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

Tony Abbott for PM

Jump to new

So once again the small target opposition who says no to Govt policy but rarely provides an alternative is to be rewarded for...

good politics.

Like the US voters, we deserve the politicians we get.

I'd argue Abbot is having great difficulties finding cost savings to cover his carbon tax repeal, and is trying not to scare those on middle class welfare too much before he does a QLD state Govt kind of mass burning after he's elected.

His Communications minister boasted on Lateline last November that he had a fully costed NBN policy, only to later back track and now admits they don't have much of a policy at all. He still claims he can build it faster and cheaper, yet he hasn't done the CBA he keeps saying Labor is required to do. He can't even say how many nodes will be installed on street corners, and from the sounds of it intends to have only passive cooling in them. I shudder to think what broadband will be like during summer heatwaves when equipment inside the cabinets reaches 60 or 70 degrees.

So Tony feels knowledgeable enough to talk about issues, even though he hasn't read the reports or been appropriately briefed by his staff, and we have a communications minister who within a couple of days goes from fully costed policy to giving excuses as to why they can't provide the public details of their alternative proposal. No looking the most competent putative leader from where I'm standing.

Quite a few people here have mentioned Gillards carbon tax lie as a reason to vote against her, but then brush aside Abbotts support of Mal Borough who was trying to destabilise the current Govt for the benefit of the LNP, who I would argue was illegally obtaining entries from Slippers diary. Weeks of going after Gillard over her moral authority to lead, yet Abbot has shown no such qualities, just political expediency.
 
Whilst I may not completely agree with you Sydboy007 (which really in my case means I don't have adequate knowledge to properly discuss your comments) - I'd like to commend you for providing some well-thought out discussion (with an alternate view to balance out the majority here) to some of these threads. Cheers.
 

Thanxs

I have always felt that with ration, fact based discourse, hopefully we all will leave having learned something.

Maybe it's the good ol' days of University where in an essay there was generally no right or wrong answer, just your argument and what fact you could show to support it.
 

I think you are being unfair to Tony Abbott and his frontbench.

It is a common perception based on fact that the Australian public were very much against a Carbon Tax.

It was imposed.

Not wanted.

Rather like waking up one morning and finding 50 tonnes of Manure in your front garden, that you didn't order and a powerful corporation who delivered it.

You then decide how to get rid of it.

And every amateur expert on your road whinges because they don't want the smell of manure passing their house.

Play fair syd.

gg
 

Labor has locked the NBN contract in with favorable union treatment there is little the libs can do now.

Here's a break down on debt left by each since you convieniently left out Whitlam before.



As for boat people

At the introduction of this policy, the volume of arrivals dropped from more than 5500 in 2001, to 1 person in 2002.

In 2007, with the change to the Rudd government the rate of arrivals via boats began again to rise. Policy changes by the government are credited with sparking this change.

In the seven years since the Labor government took power, more than 20,400 people have arrived or attempted to arrive in Australia via boat, 13,000 since the last federal election.

View attachment 50277

As for costs
Rest of article is here

So you want to be taxed more ? Well there are better ways to do it.


* smaller government - tax as % of GDP has always been lower than at any point in the Howard Govt.
Click to expand...

Someone want to pick these apart and check the figures

let us set aside the “per cent of GDP” measure, and dig deeper.

What about the raw figures?

2007-08 Final Budget Outcome Taxation Revenue (actual) – $286.22 billion

2010-11 Final Budget Outcome Taxation Revenue (actual) – $309.89 billion

2011-12 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook Taxation Revenue (estimate) – $323.63 billion

An increase in Taxation Revenue from 2007-08 (actual) to 2011-12 (estimated) of $37.41 billion.

Back to Wayne:

Collections, particularly relating to company profits, have been lower than expected. In part, our lower tax take reflects reduced tax receipts following the GFC…

We have already seen that the second part of this statement is a lie. Actual tax receipts are higher now, than they were in the 2007-08 (pre-GFC) Final Budget Outcome.

It is only when one uses the misleading and deceptive “as a percentage of GDP” measure, that black can become white. Or in the case of a government budget, black can become red. Or red can become black, depending on the political lie of the moment.

