The Abbott Government

[So_Cynical]

"We are going to keep the promise that we actually made, not the promise that some people thought that we made, or the promise that some people might have liked us to make."

That's a hell of a thing to say...i mean saying it with any real conviction, and not feeling like a bit of a dill saying it.

 

[sydboy007]

As much as you hope it will be the case, the Coalition won't be judged by the detail of a plan from Opposition. Labor wasn't.

On this issue, the judgement will primarily be one of how well their rollout is progressing at the time of the next election relative to Labor's at the last one.

I dare say the focus will be on how well the FTTN rollout is occurring compared to the run rate for the FTTP. I pretty confident in saying that between now and the next election more P than N connections will have occurred. Even Ziggy admits not many N connections will have occurred by Christmas 2014.

Throw in the legal letters currently being received by body corps from the likes of TPG telling them to provide access and by the next election people facing the reality that the kind of internet they get in an apartment may very well depend on who got to install their equipment in the basement first. Malcoms pre election poster child Sydney Park Village currently get the choice of maybe 2 ISPs - OPENetworks currently has just 4 RSPs signed up and none of their plans are terribly competitive with what's being offered on the fibre NBN.

All through the election campaign Abbot and Turnbull claimed the rollout schedule was pretty much set in stone. None of the issues that are likely to cause delays were unknown to them. The technical press highlighted many of the issues. That the Coalition brushed these issues aside and did a she'll be right mate shows either arrogance or a total lack of understanding on how complex a task rolling out a nation wide network is.

I'm just looking forward to the budget. I'm expecting Ponzi Joe's age of entitlement to be reconfirmed, especially for anyone in the top 3 to 4 income deciles, and pretty much all the attacks are going to occur on the poor and sections of the community that don't mobilise that well.

They can't even reduce PS head count by much because Labor had already done a pretty good job of it, though I dare say they could save a small amount of money by removing a few more of the chiefs and leaving the indians alone.

 

[wayneL]

Whiskers. ==> http://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2012/03/rein-or-reign/

A malapropism is a malapropism, no matter how faulty your logic on the matter, the etymology explained in the link.

And Whiskers, because I am bemused by your man-crush on Rudd and disagree with your unabiding and slavish anti-Abbott views, never means that that I am uncritical of the man, or the administration he leads. However, I think many of the criticisms from the left are unfair at this point in time.

The rough start refers to having been handed a poisoned chalice from Labor. With the benefit of hindsight, everything can be handled better and this government no doubt is on a learning curve, but so far (with caveats which I have already raised elsewhere), I think this government is showing good potential (caveats notwithstanding). Hopefully they will play to the potential I think they have.

Time will tell.

My overriding feeling is elation that the last mob of societal vandals and economic buffoons are in opposition, rather than government. However as with the Howard government, I will not hold back if I think they have screwed up.

Ergo, your analysis is once again fatally flawed by your biases and comprehensive inability.

I am also confident that you will never understand this about yourself. If you cannot admit to a simple malapropism, how can you ever admit to more complex failings?

...unless of course it is as suspected by many here that you are simply trolling?

 

[Whiskers]

"Last edited by wayneL; Yesterday at 06:35 PM. Reason: add, cause I was on my phone, waiting for missus to try on a dress."

WayneL, you're a braver man than me... trolling the internet on a Sunday arvo out with your missus, even under some difficulty on a mobile phone, than just relaxing for a bit and paying attention to her and her new dress!!!

It might have been better to put the impulses aside... to 'ignore' and just gather your thoughts for a more considered response on a better equipped PC, in due course.

It would also be wise to not rely on those 'stiff-upper-lip' BLOG sites for the meaning of language (or interpretation of the economy, national security or legal points). Language is and always has been a transitional thing, where words and phrases often mean different things to different people depending on their culture, profession/trade etc.

But as I said originally, I know what I meant, but I'm happy for you to go with your interpretation if you must.

But for me a standard dictionary definition is...

1reign
noun \ˈrān\

: the period of time during which a king, queen, emperor, etc., is ruler of a country

: the period of time during which someone is in charge of a group or organization

: the period of time during which someone or something is the best or the most important, powerful, etc.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reign​

Also, you know what they say when you let your emotions run away... your "overriding feeling is elation" that Abbott took over from Labor. It would appear from the polls that a substantial chunk of the electorate lost that feeling of elation some time ago, or was it just qualified support for the best of a bad bunch.

 

[Whiskers]

That's a hell of a thing to say...i mean saying it with any real conviction, and not feeling like a bit of a dill saying it.

Hey, where did Tony Abbott go? I want to ask him something!

Seriously though, that really lifts the art of political 'con' to a whole new dimension.

Can't wait to see how that goes down in COAG, let alone the next round of polls.

 

[Calliope]

That's a hell of a thing to say...i mean saying it with any real conviction, and not feeling like a bit of a dill saying it.

It is not surprising that Abbott is being so furtive.

