Tag Archives: julia gillard

“On Tuesday I Will Blow The Bloody Show Up!”

14 Jun

From The Daily Telegraph’s Simon Benson:

Bill Shorten, who is doing the dance of the seven veils, says publicly he still supports Julia Gillard.

But he will only support her until he doesn’t. And that could be very soon.

Shorten’s choice of words this week was telling.

When asked if he thought Gillard would still be leader by the time of the election, he said: “I believe so.”

These are not the words of a powerbroker confident in the survival of his leader.

As The Daily Telegraph revealed, Shorten is now counting numbers. And those numbers are falling Rudd’s way.

The mood even among many of Gillard’s supporters is bleak. And, after this week’s performance, their support is said to now be soft at best.

One senior Labor MP said that, unless something happens, he was prepared to walk into caucus on Tuesday next week and challenge the PM himself.

“I’ll blow the bloody show up,” they said.

Do it.

Do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it do it.

Gillard Plays The Philosophical Civil War Card

14 Jun

Barnaby Joyce writes for the Canberra Times:

Line crossed as Gillard cracks under election strain

It is the time when former senator Steve Fielding dressed up as a bottle, it is the time when former senator Len Harris dressed up as a knight in armour, it is the time when former Senator Andrew Bartlett went bungee jumping and it is the time when current Prime Minister Gillard gave a speech on blue ties and abortion.

It is less than 100 days to an election. This is a time when those behind get jumpy and desperately try anything to get a disengaged electorate to listen.

What is different this time is that it is not minor party leaders jumping for the spotlight, it is a sitting Prime Minister.

If the Prime Minister wants to play the philosophical civil war card, because the electorate and her own party have given up on her, then she will achieve nothing more than the disdain of the electorate at the end of her political career. To say that people were disgusted and gobsmacked by the pure unadulterated parochialism and naivety of this ploy is an understatement.

The vast majority in politics get furious when conscience issues are used for personal political appeal. When debate is called for on the sensitive issue of abortion, it is a conscience issue that both sides co-ordinate together on bipartisan approaches for either side of the debate.

There are very strict, but unwritten, rules of engagement and Ms Gillard broke the lot. Virtually all people have strong and indelible views on this, but how many have pulled this arrow from their quiver during this campaign? None but Ms Gillard.

The anarchy that has beset the nation is further illuminated by Mr Tony Windsor, who states that he will only work with Ms Gillard. One could be so bold to suggest that the nation might come first before personalities.

If Mr Windsor does pull the trigger, that is the end of the referendum into financial recognition of local government. Section 128 of the constitution requires that a law to amend the constitution be passed not less than two months before the referendum. On the current election timetable that law must be passed by June 25 because pre-polling opens on August 26.

Therefore, any election before September 7, in effect, would mean that this referendum would not occur. I thought the recognition of Local Government was part of the independent’s, so-called, “deal”.

As the government has basically ceased operating, it goes to show the good job the bureaucrats do as the wheels of service to the public continue. The issue is more with the private sector.

This nine-month Labor caravan of confusion, otherwise known as the 2013 election, has destroyed business confidence. As National Australia Bank chairman Michael Chaney pointed out on Tuesday, Labor’s decision to hold such a long election campaign has created a perfect storm of consumer pessimism and economic instability.

A lack of business confidence translates into a lack of investment, and an inability for the economy to change gears. As the mining boom tapers off, we need other sectors of the economy – like agriculture, construction and tourism – to pick up.

But no one is going to take the risks necessary to make this change with the “who knows what they’ll do next” crowd that we have in Canberra.

We need a fluid economy. Instead we have a deadlocked government. The general public has gone from not listening to the Prime Minister to disdain.

If you watch people’s faces at waiting rooms, there descends a set look and audible groans as Ms Gillard creates a parody of her office on the rolling news coverage.

We are a better nation than this. As John Howard used to point out there are many more things that unite us than divide us. We have been blessed to generally have leaders that have stressed consensus over division.

