Oz Federal Election 2013 - Discussion and Comments

[Pukka]

Barnaby Joyce just outlined precisely why Rudd can't return as PM on QandA.

and that's because ...........?

 

[medhead]

Hardly. Not every participant in the discussion here is attacking others. Those who indulge in personal attacks are varied in their team loyalties.

You were talking "coalition groupthink", and I don't see that as being an accurate description of this thread. It's wider than that.

This thread is full of like minded people shouting down anyone that dares to put a spot light on the coalitions, the alternative government. Groupthink, that supports the coalition regardless of party membership of the individual members of that group.

 

[medhead]

and that's because ...........?

My words to answer that are Krudd and Rudd the dud. Bananaby basically said the same, just using more words.

 

[Pukka]

My words to answer that are Krudd and Rudd the dud. Bananaby basically said the same, just using more words.

I think Barnaby doesn't want him to return, it's probably the coalitions worst nightmare an unpopular party with a popular leader v a popular party with an unpopular leader = probably not the landslide everyone expects

 

[medhead]

I think Barnaby doesn't want him to return, it's probably the coalitions worst nightmare an unpopular party with a popular leader v a popular party with an unpopular leader = probably not the landslide everyone expects

He was popular with a noisy minority. There is a reason those terms were coined. He is an ineffectual leader and he cannot win the next election. So barnaby and the coalition don't care ultimate. The only thing about a Rudd return would be to put some focus back on policy.

The other reason Rudd is unworthy is the noise he's creating around the leadership is distracting from that needed focus on policy. He'd rather have a tantrum than see his side try to win the election. Making him doubly unworthy and also a poor choice for PM.

 

[dajop]

He was popular with a noisy minority. There is a reason those terms were coined. He is an ineffectual leader and he cannot win the next election. .

Which is exactly why some may consider him to take the ALP to the next election. I don't think anyone would suggest he can win the election (I think perhaps the only person who could lead the ALP to victory in the election would be um... um ... Malcolm Turnbull, and there's probably a slightly greater chance of that happening than JG winning the election ) . The question is can KR salvage 5-10 seats, and prevent total oblivion for the ALP?

 

[Pukka]

He was popular with a noisy minority. There is a reason those terms were coined. He is an ineffectual leader and he cannot win the next election. So barnaby and the coalition don't care ultimate. The only thing about a Rudd return would be to put some focus back on policy.

The other reason Rudd is unworthy is the noise he's creating around the leadership is distracting from that needed focus on policy. He'd rather have a tantrum than see his side try to win the election. Making him doubly unworthy and also a poor choice for PM.

I agree with all that but I think with Julia it's an absolute flogging with KRudd they lose so I can understand why some Labour MP's might be clutching at straws.

Julia is hopeless and massively unpopular if they stick with her it's annihilation rather than a loss.

 

[amaroo]

Rudd should get lifetime membership of the Liberal Party. He's the best performer they have.

 

[Major]

Barnaby Joyce just outlined precisely why Rudd can't return as PM on QandA.

I did not watch it, are you able to summarise his answer ?

 

[medhead]

I did not watch it, are you able to summarise his answer ?

It basically centred around the reasons the ALP gave for so dramatically dumping him and now trying to tell the electorate they're bring him back. Symbolically it's poison.

The attack ads are written for Rudd coming back. I think that is the preferred coalition outcome because they can really hit hard over the last 3 years. As such I doubt he can save any seats. Or in other words 'he's not the messiah, he's just a very naughty boy'

 

[Pukka]

It basically centred around the reasons the ALP gave for so dramatically dumping him and now trying to tell the electorate they're bring him back. Symbolically it's poison.

The attack ads are written for Rudd coming back. I think that is the preferred coalition outcome because they can really hit hard over the last 3 years. As such I doubt he can save any seats. Or in other words 'he's not the messiah, he's just a very naughty boy'

I don't think he's as hated by the electorate as he is by his own party but I see what you're saying. I remember an interview with Wayne Swan about him which was basically a character assassination I'm sure the Libs would use that in a tv ad if he was the target

 

[Major]

It basically centred around the reasons the ALP gave for so dramatically dumping him and now trying to tell the electorate they're bring him back. Symbolically it's poison.