For the sake of thoroughness, let us break down “Tax Receipts” to just look at “Company Tax”. Perhaps Wayne Treasury is right, and Company Tax receipts have fallen since the GFC?

2007-08 Final Budget Outcome Company Tax revenue (actual) – $66.48 billion

2010-11 Final Budget Outcome Company Tax revenue (actual) – $57.31 billion

2011-12 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook Company Tax revenue (estimate) – $71.80 billion

Yes, there was a decrease of $9.17 billion in actual Company Tax revenue between 2007-08 and 2010-11.

But as at MYEFO Nov 2011, there is an “estimated” increase in Company Tax revenue (versus 2007-08) of $5.32 billion.

So, what is the problem, dear reader?

Quite clearly, the government IS pulling in more actual Total Revenue now, than they were in 2007-08.

Last year (2010-11) the government raked in $23.67 billion more in Total Revenue, than in 2007-08.

Their November MYEFO estimated that the government would rake in $37.41 billion more than in 2007-08.

With all that extra income, why is it that this government cannot seem to achieve a balanced (much less a surplus) budget for a year?

Indeed, their annual budget deficits just keep getting bigger.

Could this government’s spending have anything to do with it?

Wayne Treasury barely even mentioned the government’s actual record of expenditure in the speech to the Australian Business Economists’ Breakfast. A long, tiresome rant, complaining about lower revenue “than expected” … “as a percentage of GDP”. And a mere handful of paragraphs about “Savings” at the end of the speech. Saying absolutely nothing.

Well, except for this doozy:

The savings we find in this Budget will be consistent with the discipline that has been the hallmark of the Budgets we’ve delivered. Remember that in the four Budgets since 2008-09, we have identified over $100 billion of savings.

Really?

2007-08 Final Budget Outcome Total Expenses (actual) – $280.1 billion

2010-11 Final Budget Outcome Total Expenses (actual) – $356.1 billion

2011-12 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook Total Expenses (estimate) – $371.74 billion

An actual increase in Total Expenses of $76 billion in 2010-11, versus 2007-08.

An “estimated” increase in Total Expenses of $91.64 billion in 2011-12, versus 2007-08

But that’s ok.

All is forgiven … because they “identified over $100 billion in savings” over those four years too.

And all is forgiven with respect to our economic commentariat, who faithfully repeat Wayne’s Treasury’s misleading and deceptive statements without scrutiny. As illustrated by Alan Kohler in Business Spectator:

In fact, as Wayne Swan pointed on Thursday, Labor has already cut $100 billion from spending and this year’s budget will cut even more…

No, Alan. That is not “in fact” at all. It is what he wanted you to hear, and report. But it is not what he actually said. “We have identified over $100 billion in savings” is not the same thing as “we have already cut $100 billion from spending”.

Let us recap.

According to Wayne’s Treasury’s most recent published figures, in 2011-12 this government will rake in $37.41 billion more revenue than in 2007-08, pre-GFC.

But they will spend $91.64 billion more than in 2007-08, pre-GFC.

All the “as a percentage of GDP” nonsense, is a smokescreen.

The simple reality is, this government is getting tens of billions more annual revenue than the Howard Government did in its last year.

But they are spending a SHIPLOAD of borrowed-from-foreigners money more every year, than they are receiving in increased annual revenues.

Back to Wayne one last time:

It was Stephen Koukoulas who reminded us that … we never exceeded the tax-to-GDP ratio that we inherited…

Hmmmm.

How is that possible?

We have already seen clearly, that this government is getting more total tax revenues than in 2007-08.

So given that their tax take is up, then the only way this claim is possible is if there has also been a truly remarkable increase in the GDP figure.

Oh look!

There has!

How very, very convenient that the new System of National Accounts introduced in the GFC year of 2008-09, just happened to result in a “substantial increase” in the GDP figure. One that you would not be aware of unless you had carefully read all the fine print in the 2009-10 MYEFO. Or if you’d carefully read the Treasurer’s press release sent out on … the opening day of the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference. One month after the MYEFO.


From the crazy barn
 
Here you go Syd,

So once again the small target opposition who says no to Govt policy but rarely provides an alternative is to be rewarded for...

good politics.

What Like Rudd did in the 2007 campaign, with the me too politics.