Bob Hawke was another example. Indeed, when Julia Gillard first became Prime Minister she claimed that she wanted to govern in the consensus style of Hawke. That’s just another promise that she has failed to keep.

It is disappointing that people, complete strangers, have no hesitation in offering free character assessments of the Prime Minister of Australia. It is not that they disagree with her beliefs, it is the way she keeps returning to the bank of public trust and discerning acumen and dragging it through the mud.

The Moment When Gillard Jumped The Shark

12 Jun

Conservative blogger Andrew Bolt has called it right – “Is this the most stupid, divisive and dishonest speech in Australian politics?”

Some very interesting comments — from those most un-likely — are quoted at that link. Worth a look.

“I F***n Sacked Her”: Gillard’s Boss

31 May

From Michael Smith News:

It was about this time last year when Michael came to Melb to visit me. We had lunch at a great little Vietnamese rest on the corner of Bridge road and Church streets in the Melb suburb of Richmond. (probably the only time that I have shouted Michael a meal, by gosh it was cheap…LOL)

Not long into our soup, (which was a meal in its self) I rang Peter Gordon, former senior partner of Slater and Gordon. Peter Gordon an I go way back to the late 1980s where we both contributed to the save the bulldogs campaign against the then VFL. At the time the VFL were doing everything they could to relocate the Bulldogs and / or force them into a merger with another club. Peter answered my call and told me that he was in Darwin to see the Bulldogs game.

I told Peter that I was being hounded by the media to clarify certain points of my August sworn 2010 Statutory Declaration. I asked Peter what the circumstances of Gillard’s departure from Slater and Gordon were and he offered this comment “I could never go on the record but I f……n sacked her”. Michael was sitting right beside me. Further Peter Gordon told me to keep the pressure on Gillard’s renovations because I had only scratched the surface. This discussion took place long before Gillard’s exit interview was released. More reminiscing of the facts from me from time to time….

Bob Kernohan

Would that the nation had the power to do the same thing — to any politician — without having to endure the damage caused while waiting for an election.

Bring on a Direct Democracy movement!

Politicians To Share Burden Of “Burden Sharing” Budget

2 May

Hogs-at-Trough-014

From The Australian:

A CRACKDOWN on existing disability entitlements and a levy on higher-income earners are being considered as part of the Gillard government’s plans to fund the $15 billion-a-year national disability insurance scheme…

Yesterday Ms Gillard said reasonable options, even those previously rejected, were being considered. She said the concept of “burden sharing” would guide the government’s decisions.

The more who share the work, the lighter the load for all: business, families, institutions,” she said.

Fine.

But rather than starting with a “crackdown” on the usual populist political targets – people on Disability Support pensions, and “higher” income earners – how about we see our erstwhile “leaders” … well, lead … with a personal example.

Let us begin this concept of “burden sharing” with a May budget that includes a “crackdown” or “levy” on these high income earners –

Prime Minister Julia Gillard – $495,430

Deputy PM Wayne Swan – $390,627

Cabinet Minister – $328,698

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott – $352,517

Speaker – $333,462

Shadow Minister – $238,187

Backbencher – $190,550

Source: The “independent” Remuneration Tribunal.

flying_pig_rainbow_announcements-r4d422547306d495e975d2bda962a3baa_8dnd0_8byvr_512

Barnaby: Australia Has Some Of The Highest TOTAL Debt Levels In The World

4 Apr

Senator Joyce writes for the Canberra Times (my emphasis added):

No saving graces as Labor alliance targets our savings

I always believed a net debt figure that assumed using public servants’ superannuation savings to pay off public debt was an absurdity. Well, now the Labor-Green-independent alliance is proposing that super be used to pay off debt.

When you tax more of something you end up with less of it. Why then does the Labor government want to raise taxes on superannuation? Do we really need a lower savings rate, and therefore more consumption in Australia?