IN politics, trust is hard to earn but easy to lose. The decision by the Abbott government to abandon its commitment to implement Labor's school funding regime has shattered voter confidence.

Abbott and Pyne are treating voters as if they are mugs. The difference between what they told voters before the election and what they are saying now could not be more different. The voters have been betrayed.

Worse, they claim that Bill Shorten, when he was education minister, cut funding by $1.2 billion. This funding was cut because Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory did not sign up to the reforms to claim the money.

This is dangerous territory for a new government. Abbott has undermined one of his core commitments to voters: to be a government of "no surprises" and to restore "trust" in the political process.

Labor now sees an opportunity to expose this multi-faceted hypocrisy.

But the Opposition Leader knows he can't say the voters got it "wrong" when they voted Labor out of power. So the opposition has settled on the formulation that "voters did not get the government they voted for".

Labor, however, doesn't need to lead the attack on the Coalition for breaking its promise to voters on school funding; it has the conservative state governments to do the job for it.

See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...y-fnbcok0h-1226772527030#sthash.pH3NDIYz.dpuf

 

[basilio]

The Australian ... calling out TA and Pyne on their reversal of Education Policy.

I don't think any of the Fairfax / ABC/ ect have been as strident in their rejection of this piece of gaslighting by the PM

Be interesting to see how long they can keep up the pretense that they aren't deliberately breaking their pre election commitment to a Unity Ticket on the Gonski report.

____________________________________________________________________________

That about face by Tony Abbott on the Gonski report was a brilliant political coup. They manged to neutralise the issue without giving Labour a second of acknowledgment.

And now they want to rewrite history.

Ever since Tony Abbott made it clear that he could only be taken seriously on items he has actually, specifically spelt out the Press has been at pains to ensure he has every opportunity to spell out statements so there can be no misunderstandings.

In view of this revision of history that was waste of time wasn't it.

 

[basilio]

A really interesting series of questions for the next News Poll/Nielson Poll would be along the lines of questioning what voters understood by Tonys promises to support the Gonski report and the commitment to each schools funding.

Couple that with a question about trust and it would be a very uncomfortable poll for the Government.

 

[Calliope]

"It Can Be Better to Say Something Stupid Than Nothing At All."

Abbott has difficulty in navigating between the two alternatives.

 

[trainspotter]

A really interesting series of questions for the next News Poll/Nielson Poll would be along the lines of questioning what voters understood by Tonys promises to support the Gonski report and the commitment to each schools funding.

Couple that with a question about trust and it would be a very uncomfortable poll for the Government.

Indeed ! I am thinking the rough end of the pineapple will be applied. The media is making the most of the "Gonski" shambles that Pyne has inherited from Shorten. 1.2 billion taken away from the states and territories schools that had not signed up for their snouts in the trough (read saving?) and then Pyne to come out and say he thought the money would materialise from Treasury? WTF ??? Did he not understand the PEFO and why did Shorten call it a "saving" ??

 

[drsmith]

On school funding, the government got there in the end but as we know, the path was somewhat torturous,

Tony Abbott is addressing the media with his frontbench colleague, Education Minister Christopher Pyne.

Pyne has been speaking to states that did not sign up to the so-called Gonski reforms before the election (i.e. WA, NT and Queensland), the PM says.

The Education Minister has "secured" in-principal funding agreements with WA, NT and Queensland which makes for a "fair and national" system.

Therefore, the Coalition will also put the $1.2 billion* that it says Labor "ripped" out of the schools funding before the election back into the education envelope.

"I think the Prime Minister has summed it up well," says Pyne.

*This was money that Labor had put aside for WA, NT and Queensland for a Gonski deal.

It would obviously have been a lot simpler if they just did that in the first place. Hopefully Christopher Pyne emerges a little wiser from the past week.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...tics-live-december-2-2013-20131202-2ykf3.html

 

[drsmith]

Watching the start of question time, I'm now wondering if there was indeed method in the madness. Bill Shorten's first to questions to the PM were on education funding. It seems he didn't have a question time plan B.

 

[MrBurns]

I'm enjoying watching Tony and the team rip Labor apart, poor old Shorten is underachieving at his very best

 

[MrBurns]

Now they've cut away from question time back to the studio to mount arguments in support of Labor's position.

 

[drsmith]

Now they've cut away from question time back to the studio to mount arguments in support of Labor's position.

That's the ABC I assume.

Forget the national broadcaster. You can watch it from here.

http://www.aph.gov.au/News_and_Events/Watch_Parliament

They're now voting on the amendment to Bill suspension of standing orders motion.

Passed. QT is over now.

 

[Ijustnewit]

Now they've cut away from question time back to the studio to mount arguments in support of Labor's position.

Yes spot on Mr Burns, the ABC 24 just let Latika Bourke unleash a stinging attack on the Abbott Government.
She is meant to be their parliamentary reporter not a frontbencher for Labor.

