10,000 Years to Leader Rudd!

Courtesy Crikey:

Hicks Back for a Cameo

Remember this smiling face? Seems like a long time ago, doesn't it.

He's still languishing in jail under a legally ambiguous gag order. At the time he was freed under the very suspicious plea bargain, we all knew it was a political sew-up, but now it appears to be confirmed from the inside:

US Vice-President Dick Cheney and Prime Minister John Howard cut a deal to release Australian inmate David Hicks from Guantanamo Bay, according to a report published in the US today...

Unfortunately, their scheme worked pretty well and Hicks can't tell his story in time for the election. However, I'm pleased this story is getting an airing today - the electorate could use a reminder of this piece of skullduggery right now.

If Debate Mattered

If you go and check your favorite news site (unless, perhaps, it's The Oz) you'll no doubt find that Kevin Rudd has the consensus as victor in last night's debate. I thought it was a great performance - he was succinct, eloquent, composed and very forward-looking. Howard was grumpy, impatient and at places seemed to be making things up as he went along (the Howard "Education Revolution?"). When Rudd was asked what it was he stood for he came back swinging. If anyone doubted he's a credible alternative PM before, it's hard to think they would do so after seeing that performance.

Yes, the debate was riddled with cliches, "on-message" statements, and obfuscation. But there was some real content in there, and the leaders were facing pointed questions from each other and the media. Because of this, Howard will not let another debate happen, and it's a real shame. No more debates, and no leader would dare attend a public forum these days, so 30-second commercials and staged policy announcements are the order of the day from here on in.

Class war!

Get your pitchforks, comrades! Our glorious leader has declared a class war!

Well, what passes for a class war these days, anyway. The reported Labor tax plan will defer the tax cuts for people earning over $180,000 a year, to the tune of $2.9 billion.

The wealthiest Australians would pay $10 a week more tax under Labor than they would under the Coalition.

Mr Rudd denied Labor was engaged in a class war, saying his plan to flatten the tax system to three rates instead of the current four showed the opposition was proposing real tax reform.

This raises the question, did someone in the press gallery stick their hand up and ask "Mr Rudd, is this the first salvo in a class war?" If not, where have we gotten to where the minimum of fiscal prudence and investment in the country's future requires the leader to distance himself from a Bolshevik holocaust? $10 a week?

So, once the flames die down and the bodies of the landlords and bosses are all safely in their mass graves, I'm curious to learn more about this education credit. I'm in favour of any investment in education - so far, the "sound byte" version of sounds like a bonanza for laptop vendors, but I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.

Still, we're almost matching the Libs big cash giveaway. What a shame.

Vic ALP website updated

Well, we finally have a website for the Vic ALP. In this day and age it's getting harder to justify not having a proper web presence.

Without much lobbying from me, my step-dad has joined the Party (another member thanks to the Dark Lord). He tells me at their first branch meeting they passed a motion to fire off an angry letter to the state head office complaining about the crappy web site. So you know when a bunch of retirees in the country are angry at your web site, it's time to pull the finger out!

Now I'm off to digest the new tax plan.

This Man Stole From You

This man has billions of dollars, and wanted more, so he consipired to rip you off. Why he did so will always remain a mystery to me, since an extra few million will make no difference to the life of a billionaire. To me, my integrity is worth more than that, but I guess Mr Pratt feels differently.

I would love to see politicians distance themselves from such men. Yet I suspect his family will be offered a state funeral one day. That's not right.

Where are the "Tax and Spend" Liberals?

American conservatives like to demonize "tax and spend" liberals (with a small-L). I never quite followed this argument, as just the phrase itself was all that was offered. One supposes the that the inference is that the silly liberals will raise taxes and spend the money on silly things like magic beads.

To some degree this must have caught on in Australia because even Labor politicians talk about the "tax burden", as if trying to avoid the tax-n-spend label themselves. The way I see it, that's what a government does - levies taxes, and spends them on services the country needs. The tax rates should be fair - we need prosperity and consumer activity a lot more than we need communism these days. Both society and the economy benefit, however, from a functioning base of social services and solid infrastructure (and I think, benefit much more than the "trickle down" effect of tax cuts to the wealthy).

At the current time, nobody is complaining about too many services or too much investment in infrastructure. But by adopting the government's rhetoric, the ALP are in danger of painting themselves into a corner when it comes to maintaining the correct tax level. I'm looking forward to seeing Labor's tax policy, and hope it doesn't contain tax cuts. I am sure the public would rather see hospitals and schools improved than get $10 week back, and Labor should know that.

