Abaci and slate boards mandatory in a Tony Abbott Government!

#auspol

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott shows us he is an old world kind of guy.  He appears to know very little about technology.  Thank god Malcolm Turnbull didn’t leave Parliament or else Tony Abbott might be mandating abaci and slate boards in the national curriculum!

Low-tech Tony

IT'S a little more than a year since that celebrated interview in which Tony Abbott shocked the nation with this revelation: "I'm no Bill Gates here and I don't claim to be any kind of tech head." As became apparent during an interview with Jon Faine on ABC Melbourne yesterday, Abbott hasn't upgraded:

Faine: "And just finally, on a fairly trivial point [our favourite type], but one that people will undoubtedly read more into depending on your answer. Julia Gillard in her letter to you crosses out the formal typed, 'Dear Mr Abbott', and replaces it with a handwritten, 'Tony'. The reproduced letters on the front page of today's The Australian newspaper sees you do not reciprocate with the informality."

Abbott: "And please don't read too much into it, Jon. I had to send that letter electronically and I can't cross something out and write in my name electronically, or at least I don't know how to do that. Maybe others can do it but I can't do it! But I would have, I would have, if I'd had the ability to do it I would have done it in the return correspondence."

There are plenty of bright young sparks in Abbott's office; perhaps it's time for them to stage an intervention.

(via STREWTH! James Jeffrey)

 

On a side note I hate when people cross out the title and handwrite in the persons name.  It’s just annoying to me. 

CSG populism at odds with his Party’s approach

I recently watched an episode of Landline where the competing interests of Farmers and CSG Miners were highlighted. There is a great divide between the Miners belief in the science and the Farmers scepticism. And as much as I understand the principle that we don't own the minerals beneath our land I still have much sympathy for the farmers. This not an easy issue. The Miners and Government's say that CSG mining is safe and doesn't affect water stores. Many don't believe them and argue that we wont know the affects for many years and perhaps when it is too late.

I don't know the answer. Hopefully some independent research

Campbell Newman however has accused the Queensland Labor Government of "allowing CSG projects to grow at break neck speed to prop up their budget without concern for farmers and the environment."

But he fails to mention that this industry has had bi-partisan support.

But Campbell left himself a back door from which, when in power, he will miraculously step when he fully supports the CSG industry. He said:

"We will only allow CSG to go forward where it clearly doesn't affect the water resources under the ground that are so vital for future generations."

Isn't that the position already held by the Queensland Government? This is also the position now decried by the two great populists Tony Abbott and Campbell Newman.

Voters should be able to expect the Leader to enunciate a clear policy position which isn't at odds with the Party's actual position.

(Via http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/newman-vows-to-protect-farmers-against-csgs-spread-20110813-1irp6.html)

You can’t govern from opposition!

#auspol

As I have previously blogged Tony Abbott will do anything to become Prime Minister.  His policy development strategy can be simplified and taken from his own words “you can’t govern from opposition.” (See below clip)

His position on the climate change debate is, I think, the greatest indicator that he will do anything and say anything to get into the lodge. 

First, Abbott claims climate change is crap.  He then writes in Battlelines that the Liberal party should just pass the ETS for political reasons.  Then, when he sees an opportunity to oust Malcolm Turnbull, he supports a vehement opposition to the ETS.  The Government, under Kevin Rudd, blinked and the ETS was shelved.  Now a Carbon Tax is enemy number one for Tony Abbott.  Except he provided an interview (before becoming Opposition Leader) saying that if a price on carbon was necessary a carbon tax was the way to go. 

So what is he saying now?  Is he back to “climate change is crap”?  This appears to be one logical explanation.   The only other one I can come up with is that this is the best way for him to get to the lodge.  After all that is what life’s all about, isn’t it?

 

Here is the clip where Tony Abbott supports a carbon tax.

What’s $10.6b between friends?

#ausvotes #auswaits

The Australian public learned today why the coalition failed to release their election commitments to treasury prior to he last election.  Because their figures were bogus.  All the shadow boxing about treasury leaks was a great diversion for the real fact that while they claim to be the best economic managers, without the treasury holding their hands, they are incompetent and reckless and will, like the Howard Government before them, spend to win office.  Here is what the couriermail reported today:

TONY Abbott's budget credibility was under fire last night with Treasury saying there was an error of up to $10.6 billion in his election promises.

Tony Windsor, one of the three independents who asked for the costings, last night described it as "a black hole''.
But Mr Abbott stood by his election costings and insisted he would improve the Budget bottom-line by more than $11 billion.
The Treasury documents released at 10pm by the independents found the Coalition would improve the Budget bottom line by $863 million over the next four years - well below the $11.5 billion improvement predicted by the Liberals.
The Liberals would deliver a Budget bottom line that was eight times better than Labor, but only a fraction of what they had promised.
The Treasury's five-page report on the Coalition's costings suggested the bottom-line could rise from $863 million to $4.5 billion if other assumptions were made. Mr Abbott said those other assumptions could be "responsibly achieved through prudent economic management''.

The Treasury said Labor would improve the bottom-line by $106 million - double its prediction of $44 million.

Mr Abbott refused to submit the Coalition's costings to the Treasury during the election campaign.  "I think we understand now why he wasn't interested in releasing the numbers," Mr Windsor told the ABC's Lateline program.

"(It's) what I call a black hole anyway of probably somewhere between 7 and 11 billion in terms of difference between what the Coalition said their costings were and what the Treasurer would suggest in terms of an incoming government for their bottom line."

Read more here

Facebook: Vote for PM

#ausvotes #RootyQ

I saw today an online quiz on Facebook asking who I was going to vote for.  This is the option I was presented with:

Looking at the photo’s I wonder who this is sponsored by? 

Tony Abbott’s dismissal of gay marriage

#ausvotes #qanda

On Monday 16 August 2010 Opposition leader Tony Abbott appeared on the ABC’s program Q & A.  He was asked a very heartfelt and personal question from a Mr Geoff Thomas, Vietnam veteran, plumbing contractor and father of a gay son.  (See full video below)

He asked:

Thank you. I am a Vietnam veteran, I have been a plumbing contractor for 37 years and I support, with a social conscience, the Liberal philosophy. I have a gay son. When I was confronted with that situation in a very short amount of time and with due consideration I accepted his position and I overcame my ignorance and my fear of gays and the idea of gay marriage. When will you, Mr Abbott, take up the same - when will you, sir, overcome your fear and ignorance of gay people and give them the dignity and respect that you'd happily give to all other Australians?

Mr Abbott’s response was the usual political spin of – I respect gay people but I just don’t want to let them get married.  What struck me as odd, (and I may be overreacting) was his choice of language when responding.  He said the following line:

… I would always try to find it in my heart to give dignity and respect to people, regardless of their circumstances, regardless of their opinions, so that is absolutely my position but I think that there are lots of terrific gay relationships, lots of terrific commitments between gay partners, but I just don't think that marriage is the right term to put on it.

I found this comment odd.  Why does he need to try to find it in his heart.  Is it because he is still confronted by gay people.  Like I said I may be overreacting to this turn of phrase but it struck me immediately when he said it. 

My final point of disgust with Mr Abbott’s answer to this question was the part in the middle of his answer where he almost mocks gay people by grabbing the show’s host, Tony Jones’ hand and saying that he knows gay men.  Although the crowd had a bit of a laugh it struck me as distasteful that the alternative Prime Minister would make a subtle joke about gay men in this way. 

And don’t take this as a pure rant on the Coalition.  I have previously expressed my disappointment with the ALP in this issue.  See my previous blog post here.

I’ll give him some credit for trying to admit his failings on the subject by saying:

[Sometimes] our initial reactions to some of these things can be far from perfect and I'm sure that at different times I have reacted a bit poorly at first to things but I hope I would always find it in my heart to treat people the way everyone should be treated, with dignity and respect and I think that people who know me well who are gay would be only too happy to testify to that.

But I think the quote of the night for me was this, by Geoff Thomas when asked if Tony Abbott had answered his question satisfactorily:

Well, we all talk about it, don't we, but we don't get there. If I'm in a loving relationship, it's fundamental to me that I want to marry that person. I mean, I'm sure I listened to Graham Richardson on this program a few weeks ago and Penny Wong and I thought their comments were insulting. Graham Richardson said that gay people have to wait. They shouldn't have to wait. You're in the government; you should do something about it now. These are decent people who just want to lead decent lives like everybody else. That's it.

Definitely, could not have said it any better myself!

(Video of the Q&A on gay marriage via Q & A.)

 

See here for an article where Geoff Thomas is interviewed after the show.  He is a very good man!

The iAbbott launches!

 

The political ad too risqué for YouTube

#ausvotes

This ad received widespread criticism when it was released and it was removed from YouTube.  The creators, the ACTU said that Liberal supporters were responsible for its demise.  It has now made its way back on YouTube. 

I personally don't think it is worth the attention. I think it is just plain stupid and not very clever.

I think that Gruen Nation has a lot to answer for.  Making me expect quality political advertising.

 

Abbott does the Time Warp!

This is a very funny advertisment produced by the ALP. 

 

My only question is why they don’t release ads like these on mainstream media.  This would have people talking and produce a much more favourable result than the typical ad with a horrible black and white picture of Tony Abbott and a large stamp across his face with slogans like “Don’t risk him”.  Here is an example of the later advertisement.

 

GetUp!’s latest ad: Tony Abbott’s archaic views

GetUp! have created a new advertisement creatively showing us the old world views of Tony Abbott.  Peter Black commented today:

I think this is one of the more effective negative ads we have seen in the campaign so far, and reminds people that the very measured, restrained Tony Abbott we are seeing throughout this campaign, is not the Tony Abbott we have seen over the past few years.

(Via Election Blackout)

Who has a plan for Australia?

In the washup of the great (or “not so great”) debate, Peter Hartcher writes that while not being flashy Julia Gillard showed she has a plan for Australia.  Tony Abbott, on the other hand, did a good job as an opposition leader but has no plan or vision for the country.  Who do you want leading the country? 

Tony Abbott made a strong critique of the Gillard Labor government in last night's debate, but utterly failed to establish his own party as the alternative.

Abbott approached the debate as he is approaching the election - as an Opposition Leader, an insurgent, a little angry, seeking a protest vote, hoping we will reject the government rather than embrace the Coalition.

He even hinted at some blokeish resentment of the biological fact Gillard is a woman, and has an advantage with women voters - Abbott appealed to voters to choose their government on the basis of the job done, "not on gender".

This turns gender inequality on its head, suggesting Abbott thinks Gillard the beneficiary of a gender bias, and sees himself as the victim.

This was too much. Gillard has never played on her gender, never run as a "women's" candidate.

By suggesting some sort of gender inequality is at work, Abbott was not legitimately criticising his rival but revealing his own exasperation with women voters.

But the central problem of Abbott's performance was the absence of a plan for government.

He stuck hard at Labor over its leadership coup, asking how the public could trust the Labor Party "when even Kevin Rudd couldn't".

Abbott offered an "action contract" to the Australian electorate, but every point on it is a repudiation of Labor and not a positive alternative.

This is his mantra - he promises to "end the waste, repay the debt, stop new taxes and stop the boats".

Abbott likes this so much he ran through it no fewer than three times. But it's a mantra for an opposition, not a government. He failed to mention any positive offerings on education or health. Abbott did play up his plan for a more generous paid parental leave, but a single initiative is not a plan for government.

Gillard's performance was not compelling, but she was positive, self-possessed, at ease, and, vitally, she had a plan.

Where Abbott chanted his four-point repudiation, Gillard pitched positives.

She listed the Government's six-point economic plan, plus its new offerings on education and health. Taking a tip from US presidential debates, she repeatedly declared herself an optimist, a sunny contrast to Abbott's dark clouds of concern.

The bottom line? Abbott ran as an insurgent, not a potential prime minister. Gillard ran as a leader with a positive plan. That is why she won the debate.

I think Tony Abbott spends far too much time talking about which ALP policies he thinks have “failed” and not enough time on where he wants the country to head. And of course how tot get there.  Kevin Rudd won power on a positive message and vision.  Even if at times it resembled a “me too” campaign.  Can Abbott change himself this late in the game? 

Source: Abbott, a man with a gripe and a mantra: Sydney Morning Herald

The value (or lack of) of online polls

On the Daily Telegraph website today a poll asks who will win the upcoming election, Julia Gillard or Tony Abbott.  The result as at 9.35am is:

Which is funny considering the latest Newspoll shows:

 

Gillard: red; Abbott: blue

So how can we marry up these two conflicting polls?  What value should be placed on online (or even phone in) polls? 

I would suggest none. 

Online or phone in polls are based on people voluntarily using the website or calling the poll number.  This means they must be motivated to enter the poll and it may be biased for a number of other reasons. 

It may be that one type of party voter is more interested in taking part in the poll on a particular issue.  Voters who vote ALP may be more interested in reading about IR policy stories which have a linked question conversely Coalition voters may be more interested in a story linked to business.  This would therefore lead to a skewing in the sample pool.  The sample pool is hardly random. 

Other than this you just need to look at the above contrasting polls to know that something is up!

 

UPDATE:

This is further evidence of the lack of cogency of online polls.  On Monday 2/8/10 the Couriermail had a poll asking “Which party would get your first preference”  And the results:

So who reads and contributes to the couriermail polls?  Overwhelmingly Liberal supporters!

The Abbott Family: Viral Video

This is the AWU's viral video of the Abbott Family which is doing the rounds this morning.

Work Choices: dead or alive?

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has, since becoming leader, struggled with the notion of what to do about Work Choices.  This policy was central to the Howard Government and has been at the core of Liberal values for decades.  Abbott was a key member of the Government that implemented Work Choices and has long been an advocate of it. 

Earlier this week just prior to the election being called he spoke to the LNP Qld State Conference and said that Work Choices was not only dead but it had been cremated.  A strange line lacking wit, but it got the point across.  It was certainly better than his earlier statement that “the name Work Choices is dead.”

Tony Abbott then announced that there would be a 3 year moratorium on changes to Industrial Relation laws.  They would work within the laws and go to the umpire to settle any disputes.  But then came the startling admission from Senator Eric Abetz that they plan tweak the laws which means that through changes to the Regulations, which only require Ministerial consent, they can effectively do what tony Abbott said he would not do. 

Tony Abbott when question on the Today show seemed to indicate, what many people fear, that he will say on thing and do another.  He answered a question on whether he will bring back Work Choices after his first term by saying to Lisa Wilkinson, “Well, well Lisa, I've got an election to win”.  Later he spoke with Neil Mitchell where he hardened his position, presumably after speaking with his minders, and said that he would not be changing the legislation “not now, not ever”. 

The fear I have is that these statements fit into one of three Liberal election promise categories:

1. Non core promises
2. John Howard’s GST “never ever” promise
3. Tony Abbott’s make sure you get it in writing

But the startling part of Tony Abbott’s IR policy moratorium is that he freely admits that in 3 years time he will look to advance an agenda that would return some aspects of Work Choices.  Tony Abbott is looking for some fresh air between the Howard and (presumably) an Abbott Government with which to kill off public sentiment towards Work Choices. 

Tony Abbott is, as I blogged previously, more interested in winning elections and leaving wiggle room to change his policies.  He will say and do anything because he’s “got an election to win”.

What I find amazing about Wyatt Roy

Wyatt Roy is the LNP candidate for the seat of Longman and he was profiled in the QWeekend magazine on Saturday 10/07/2010. 

He is just 20 years old and has become something of a spectacle since being preselected at the age of just 19.  But it is not purely his age that I find amazing about him, it is his grasp of the political lines and snipes at such a young age. 

He takes his first swipe at the ALP by saying,

“I don't think I would have been the candidate in the Labor Party.  The ALP is faceless men in smoky rooms in Canberra pr Brisbane saying to locals here’s the candidate you’re going to have. There’s no way I could be a part of the political party that does that.”

He then proves his skill as a politician through his rehearsed lines on policy areas:

 

 

Roy has the lines polished like he has been watching Tony Abbott on re-run since being preselected.  Although he does tend to differ from his leader on Climate Change where he suggests an insurance policy is needed.  (Is he suggesting the ETS as an insurance policy perhaps? I doubt it)

So should we look at Wyatt Roy as a 20 year old kid who is looking to break the mould and give us “hope and honesty.”  Or is he just another political hack who is willing to rehearse the lines the leadership set and do anything to gain power. 

Time will tell.