind of its own.
The Liberal Democrat Senator a libertarian joined hands with the Family First Senator to prevent the government from income tax breaks that were to disappear with the carbon tax!

The Coalition need to stand back and reassess how they are going to govern otherwise this term is going to make the Gillard/Rudd previous term look like a picnic. Busting through is not an option. We are in a democracy chaps, the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
 
Julia Gilliard kept her minority Labour government operational and effective for a full term. That was in spite of the full press "take no prisoners" assault of Tony Abbott.

The key element in her legislative and operational success was excellent communication and negotiation skills. She managed to work with the Independents and Greens on a daily basis.

I cannot see how Tony Abbott will emulate that feat. Not yet at least. On all accounts he doesn't have the skills and diplomacy to effectively negotiate with the herd of cats on the cross bench. Frankly I think he would be better coming to terms with the Labour Party in negotiations - but after the way he trashed the last Labour government I just can't see any chance of good will.

He poisoned the well and now he has drink from it. Karma.
 
drsmith said:
On matters Clive, he's walked out during an interview with Sarah Ferguson for the ABC's 7:30 program.

With the carbon tax repeal where it is, there hopefully won't be any loose cannon from the Libs in response.
Click to expand...

Doc, that "DUMMY SPIT" with Sarah Ferguson certainly did not do him any favors.......she well and truly painted him into a corner and he did not know to get out of it so he pulled the plug.

Sooner or later this windbag is going to come unstuck......The chows could yet be his down fall.
 
Top