This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The Albanese government

Who is going to be the first to try and knife Airbus next year?

  • Marles

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • Chalmers

    Votes: 3 25.0%
  • Wong

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • Plibersek

    Votes: 3 25.0%
  • Shorten

    Votes: 2 16.7%
  • Burney

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 2 16.7%

  • Total voters
    12

Which aligns with SirRumpole point "I wonder what can be said about the quality of the constructions if contracts were granted on the basis of bribes rather than competence?"

The RAH was a Labor Government build, plenty of snouts in the trough in an attempt to not have a repeat of the Myer Centre fiascos. But it still went over budget, over time, build issues galore, and a death of a workman even with the unions strict safety and pay rates. They even forgot to consult medical specialists about room sizes and requirements.

Whereas the Calvary Adelaide hospital was a private build, with everyone involved in the build and the end users sitting down together and worked out a plan, signed contracts, and then got on with it. No budget blow-outs, no extreme delay, no issues with medical equipment not being able to fit, etc.
 
It all starts here...

I'm starting to think that it all started with Albanese trying to be too strategic, here's a perfect example -

In truth, this is the report on how the nation managed Covid when you don’t really want the report. The pandemic was the greatest health challenge Australia faced for a century and the greatest potential economic challenge since the Depression and what do we get? A federal government that lacks the honesty and courage to properly assess what happened. It is beyond pathetic.​
In truth, this is the report on how the nation managed Covid when you don’t really want the report. The pandemic was the greatest health challenge Australia faced for a century and the greatest potential economic challenge since the Depression and what do we get? A federal government that lacks the honesty and courage to properly assess what happened. It is beyond pathetic.​
The inquiry was hampered by the outrageous term of reference that it must not examine “actions taken unilaterally by state and territory governments” – which covers the bulk of the Covid health measures. In this sense, the review is a macabre joke – it bemoans the “lack of transparency” in the pandemic measures yet the entire report suffers from a lack of transparency.​
In truth, this is the report on how the nation managed Covid when you don’t really want the report. The pandemic was the greatest health challenge Australia faced for a century and the greatest potential economic challenge since the Depression and what do we get? A federal government that lacks the honesty and courage to properly assess what happened. It is beyond pathetic.


 
Just being objective

While you're being objective, and having started this thread, do you mind sharing your thoughts on who should be the next PM, who from your list of candidates?

Social order depends on smart and sensible politics. Weak leadership at the top risks sending discordant ripples down through the ranks of government and administration, resulting in poor vision and bad decisions that disrupt the smooth and efficient workings of an economy and the more generalised ways of life of the people. Fundamentals become overgrown with weeds.
The first task of government is to look after the people, which means securing their prosperity and wellbeing, future planning, and defending the country. Each of the three challenges has sunk into neglect as sober good sense seems to have fled the political stage.
Leadership is about making hard decisions. Anthony Albanese seems constitutionally evasive, incapable of making the tough call, his characteristic look blank with uncertainty. He is stranded indecisively between three powerful and clashing forces—big business and economic dynamism, the unions, and the Greens. Bill Kelty, with his frontline experience of strong leadership in the Hawke/Keating years, judged the government as ‘mired in mediocrity’.


 
While you're being objective, and having started this thread, do you mind sharing your thoughts on who should be the next PM, who from your list of candidates?
Sure.

I think Labor needs more than one term to make a difference and one that isn't hobbled by obstruction by the Greens and the LNP.

To me, Albo looks as though he's tiring of the job and is thinking more of life after politics with Jodie so we need someone with the energy and motivation to go another 3 years at least. Chalmers would be my choice, he appears to have energy and vision and has done a good job as Treasurer in my opinion.

What do you think?
 

I think that Chalmers lacks experience and the toughness required to lead the country, he would be another version of Albanese. We would be better off having Albo in for another term, bouncing off the experience he has acquired from his first term.

From the list that you made, the only one that looks like a strong leader with the required skills is Shorton. Sadly, he’s had enough of the politics and is retiring to another field.
 
John Carroll is professor emeritus of Sociology at La Trobe University.
Referring to the article, I agree with the overall point and most of the detail but I think he's gone very close to another issue, education, but failed to hit that nail on the head.

I won't challenge his knowledge on sociology, I'm sure it's far better than mine. I dare say my understanding of electricity generation's a fair bit better than his however.