The attack ads are written for Rudd coming back. I think that is the preferred coalition outcome because they can really hit hard over the last 3 years. As such I doubt he can save any seats. Or in other words 'he's not the messiah, he's just a very naughty boy'

Ta, apparently "The Voice" was required viewing in our house last night

 

[eastwest101]

I don't think he's as hated by the electorate as he is by his own party but I see what you're saying. I remember an interview with Wayne Swan about him which was basically a character assassination I'm sure the Libs would use that in a tv ad if he was the target

Agree with the opinions that Rudd is less unpopular than Gillard, hence the attraction. Rudds motivations are complex and difficult to nail down. But it really is a guessing game if Rudd actually wants the leadership or just wants to spoil the current governments campaign. On some level he must see that he has some sort of political future otherwise why bother? Either he is a actually a team player and just wants to save some ALP seats, or maybe he wants to gain the leadership of the ALP after a loss? Seems like a long hard thankless task as opposition leader, made less worse by saving some ALP seats or "saving the furniture". But he would inherit a party that is so divided and dysfunctional and has yet to tackle the big reforms proposed by Faulkner to re-energize, democratize the ALP and get rid of the worst excesses of the factions and union movement that even someone with the self confidence of Rudd must wonder about the magnitude of the task.

I would wear a character assasination by Swan as a badge of honour myself, but electorally you would see how it would run in any potential Rudd vs Abbott campaign.

Rudd is such a strange media prescence, I swear he must put something in the press galleries water supply I thought, as I saw the media pack chase him around yesterday in the "Rudd media bubble" - it was reminiscent of the old Rudd as opposition leader - not a single serious question asked or answered by him. Its the same guy whom just fell into office in 2007 thanks to no credible testing at all by the media. I think this is the point that medhead is alluding to in his posts, the last time we had a campaign dominated by personality politics and an almost policy free zone and whom was not held to account by the press we got Rudd as PM - whom whilst being a great campaigner, also had some big problems organizing things and managing people. Not to detract from the generally accepted wisdom that modern oppositions typically run with the minimal amount of policy detail as possible in order to retain focus on the unpopular elements of the government and starve any potential fear campaign (thinking of Hewsons loss in 1993 as an example).

The more interesting thing to think about is the position that Shorten, Howes, Combet, Smith and Bowen are in. They are all collectively the future of the ALP leadership group but there are no easy options left for them now, and certainly Gillard will not go easily and will probably retain the leadership up to the electoral loss. If not - she will need to be blasted out of office by a very messy and protracted battle that no-one has the stomach for, better to have those battles and bitter recriminations behind closed doors in whilst in opposition.

 

[medhead]

I don't think he's as hated by the electorate as he is by his own party but I see what you're saying. I remember an interview with Wayne Swan about him which was basically a character assassination I'm sure the Libs would use that in a tv ad if he was the target

When the public service where saying many of the same things that the ALP gave as reasons for dumping him, I don't think it was character assassination. His management skills are questionable at best. I also think he is only popular now because people have forgotten how he was back then. A large number of letters to the papers at the time mentioned that people felt robbed of the chance to vote out Rudd.

The other comment about Rudd falling into the top job without any serious questioning is kinda ironic since we are facing the same thing again with Abbott only 2 elections later.

 

[medhead]

Oh did anyone see Scott morrison's comments about 457 visas. How the hell he can compare the current 457 visas with the snowy mountains scheme is beyond belief. I'm sorry but a one off scheme that took 25 years from start to finish and employed 100000 people total, apparently 7300 at any one time and 70% were migrants, is nothing like 150000 people at anyone time in a thousand different businesses across Australia.

One is a special major project that was always going to require additional workforce, the other is just normal business.

 

[joeymelb]

One is a special major project that was always going to require additional workforce, the other is just normal business.

On the other hand, a big mining company needs a huge amount of labor to kick start building of a mine. The work of digging and initial construction is actually similar to Snowy Mountain project. Large number of unskilled workers (457) and small number of skilled engineers, designers and backoffice staff. After the construction is up to a certain stage the number of construction work force will shrink and eventually a constant mining workforce (hopefully local Australian workers) will take over. 457 visa is good for starting the project as that workforce is the "expendable" employment, as a business that is the part of work where contractors and temporary employment are desirable, because less overhead to train staff.

There are many reasons for small business to take on 457 workers - the above example is one - another example is hospitality where Aussie workers simply turn their nose up at it. Especially, when some can just earn more off welfare rather than doing minimum wage job.

If you have traveled to country like Germany, Switzerland, Taiwan, Dubai, Singapore... you will find similar visa scheme happening there. In some countries, like Germany, guest workers have no right of claiming citizenship even if they are born in Germany with parents born there too. 457 visa - yes, it can be rorted and not always perfect - is a mean to meet Australia's need. If there are Australians on welfare so willing to work, then I am sure the use of 457 visa will lessen.

Your criticism on Scott Morrison's comparison of using 457 workers on one-off project, in my opinion is overly harsh. I can see the similarities in using migrant workers in Snowy Mountain and one-off building/construction projects of mines/buildings. Yes, some 457 are employed permanently by business to fill the skill-gap when some Aussies with similar skillset sit idle. In that case, it is us - voters - must ask our politicians why that is the case? Was it because our welfare system too generous? or other factors?

Lastly, how do you defend Gillard's PMO communication officer?? He is a 457 worker hired before any Aussies PR specialists.

 

[medhead]

On the other hand, a big mining company needs a huge amount of labor to kick start building of a mine. The work of digging and initial construction is actually similar to Snowy Mountain project. Large number of unskilled workers (457) and small number of skilled engineers, designers and backoffice staff. After the construction is up to a certain stage the number of construction work force will shrink and eventually a constant mining workforce (hopefully local Australian workers) will take over. 457 visa is good for starting the project as that workforce is the "expendable" employment, as a business that is the part of work where contractors and temporary employment are desirable, because less overhead to train staff.

First off- fundamental misunderstanding of 457 visas. They are for skilled workers where the skills are not available in Australia, not unskilled workers. I'd suggest that 83% of the rest of what you wrote can be ignored given its false premise.

There are many reasons for small business to take on 457 workers - the above example is one - another example is hospitality where Aussie workers simply turn their nose up at it. Especially, when some can just earn more off welfare rather than doing minimum wage job.

If you have traveled to country like Germany, Switzerland, Taiwan, Dubai, Singapore... you will find similar visa scheme happening there. In some countries, like Germany, guest workers have no right of claiming citizenship even if they are born in Germany with parents born there too. 457 visa - yes, it can be rorted and not always perfect - is a mean to meet Australia's need. If there are Australians on welfare so willing to work, then I am sure the use of 457 visa will lessen.

And the government is talking about addressing the rorts not stopping 457 visas.

Your criticism on Scott Morrison's comparison of using 457 workers on one-off project, in my opinion is overly harsh. I can see the similarities in using migrant workers in Snowy Mountain and one-off building/construction projects of mines/buildings. Yes, some 457 are employed permanently by business to fill the skill-gap when some Aussies with similar skillset sit idle. In that case, it is us - voters - must ask our politicians why that is the case? Was it because our welfare system too generous? or other factors?

I think it is entirely fair. The Snowy Mountain scheme is recognised around the world as a major nation building project. As such it was always going to be subject to migratant workers if required outside of normal immigration controls. It was not just the 10th iron ore mine in the pilbara. Scott Morrison has made a ludicrous a comparison by trying to claim that trying to stop rorting 457s visas is the same as never making the Snowy Mountain scheme.

It is made even more ludicrous by the size of the workforce, upto 7300 people at any one time. An average of about 7000 people working on it per year, 70% of whom are migrants. 70000 migrants total over the 15 years of construction, ignoring the 10 years it took to get the legislation in place etc. So about 6000 migrants per year. That is nothing like 150000 current 457 visa holders. 50% more than the entire snowy mountains workforce, including non-migrants ie Australians.

A high impact nation building scheme with a relatively low migrant intake requirement.It was always going to have special immigration rules. There is absolutely no comparison to 457 visas.

Lastly, how do you defend Gillard's PMO communication officer?? He is a 457 worker hired before any Aussies PR specialists.

What? Try reading what I wrote. I never said anything about the 457 visa scheme. I did not attack the 457 visa scheme, I attacked a ludicrous analogy. I have no need to defend the use of that scheme at all. Your question is particularly strange - that's about the nicest thing I can thing to say that conveys my feeling about your tangential question.

 

[Skyring]

This thread is full of like minded people shouting down anyone that dares to put a spot light on the coalitions, the alternative government. Groupthink, that supports the coalition regardless of party membership of the individual members of that group.

Well, that may be how you see it, but frankly the Coalition is far less interesting that the Government circus.

It's like watching a trailer for an upcoming documentary, when you can watch an actual 3D drama-adventure-comedy instead.

 

[Hvr]

Well, that may be how you see it, but frankly the Coalition is far less interesting that the Government circus.

It's like watching a trailer for an upcoming documentary, when you can watch an actual 3D drama-adventure-comedy instead.

And yet surely it (the Coalition) is far more important than the current incumbents because they will be in government come September 15.

Why are the Liberal party afraid of scrutiny? Might we find that Tony Abbott is a fundamentalist religious zealot with no real policies?

 

[medhead]

And yet surely it (the Coalition) is far more important than the current incumbents because they will be in government come September 15.

Why are the Liberal party afraid of scrutiny? Might we find that Tony Abbott is a fundamentalist religious zealot with no real policies?

Oh come on. How dare you be worried about the future.