I'd argue Abbot is having great difficulties finding cost savings to cover his carbon tax repeal, and is trying not to scare those on middle class welfare too much before he does a QLD state Govt kind of mass burning after he's elected

I would have to agree with you on this one, no matter who gets in it will be hard to cover the interest payments on $300billion debt and reduce budget deficit. The fact still remains, historically there is a better chance with the Liberals. Labor are yet to achieve a budget surplus, despite increasing the tax base


His Communications minister boasted on Lateline last November that he had a fully costed NBN policy, only to later back track and now admits they don't have much of a policy at all. He still claims he can build it faster and cheaper, yet he hasn't done the CBA he keeps saying Labor is required to do. He can't even say how many nodes will be installed on street corners, and from the sounds of it intends to have only passive cooling in them. I shudder to think what broadband will be like during summer heatwaves when equipment inside the cabinets reaches 60 or 70 degrees

Without knowing the true exposure to contractual obligation already commited to by the government, no one could cost an abreviated roll out. All one could assume would be, there would be a cost reduction because fibre to the node as opposed to fibre to the dwelling would logically have to be cheaper.
As for cabinet cooling, it would depend on the nature of the equipment in the cabinet and the specifications the equipment was built to, which would dictate the appropriate cooling required


So Tony feels knowledgeable enough to talk about issues, even though he hasn't read the reports or been appropriately briefed by his staff, and we have a communications minister who within a couple of days goes from fully costed policy to giving excuses as to why they can't provide the public details of their alternative proposal. No looking the most competent putative leader from where I'm standing

Would Tony talking on issues he is not fully versed in, be in anyway similar to the Government shutting down live cattle exports overnight, on the strengh of a t.v programme. I fail to see how either parties can be cast in a better or worse light.

See when you add it all up Tony isn't that bad.
 
I'll provide a response to:

* Labor has locked the NBN contract in with favorable union treatment there is little the libs can do now.

Can you quote a source for this claim?

My understanding was originally Silcar and other bidders tried to price gouge on NBN contract. Quigley basically said no thanxs and cancelled the bidding.

Roll on another year and the bids came in at much more reasonable levels.

Most of the workers for the NBN are contractors, mainly from the labour hire firms. I don't see these as being paragons of union membership

* By the end of the Howard Government in November 2007, net debt was again negative at minus 3.8% of GDP. Aided by some of the strongest years for world GDP growth ever recorded and no global recession during its tenure, the Howard Government moved to negative net debt via a run of solid Budget surpluses.

Howard did have the advanatge of some of the highest economic growth experienced in Australia. Resource boom mark 1 saw prices rise, with little offsetting against corporate tax.

Labor inherited resource boom mark 2, where tax fell quite significantly due to the resource companies being able to make much larger tax deductions.

You would have to admit that the GFC changed things a lot for the economy, especially tax receipts.

* As for boat people

Once again I will say that since the GFC there have been far more conflicts in the world which always increases refugees. A lot of countries are also in bad shape, creating alot more economic refugees.

Let me ask you this. If TA is in power at the end of the year, how many boats will be coming by the end of 2014?? How is he going to ahcieve this? Towing boats back is illegal and will surely piss of the Indonesians. Being such a principled man, I seem to remember TA was too big a pussy to talk about this when he met with SBY last year.

* let us set aside the “per cent of GDP” measure....

raw figures don't show a true picture. Australias population is close to a million higher than when Labor got into office.

I would argue % figures are the only way to cope with changes in the economy. The Austraian economy 10 years ago was much smaller than it is now. Even taking inflation into account it would not really show a true picture across time. Raw figures would be a bit like comparing Australia to the UK - their economy is much larger, mainly due to a much larger population. A % figure helps to show the relativities between multiple outcomes.

* good politics. What Like Rudd did in the 2007 campaign, with the me too politics.

Totally agree. It's disgusting that both parties treat us with such disrespect. Too afraid to show us what they've got.

My main point is a lot of people keeep saying Tony is better than Labor, yet there's little evidence as yet to show this. How economicallly rational will he get to be when Barnaby will prob have him by the googlies. Labor might suck up to the Greens at times, but the Liberals are always sucking up to the Nationals.

* Without knowing the true exposure to contractual obligation already commited to by the government ....