The point there not being a personal contest or anything like that, but simply that we need the right person for the job and that's where so much is going wrong. There's a great many issues where public debate is outright cringeworthy from the perspective of a professional or even an enthusiastic amateur who knows their stuff.

We seem to have gotten into a situation where anyone with an impressive sounding title is deemed to be an expert on everything and where broad theories or concepts are assumed to universally apply. A scenario that's equivalent to assuming an orchestra conductor must know about rap, because it's all music, right? Err, no, not really......

Pick pretty much any issue of public debate and it ends up with those who actually do have the answers forced to the sidelines, watching politicians run around trying to come up with something that sounds plausible. That's not the way to do it if the aim is to achieve high performance.

We really need to stop viewing tertiary education as a general intelligence test, which has never been, and instead seek out real knowledge and expertise on any subject of relevance. If the subject is, for example, road safety well relevant people include traffic engineers, automotive technology experts, people who know about human behaviour and how to influence it and so on. Trouble is, the way we're doing things at the moment government would end up putting someone from the legal or economics professions in charge of it then a decade later wonder why the road toll hasn't come down. Not because lawyers or economists are evil, just because it's not the right knowledge base to be addressing the issue at hand.

My observation is that's where much is going wrong. People who are intelligent and well educated as such but they're not well educated on the subject at hand, so what they come up with ends up being a disaster. That isn't aimed at the author of that article, just that it's a situation I've seen plenty of. Smart people getting involved in things they're really no smarter on than the average layperson.

Much like corporate boards and this video, especially the first bit and also towards the end, is worth watching:


A lot of the same goes on in government. People put in high places not because they're right people but for "other" reasons and it's not serving us at all well.
 
That absolutely nails it, 20 odd years ago everyone was sold the concept that kids would have to go to university to be able to get a job, hurdles were put in place to stop kids leaving school at 15 to do apprenticeships and technical colleges were changed to universities.

Now we have to import tradespeople, kids leaving school at year 12 can't afford to live on apprentice wages and employers can't afford to pay them more, because for the first two years they are a burden.

When kids started an apprenticeship at 15 they lived at home didn't have a car and their parents subsidised them.
When they got to 17 they were earning reasonable wages, because they were actually useful by then and paying their way.

Nursing a similar situation, previously year 12 leaving certificate was a pre requisite for a hospital based RN traineeship, then the training was caried out at a recognised training hospital with a school of nursing, where the student received both theoretical and practical training on the wards under supervision. The trainees received wages and experience, now the nurses come out of uni older, in debt and inexperienced.
Teaching has the same issues and problems.
As with most things, no one wants to admit there is a stuff up and things need changing, it is easier to just keep kicking the can down the road.
Fortunately the young are starting to see the fall out of an idelogical driven education system.
 

The bath water is definitely heating up for Albanese, you may see Chalmers putting his hand up for the job.

My opinion is that the Labor party will ride this out to the election, Albanese's figures aren't the best but they're also not the worst. And if the party rolls the PM the voters may not be happy. However, if Albanese steps down, that could be a different matter.


However, Mr Dutton lifted four points to 41 per cent. This is now the closest margin between the two leaders since the last election.
Mr Albanese’s net approval ratings have dipped to a new low since becoming Prime Minister.
While his approval ratings remained unchanged at 40 per cent, those dissatisfied with the Prime Minister rose one point to 55 per cent. This gives the Labor leader a net approval rating of minus-15 – his worst result.

 
Any one but The Elbow.
 
I am somewhat siurprised to say the least that Albanese has come out in complete support for Rudd.
Despite another video emerging where he calls trump " a Village Idiot", Albanese has expressed continuing support for Rudd.


Although its nice to stick up for your mates, in this case, having your ambassador pour crap on the POTUS, even if it may be deserved, does not help Australia's cause.
Trump is if nothing else, a man who likes to seek revenge on his detractors, and I cannot for the life of me see Trump accepting any invitations from the Oz embassy for a little tete a tete.
Cut you losses Albo, bring him back, give him another cushy job somewhere else, and appoint a diplomat who has not opened his fat mouth on all and sundry.
Mick
 
Why not send Malcolm T? He and Trump got on so well. LOL.
 
Push him off to China. He just may incite them enough to lock him up!!!!!!!!
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...