Evan Thornley to speak at next meeting

Evan Thornley will speak at the next branch meeting. Evan, a member of the Victorian upper house (the Legislative Council) is a great speaker and always has a focus on the big issues. I'm keen to hear his insight applied to the coming election.

One matter we plan to raise with him is the performance of the Greens in the upper house. It's possible that they'll have the balance of power in the Senate after November. What does their track record in State politics tell us?

Practical Reconciliation

John Howard's bizarre backflip on reconciliation with indigenous Australians almost makes me feel sorry for the poor bloke - he's on the ropes, and clearly not getting enough sleep. Neither, apparently, are his advisors.

Are those constituents for whom reconciliation an important issue now going to stick with the PM given this 11th-hour announcement? It's hard to think so. However, his less sympathetic supporters, who've been relaxed and comfortable for 11 years now, will be nothing short of disgusted with this announcement.

No doubt the nation's indigenous leaders will be pleased by this, but I doubt any of them are so naive to believe the Liberal party represents the future of indigenous affairs in this country. His conversion leaves a lot to be desired - he speaks of his previous focus on "the practical side of reconciliation", but in reality has accomplished practically nothing in his tenure.

All in all it's almost surreal. It only makes any sense in the context of a man who knows he's on the way out, and is worried about his legacy. Well, your legacy, Mr Howard, will be of 11 years of inaction, and I am looking forward to moving on to some real action.

Let's see if anything more than "me too" will be forthcoming from Kevin.

What goes on at a Labor Party Branch Meeting

What happens at a typical branch meeting? Perhaps you imagine a handful of political nerds trading gossip, or some minor union functionaries concluding their factional horse-trading. Perhaps a group of students in Che Guevara T-Shirts discussing Marx?

The reality is perhaps less interesting but more fun. Our branch is a very active one, and we have about 130 people as members. We generally have north of thirty locals attending the monthly meetings, many more if we have a high-profile speaker.

Our active membership is very diverse, and pretty representative of the area we live in. Many of our members were born overseas. Many of our stalwarts are from Greece, Italy or Malta, for example, or from a newer wave of immigration from countries such as Cambodia and Vietnam. Many others have parents who born overseas. We have a high percentage of retirees, but students, teachers, IT professionals and other workers are to be found at each of our meetings.

A typical meeting starts with a cup of tea and a hello. Once the meeting is officially started, we follow the prescribed format - the President opens the meeting up with a few remarks, we hear from the Secretary and Treasurer, new members are welcomed, and then we move on to "General Business". When we have a speaker, usually they address the branch at this point. Often an MP will speak about current events in State or Federal Parliament, or perhaps someone from an NGO will talk to us about refugees or public housing. Usually there's a flurry of questions.

In General Business, members make motions from the floor that we then discuss and vote on. Most of the motions take the form of "that the branch write a letter..." or "that the branch condemn..." in response to some current event. Although we often write to a Government minister, we also definitely keep the heat on the higher-ups in the party. Here are some example motions from the last meeting:

• That the branch write to Tony Robinson expressing our concern with the government’s plan to allow an expansion of gambling by permitting the sale of scratchies in supermarkets, and expressing our desire to maintain a cap on pokie machines.


• That the branch write to John Brumby accusing him of being overly autocratic with the desalination plant and water pipeline, and encouraging more openness, transparency and consultation. (narrowly defeated!)


• That the branch invite Nick Staikos from Glen Eira Council to address the branch next month on the subject of the Maccabi Victoria Tennis Centre.


• That the branch resolve to keep the pressure on the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party, when in government, to adhere to Labor’s principles on issues such as: refugees; social justice; community housing; the environment and education.

There are usually a good mix of national, state and local issues discussed, and plenty of people have their say on each one.

After the meeting we all tuck into the many treats that Voula and others have cooked up for us. I must admit, I think this has a lot to do with the popularity of our branch.

It's a good thing about Australian politics that branches still matter. To move up in the party - or to retain preselection for your seat - you still need the support of rank-and-file party members. Factional blocs and (regrettably) stacks of course play their part these days, but a branch member, even at the individual level, can still get their voice heard.

Lobbying against the death penalty isn't invading New Zealand

Oh dear - I'm afraid I have to back the PM over our dear leader on this one. As the heat over a controversy that never should have been continues, the Howard chimed in with this statement bout Rudd's treatment of McLelland:

"He's absolutely humiliated a decent bloke. For what? Articulating his policy. I mean, I could understand him humiliating him if he'd come out in favour of invading New Zealand or something stupid, but all the bloke was doing was articulating what Mr Rudd himself has already said."

Although Howard is just scoring points, it's hard to argue with. Yesterday was "World Day Against the Death Penalty", and exactly the time to speak out against capital punishment. Although it's regrettable the families of Bali bombing victims were upset, their (understandable) desire for vengeance shouldn't cause us to waver in our opposition to the death penalty. A policy of opposing the death penalty except for really bad people is not much of a policy at all.

Unmasked: Robert McLelland was Osama bin Laden's Gardener

I think I can speak for the branch on this one, when I express a little bewilderment at the furore over McLelland's comments on the death penalty today. The attack by Howard and his henchman (rapidly becoming shorthand for Alexander Downer) was swift and the media were only too willing to play along.

Soft on terror or strong on human rights?

The suggestion that the timing was insensitive is understandable if arguable. That it was impolitic I suppose is obvious. However, it was undeniably principled and totally consistent with the stated policy of both the Labor and Liberal parties. If anything, it's the Liberals who should be ashamed by McLelland's speech. Howard's hypocrisy is more tangible than usual on this issue, condemning the death penalty when it's convenient (Nguyen) and playing along when it's popular (terrorists).

I'll take any excuse to quote H.L. Mencken:

The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.

Certainly the Bali bombers are scoundrels and will not be missed by many over here. But that's the true test of a principled policy. If our policy is to oppose the death penalty except for people we really hate, then I don't think that's much of a policy at all.

John Howard, the Economic Genius

According to conventional wisdom, the Coalition are the ones to be trusted on economic management. A current poll offers these distressing statistics:

The Coalition is strongly ahead as better economic manager — 40 per cent, compared with 12 per cent who put Labor as the better manager of the economy.

I'm sure many Labor insiders bridle at these sorts of statistics, because like most conventional wisdom, if you really try and investigate the logic behind it, you don't come up with much. For instance, according to Wikipedia - a source that Howard's own staff are free to edit:

During Howard's tenure as Treasurer, the 90-day cash rate peaked at 21% on 8 April 1982, while home loan mortage rates were capped at 13.5%, and inflation peaked at 12.5% in September 1982. Peter Costello commented, in 2007, that "The Howard treasurership was not a success in terms of interest rates and inflation... he had not been a great reformer."

Traditionally, conservatives have been less inclined to deficit spending than progressives. When managing a household budget or company books, this is perhaps the essence of fiscal responsibility. But there's a big difference between using a credit card to buy a plasma TV and issuing government bonds to invest in vital long-term infrastructure programs. Under Howard, it's fair to say we've gotten a lot more TVs than highways. For the resources boom that even Liberals must acknowledge has little to do with their handiwork, we've gotten some big surpluses but have very little to show for it: sub-standard broadband, crowded roads, chronically underfunded universities and hospitals. Only the Defence Force has consistently reaped a bumper harvest, with defence spending increasing 46% in real terms under Howard. I also wonder how many Australians feel they got $1 billion in value by keeping 1700 asylum seekers from filing their paperwork on the mainland.

Time Colebatch points out today that there are only two countries in the world in recession: Zimbabwe and East Timor. Many countries are enjoying record low unemployment. The Australian situation is nothing if not typical. Arguably, as the largest exporters of iron ore and coal we should be doing even better than we are. What good times we are enjoying aren't due to some Government economic genius - it's just their good fortune to be the Government during a boom.

Have they nevertheless been competent administrators or just bumbling along while the good times roll? I think the jury is still out on this one. Although we do have large surpluses, there has been a deterioration in services and lack of investment in infrastructure and education that is sure to retard economic growth in the future. (And who will get the blame then?)

A more sinister take on the PM's economic track record was offered a week or so ago by Andrew Charlton in a Fairfax opinion piece. Howard's economic policies make sense, he says, if you look at them instead as policies to cement the Liberal party's hold on power and weaken the opposition. Underfunding universities and introducing Voluntary Student Unionism steers students away from the humanities and helps stunt the growth of the next generation of intellectuals and lefties. The massive subsidy of private health and private schools disinvests people in from these social (and socialist) institutions. And WorkChoices, of course, is a direct frontal assault against the trade unions - the largest financial backers of his political opponents. In summary,

In each of these policy areas, Howard's record seems almost incoherent from an economic point of view, but clinical and logical from a power perspective.

With luck this strategy will prove ultimately futile. But it will be our skills-strapped economy that will pay the price.

Don't Jinx It

A new round of polls are coming out and the new status quo has been maintained with Labor commanding a solid lead over the Government. The quest for 16 seats, though far from over, is coming along very nicely. Presumably Kevin07, his front bench, and many prospective MPs are making plans for the upcoming succession. It's the prudent thing to do - you don't want to win government and be caught with your pants down, not having an office or a staff ready to go.