I work in IT, and let me tell you that 60-70 degree temperatures is going to cause maintenance costs and downtime to sky rocket.

At my company I have the fastest internet speed at 12Mbs. The next best is aroun 6, and then things get ugly after that. The amount of bad copper in the ground is amazing. Every day I deal with Telstra techs telling me there's no good copper pair left to move a faulty service on to. So by the time the dud copper is replaced, I doubt the LNP castrated NBN will be much cheaper than Labors current policy.

The power requirements *per user* for FTTN vs FTTH is roughly doubled, and FTTN would likely require the equivalent of 2 to 3 additional small power stations be made available to meet this demand.

IF Turnbull is makign claims of cheaper and faster, then he should be able to at least say how many FTTN cabinets will be required, what will be the maximum distance from each node for a house, what is the likely minimum speed. So far the silence is deafening, except for his obfuscation.

My dad is lucky enough to be on the NBN. When I went down to set his new modem up he got on the PC and was like "I just click and it's there". he went from paying $70 a month to just $35 and has 8 times the speed. He's not paying for line rental anymore, has a free VOIP account with his ISP, and gets 10c untimed lanline calls and cheap per second no flag fall calls to mobiles. He's saving about $50 a month on the NBN. My Gran and Aunt up the road are in a similar positition. For pensioners that's a significant saving.

* Would Tony talking on issues he is not fully versed in, be in anyway similar to the Government..

I only made the point because Tony is being hypocritical by demanding the PM be held to some impossibly high account, yet shows a difference face when it's someone within his own party.

Sort of reminds of Howards ministerial code of conduct. After 1 too many ministers being caught up in it the code was watered down.
 
sydboy007 said:
I'll provide a response to:

* Labor has locked the NBN contract in with favorable union treatment there is little the libs can do now.

Can you quote a source for this claim?
Click to expand...

30% of NBN is locked in thats from Conroys lips the other is wound up in contracts

Any contracts signed by NBN Co will come with penalty clauses that would add to costs any future Coalition government would face if it made good its threat to unwind the $35.9 billion project.
Click to expand...
http://www.afr.com/p/business/companies/nbn_co_awards_contracts_for_vic_McOElx3V6t37LhMKmM33IJ


http://smarthouse.com.au/Wireless_And_Networking/Industry/W6G5R5V7?print=1

Just to add Howard govt survived the asian financial crisis which was a lot closer to home.
And labor was against supporting mining back in 97- 99 saying there would be no boom and it was a waste of money
add +, I fully support the NBN. Libs will fall in behind it but look for savings imo too much of the electorate is behind it.
 

A couple of things worth responding to.
1. The equipment in the enclusure will have to meet the criterea, i.e it may have to be able to cope with 70c, which military spec electronic equip can. Or the vendor will request the equipment enclosure be ventilated to keep temps within given parameters.
In remote diesel power stations, the electronic equipment is often housed in cabinets without forced cooling or indeed natural cooling. Most of these power stations are located in the hotest areas of Australia.
It would be imature of us to think this wouldn't be covered in any tendering process.

2. It is wonderfull to hear your Mum, Dad and extended family have the NBN and 'bling' speed internet.
You are in a terrific position to report how the expenditure ($50billion) is improving their life and moving us forward.
Other than moving us forward to paying for things, we currently get free.
 
Garpal

I think you are being unfair to Tony Abbott and his frontbench.

Why? They spend nearly a month of question time hounding the PM about a 2 decades old issue, and still nothing new has been uncovered and the police are not involved. Why waste all that time when there's so many economic issues they could have been pressuring the Govt about??

It is a common perception based on fact that the Australian public were very much against a Carbon Tax.

It was imposed.

Not wanted.

So was the GST, but we lived with it and came to accept it as good policy.

Australians are extremely wasteful energy consumers. Even stripping out the high usage from Aluminium production and the mining sector we use over twice that of Germans, and nearly triple that of the Japanese.

Shouldn't we aspire to be near the top in energy efficiency than near the bottom. How will we remain competitive in the face of the US gas glut that will transform their manufacturing industries when we have to use more inputs for every unit of output?

* Yes howard went to an election on this, and won - but the ALP got more of the votes IIRC, so I'd argue the situation is similar. Angst has died down since the introduction.