Australia has some of the highest total debt levels in the world. In net terms, from the public and private sectors, we owe more than $700 billion to overseas countries. In terms of our GDP this is the eighth highest level of debt in the world, behind countries such as Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain.

Our debt is partly a consequence of a mining boom, where billions has been invested in our mining industry. Private companies need to take on debt to build these assets and we can’t fund all of these investments from domestic savings. But that is no reason to unnecessarily reduce domestic savings even further, and increase our reliance on foreign debt even more. We should be doing the opposite. We should be making it easier and more attractive for Australians to save. Our tax system barely does that now, however.

Let’s say you get a $1000 bonus from your boss. You have two basic choices: you can spend the money, or you can save the money. If you spend the money you will pay about 30 per cent in income tax and a 10 per cent GST. This leaves you with around $600 to spend on say a flat-screen TV. You pay no more taxes after that.

If you save the money by, say, putting it into bank account, you will pay the income tax up front, and then get taxed every year on the interest you get paid in that bank account, including on the part of the interest that just compensates you for inflation.

On that basis, the “double taxation” of savings is a raw deal. That’s one of the reasons why we offer a lower tax rate on superannuation: to encourage people to save not spend; to encourage individuals to make provision for their own retirement, rather than all of us having to fund pensions for everyone.

With an ageing population, that problem is only going to become worse and we should be looking to encourage more Australians to save rather than raise yet more taxes on superannuation. That’s exactly what the Coalition has proposed. We have proposed a 10 cents in the dollar tax concession for those that put money into super funds that invest in nation-building infrastructure. It’s a two- birds-with-one-stone approach. We encourage more people to save and have more funds available to invest in the roads, rail and water infrastructure a growing nation desperately needs.

The reality is Labor know all this. They know that we should encourage savings not spending. There is only one reason that they are looking to raise taxes on our savings. They have run out of money and need more of your savings to pay for their debts.

Any government looking to raise taxes on you should be required to get their own spending in order first. Our government is not spending our money wisely enough to be deserving of us giving it more. The Green-Labor-independent alliance spent years promising that our debt is not a problem. If our debt is not a problem, why do they need to raise taxes on our savings?

Cleaning up after this fiasco will be an infuriating task. They create a fiasco selling mining licences without the appropriate oversight and in inappropriate area. Somehow the Coalition is left explaining what we will do to rectify their problem.

They shut down trade with major trading partners in Indonesia and decimated the northern cattle industry and we are asked how we will fix it up.

One of the key reasons that I believe that I have a duty to stand against a key player in this Green-Labor-independent alliance, in Tony Windsor, is that you cannot possibly fix anything from Opposition. That means my job is to help win seats off the government wherever they are standing. Tony Windsor is a key member of that government and it is his job to defend the record of waste, mismanagement and higher taxes of the government he chose.

Owed To Me – Gillard vs Rudd (Reprise)

21 Mar

A moment or two of deja vu:

Pride Is The Root Of All Evil

19 Feb

254502_287222121392119_2147028512_n

Yes, I know that St. Paul is oft-quoted as instructing that “the love of money is the root of all evil”.

I tend to disagree.

For some years now, it has been my sense that the real root of all evil is Pride.

From the Canberra Times:

The polls don’t lie. There is no hard data yet, but one of the country’s best pollsters says he’s begun to pick up a hard edge in the qualitative responses that isn’t being fully reflected (yet) in the quantitative results. There is no drift back to Labor. It seems the ‘bounce’ the government received over Christmas (a) wasn’t real, and (b) was simply because people were seeing less of Gillard and Swan. But they don’t accept this yet.