 

[basilio]

Well that was a close call for the government. When Andrew Bolt and The Australian start gunning for you on the question of reneging on your promises I think you are in very dangerous waters.

In theory the next election is 3 years away. In practice of course the Abbott government is keeping its options open for a double dissolution over the failure of Labour to pass the repeal of the Carbon Tax. It would have been fun watching TA attempt to prove his credibility on the top of overturning the Gonski report.

 

[drsmith]

I'm enjoying watching Tony and the team rip Labor apart, poor old Shorten is underachieving at his very best

The ABC's view on today's QT,

The Government's about-face appears to have caught the Labor Party flat-footed, effectively neutralising its attack which was primed for today's parliamentary Question Time.

The Opposition asked no less than eight questions of the Prime Minister, based on the Government's previous stance that it would not abide by the funding deal.

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten rounded off the series of questions by asking "when will the Prime Minister stop lying?" - a phrase he was forced to withdraw.

The questions gave the Prime Minister the opportunity to criticise Labor over its failure to secure a national agreement on schools funding while in government.

"I want to make it absolutely crystal clear that this Government is cleaning up Labor's mess," Mr Abbott said.

Mr Shorten then moved the new parliament's first motion of censure in the Prime Minister, "for breaking his promise to parents and children across Australia that no school will be worse off under his Government".

But the Government used its numbers to instead censure the Opposition Leader for cutting funding to the hold-out states and "failing to achieve a national, fair and needs-based school funding mode".

The $15.2 billion Better Schools Plan was based on recommendations made by a review panel which was chaired by businessman David Gonski.

Sixty-five per cent of the additional money was slated to come from federal coffers with the rest contributed by states and territories.

The government clearly outwitted Bill Shorten and the Opposition in QT today, but overall it still would have been better had they not created the problem for themselves in the first place.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-02/abbott-gonski/5129118

 

[sydboy007]

Indeed ! I am thinking the rough end of the pineapple will be applied. The media is making the most of the "Gonski" shambles that Pyne has inherited from Shorten. 1.2 billion taken away from the states and territories schools that had not signed up for their snouts in the trough (read saving?) and then Pyne to come out and say he thought the money would materialise from Treasury? WTF ??? Did he not understand the PEFO and why did Shorten call it a "saving" ??

I suppose money not spent is a saving?? At least when i don't spend money I was thinking to spend i think of it as a saving (unless I decide to spend it on something else)

Now we have the recalcitrant states being rewarded with no strings funding, the other states also probably having their strings cut.

Going to make any economic reform with the states rather difficult now that holding out may not have any negative consequences if you can get a bit of voter backlash working for you.

Lucky for Pyne and Tony Christmas is coming. Much more yes no maybe no, ah yes would certainly see the political capital severely depleted.

I just can't help but feel they love the media attention

 

[wayneL]

"Last edited by wayneL; Yesterday at 06:35 PM. Reason: add, cause I was on my phone, waiting for missus to try on a dress."

WayneL, you're a braver man than me... trolling the internet on a Sunday arvo out with your missus, even under some difficulty on a mobile phone, than just relaxing for a bit and paying attention to her and her new dress!!!

It might have been better to put the impulses aside... to 'ignore' and just gather your thoughts for a more considered response on a better equipped PC, in due course.

It would also be wise to not rely on those 'stiff-upper-lip' BLOG sites for the meaning of language (or interpretation of the economy, national security or legal points). Language is and always has been a transitional thing, where words and phrases often mean different things to different people depending on their culture, profession/trade etc.

But as I said originally, I know what I meant, but I'm happy for you to go with your interpretation if you must.

But for me a standard dictionary definition is...

1reign
noun \ˈrān\

: the period of time during which a king, queen, emperor, etc., is ruler of a country

: the period of time during which someone is in charge of a group or organization

: the period of time during which someone or something is the best or the most important, powerful, etc.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reign​

Also, you know what they say when you let your emotions run away... your "overriding feeling is elation" that Abbott took over from Labor. It would appear from the polls that a substantial chunk of the electorate lost that feeling of elation some time ago, or was it just qualified support for the best of a bad bunch.

Well duh, yes, we all know what reign means. However we are discussing (on the side) English idiom and your alarmingly Dorrie Evansesque malapropism. Think of the grammar, a reign may be unfettered, vis a vis an unfettered reign, but 'free reign' is an absurd combination that doesn't actually make grammatical sense and looks rather foolish.

Alas, in Whiskers World, Whiskers is the only authority and the Oxford Dictionary et al just of cursory interest. In Whiskers World, Whiskers is happy to both denounce authoritative comment from a dictionary org and simultaneously attempt to use one to support an erroneous, untenable argument.

Cognitive dissonance anyone?

Also, with reference to 'elation', clearly Whiskers is unable to discern hyberbole. Alternatively, this was perhaps the most childish argument I've seen on ASF for some time.

Et Al,

I apologize for feeding the troll, now on to more productive endeavours.