Rather like waking up one morning and finding 50 tonnes of Manure in your front garden, that you didn't order and a powerful corporation who delivered it.

You then decide how to get rid of it.

And every amateur expert on your road whinges because they don't want the smell of manure passing their house.

Not sure what the point of this is?

I will say again I am only foocusing on an issue that the LNP says is important - the public seems to not agree.

Let me ask you this - does an honest person ask someone else to copy notes from their employers diary to be used against them for political purposes? Do you think what Mal Borough did was right? Do you think Abbotts defense of him is right, esp in light of the claims he was making for over a month against the PM?

The double standards in politics needs to stop!

So I ask once again, what specific policies do the LNP have that makes you want to support them?
 
moXJO

* 30% of NBN is locked in thats from Conroys lips the other is wound up in contracts
that is generally for wireless and satellite. A reasonable amount of fiber will have been started on by the election, but there will still be plenty of work left to do

* Just to add Howard govt survived the asian financial crisis
they also had the advantage of an AUD acting as the shock absorber back then. With the rest of the world debasing their currencies Australia is facing a tsunami of hot money that's artificially boosting it. Whether the dampening effects on inflation are enough of an offsetting benefit is yet to be seen.

sptrawler

* 1. The equipment in the enclusure will have to meet the criterea
you are correct. I think you would agree that milspec gear is multiple times more expensive than the standard gear most Telcos deal with. As yet I have not heard MT speak of this, nor even acknowledge it as a problem. He's not even acknowledge the problem faced by BT (he's always holding them up as a FTTN example) of the nodes being vandalised and the car batteries used as backup stolen. AT&T has had to replace the batteries in thousand of nodes as they bought a bad batch and 3 nodes and gone up in flames.

* 2. It is wonderfull to hear your Mum, Dad and extended
Baring Australians turning off the internet, the NBN will pay off itself well before the end of it's economic life. It doesn't really need to make a profit, just break even and pay for running costs. How is the NBN any different to building a toll road? The cost is around $4 billion a year. Family tax benefits costs more. It's not a huge expense for a near 1.5 trillion economy.
 

Gillard is crooked, ( and everybody knows it) I don't think it's a waste of time pursuing that.

It is a common perception based on fact that the Australian public were very much against a Carbon Tax.

It was imposed.

Not wanted.

So was the GST, but we lived with it and came to accept it as good policy.
Click to expand...

GST went to an election I get sick of reminding Labor fools of this fact.


Bull**** - Gillard did this the get favor with the Greens, she has no morals or higher aspirations other than her own advancement.

* Yes howard went to an election on this, and won - but the ALP got more of the votes IIRC, so I'd argue the situation is similar. Angst has died down since the introduction.
Click to expand...

Bull**** again, people hate her as you will see at the election.

So I ask once again, what specific policies do the LNP have that makes you want to support them?
Click to expand...

The LNP have a policy to rid this country of the socialist looters and their lying crooked leader, thats enough for me AND THE MAJORITY.
 

Firstly, it is pointless for the libs to pressure the government about issues as the government seem to make up their mind (they don't even listen to the opinion polls which were strongly rejecting the carbon tax at the time of legislation) and will go ahead with their own agendas regardless. They know there is major concern with our unprotected borders and yet sit on their hands shelling out billions of tax payer funds to the mass influx. I can't see them listening to the libs when they don't listen to the people.

Also, I see it perfectly reasonable that a PM should be able to answer questions on serious issues such as this one where a lot of union members funds went missing and have never been recovered. Surely, it is the right of voters to expect a PM to be fit for the highest office in the land.

On the basis that you say the majority didn't want GST due to primary votes, the libs actually out polled labor on primary votes in 2010. So, the people didn't want labor in government. At least Howard gave democracy a fair go by putting his GST backflip to the people. He knew it could have cost him government, but it was the honourable thing to do, imo. If Gillard had held off on carbon tax and taken her backflip to the next election, she would have had three years to sell her concept to the people and it would not be considered such a massive lie.