And so the chess game remains in stalemate. Every move to try and build up the party is countered by another blocking move from those in power. No one can advance. In the meantime, Tony Abbott creeps closer and closer to government until, when he finally walks into the Lodge, a great sigh of relief will be heard around the country. Not necessarily because voters want the Coalition, you understand, but simply because they are so sick and tired of the puerile, wretched and pathetic collection of such obviously self-interested people making up today’s Cabinet…

Currently, with Gillard leading and Swan as Treasurer, Labor will be booted so far into the outfield its remaining members will take on the appearance of a self-help group labelled ‘’Politicians Anonymous’’.

This doesn’t concern the self-interested cabal that’s currently in charge of the party. Swan knows in his heart of hearts that the job is beyond him; that he’s electoral poison – he just can’t bring himself to admit it. Gillard knows the same thing and there is even a bizarre rumour that, if the polls don’t change (and they won’t) she’s prepared to stand down at the last moment and let somebody else take the party to the election. That would deprive voters of the one thing they really want to do: kick the government.

Both Gillard and Swan need to swallow their pride and depart.

Mind you, since pride is, I think, the universal evil, merely seeing the back of Labor won’t change much.

As we have seen previously (The Sociopaths Who Are Drawn To Leadership), it takes a certain kind of person to become a politician. Even moreso, a successful one.

Are Gillard Govt Insiders Really Saying This?

16 Feb

Via Catallaxy Files reader and commenter “Mk50 of Brisbane”.

On the budget:

Just got a friend on the line from Finance. The whispers there are for a deficit of $30-35 Billion this FY if the lunatics continue running the asylum.

I DO stress these are just rumours.

On the government:

From an email just received from a contact in PM&C:

“… In all my years I have never seen anything like this. … The Gillard government are filthy, vicious, dirty, disease-ridden, perverted, corrupt, ghastly, disgusting, mendacious, revolting, retarded, thuggish, loathesome, atrocious, abhorrent, awful, beastly, contemptible, accursed, deviant, repulsive, despicable, foul, grimy, hateful, inferior, cretinous, hellish, horrible, appalling. lousy, thieving, nauseating, obnoxious, odious, sleazy, offensive, micromanaging, repellent, reprehensible, arrogant, repugnant, kleptocratic, rotten, stinking, terrible, vile, wretched, incompetent, sociopathic, schizophrenic, worthless, pretentious, wretched, arrogantly cretinous unhinged societal parasites of the foullest kind. Now, let me elaborate each point with multiple examples…”

It’s not a short email.

Top rant.

Humbling stuff.

And difficult to dispute.

When Was Gillard’s TV Dirty Deal Really Made?

15 Feb

On July 13 2010, journalist and radio personality Michael Smith interviewed then newly-ascended prime minister Julia Gillard to discuss “her” new mining tax deal:

“Now, the debate [with the mining companies] got bogged down in a lot of, uh, you know, some name calling, some conversations that lacked respect and good will. What I did as prime minister was got the good will back into that debate by cancelling the ads on TV…”

No doubt Gillard was here referring to her (apparent) post-ascension offer to the Big 3 miners, to cancel the government’s pro-mining tax advertising. She says that she did so as a gesture of “good will”.

In your humble blogger’s opinion, this claim does not pass the sniff test.

Three weeks prior to the Michael Smith interview, the following article appeared in the Australian Financial Review; it was the very day after Rudd’s ousting –

June 25, 2010 – Rio Tinto Ltd says it has suspended its anti-resources super profits tax (RSPT) advertising campaign and is “cautiously encouraged” by Julia Gillard’s pledge to negotiate with the sector.

Ms Gillard, who ascended to the prime ministership after Kevin Rudd declined to contest a leadership ballot, told her first press conference as parliamentary leader she would throw the doors open to negotiate with the mining sector.

She also suspended the government’s pro-RSPT advertising campaign, provided the mining sector shelved its ads against the tax.

BHP Billiton Ltd, the Minerals Council of Australia, the Queensland Resources Council and the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies Inc all pledged to immediately suspend their anti-RSPT ads.

“As a sign of good faith, we have suspended our advertising,” Rio Tinto said in a statement.