On the other hand, none of them would want to public to know that they were making such preparations. Politicians live in fear of the backlash the voters are certain to mete out on those seen to be "arrogant" or "taking the electorate for granted". The conventional wisdom, for what it's worth, would lead one to believe that unless we think the polly is afraid of us and in desperate courting mode, we'll punish them with a vote for the other guy. I don't know if there's any truth to this, but I must admit it knowing Aussies it doesn't feel outside the realm of possibility! Downer, the new Liberal enforcer, has certainly tried to use this as a weapon, telling all who would listen that Rudd is telling people in private that the election is in the bag. This appears to have worked as well as all of the Liberals' other attacks so far.

Another reason I think many people are hesitant to declare the ALP in with a shot is the idea of the "narrowing" - that is, the narrowing of the gap in the polls that is thought to occur during the campaign proper. In "Crikey's Guide to the 2007 Election" they opine that this is merely a result of the polls becoming more accurate as people make up their minds, but Possum's Pollytics does a good job of showing that the whole concept of the Narrowing is more mythological than anything else. How many people are going to fall in love with Howard again just because they know the election has gone from probably being on the 24th of November, to a certainty?

Finally, I think a lot of it comes down to the childhood superstition of the Jinx. Expressing optimism at some upcoming good fortune, people instinctively feel, may prevent it coming to pass. In China, at least in the past, one would never speak openly about how well a child was doing lest mischievous spirits overhear and visit some illness on the unfortunate babe. Perhaps we just think the universe doesn't like a braggart. Certainly I think that many in the ALP have been in opposition too long and just don't want to get their hopes up.

In any case, at the risk of jinxing it, I think we have the best chance in a decade of crowbarring the dessicated coconut off his seat, and I for one am going to maintain a sunny and optimistic attitude to the brave new Labor world that is coming. Touch wood.

Joe Hockey: "Squawk! Squawk!"

Minister, methinks thou doth protest too much.

The release yesterday of the first stage Australia@Work report from the Workplace Research Centre in Sydney is a pretty damning indictment of WorkChoices. The survey of more than 8000 Australians shows that those on AWAs do more work for less money: on average, $100 per week less. It's just confirming what everybody already knows, but it's only natural that the minister should try and put some political spin on it to try and minimize the damage. His rather dishonest attempts to find statistics - any statistics - to paint a rosier picture of WorkChoices was therefore not surprising.

His direct attack on the researchers themselves, though, was a surprise, even from a political " "brawler" such as Hockey. Comments such as "former trade union officials who are parading as academics" and "I'm not sure that this institution is known for academic rigour" amount to nothing more than ad hominem attacks and do nothing if not highlight the weakness of Hockey's position. Although the study is funded partly with money from Unions NSW, it has nearly $1 million in Australian Resarch Council money; it was signed-off by the University's ethics committee, it was peer reviewed by three anonymous referees and two internal referees, and was reviewed by the full board of the ARC. Those working on the report have eight degrees including two PhDs between them. Given these facts, can anyone seriously suggest this study is a flawed exercise in Union PR hackery? To do so would be an insult to academics everywhere.

The numbers back the report's authors up. Hockey has cherry picked his own data to try and show that WorkChoices is a bonanza for the Australian worker, but now even the ABS is pouring cold water on this (from The Age):

Mr Hockey said that ABS data showed that workers on Australian Workplace Agreements "earn nearly twice as much as people on awards". Prime Minister John Howard also said that the ABS "tell us that people are better off under AWAs".

But the ABS's assistant director of labour employee surveys, Valerie Pearson, said the survey Mr Hockey had referred to "was conducted only six weeks post WorkChoices".

In fact, the only data that shows employees on AWAs earn more also shows that they work longer hours and get paid less per hour than those on collective agreements. The common sense of the Australian working public has always told them this would happen. The idea of a lowly worker entering into tough negotiations with his boss and coming out triumphant is clearly ridiculous. The numbers only confirm that WorkChoices is all about the employer, from A-Z.

The minister has a tough task defending it, but he crossed the line yesterday. He has come off as shrill, desperate and thuggish, and may even have opened himself to defamation proceedings. Thanks to the Howard government's neglect of tertiary education, universities are encouraged to pursue parternships with business and industry to secure funding for their projects. Hockey's meritless trashing of the Centre and the researchers involved has damaged their commercial reputation. The researchers know this and don't appear to be taking it lying down. Nor should they. Hockey has dug himself into a hole, and the only way out is a public apology.

I won't hold my breath.