And let me ask you, if Gillard had always intended to become PM, why didn't she create a file for the AWU slush fund? Surely she would want to stay squeaky clean and be able to substantiate her dealings as a lawyer as being PM does bring on the spotlight. And why isn't she chasing those missing files to substantiate her innocence? The way it stands, it looks entirely possible that those missing files contain information someone would not want the public or police to know about. Any Brough issue is tiny in comparison the millions of missing union funds that is important enough for someone to be able to misplace some very important files.
 
Mr Burns

* Gillard is crooked, ( and everybody knows it) I don't think it's a waste of time pursuing that.

Then why aren't the police involved? All that time and not a single issue passed on to the police. Your assuming she's crooked. Till then she's got the right to the presumption of innocence.
What do you say to Malborough illeglly gaining access to Slippers diary? At least there is concrete proof he did this. Should someone who takes such actions be upported by a political party as a member for a Federal Electorate?

* Bull**** - Gillard did this the get favour with the Greens, she has no morals or higher aspirations other than her own advancement.

To a degree (re Greens), but i would say she aso believes it will help. The scary fact is we are VERY economically vulnerable against other countries due to our profligate use of energy. Considering the targeted tax cuts to lower income households I would say the harm was minimal, and over the long term should help make Australian energy use more efficient.

If we don't wise up, by 2020 our oil import deficit is going to be close to $50 billion a year - currently around the $18 billion mark. How are we going to fund that?


* Bull**** again, people hate her as you will see at the election.

I suppose we will have to wait and see. Please don't confuse your hate with fact or that it is representative of others. It's always good to speak with others who don't necessarily share your views. Just because it's on Fox News doesn't make it true.

* The LNP have a policy to rid this country of the socialist looters and their lying crooked leader, thats enough for me AND THE MAJORITY.

Could you give me a link to this policy? I'd love to have a read of it before commenting on if it will achieve what you state.

Twas the Howard Govt that introduced the baby bonus and corrupted the whole family tax Benefits to hold onto power.

At least have the honesty to admit both sides are out to buy votes most of the time. Labor is no worse on this, and I would argue have at least started to take steps to wind back the welfare mentaity that Howard pushed on us!
 
Sails

* Firstly, it is pointless for the libs to pressure the government about issues ...

Totally disagree. Hammer the Govt on economic issues, or highlight policy areas you are going to make improvements on. 1 month on an issue from so long ago, being unable to provide any new relevant FACTS is a waste of time. Personally I feel any politician wasting question time should have that days pay docked. Be interesting to see how many more relevant and useful questions would occur then.

* Also, I see it perfectly reasonable that a PM should be able to answer questions ...

She did, over and over again. No new questions, no new information. Nothing referred to the police to be investigated.

When Will TA and MB start answering questions about who knew what and when, and why MB was gaining illegal access to Slippers diary.

* On the basis that you say the majority didn't want GST due to primary votes ...

Totally agree with you that Howard did the right thing. Probably Gillard should have done the same as well. Considering Howard was forgiven for core and non core promises, why can't we do the same for Gillard - Tony has his blood promises and only says to only believe what's written down, not what he actually says.

Still, I would say Tony's fertilzer comments re the carbon tax are now starting to leave a pungent fragrance around him.

* And let me ask you, if Gillard had always intended to become PM...

I've yet to see any proof she went into the 2007 election with the agenda of getting rid of Rudd before the 2010 election. If you have some please share it.

Now, will you answer my question, rather than avoiding it with another question?
 

etc etc

Once there's an enquiry into the unions we'll see some action, Gillard is sly and has probably covered her tracks to some extent but why no file ? and files lost ? thats complete rubbish.

The Libs arent perfect but anything would be better then this deceitful and untrustworthy woman surrounded by her trained lap dogs.
 
Some Dude said:
Or Tony Abbott and the Australians for Honest Politics.
Click to expand...

I'd heard about this, but if the quotes from Tony are true then he truly has no morals.

Absolutely disgusting to treat the law with such contempt.

Sadly i would say most people on this forum wont take the time to read it.

Seems the LNP are to lead by divine right

She could write to Abbott along the following lines.

I will call an inquiry into my involvement in and public statements about in the AWU slush fund ― if you will consent to the same inquiry examining your involvement in and public statements about the Australians for Honest Politics slush fund.

They are both very old. They are both about character. And how Tony Abbott might react would say a lot about his character.

I'd totally support her in this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...