“This commitment is, of course, dependent on the government’s willingness to properly engage on the threshold issues.

In other words, their “sign of good faith” was clearly conditional on Gillard playing ball, and renegotiating (ie, “properly engage”) the core elements (“threshold issues”) of the mining tax design.

There is something else quite interesting to consider here.

Apparently it is possible to suspend a multi-million dollar TV and print media advertising campaign within 24 hours.  That is the implication from Rio’s statement “we have suspended our advertising” in swift response to new PM Gillard’s supposedly impromptu “good will” gesture.

It gets more interesting when we look at how quickly BHP Billiton, the prime mover in the anti-RSPT campaign, apparently managed to pull their advertising campaign. From ABC News, first posted June 24 2010, 12:32pm AEST:

Gillard, BHP can ads in mining tax truce

Julia Gillard will can the Government’s mining tax ads as one of her first acts as prime minister, and has called on the mining lobby to do the same.

Mining giant BHP Billiton, which is among the companies leading the campaign against the tax, has responded by suspending its ads.

The second biggest, Rio Tinto, followed later in the day

Sky News is reporting that the mining industry’s main lobby group, the Minerals Council of Australia, is also suspending its advertising campaign.

Impressive.

Barely 2.5 hours prior, the ALP caucus had chosen Gillard to be the new prime minister.  BHP was very quick-off-the-mark to suspend their advertising in response to Gillard’s gesture of good will, wouldn’t you say?

There is a Big Question arising out of all of this.

Was there any discussion or deal made with any/all of the Big 3 – particularly BHP – to suspend their advertising prior to Rudd’s knifing by Gillard?

It is an important question.

Because some have claimed that Gillard was “given the nod” by the Big 3 foreign miners to topple Rudd, and have suggested that the issue (promise?) of the withdrawal of their anti-mining tax advertising was already on the table prior to the coup; that Gillard knew the miners would pull their TV advertising before she made the decision to challenge Rudd for the leadership:

JULIA Gillard was “given the nod” by the big three mining companies – Xstrata, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton—to challenge Kevin Rudd’s prime ministership, knowing the advertising campaign against the mining tax “would be pulled”.

… The revelations come from an article written by Mr Rudd’s friend and actor Rhys Muldoon, published in the latest issue of The Monthly magazine. He questions whether “the party backroom boys” could “have sought tacit approval from the miners for a change at the top to seek an end to the damaging impasse” on the tax.

Does anyone seriously believe that BHP Billiton et al only decided to hastily suspend their advertising campaign in response to new PM Gillard’s immediate gesture of “good will”?

Does anyone seriously believe that Gillard and/or the ALP “faceless men” did not come to an agreement with the Big 3 miners on the specific issue of stopping their politically damaging TV advertising, prior to the knifing of the prime minister?

If Gillard knew that BHP was prepared to pull its TV advertising campaign on the condition that the mining tax be negotiated from square 1, then why not tell PM Rudd?

If Gillard knew that BHP – a foreign-owned mining corporation – was prepared to pull its TV advertising campaign on the condition that a democratically-elected PM be removed from office, why not tell PM Rudd?

Why not help the national leader to whom you had repeatedly and publicly declared your loyalty, with devising a strategy to deal with this foreign corporate “threat to democracy”? (Swan’s words, directed at Aussie miners)

Why challenge for the leadership … other than out of sheer greed and selfish opportunism, a preparedness to sell out the best interests of the nation’s citizens (and the very concepts of representative democracy and national sovereignty) for the fulfillment of your own naked ambition?

The widely-propagated story that Julia Gillard, the loyal deputy PM, the Great Negotiator, reluctantly agreed to be elevated to the prime ministership because “a good government has lost its way”, and only then made a brilliant, impromptu gesture of good will towards the Big 3 foreign-owned mining giants by suspending the government’s TV advertising and calling on them to do the same, simply does not pass the sniff test.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: