Labor Blog

159 Comments

• 

  Dragonfly from Wollongong , NSW Wednesday, 6 October 2010, 08:06

  Well, all the party faithful, how do you now explain the BUYING of the Independents and the Greens by your Red Queen? Will you continually make excuses for her? People are FED UP with the delusion that is the Labor Party. Robertnstephenson, you are hardly in a position to criticise me, you foretold 5-7 seats --- try two seats she BOUGHT! Well you had better enjoy -- they will be out in six months. She is already boring Brussels rigid. And, I will get on this website if I wish, or have Bitar and Arbib vetoed this as well -- is Joe Stalin really dead? ENJOY, THE AXE WILL SOON FALL!

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Tuesday, 7 September 2010, 16:07

  Well, it would seem we now have a government (decided by the independents - NOT the people). I can only hope and pray that Gillard has enough decency NOT to move her live-in boyfriend into the Lodge!

• 

  pfleming from minnipa , sa Tuesday, 7 September 2010, 16:07

  Julia just remember that you still are not an elected PM and that most people in Australia did not want you as our leader, your back stabbing ways will never be forgiven

• 

  1234jimmy from burwood , pissed right off Sunday, 5 September 2010, 12:05

  and i sincerely hope that you ms julia gillard do not become our next PM....the arrogant manner in which you treated me and the contempt you showed me merely serves as a warning never to vote for any female politician EVER! what gives you the temerity and the privelige to send federal police officers to my door after i asked you a perfectly honest and legitimate question referring to the port folio you held at that time? why? didn't you know the answer, my dear? there was certainly no need for you to ignore me for as long as you did, and have done! i surely shall have a heart attack should you ever call me or even just send me a letter of apology! and rudd met his demise at your arrogant hands as well! arrogance cometh before a fall......should you (perish the thought) become PM it will not be long before swan or shorten stick the damn knives in your back and may i say deservedly so! please do enjoy your albeit short tenure as PM and remember i shall not forget the arrogance and contempt displayed by you and the labor partyy EVER! i'm not some fool that you think is beneath you but by your actions i can walk tall and proud knowing that i am not an arrogant ignorant *****!

• 

  maureenmans from Macedon , Victoria Saturday, 4 September 2010, 12:04

  Spacek we cannot ignore the fact that Kevin Rudd, who I regard as an exceptional human being and politician, was severely wounded by the mining giants whose power in this country is real. However I am convinced further down the track we will all be grateful for his action. The fact that there is not a gap between his rhetoric and action is readily acknowledged. Incidentally, I recall a very similar scare campaign with Land Rights. It was John Howard's government that suggested people's backyards weren't safe from Native Title claims. The Labor Party had to choose between going to this election with a severely wounded PM or take the brutal action they did. Julia Gillard took no pleasure in it. She was regarded as a future leader and did not need this complication to further her interests. Kevin Rudd knows you sometimes lose battles to win wars. Thankfully for us all, he can see the forest is made up of trees. I see that you are angry and frustrated with th ALP but you seem someone who wants things to improve now and for the future. I trust the ALP feels the same. The LNP is not in a position to feel anything.

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Thursday, 2 September 2010, 23:02

  robertnstephenson, the country is grateful you are not a fortune teller. 5-7 seats! Hah. I will gloat all I like, and if Gillard gets in a poisoned chalice awaits her. What will Rudd be, her offsider -- the stabber and the stabbed? Obviously you have no ethics to think this is totally unAustralian behaviour -- engineering by the Right wing of the ALP. So will she have a clear mandate? Your thinking is illogical -- only that of a red ragging Labor supporter -- and I have been a union delegate for years. Until now ----- and I know plenty of people of the same mindset. Labor has changed since Chifley, when they had principles. Will the real world ever hit Hawthorndene?

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Thursday, 2 September 2010, 23:02

  Robertnstephenson, funny how Labor stalwarts do not give credence to anybody else's opinion. If Gillard gets in, it is because of the Labor right wing factions -- Bitar and Arbib. And how does one "hedge your beds" -- Sleep City combined with Bunning's gardening section perhaps. You should concentrate more on your written articulation skills than your ramblings. The bloodnut can HARDLY claim a mandate if she is pushed in by el Blando Wilkie, and her totally unethical deal with Bob Brown. She still has to cope with a still wounded and emotionally bleeding Rudd -- or do you have no empathy for him.

• 

  maureenmans from Macedon , Victoria Wednesday, 1 September 2010, 23:01

  This ALP team is a great team, doing a great job - warts and all. Their positive vision for the future and their well thought out policies are a realistic economic and social response to the challenges facing Australia and the rest of the world. They know they have to negotiate and achieve consensus. They know it will take patience and methodical hard work. Thank you Julia Gillard. The real problem the ALP has faced in this election has been how to cope with the hubris of LNP- demanding power because they don't know how to accept defeat with dignity. Their smear campaigns, leaks and petty nastiness have been a smoke screen for the extreme difficulty they have engaging with the issues of the future, not to mention attracting talented candidates. Malcolm Fraser said they are not ready to govern. John Howard said the LNP was dead until Tony Abbott brought it back to life. Sounds like he thinks it would take a miracle. I don't believe in miracles.

• 

  zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Wednesday, 1 September 2010, 21:01

  Sanga I think your point is that a person is capable of having religious beliefs that are different to the beliefs of others, including the majority of others, legally and morally within Australia. Wenvas, I think your point is that the structural institutions of the country are christian and have a religious component. As to whether Julia Gillards marital status is an issue given that the paramount power in our democracy is the consolidated vote it therefore follows that it is an issue, in her political life, if she loses more seats as a result of the influence it has on votes than she gains. With regards the technological aspects of this site I think we have to be careful not to see the web as the be all and end all of mass influence, and that is not to understate it's importance. In relation to whether the nature of these posts get to particular people within particular organisations, in particularb the ALP, of the notions I have tuned into over the last 20 years 6 degrees of seperation, hubs in networks, and so on, would be in the top dozen. The risk of not being heard by the ALP, on that basis, would be greatly reduced by posting here I am thus encouraged to speculate. However there are no gurantees in life.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Wednesday, 1 September 2010, 20:01

  Well excuse me for being blunt sangerer, but isn't this precisely what you're trying to do...impose your brand of (immorality) on others! What you seem unable to grasp is that your opinion is just that...your opinion! (And) you've shown clearly that you have absolutely no tolerance for other's. You throw around words such as bias and prejudice as though they apply exclusively to people who's standards of conduct differ from yours...wouldn't you say this is just a little bit hypocritical? As for your argument that how people choose to live their lives is their own business; I agree, this is between them and their conscience; However the conduct/morality of our PM is most certainly subject to public scrutiny, and rightly so! At this stage, I believe it would be prudent to amicably agree to disagree on this topic and move on.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Wednesday, 1 September 2010, 18:01

  You are correct ”Wenvas”. I actually have a copy of the constitution including several volumes of high court decisions standing in my shelf. Parliamentary conventions do make use of prayer and reference to the Queen and her representatives. You are also correct that Ms Gillard has spoken well of Mr. Rudd in public. The problem we are having here is how all this is connected to Ms Gillard’s marital status. I have no problems with your belief. I have a problem with your logic “Wenvas”. I have stated that I don’t care about your or anyone else’s religion, colour, creed, sexuality, marital status, gender, or whatever other bias or prejudices you or anyone else might have. I am only concerned with the politics of performance and not with the morality of perceived values. I do think it is about time that after 2000 years we separate church and state. As a society we could be a lot better off as well as avoid a range of wars and other nasty disputes that are still raging around the world because of people who like to impose their brand of morality on others. Don’t you agree, ‘Wenvas’?

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Wednesday, 1 September 2010, 13:01

  Sangerer, as I'm sure you're aware, Julia Gillard herself referred (publicly) to Kevin Rudd as an HONOURABLE man. She also repeatedly declared her unswerving LOYALTY to him as the Prime Minister...right up to her knifing him in the back! This must be obvious, even to you, that Gillard herself recognised these values even though they were not part of her own character. As for your denigration of our religious values, let me tell you that this is embedded in our Constitution. Please do take a look at the preamble of the "Australian Constitution" which states: "Whereas the people of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, humbly relying on the blessing of ALMIGHTY GOD, have agreed to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and under the Constitution hereby established:"...It would seem that your unconventional (over-liberal) mindset is in conflict with our own Constitution; (AND) until the Constitution itself is changed, that's the way it is. I should also point out that members of parliament are still required to stand for "The Lord's Prayer" whenever the house sits...I assume you do watch "Parliament Question Time".

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Wednesday, 1 September 2010, 10:01

  So you are telling me that Julia has no integrity, honesty, honour, morality, loyalty, sincerity etc because she is not married “Wenvas”. How does a quaint tradition that was enforced through the master and servant act and even the British slave act to control the movement, reproductive patterns and personal ownership rights somehow deliver virtue, integrity, honesty, honour, morality and sincerity. How does a ritual used by a religious organization as a state instrument to control people and enforce the rights of the master of the manor somehow turn a virtuous system of morality and loyalty. I am sure the young girls who were deflowered by the master of the manor before the master would give them away in marriage to a deserving serf had no issues with the church that enforced this system of loyalty, sincerity, morality. My point, ‘Wenvas’, let’s keep religion and the more dubious values, rituals and practices out of public service management issues. What you or anyone else does in private is no one’s concern. Commenting about people’s private lives is simply small minded gossip mongering and imposing a value system that is simply not shared by everyone. I am mean lets face, would you call Abbott’s budget honesty and the clear one liner lies through the campaign the act of a person with integrity, sincerity, honour and honesty. Well according to your yardstick, he has the measure, because he is married and a good catholic. Come on, give us a break! ----> P.s No one from the Party with any clout is on this this site. We are just blogging amongst ourselves. Can't you see that the whole site was designed by a bunch of advertising and marekting people without any understanding of the use and power of this technology...."werz51".

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Wednesday, 1 September 2010, 09:01

  Does anyone from the Labor party executive read these comments, or are we just venting to ourselves. If they do, surely they must see we were unhappy with the sacking of the PM, Kevin Rudd, and the way it was done. We are also angry with the people involved in it. These are the people responsible for labors loss, and it would do the party a service, if it got rid of them from any position where they get the chance to sell out the electorate again.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Wednesday, 1 September 2010, 00:01

  @sangerer: "I have always wondered about any nebulous notions that relate international standing with morality. Does this mean that Jacob Zuma is more moral than Julia because he has more than one wife, or does your morality only apply to a single western woman."...Now, that has to be the most ridiculous argument of all! If you had (like I have) spent any time at all in Africa, you'd realize that having more than one wife has always been an accepted part of their traditional culture. This is Australia (not Africa) and here we have very different values! As far as I know, bigamy is still a crime here. Nebulous notions? I thought I'd expressed my views clearly...nothing vague about what I said at all! In case you're still in doubt let me spell it out for you. It comes down to traditional values (virtues) such as Integrity, honesty, honour, morality, loyalty, sincerity etc, etc.. As surprising as it may be for you there's still a large percentage of Australians who do value these things.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 23:31

  @Wenvas I have always wondered about any nebulous notions that relate international standing with morality. Does this mean that Jacob Zuma is more moral than Julia because he has more than one wife, or does your morality only apply to a single western woman. If the later is the case, then the current practices of the Taliban towards single women of marriageable age comes to mind as a moral template for your convictions. It is not likely that we would tolerate a Prime Minister who is considered by Australians as well as by her own morality as chattel. It would not matter if I lived to 120! I would never wish to denigrate anyone to a second class citizen on the moral correctness of their marriageable status.

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 23:31

  Wenvas, you make some very pertinent points. I agree with you regarding the American system (which will interestingly NEVER appoint a foreign-born president). Gillard gained seats erroneously through the ridiculous preference system. And look at the ousting of a victorious Liberal in Tasmania -- this was LEGAL? Houseman was excluded from any conversations by Bartlett and the Green (Kim ?). At least they have one thing right, first past the post. You speak of a three-ringed circus -- you should have seen the polling booth in my electorate where soccer balls were being played with, near elderly and in some cases blind citizens and none of the officials said anything -- a shrug was what I received to my comments. If voting is made NON COMPULSORY as it is in every other country, people would not be voting to avoid a $20 fine and people who actually think would vote. And to all my detractors, where is my right to an opinion? And Robertnstephenson, did you mean "ranga" by range -- spelling is not your strong suit, obviously.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 23:31

  @Sangerer: "There is no substance in your mining / union conspiracy theory ‘Wenvas’."... I gladly stand corrected if in error here, but wasn't PM Rudd's stand on the "Super Profits Tax" the bullet that removed him from office; (And) wasn't it Paul Howes, Bill Shorten and their ilk who loaded the gun (metaphorically speaking). It's not too far a stretch to conclude that replacing Rudd with Gillard was a move to engage the mining magnates in a compromise they would find more to their liking...no-one can deny that this was precisely what happened. It's my view that the mining companies scare tactics would not have stood up under public scrutiny and that a strong leader such as Rudd could have gone on to win this election. It's as clear as day that people such as Howes and Shorten played right into the hands of the Mining magnates. Were they so stupid that they just didn't see this, or were they complicit (out of fear of losing this election)...

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 19:31

  @Sangerer: It is, of course, your perogative to disagree. I'm simply expressing the view that many of my generation have expressed to me...time and time again! You must agree that we too form a significant percentage of the electorate and the feedback I get is that many are disturbed by this lack of morality. This most certainly will impact on Australia's standing in the international community. As for the Unions involvement with the mining magnates, I suggest you research this a little more. I also should say that I'm not at all surprised by your stand regarding Gillard's marital status (or rather the lack thereof) nor do I deny your right to have such a view; however others, like myself, are just as entitled to their view. We've seen the moral fibre of our society disintegrate at an alarming rate and it doesn't sit well with many older citizens.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 19:31

  There is no substance in your mining / union conspiracy theory ‘Wenvas’. I respect your view that a party leader should be an example. As such I would consider myself even more at odds then you think you are. I am not interested in gender, race, colour, religion, sexual orientation, marital status or indeed the personal opinions and preferences of any politician with regards to any of the above. The only thing I am interested in is performance and the fact that people are not discriminated against on the grounds of irrelevant affirmative action policies that seem to dictate and protect people whose performance is simply wanting. In cases where performance is clearly over shadowed by unacceptable conduct ( such as the David Jones case ) standard legal recourse and mechanisms that allow people access to these mechanisms should be sufficient. However, ‘Wenvas’ what you are suggesting is treading on very dangerous ground because there are people in the public service at both federal and state level who actively abuse questions of morality in order to gain advantages by manipulating affirmative action policies and procedures. It would not do to add to the existing levels administrative procedural abuse by those who seek to use separateness or difference as an excuse for personal advancement to also have access to a martial requirement. Sorry ‘Wenvas’, I know what you are saying, but as a person who has been fighting against the excesses and deliberate abuse of affirmative action legislation for over two decades, I simply must disagree.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 14:31

  I should also add here, although I'm probably opening myself up for a lot of criticism; that, as an older Australian (descendant of early Australians sent to the (then) "Penal Colony") and with great-grandchildren already old enough to attend school, and as a loyal Labor supporter for most of my adult life, I shudder at the thought of our PM moving into the Lodge with a De-Facto partner. There are many older citizens, still holding traditional values, who feel the same horror at the thought of this. I know the younger generation have no problem with this, but my generation do find it disturbing enough to vote for the Coalition... Our leaders are supposed to set a good example! Morality is still importand to many of us...

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Tuesday, 31 August 2010, 14:31

  @ Flemosplace: In her first press conference as Prime Minister, Ms Gillard said a good GOVERNMENT had lost its way and she had a responsibility to step up and make sure it got back on track. Without doubt she was implying that the government (including the cabinet) had, under the leadership of PM Rudd, lost its way. The PM, along with his cabinet, is responsible for the policies, so how, pray tell, had a good government lost its way? PLEASE, let's be honest about this; apart from caving in to the mighty mining magnates demands, the policies under the Rudd government are the same policies promoted during this campaign. Let me point something out here; Having watched the "Australian Story" on ABC (23rd Aug.) which featured the secretary of the AWU (Australian Workers Union) Paul Howes, it was clearly seen that Howes was in league with the miners...there he was, as large as life, dining with a mining magnate (or two?) prior to the coup. There can be no doubt that PM Rudd was not going to shift from his stance and it was this, more than anything, that led to his removal. The first thing Gillard did (after the coup) was to capitulate to the demands of the mining magnates. A large majority of the electorate, myself included, agreed that a "Super Profits Tax" was fair and equitable; but no-one understood the combined power of the Mining magnates and the Union heavies. The Labor party has revealed its ugly/corrupt underbelly and in so doing has lost a great deal of support from loyal supporters. This is the "elephant in the room" that they refuse to recognize.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Monday, 30 August 2010, 23:30

  Should the leader of a parliamentary party be treated as the CEO of company? If the answer is yes then removing a non-performing CEO can have a positive impact on the share market. It can also elicit a wait and see market attitude if the company’s problems are more deep seated then poor leadership. It can be assumed that the electorate judged that the problem was not the leader but the board of directors responsible for some very sloppy decisions and some serious mistakes that cost the company dearly. It can also be assumed that members of a political party do not consider themselves as shareholders, even if the shared ideological principles are not always aligned. -------- I don’t know whether this analogy has any merit so let’s try a football team. The question is whether the PM is the coach or the owner? Either way, the club is down 2000 points on the latest count and both the transfer fees and the reserves on the benches are not the players I would rely on in a serious scrap against a quality opponent. Already more than 37% seem to think along similar lines. So let’s have a look at a serious player! -- If the adoption of carbon capture and storage (CCS) is urgently needed to help Australia meet it’s mandated targets, why isn’t it happening faster? --- No doubt a good question that needs to be reviewed in the light of the Carbon Institute Tax exemption status and a legislative decree to create an Institute with public money to deliver an outcome in CCS technology that has been in existence for many years. Why is CCS not being implemented despite the fact that technology is well known? In fact the implementation of GHG’s has not progressed much passed the theory because of the cost of research and testing as well as the cost involved in implementation and related market O&M constraints. It has been calculated that the cost is above $50 /MT. The reality is that there are a variety of other options that are not only more cost effective but can be delivered at a marginal cost utility well below $50/ MT. NO doubt the Labor government will stand by it’s stupid decision to support the Carbon Institute with tax payer dollars and underwrite the Institutes tax exemption status despite the fact that aggregate economic advantage suggests that waiting for CCS technology to be competitive will be the same as waiting for stage 4 nuclear power to become economically viable. -- The attached link is a great overview of the Cost of Carbon Mitigation. The “Vattenfall curve” is found on page 13 and really highlights why the cost of current investment in CCS is not considered the best spend of scarce resources by any country serious about CO2 reduction and energy cost control. --http://www.iea.org/work/2007/priority/Nelson.pdf ----- So here we not only have a football club that kills the coach, but actually allows the senior players to bet on decisions that are not in the long term interest of the club, or in this case the game…… We deserve good policy and good government. Will the three rednecks hold the country for ransom to achieve their version of good government and good policy? Until July 2011 at least, it seems! Will it be Abbott or Gillard at the helm? Neither impress! Although I think Abbott is worse. Labor has better policy options but a tendency to make some truly awful policy decision such as the Carbon Institute. Does this mean that a do nothing approach for the next 3 years might actually be best the best option. Maybe we can organize for Gillard and Abbott to take turns with a clear caveat that neither party is allowed to make any decisions and each policy must be voted on by the public. It s relatively easy to put in place an electronic voting system. They are doing it in the US, so why not here.

• 

  flemosplace from Warwick , Western Australia Monday, 30 August 2010, 19:30

  I agree Wevas it was something they brought upon themselves but it still could have been handled much better. Rudd was Pm but he wasn't the entire Government much of the positives would have been initiated by other members of the Cabinet while other initiatives are still to be implemented. It would have been an easy matter to promote the ALPs positive achievements in Gov't that would have elicited a much more positive response from the electorate on polling day. If your trying to sell something in a competitive environment the last thing you do is spend your time criticising your competition.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Monday, 30 August 2010, 14:30

  In response to flemosplace: It's perfectly obvious why the campaign was (mostly) an attack on one party by the other. First, Abbot had no positive achievements to put forward, and Second; the Labor party couldn't build on the achievements of the Rudd Labor government (which were many) because they'd made such a point that Rudd had "lost his way" and had to be removed. They were in a dilemma! How could they build on past achievements when it was Rudd who was at the helm during that time. This is something they brought upon themselves and they paid dearly for it!

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Monday, 30 August 2010, 13:30

  This whole debacle has turned into a three-ringed circus and needs to be settled sooner rather than later...enough is enough already! The continual bickering/infighting is sickening, to say the least! It's obvious that neither party will ever accept their own role in this unseemly mess. It seems all we can expect is the same ugly "business as usual" no matter who wins government. It's still a battle between the lobbyists, the factions, the unions, big business, and all those who seek to enforce their own interests, their own power...and to hell with the electorate! Democracy be damned! When it comes down to it the voice of the people (the electorate) is of little consequence. The people's right to expect those they elect to have a mandate to stay in office for a full term is the greatest falacy of all. Anyone can be replaced at any time for no legitimate reason...so what's the point of elections? I'm leaning more and more towards the American system where the party leader is elected by the people in the run-up to the major election. This would certainly put a stop to the revolving door of party leadership...here one day, gone the next on the whim of power brokers.

• 

  flemosplace from Warwick , Western Australia Monday, 30 August 2010, 12:30

  We are wasting our time if we are going to get into the arguement of what specific issues derailed the Labor Government ie Pink Bats ETS etc. In isolation none of these issues was the real cause. the rel cause of the debacle which accurred on 21 August was the totally inept campaign run by the Power Brokers in the Party. Many people have said that Kevin Rudd failed because he failed to sell his policies. I dont think that failure is confined to KR it seems to be a strategy of the Small Target which seems to have taken hold since Howard s success against Keating. The only TV ads I saw throughout the entire campaign were negative, warning about a return to Work Choices under Abbott or one showing a couple of over weight miners disacussing the Mining Tax. There was as far as I could see no positive advertising to re enforce some of the positive policies Gillard was proposing consequently they were lost. The electorate in the end was confronted with two negative messages one from the Libs and one from the ALP. The Libs could be excused they had nothing better to offer but the ALP after 3 years in government should have had a positive messagfe of achievment. To achievements were there but we weren't telling anyone. Therefore the electorate could not decide between the two negatives and returned a hung Parliament.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Saturday, 28 August 2010, 22:28

  Getting this blog working for the party by structuring it so that people can actually have proper policy access and get real time feed back could do a lot of good for a party that is strtuggling with power mongers at all levels. Using modern technology to democratize the party, deliver greater transparency and break down the existing power structures could even invite me back into the party. But as it stands, that would mean a lot of work form the ground up and I do not think the party is ready for it. What do you think "TheMagus2010"... p.s great book The Magus...

• 

  THEMAGUS2010 from Cairns City , Queensland Saturday, 28 August 2010, 18:28

  The people of Australia have made their judgement on political partys with six words - A POX ON BOTH YOUR HOUSES -. Now is the time to repair The Labor Brand. It shall be up to each any every member to do the hard yards like it or not.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Friday, 27 August 2010, 18:27

  Some would argue that the thesis of the faceless men is found in “The Third Man” http://www.filmsite.org/thir.html. It also has connotations to the fifties and sixties bogey man, the fear of communist infiltration. It is always used by the conservative right to remind people that Labor has a tradition of radical left wing union supporters who run the party. In truth the party is run by those who organize the branches. Much of this leaves a lot to be desired and explains why I am no longer a member. What is probably far more of a worry is the Gillard thesis that aimed to centralize political control of the parliamentary power base in the hands of a small number of senior ministers without actually putting in place proper checks and balances. Hardly the job of the faceless men, rather than the exclusion of those who required consultation! - I agree, the conduct and the quality of the media leave a lot to be desired. However, I would argue very strongly that the proper use and control of the media is the responsibility of the party and in particular those in charge of communication. I think it is obvious that Labor suffered not only a catastrophic communications break down at all levels, it suffered a communication disconnect between the executive, the rest of the party at all levels and the voters. So if you want the answer about what went wrong? Well here it is in a nut shell. How did it start? The Gillard thesis..... The rest is just the inevitable consequence of the hopeless inept disconnected and alienated ....

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Friday, 27 August 2010, 10:27

  I simply dont get this "faceless men" argument. Those that brought on the leadership spill had faces and they were in the caucus. The whole conundrum about Rudd was that Labor's policies were good but his ability to sell them and bring the Australian people with him had diminished. I don't entirely blame Rudd for this although I think his management style was very demanding of those around him and excluding of those that might have been able to give him sage advise. I also blame the media. They seemed to let Abbott get away scot free running around like a headless chook squawking "great big new tax on everthing" about the CPRS. The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme was a key policy of the 2007 election and a lot of swinging and left leaning voters voted Labor on that basis. As leader, Kevin Rudd, failed to communicate to the community about the virtues of the scheme. The Liberals were able to conduct an effective scare campaign on prices going up on electricity. Labor failed to stress that lower income people were going to be compensated. I dont understand why the CPRS was put on the backburner when it failed to pass the Senate for a third time. It was then that Rudd had to call a Double Dissolution election on the issue. If you recall Abbott had only just become leader and they voted the legislation down. Turnbull crossed the floor in the lower house over it. This would have been the opportune time to call an early election. Labor would have rightly been able to say that the Senate (including the Greens) had become obstructionist, the coalition was split in two over it and Labor was soaring in the polls. It was this error on Rudd's behalf that lead to his downfall. This error has done much to diminish Labor's stocks. Julia Gillard has done everything she can to restore the faith but she is doing this in an unprecedented environment. The cabinet leak in week 2 of the campaign would have sunk most leaders. Imagine if she'd have been given clear air in the campaign without the Rudd distraction ? We are now sitting on a knife edge. If there is another poll I can only hope that those "protest" voters and quite a few Green voters will swing back to Labor in the lower house. It will be a lower house election only I'd imagine.

• 

  maureenmans from Macedon , Victoria Friday, 27 August 2010, 08:27

  A lot has been said about the excessive influence/interference of the faceless men in the Labor Party, how about adding the pressure exerted by the faceless men of the LNP - Mining magnates, media barons and tobacco companies- to the discussion? I came to the conclusion that the ALP was forced into an intolerable position after the raising of the issue of the mining super profits tax. Queensland's multi-billionaire mining magnate and LNP donor, Clive Palmer, whose twenty year old son was standing for Moreton before withdrawing for health issues, was particularly resistent to the super profit tax.

• 

  zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Friday, 27 August 2010, 06:27

  Arbee25 I think there is a lot of evidence that the country is fragmenting and the test of national views, the Federal Election, seems to indicate that. What is interesting about your comments is that in some ways "asylum seekers" represents dealing with difference, and difference is what you are experiencing with the comments in this blog. Accomodating difference costs. But difference is an opportunity. The Australian way has been to have a strong central uniting theme first and then, but always then, have an ability for difference to contribute. This has been successful. It's sister long serving theme for Australia has been the experience of natural environment. I would argue that both look a bit shakey at the moment, and as a result my views on how to set my family for the future are rapidly changing from embracing to common purpose in favour of a more competitive, exclusive, and self serving approach. I would imagine many Australians are going the same way. And that is the problem.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Friday, 27 August 2010, 02:27

  A lot of life time labor voters had problems Arbee25. I suspect the problems stems from a series of polices that could have come straight out of the old Howard book. Policy consistency that differentiates not just a vision for where the nation should be economically; but where it should be ethically, legally and morally; are very important to the 21st century electorate. It seems to me that neither of the major political parties have actually picked up on how sophisticated the electorate truly is. There is a different voter in town and that voter is better educated, has travelled extensively before settling down to raise a family and is able to follow and discern political discourse far more quickly than the previous generation ever did. The voter knows a stuff up for what it is and is less likely to be forgiving of incompetence and frivolous parliamentary performance. After all, the voters have now had more than decade of doing it tough and delivering on the tread mill. What makes the politicians think that any voter will tolerate a second rate politician wasting their time with nonsense, indecision, and incompetence. If the voter is not going to put up with second rate politicians it is not likewly they will put up with non-elected party officials who try to shuffle the deck for personal gain, or some other Marchiavellian notions that are justified in the public good. Every politician will tell you what you need and what is good for you. Ever noticed that? I always wondered how they knew me? Well, given the questionable things that are going on in Victoria and NSW it seems to me that both the liberal and the labor parties are in serious need of internal reform if they want to capture, inspire and represent the voters again.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Thursday, 26 August 2010, 22:26

  Arbee25: Had PM Rudd not have had a close working relationship with his cabinet, the outstanding results they achieved would not have been possible...common sense alone should tell us this, surely! As for the unions; Yes, they have (and still do) play an important role within the labor party. But when their power reaches the stage where they're able to orchestrate the demise of a Prime Minister then, I believe, this is a great threat to democracy. Believe me I too am deeply saddened by the way things have turned out, but it could have (and should have) been prevented. They say that the people get the government they deserve; well I strongly believe that, as long as the people are prepared to accept non-accountability from our politicians, this is precisely what we'll get. This is an election Labor should have won. The policies were by far the best for our country...none can doubt this! So why were they not able to gain enough seats to form government? I have a wide circle of friends and acquaintances and I know the anger over the WAY our PM was deposed that's in the community...this election has proved this beyond doubt. We need honesty, integrity and accountability from our politicians...we should DEMAND nothing less!

• 

  Arbee25 from Jerrabomberra , NSW Thursday, 26 August 2010, 18:26

  I thought this was a Labor blog - I'm astounded by some of the downright nasty commentary going on, and some very obvious non-Labor views. I'm a life-time labor voter but had a really hard time supporting them in this election (particularly over asylum seekers), and only voted Labor because I like my local member. I'm really unhappy with Ms Gillard's treatment of the unions - who after all have and continue to be the backbone of the Party. Unlike many - I suspect that Kevin got it wrong, not necessarily on his policies, but on his relationship with his own cabinet and parliamentary party. I think what we saw was a parliamentary party who were tired of being ignored. I think Kevin may have forgotten, or not paid enough attention, to the fact that we are a democracy and people expect to be listened to. Whether they were wrong in what they did will become clear with time. There are many things about the Party today that make me unhappy, and I had hoped this blog was a way of getting them to listen to those of us who support them. The standard of conversation on this site worries me. How can we raise the standard?

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Thursday, 26 August 2010, 18:26

  As for bringing Kevin Rudd back; sadly that's not possible. The deed has already been done and there's no undoing it I'm afraid. However Labor might (perhaps) gain back some of the respect they've lost by loosening the hold of the Unions. But, in all honesty, I really can't see that happening. In regards to the "Spin" that's constantly fed to us; One glaring example is the "Free to Air" television slogan. There was a time when it was (rightly) called "Commercial Television" and the only "Free to Air" channel was the ABC. But, in those days at least, even that wasn't actually free as we had to pay a license (which went to the ABC). It's as clear as daylight why the "Spin Doctors" chose to change commercial TV to "Free to Air"; And it was not because we were suddenly free of continuous brain-washing commercials...NO! This was done so that we would (more readily) accept the rubbish dished out if we were told it was free...Rubbish! The commercial channels make a fortune through our constant exposure to mind-numbing commercials. In the same vein politics embark constantly on "Spin" to persuade the public to believe their propaganda. It's just been done to death and very few believe it anymore.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Thursday, 26 August 2010, 17:26

  MaryCH Wrote: "To whoever asked can we have Kevin back my answer is a huge NO. To those who are trying to rewrite history and make out Kevin is modern day messiah please think about the following very carefully. Rudd had no compunction about "knifing" Kim Beazley. He played the numbers game when it suited him." Kim Beazley was NOT the duly elected Prime Minister...there can be no comparison! "The leader of the party is decided by the caucus not the Australian people." Yes indeed, the leader of the party is SELECTED by the party, however the prime minister is ELECTED by the people... it is the people that decide who they want as their PM. This whole ugly mess is due entirely to the faceless men exercising their power...nothing more, nothing less! Surely you remember PM Rudd standing up to the Unions (trying to bring them under control). He was the only one with enough gumption to attempt this. You either have a very short memory or you're very misinformed. Whether the following URL will make it through or be censored is anyone's guess, but on the chance it does, here is a link to the latest "Australian Story" on ABC. http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/program/625011 Your really are quite naive if you believe the spin doctors. As a senior citizen and a loyal labor suppporter, I've seen enough of politics to recognise spin when I see it.

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Thursday, 26 August 2010, 16:26

  To whoever asked can we have Kevin back my answer is a huge NO. To those who are trying to rewrite history and make out Kevin is modern day messiah please think about the following very carefully. Rudd had no compunction about "knifing" Kim Beazley. He played the numbers game when it suited him. The leader of the party is decided by the caucus not the Australian people. I know the campaign are conducted in a presidential way but the leader comes from the person that has the support of the members. If it had gone to the vote he would have lost 80/30. I am convinced the sitting members that swung behind Gillard did so in the interests of the party. Rudd's message was not cutting through or getting through. He was incapable of standing up to Abbott nonsense and that is what Julia meant by "losing its way". The so called undecideds we saw at Rooty Hill and the Broncos leagues club asking Julia Gillard about why she challenged him for the leadership said something to the effect that it was their job to oust him. Well excuse me but dont you find it completely ironic that those who wanted to lynch Labor in NSW and QLD are the very ones wanting to deify him and then still vote coalition.

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Thursday, 26 August 2010, 15:26

  At one of the first hurdles the Liberal Party and Tony Abbott are faultering. Though the request for the costings is unusual, it is reasonable and the Labor government is complying to this request - though from last report the ALP do need to get some advice on how it is done within our political framework.
  
  Regardless of which party gets the numbers these individuals are going to be a real problem - every single policy vote will come down to what they can get out of it for themselves and in the end I feel after about 12 months the political system will be ready for another election.
  
  

• 

  JamesBluntus from Wyong , New South Wales Thursday, 26 August 2010, 10:26

  Spacek. We haven't lost the election yet. Why won't Abbott submit his policies for costing? If he is worried about a leak, there shouldn't be a leak if it is all above board. He has something to hide.

• 

  flemosplace from Warwick , Western Australia Wednesday, 25 August 2010, 18:25

  I thought this Web Site was set up to get positive suggestions for new policy ideas etc. If I wanted to see Liberal Party propaganda all I would have to do is read the ABC Drum site. I suggest Spacek you go there you will find many extremists with your views you would be right in your element.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Wednesday, 25 August 2010, 12:25

  It's high time the parliamentarian's realised the fact that they are elected by the people to serve the people...Not the the faction warlords. It was the people who elected PM Rudd and no union heavy's or powerful faction leaders have the right to snub their noses at the sacred voice of the people. The people had their say in 2007 and their voice has (again) been heard in this (2010) election. BUT STILL it's business as usual and the voice of the people is (again) not being heard. The Labor party is instead (still) feeding the line that PM Rudd had to go. They will NOT, under any circumstances, shoulder the blame for the mess we now find ourselves in. PM Rudd had to go because the faceless men felt threatened by a "Good Man". I'm reminded of another "Good Man" who was deemed a threat to the powers brokers of the day...he was crucified! These thoughts were expressed on Labor Connect by myself and many, many others the very night of the coup. I myself begged Gillard to please withdraw her challenge, others said; "You will destroy Labor". But nobody listened, and you're not listening now. The more you try to whitewash those responsible for deposing our duly elected PM the more the people dispise your actions.

• 

  noname from Paddington , NSW Wednesday, 25 August 2010, 11:25

  Can we have Kevin back?

• 

  maureenmans from Macedon , Victoria Wednesday, 25 August 2010, 11:25

  It's not over til the last ball bounces and that hasn't happened yet. I agree with Lyphoung 'United we stand United we stand United we stand United we stand'' I am convinced the ALP has a positive vision and the best policies to foster the Australian people's wellbeing while behaving as decent global citizens. They are also a very talented and honourable team who have been tackling the hard issues. No-one could deny these require patience and persistence. While it's necessary to discuss what needs to be done to improve among supporters, it is not helpful for ALP politicians and public figures who identify themselves as ALP supporters, to be publically bagging the ALP, especially to ABC Radio National reporters/presenters, some of whom seem to be sweating on a coalition government.

• 

  pfleming from minnipa , sa Wednesday, 25 August 2010, 10:25

  I was just wondering if anyone from the federal Labor party is reading these comments? They all have the same feel about them or are they still treating us like idiot's as before. Haven't you learnt anything in the past week. The people have spoken, why haven't the faceless men been delt with? Haven't you got any guts Julia? Kevin would have.

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Wednesday, 25 August 2010, 09:25

  Well, let me make this simple... idiots made bad voting choices. Idiots believed the sky was falling, and idiots believed the man who cried wolf. Now we will have idiots holding the power... this will be a very short term of government, then we will have a reduced greeens influence as people see how foolish they are, and it is quite possible some of those independents will go as well.

• 

  THEMAGUS2010 from Cairns City , Queensland Wednesday, 25 August 2010, 06:25

  I trust members will wait until the count is final before we begin to consider how we repair The Labor Brand. The Australian People got it right on Saturday and there now is a new page in Australian History. I am proud of the Australian People.

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 20:24

  Spot on. Liberals have unattractive policy but implement it well. Labor have attractive policy but implement poorly, or at least thats what they've done in their term. Wyatt Roy is the 20 year old.

• 

  jonathan from latham , act Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 18:24

  Re Rudd's removal: Labor politicians and some supporters just DON'T GET IT. Many (most?) of us were (and forever will be) grateful to Rudd for rescuing Australia from the abhorrent Little John Howard, no doubt about that. AND, many of us believe that this should have given him a very large store of credits - certainly enough to ward off any leadership challenges in his first term short of a major disaster. We are, though, both disgusted and disenchanted because of the way the dumping was orchestrated (p^ss off Shorten, you are forever tainted), and how the dumping has clearly diminished the value of the PRIME MINISTERSHIP. Note to Federal labor politicians - Dumping an incumbent PM is NOT THE SAME as changing Opposition Leaders!!!

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 17:24

  Sorry MaryCH if I upset you! My loyalty is to the logic of good policy and not the minute details of bad party politics or poor policy implementation. I will agree with you that on the basis of good or bad policy the liberals are worse. But if we are talking about Labor’s track record on implementation, we might as well put that 20 something liberal kid (what's his baby face ) from QLD in charge. NO MaryCH! My comments are not about the party, or indeed about any party. They are about the process of arrogance and the fact that not even party political opinion has managed to keep pace with the shift away from the religious right. Has anyone asked why so many informal votes were recorded? I did a bit of research on this before the election and discovered that a large number of 20 - 35 males intended to cast an informal vote because no party represented their interests. So what where the issues for this demography? They wanted Jobs, cheaper or even free education, no Religious extremism dictating political policy, no internet filter, no church / religious influence on public policy, better / free health services just like western Europe ( because no one has time to work the mess called Medicare or even take days of work to claim the rebates), less conservative restrictive media censorship, green jobs and new high technology manufacturing, policies that do not favour big business and support monopolies and anti-trust relations and policies that do not sell public assets to the private sector. In contrast, many women in this age group added to this list a preference for the Greens since they did not want to give their vote to the Sex party or an independent where preferences could be lost. So what this demography of people ( who have also travelled extensively through Asia, Europe and US ) are talking about is a policy vision that identifies the type of society they want to live in. They are telling us what type of society they don't want to live in because they have seen the best and the worst in their travels overseas and they do not want a country (their country) as rich as Australia turn into a basket case because we can’t find intelligent people to run it.--- The same criticism applies to the bush. I have now been dealing with the farmers and the greenies, surfers, ferals and ratbags for a long time and I can say with certainty that not one of them gives a R....ts a..... *** about a carbon tax, but everyone wants clean energy and everyone wants to share in the ownership of clean energy because no one wants to pay their bills to an overseas owned investment board. So if you have that level of consistency between the most conservative and the most left wing radical people in the country, only a political party consisting of complete numb nuts is incapable of formulating a coherent and consistent policy.

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 16:24

  I wish people would stop saying things like the two parties are the same. They are not. The neo-cons in the Liberal Party have stated they will slash and burn many services in education and health. They kept going on like a broken record about debt - what debt ? The debt to GDP ration was 6% .The Liberals acted like surpluses are personally their money and were so very proud of the them. Well its our money and I, for one, would rather see taxpayers money go to government services or improved infrastructure. Labor was not a bad government. It unfortunately had to steer the nation through unchartered waters of the GFC which meant its original agenda had to take a back seat. The Liberals and Nationals at the time were espousing a modest stimulus. That would have proved disastrous for the economy as people would have lost confidence. Mark my words we would have had a recession if the coalition had the reins. I am also sick of all this talk of the faceless men. When Rudd was rolled he was heading the government to defeat. I followed the political proceedings very carefully at this time and it was clear that Abbott had his measure. The faceless men had faces and werent afraid to call a spade a spade. They did what they had to do and as a life long Labor supporter I agree with decision to replace Rudd with Gillard.

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 15:24

  Well, so much for my guess that the Independents will select Labor. I can hardly see how they would do that now they're tearing each other appart like this. Its all playing beautifully into Liberal's hands as they keep up the message that Labor can't form a stable government.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 15:24

  I am not a party member. I resigned years ago because of the corruption in the Victorian Branch. Therefore I can't comment on people that are being blamed by some on this blog. ----> As far as I can see there is an organizational disconnect between the party leadership and the rest of the party. This would not have happened if the parliamentary organization would not have been restructured in a way suggested by the Gillard Thesis. I presume, the power vacuum and the position of vulnerability for a kitchen cabinet without party support is very plain. It also points to major flaws in the Gillard thesis of the party restructure. Mind you, as a non-member and as independent outside observer, I am not familiar with the details and don't actually care. I am only interested in good policy and a bunch of politicians who are genuinely interested in quality legislative processes that deliver the best outcome to this country instead of the best outcome for an individual. I see the whole notion of concentrating power for the benefit of building a leadership cult as fundamentally totalitarian in nature and intend. Any good thesis on leadership would tell you that this only works when the leader has what is called charisma. Do we really think that either Rudd or Gillard has the sort of Charisma that a Hawk or a Whitlam still commands today.... No, neither have it because both lack the intellectual capacity. Even "The Abbott" and the rest of the crew on the liberal side of the fence don't have any mark of greatness. Here is the problem that Australian politics is facing. The nation has grown in sophistication and we are left with Howard’s 50” white picket fence mediocrity. The fact that we have no great visionary or genuine great statesmen is truly disconcerting. - No one really cares about any post mortem finger pointing. No one cares whether the quality of mediocrity is described with the rise of "The Abbott", or by sending the Napoleon Rudd to the proverbial Elba. All is basically not relevant! The fact that Australian voters are faced with totalitarian notions of power, by two parties that make no effort to disguise their ambitions as fundamentally non representative of the reasonable aspirations of the average Australian is what is important. Don’t blame the faceless men and the media for creating a political climate that deliberately pushes an agenda that divides opinions by whipping up prejudices and bigotry and feeding the base human ideals with ignorance and misinformation. This sort of exercise is so negative and pointless. The real issue is this. What do the main parties do now that they know that the Australian voter is not fooled by people of lesser ability and lacking honesty and backbone to deliver genuine quality policy that benefits the whole nation and not just a few mates? That is the true question the no hopers in Canberra are being asked to answer. Mind you, I don't think that the kid from QLD would have any hope in hell in comprehending that one. Who on earth thought about preselecting a mental midget...... maybe in future we just nominate clowns, bimbos and no-hopers for parliament as long as we can pass a law that says that we don't have to pay them more than the minimum wage.

• 

  rampam89 from Baulkham Hills , NSW Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 14:24

  The faceless men who orchestrated the removal of Kevin Rudd should be given the sack. However looks like the faceless men are being protected. Mark Arbib chickened out Q and A. I will never ever think of voting for Labor if Bill Shorten makes it as a leader of Labor party.

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 14:24

  Spacek some questions for you - why are you questioning people's heritage as if somehow this is a relevant point ? Why do you assume that asylum seekers that are legitimate refugees will be on Centrelink payments for life ? More to the point where is your evidence of this ? Why have you, throughout your posts, resorted to calling people tree-huggers even when the topics isnt even anything to do with environmental issue when you disagree with someone. I think we have all had about enough of your putrid drivel. Perhaps you should take you redneck and racist beliefs to a Liberal Party forum. I dont think even they would countenance your nonsense.

• 

  rampam89 from Baulkham Hills , NSW Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 13:24

  The faceless men who orchestrated the removal of Kevin Rudd should be given the sack. However looks like the faceless men are being protected. Mark Arbib chickened out Q and A. I will never ever think of voting for Labor if Bill Shorten makes it as a leader of Labor party.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 13:24

  You are lucky JoshuaLove. I just received a couple invites to take on senior executive posts offshore myself. You are a bit late tiamaria. I agree that Australia has never respected either aged care or health care. The fact that Australia has a complete farce of a superannuation system to fund long term health and aged care policy to a quality level that is expected in a modern western european country instead of a third world state, has always been a nagging backdrop to my arrival by plane. The fact that australian voters have done nothing about it since the sixties stands as a testimony to how little Australians care about quality health and aged care. It is simply unbelievable that Australia has allowed a quasi US health system to develop that is specifically designed to serve the greed of the medical profession and the private for profit based operators. It is not suprising that many people are going overseas for major dental and other work because at least the price advertised on the website is the price you pay for the service.

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 13:24

  And to top it all, Bill Shorten has aspirations to become PM. I hope not. Labor voters will never forget his disloyalty and bad advice. Whenever any of the backroom plotters are seen standing for election, we won't forget the damage they've done to the labor party and the country. We don't need the self serving incompetents making anymore stupid decisions.

• 

  tiamaria from Lake Tabourie , NSW Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 13:24

  Hi PM Julia Gillard, If we need to go back to the poll booth,( i hope not) but how about thinking more on what can be done for us retired and disability pensioners after all we worked hard and paid our tax during our days and no hand out from the government back than,Not like they received from our government in todays society all for the younger generations and No Respect for the retired pensioners. We would like to received a big bonus every year to help us get by.just maybe U may win more votes over next time. I always been a devoted Labor supporter and this voters going through tough times with medicial and phyicial and struggle trying to make ends meet. Thank you Julia good luck tia-maria

• 

  JoshuaLove from Shoalhaven , NSW Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 12:24

  I love how people criticize the ALP for the removal of Kevin Rudd, it is politics, same party different face. Get over it and stop your media fed delusions. I'm glad I'm moving to the USA for half of the next Governments term because Tony Abbot will kill companies, families and schools. Putting jobs at risk and raising the cost of living, driving our economy into recession. He is comparable to George Bush with his racism and backwards policies.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 10:24

  You got it "The FencersYarn". Labor spat the dummy over the carbon tax when they realized that the public service was taking them on a suckers ride to deliver a tax that would compensate the polluters. Since they had no idea how to get out of the mess they just dropped the ball altogether. Next, came the panic over the GFC that was linked to someone telling the Rudd govenrment "we must stimulate the economy". The whole notion of pink bats and school halls and giving away a few bucks for Christmas is just complete kinder garden panic. Much better results could have been achieved by stimulating the economy with some serious infrastructure projects such as fixing the national electricity grid or building a water pipe line from the north of Australia to the south. In fact, looking for projects where money can not be siphoned away by unscruplous state public servants or anyone without proper workplace tickets wishing to establish a two bit company, should have been the priority. -----> Secondly, publishing the reports on Australia's water and energy security and putting in place proper third party access legislation and a national feed in tariff would have delivered a creditable Rudd term and avoided the unnessary Gillard event. In short, labor did not just loose its way, it lost its nerve and was badly advised about what policy agenda it should have driven through its entire first term. The first thing that should be done now is to get rid of the kids that are pretending to be policy advisors. The second thing is to listen to the people who Know and who are in the know regardless of where they stand politically. -----> This means that the appointment of appropriate state officials to Indonesia should have been a priority. In line with this appointment a policy initiative that speeds up refugee processing and seeks out those who wish to profit from human trafficing would have killed the boat issue dead in the water. Instead, labor enters a campaign facing the need to resolve a diplomatic issue with an ill defined solution. Once again, the problem is poor policy, poor execution and poor management. The three aspects of the entire labor term boils down to poor policy advisors, poor policy management, and poor project management. Why because of poor HR management and inappropriate people being placed into positions of authority due to an attempt to re-structure the parliamentary party vertically (thanks to the Gillard thesis) without maintaining the appropriate checks and balances. So I say it again..... get rid of the children and the would be could be's....Let's take the mining tax. Any advisor with a brain would have advised you that a major tax reform is always run thus; " introduce it through a campaign and implement it at the start of the term." So what idiot advised you to implement a major tax reform at the end of a term and before an election.........Get some professional advisors who know what the hell they are doing.....!

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Tuesday, 24 August 2010, 00:24

  I think I've figured this flaming mess out. Some blokes have said: if you don't stand for something then you will fall for anything. Labor didn't bloody stand for anything like it did in 2007 and Libs made 'em pay for it by causing them to fall on anything and everything from poor project management to assylum seekers to Rudd's demise to internet censorship and failed climate change policy. It didn't matter if these were real things to fall on or only percieved ones, Tony was successful in making them fall because the only thing they could stand for was an NBN with a flipping filter. Libs didn't stand for anything except stopping boats, despite their slogan, which is probably the only reason they didn't completely run Labor out of government. What do you stand for Labor? What do you stand for Julia? What are you bloody moving Australia forward to?

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Monday, 23 August 2010, 23:23

  I still find it hard to believe that labor lost this election, after bringing us through the recession in such good shape. Labor lost it, the liberals didn't win it. Their disloyalty to Rudd, and pushing an unknown on to us in Gillard, then calling an election immediately was the height of folly.

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Monday, 23 August 2010, 21:23

  Sound policies but uninspiring. Labor lost the vision and dream it gave Aussies. The NBN was the best vision they had but they were a match for Abbott's anti-boat people policy so no blasted difference there and they wouldn't drop that Bloody filter, so none of the techys and web surfers were really that attracted to it. Truth be told the ADSL connection isn't all that slow enough for a lot of people to really whinge about it. People would have been more impressed if they promised to get all of Australia in speeds better than flipping dialup.

• 

  Roadrunner from Bundoora , Australia Monday, 23 August 2010, 21:23

  Robertnstephenson has a very good point. There is no doubt that Labor policies are sound, and that given a proper opportunity that Australians would prefer a Labor government. But that opportunity was taken from us, not because people don't want a country with a good federal run health system, or an intelligent country born through skilled educated workers. It wasn't taken from us because we wanted WorkChoices back, or a sub par broadband infrastructure. And I definitely wasn't complaining about a mining tax, that similarly funds another country with the highest standard of living in the world. Sadly, none of this was made clear to the hard working Australians that are too busy working to provide for their families to investigate these matters for themselves. That is what the media is for. Unfortunately, the Liberal Party's superb team of marketers managed to spew out some inspired propaganda. And Labor did not. The election result is the outcome of Labor being on the back foot when it comes to communications. The people have spoken. I just hope this doesn't cost us a second term.

• 

  Roadrunner from Bundoora , Australia Monday, 23 August 2010, 21:23

  Robertnstephenson has a very good point. There is no doubt that Labor policies are sound, and that given a proper opportunity that Australians would prefer a Labor government. But that opportunity was taken from us, not because people don't want a country with a good federal run health system, or an intelligent country born through skilled educated workers. It wasn't taken from us because we wanted WorkChoices back, or a sub par broadband infrastructure. And I definitely wasn't complaining about a mining tax, that similarly funds another country with the highest standard of living in the world. Sadly, none of this was made clear to the hard working Australians that are too busy working to provide for their families to investigate these matters for themselves. That is what the media is for. Unfortunately, the Liberal Party's superb team of marketers managed to spew out some inspired propaganda. And Labor did not. The election result is the outcome of Labor being on the back foot when it comes to communications. The people have spoken. I just hope this doesn't cost us a second term.

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 21:23

  ??? Well... Neither did I. I continue to agree that the removal of Rudd was wrong, or at the very least done VERY wrongly. Removing Rudd threatened the marginal seats won in his 2007 election and seated by relativley new, minor members of the party. But keeping Rudd was a threat to the WA seats held by longer term members. The miners sold their plight very well and Rudd sold the tax very poorly. The miners could have taken it but Rudd should have backed down and negotiated once he realised he couldn't sell it. Still, I think he could have salvaged the situation or, at the very least, he should have been given a chance to salvage it. Tony Abbott took on Malcolm in public and gave him an opportunity to decline the support to Labor's policy that he protested and then took a shot at the leadership. Effectively, it didn't look like a backstab but a respectable opposition and difference of opinions before the issue of a respectful challenge to leadership. Rudd's removal didn't look respectful at all and came across as completley cruel.

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Monday, 23 August 2010, 20:23

  @Wenvas: I never said it was legitimate ;)

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Monday, 23 August 2010, 20:23

  @GLaDOS--Even if what you say has any substance other than heresay, biased opinion, or political spin, it's still not a legitimate reason to sack the duly elected Prime Minister. Sorry, but I just don't buy that argument... ...I should also add that a leader trying to implement much needed reform cannot be seen as a wimp who can easily be pushed around. I point to John Brumby as an example. His whole demeanour during those negatiations could only be described as a dictatorial bully. Negotiations can be tough and it takes a firm resolution to put across a convincing argument.

• 

  chris1948 from Melbourne , VIC Monday, 23 August 2010, 19:23

  An extraordinary amount of drivel and half truths on this blog. What I want to know is where's Karl ( or Wally is it ) and why Arbib has done a runner from Qanda on the ABC tonight?

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Monday, 23 August 2010, 19:23

  @GLaDOS--Even if what you say has any substance other than heresay, biased opinion, or political spin, it's still not a legitimate reason to sack the duly elected Prime Minister. Sorry, but I just don't buy that argument.

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 18:23

  Kevin Rudd is finished in the senior Labor team if Labor doesn't get in on this election. It would not surprise me if he decides to become an independent in his electorate, or even join one of the other minor parties. If Labor do get in, I seem to recall that he's been promised a senior ministry position which is why he's been playing ball. Kevin Rudd's decline in popularity didn't simply start with the failed ETS. He also came across as a bully in the way he pushed his Federal hospital system onto the states. The labor members of the states wanted a chance to look like they were standing up for their voters and he remained stubbornly against them for quite some time. This probably sewed the seeds for the rest of Labor's dispise for him. The mining tax was pushed too hard. Sure the mines could afford it, but they couldn't sell it to the Australian public while the mining giants pulled together over three hundred million dollars to campaign against it (I think the two major parties spent only about thirty million together on TV adds in the election campaign). The whole thing threatened the electorates of senior Labor MPs so they got right behind getting rid of him ASAP. I still believe they were best to stick by him and go for a late election, but if they were truly hell bent on getting rid of him, it should have been done better. They should have, at least, APPEARED to give him the chance to win back popularity. Only a week, would have been needed, then they could still dispose of him but look more lenient about it. Instead they took a hardline approach and have paid for it ever since with the public's perception of them as cruel *****s every time that image of Kevin shedding tears was played.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Monday, 23 August 2010, 17:23

  As a loyal Labor supporter all my adult life, I couldn't bring myself to put in a blank ballot paper nor to vote for any other party (in spite of my determination NOT to support the malicious coup de'etat). As a disillusioned supporter I feel I'm entitled to know what were the grounds for dethroning PM Rudd? The story line that he had somehow "lost his way" does not stand up in my opinion. How had he lost his way? I'm now regretting my decision to vote Labor as all I hear is how much worse things would have been (in this election) if he was still the leader; Why, I ask, why, why, why? The fact that he was dropping in the polls also doesn't hold water as polls are up and down all the time, and it's hardly surprising he suffered a drop in popularity considering the vicious media villification he was subjected to for months...where was his team when he needed support, and why did they stand back and let the blame for dropping the ETS fall on his shoulders? These questions need to be answered! It sickens me to listen to the Labor power brokers (and) the media still sticking the knife into him at every opportunity. In my opinion he (alone) has acted honourably through all this ugly business. It's no secret that Bill Shorten hates him with a vengeance; But again, the question begs to be asked...WHY??

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 17:23

  I personally suspect the independents will still select Labor. Sure, they are considered to be more aligned with Liberals in their values, views and tendencies, but Labor will negotiate with them much more and is unlikely to disolve parliament and call another election in the near future since Liberals would almost certainly hold more popularity for sometime. The last thing Labor want is to get into power and give the Liberals more ammunition about them not running a stable government by disolving parliament early. Its in their best interests to keep going at all costs. Independents are likely to want the NBN to their electorates, a lowering of the Australian Dollar and (if they're smart) changes to the electoral system so smaller parties have a greater chance of holding the balance in the lower house in future. Changes to ensure the election of a neutral House Speaker and Governor General would be desirable as well. Whatever the case, we're likely to see all parties continuing their campaigning right up until another election is called be it 3 years away or less than 1. Although, I'm not sure how they can get grounds for a dissolution of parliament by the Governor General if they don't have a policy rejected by the Senate twice... Rudd should really have called another election then, when he looked like he was pushing for climate change and it was getting rejected by the senate.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Monday, 23 August 2010, 16:23

  Some of the comments are getting a bit frisky. Do I detect a general mood that Gillard is not likely to pull together a stable minority government and that even Abbott will be struggling? Surely Abbott has a slight seat advantage and the conservative tradition of the independents. This seems to suggest that not much of the labour agenda can be saved and we have to resign ourselves towards higher unemployment and a deep economic downturn. It is time to organize the next campaign with a better alp.org. It is time to concentrate on better policy, better implementation and better organization.

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 15:23

  Its difficult because Labor have such a diverse range of members with very different beliefs and values between semi-right wing and semi-left wing politicals views. For instance, Stephen Conroy is a dedicated Catholic and a number of other Labor members are strongly religious. If Julia decided to announce Gay marriage, its likely these people would cross the floor if they couldn't get her dethroned, rather than vote this in. Its likely that this occurred with climate change. While they went in on the popularity of it, by signing the Kyoto protocol, when it came to the crunch of implementing a plan, a good many labor members are actually skeptics or highly concerned about the retaliation by business or the impact on the economy at implementing the scheme. Despite how he's thought of as a dictator in his party, it's likely that Kevin had to very much pull back on what he wanted to do with climate change, because of his party. I'm surprised they didn't go at odds with Tony over Assylum seekers. They could have minced him by showing the real figures to play down the threat that he made them to be and given an alternate policy to inject the money due for detention centres into overseas processing centres in Indonesia. Many of the asylum seekers travelling by boat have been there, awaiting processing, for a long time, not jumping on the smuggler's boats immediately. You give them faith in the processing system and you suddenly remove the smuggler's customer base. The people can come over and go straight into jobs and begin paying taxes and renting their own accommodation instead of sitting in detention centres or out of work while they're processed. Julia is a member of the soft-left faction which is the smallest, as far as I know, so she's forced to deal with the larger Labor-left faction and even more so with the biggest, Labor-right faction which voted her in to replace Rudd. Senior members derive from a number of seats in WA which came under threat from Rudd's mining tax stance while the members who have lost their seats have all been fairly junior members who didn't have a lot of sway in keeping Rudd in so they could retain their seats. Rudd's stance threatened the electorates of senior members of the right so they worked quickly to eliminate that threat and keep a grip on their own power. As much as all of labor would like to win the election, the senior members will happily see them loose it and minor members fall before they risk becoming a back bench candidate with Labor in power.

• 

  peterj60 from Carina Heights , Queensland Monday, 23 August 2010, 14:23

  GLaDOS: I agree Kevin could have redeemed himself and maybe saved the day, if he was given the chance. He was of course the leader who appeared to actually lead at the 2007 election and was a bright hope for a renewed ALP. His apology to the Stolen Generation and signing of the Kyoto Protocol were evidence of this - plus the ETS, NBN and evn perhaps the mining tax. I suppose I was getting at that, in my circle of friends and acquaintances, the disappointment with Labor has really stemmed from the inability to continue that leadership and backdown on certain issues - carbon emissions and treatment of asylum-seekers, mainly. This started with Kevin - which perhaps wasn't of his own making - but certainly ended with Julia. It was these factors, plus the lack of much of a positive vision that came more into play with our disappointment, rather than who was the leader, leaks etc, although the broader electorate may have had different ideas. It would have been great if Kevin had the chance to put things right and prove himself for re-election, but that wasn't to be, and no real attempt appeared to be made by Julia to do the same. She just seem to be in the business of placation and damage-control when some aspiration based on the recent past would have been welcome. The Greens reaped the rewards as a result - still don't understand the Tony vote at all!

• 

  stasher from Sydney , NSW Monday, 23 August 2010, 14:23

  If Labor manage to convene a government PLEASE JUST LET JULIA get on with the job. For those evil power brokers in the background STOP! We the voters are tired of the games, back-stabbing, and want a real government that takes good positive action. I think Julia is a good leader, and will be a good leader.

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Monday, 23 August 2010, 14:23

  At the moment the media seem to hedging their beds with Tony Abbott. I have no issue with anyone forming government but I guess I have issues with the media telling us, the Australian people how things should work. In a way they told us how to vote... it isn't our political system that could use an overhaul, or media services could be reeducated into neutrality in political reporting... then I guess that is same as wishing for Tony Abbott to recognise Climate Change

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 14:23

  The problem with Gay marriage is that it really has a lot more opposition than most people think. Many people are willing to accept Civil Unions for homosexuals, but won't budge on the word marriage. The real issue is that marriage either is, or has become, a subjective term and that this subjective term exists in the legal system. Here's what I propose: REPLACE THE WORD MARRIAGE WITH THE TERM "CIVIL UNIONS" IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM. This way, Catholics can claim that their unions are truly marriage, Islamists can claim that theirs are true marriages, homosexuals can claim that theirs are marriages but the legal CONTRACT which covers the rights and obbligations will be known only as a CIVIL UNION CONTRACT. A catholic marriage will be legally enforced by a civil union contract, just as it will be between gay couples. Everyone is on even terms legally and the debate over the meaning of marriage can continue outside the law. Seriously, does any religion regard the union between an athiest man and an athiest women by an athiest celebrant to be a true marriage in the eyes of their deity/s?

• 

  tiamaria from Lake Tabourie , NSW Monday, 23 August 2010, 13:23

  Hi PM Julia Gillard, We are retired and unfortunately not one party either Labor or Liberal offered anything on the table for us.( it was for the families,paterninty leave,apprentice,schools kids,etc) I am just wondering if you need to have another voting day? How about re-thinking about a couple of very keen isues that been missed by both parties that is GIVE A BIG BONUS EACH YEAR TO RETIRED PENSIONERS,just like you give baby bonus...and futher more give the Gay men and women the right to married (but not in the church) is it realy going to worry anyone?No I would be more concerned that Asylum seekers have more right than the Australia taxpayer. Just hope you see my point of view just maybe you can received more votes if we need to go back to the polls. cheers maria

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 13:23

  @Robert: I agree that if the conservatives choose Liberals, they'll likely see another election in a year or so. Liberals are unlikely to negotiate and very likely to keep gaining popularity. As soon as they believe they're strong enough to win it, they'll call another election. Labor will be the opposite. They'll negotiate very well because they know it'll come back to haunt them if they can't keep a government together for another full term. They're also the ones more likely to negotiate on changes to the electoral system since a lot of the smaller parties which would benefit are actually on their side. IMHO even though the conservative independents are more aligned in their values with Liberals, they'll get a better deal with Labor and a lot more flexibility in bargaining. However, at the same time, the independents will also be able to pick and choose between party policies. Just because they put one party in power and not the other, doesn't mean that they can't negotiate with the opposition to get a certain deal for their electorate in exchange for passing an opposition's policy. Anyone sitting in the independent's electorates are going to feel like they're sitting on gold with the amount of good deals that are going to come their way. If these people can really pull appart the two party system to allow a better chance for the smaller parties to hold power and negotiate for the people they represent, it'll be the dawn of a new era for Australia politics. Instead of ***** fights and stubborn stances, we'll see true bipartisanship on policies and negotiations which lead to a better deal for all Australians in every instance. Take the NBN and net filter for example. They can negotiate to get the NBN through without the filter, or negotiate to have better funding for Mental health care, together with the improvements to general health care. Instead of a one-track path lead by one side of government, we can finally see true democracy with more representation for all Australians and cake for everyone!

• 

  jonathan from latham , act Monday, 23 August 2010, 13:23

  Still incapable of making a coherent argument on any level I see Louise. You really should give up listening to right wing shock jocks and start educating yourself about issues. Here are a few things for you to start with. ++++++++++++ Economic mgt? Australia has had 3 recessions in modern times, 2 under Libs, one under Labor (guess that makes Labor twice as good as Libs then huh?). Highest real interest rates - yes you guessed it, they occurred under a Liberal govt, John Howard treasurer no less. Highest inflation? Liberal again. Most significant economic reform - Labor (Hawke-Keating). Which western country weathered the GFC storm the best thanks to (in part) prudent economic mgt - yep Asutralia under LABOR. These are not idle opinions Louise, they are either statistical facts, or considered views of MANY INDEPENDENT EXPERTS. +++++++++++++ Now the mining super tax, or mining resource rent tax as it properly should be known. The Australian people own the country's resources and it is entirely appropriate that the government (irrespective of its persuasion) should seek to maximise the return for all citizens. So when company profits skyrocket as a result of commodity price increases, the return to the government should rightly increase significantly. Your comment that 'people will not invest in Australia' (presumably as a result of the mining super tax?) yet again has no basis in fact. Australia has had a resource rent tax on the petroleum industry for a quarter of a century, and despite the same huff and puff from the industry and predictions of total gloom from the usual suspects, it has been a spectacular success. And the industry has thrived. But don't take my word for it Louise do some research of your own. Here are a couple of rational discussions regarding the mining tax issue that you undoubtedly won't have read (they won't get into the Daily Telegraph, sorry). The first is by David Buckingham a former head of the Minerals Council no less. http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Behind-the-resource-rent-tax-hysteria-pd20100510-5ARLS?OpenDocument +++ http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/an-accountants-view-the-nonsense-being-spouted-on-mining-tax/ Quick lesson Louise - invective will never win any argument, it merely refects poorly on the writer, as does repetition of half 'truths' and mis-information, something which the conservative press prides itself on.

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 13:23

  What you fail to realise is that Labor's policy towards assylum seekers was no different. They were both going to be hard on them, Abbott was simply the only man going on about it so it wasn't much of an election run for him, however you are correct that the execution of Rudd and the ill-planned stimulus packages played a good part but you fail to acknowledge that a lack of work on climate change also helped, considering how much of the vote the Greens took. Its worth noting that despite how ill-planned the stimulus packages were, they really did save the economy. If you go back to the Keating years, you'll see he tried the same thing but the only reason he failed was that he took too long in the planning and Australia had already sunk too low. Labor learned from the Keating years and implemented stimulus as quick as possible, despite a lack of planning and it worked. The mining industry held it's self up but the hand-out gave the retail industry a much needed boost and the insulation and BER programs employed builders and workers who no longer had factories to work in or houses to build. If Labor had followed Liberal's advice of holding back and planning better, they would have been repeating the mistakes of the Keating government's attempts to stop the recession of the early 90's. As for your assessment of the mining tax, please pay attention to the sharemarket where mining stocks hardly budged when there was a chance of a %40 tax and even less when the tax was reduced. This is because investors are wise enough to realise that the mines were in a great position regardless (in fact there were BUY recommendations on RIO). What you fail to understand is that its not so easy to shift investment in resources when those resources are in limited supply in a limited number of locations, particularly when those resources are in demand.

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Monday, 23 August 2010, 11:23

  spacek - Louise - it is indicative of the Liberal mindset at the moment that you express yourself in such a repulsive manner. You have been ranting innanely for the last week at least and as such everything you say can be ignored without guilt or even reasonable consideration.
  
  While the Liberals seem to be claiming victory, as you seem to be reporting, it is clear the Independents, that will have the last say by the way, have yet to choose their support. Media reports want Tony Abbott and have been saying so for the last 2 days, yet Tony Abbott as yet does not have the required seats - note, neither does Labor.
  
  Labor may still form a government, time will tell - but if Abbott forms one their will be a new election in 16 months to 24 months, as the Liberals cannot work with independents, have never truly been able to, and they most certainly can't work with the Greens.
  
  So, Louise, be as abusive and disruptive all you like, your voice will not change anything and in fact has only really showed you up as being a bit obsessed in some way. That isn't a good way to be, so think about how all this sounds.
  We might know by Friday, we might not, so until then maybe keep your gloating down a bit...

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Monday, 23 August 2010, 11:23

  spacek - Louise - it is indicative of the Liberal mindset at the moment that you express yourself in such a repulsive manner. You have been ranting innanely for the last week at least and as such everything you say can be ignored without guilt or even reasonable consideration.
  
  While the Liberals seem to be claiming victory, as you seem to be reporting, it is clear the Independents, that will have the last say by the way, have yet to choose their support. Media reports want Tony Abbott and have been saying so for the last 2 days, yet Tony Abbott as yet does not have the required seats - note, neither does Labor.
  
  Labor may still form a government, time will tell - but if Abbott forms one their will be a new election in 16 months to 24 months, as the Liberals cannot work with independents, have never truly been able to, and they most certainly can't work with the Greens.
  
  So, Louise, be as abusive and disruptive all you like, your voice will not change anything and in fact has only really showed you up as being a bit obsessed in some way. That isn't a good way to be, so think about how all this sounds.
  We might know by Friday, we might not, so until then maybe keep your gloating down a bit...

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Monday, 23 August 2010, 10:23

  How come Karl Bitar has now been pushed into an upper house job on a massive salary (according to Morris Iemma) by John Della Bosca, if they all have such a great moral compass? Another bludger for us to support. It's about time you Labor idiots faced the fact. Your back room boys are scum. Abbott for PM --- you can all cry into your beer -- except Jonathan, yours would have to be a *****tail or Corona, you arrogant turd!

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Monday, 23 August 2010, 10:23

  jonathan, why DO YOU THINK LABOR LOST THE ELECTION? IT WAS THE ASYLUM SEEKER ISSUE IN ADDITION TO THE PINK BATTS, THE BER, ALL THE ***** UPS THE LABOR PARTY EXECUTED - AND FINALLY THE EXECUTION OF RUDD. Are you going to trot out the usual bull***** about your trivial percentages coming by boat. Are you now going to deny that Gillard, Arbib, Bitar etc. stabbed Rudd in the back? I hope Labor CANNOT govern, and we have Liberal for at least 12 years as Mr Howard created an economically viable and respected economy. *****hole, we are now 31st in the world thanks to the mining tax bought on by the bloodnutted ***** -- people will not invest in Australia. So you had better keep your public service job --- and I hope you choke on your scnitzels, prawns and macchiatos --- you ignorant, arrogant Canberra dwelling lump of dung!

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 09:23

  @peterj60: If they'd given him time, Kevin would have backed down and negotiated on the tax, then called a late election to give his and Labor's popularity time to recover and maybe even develop a new climate change policy that he could go into the election with to gain back support despite no implementation of a climate change policy in the first term. Right there, they would have had a vision for climate change AND a vision in the NBN (even if it was poisoned by the Net Censorship). He also would have gone in as the savior of the economy, the man who appologised to the stolen generation and the one who's name is inked into the Kyoto protocol. They would likely have lost some seats in Western Australia, but no-where near what they've lost in N.S.W. and Queensland. So many of those were lost by a hair's width that they'd have easily held a lot more. But alas, Kevin suffered the same fate as the Companion Cube.

• 

  GLaDOS from Aperture , Science Monday, 23 August 2010, 09:23

  @Sangerer: It would not surprise me at all if the conservatives join with Labor. Liberals are likely to get popularity after this and hold off on any agreements until they can push for another election. Labor will be sitting low for sometime and be much more open to suggestion from the independents and Greens. The best thing they can all do is get changes made to the electoral system to even the fight between the big and small parties or independents in future elections so that they achieve this same outcome in the future. Julia could easily remain PM and then there will be cake!

• 

  peterj60 from Carina Heights , Queensland Monday, 23 August 2010, 07:23

  While many of the comments here may reflect the some of the reasons for the decline in the Labor vote, they are not demonstrated by people I know here in Brisbane and elsewhere via Facebook and the like. Maybe I belong to a network of old tree-huggers and bleeding hearts, but disappointment started with Labor when they walked away from the ETS or other mechanisms in the follow-up to Copenhagen, before Kevin was dumped. Then there was disappointment in the way the mining tax was communicated and 'sold' to the nation. Kevin's demise as PM upset and shocked us and we despised the "backroom boys" who toppled him, but we hoped that Julia would take the mantle of leadership and reinvigorate the government based on the energy and vision that brought Labor to power in 2007. This did not happen. Instead we got another "solution" to refugees arriving by boats and "a small Australia" policy with no clear rationale, other than to appease voters in western Sydney. It became clear that the government was very different to that elected in 2007. It was almost unrecognisable. When the election campaign got underway, there were hopes that a vision would be articulated. It was not. The message of economic responsibility during the GFC was well made I thought - as well as the need for the NBN - but it seemed that their main messages were about management or reaction to this issue or that. Again, no real vision, and certainly none from the opposition. It's very difficult to get excited about voting for managers, for that is what we seem to have in the two major parties. Added to that are faceless, backroom managers who seem to be floating around Labor who we also need to consider. We could have voted for vision at the election, or at least getting back on track to realise the vision of 2007, but only the Greens were really offering that. Labor had relinquished its environmental leadership and compassion for refugees months and weeks before. The Rudd factor may have played a small part, but Labor really started to lose or disappoint its followers well before he was removed as PM - as least in my cohort - which is substantially based in Kevin's own electorate in Brisbane.

• 

  hojinl from STRATHFIELD , NSW Monday, 23 August 2010, 07:23

  I'm extremely happy that "back-stabber" Julia has paid the price. This should serve as an example how not to betray your leader. She should immediately resign and reinstate Rudd as true PM of Australia or elect the new leader of ALP. Well done, Mr Abott.

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Monday, 23 August 2010, 02:23

  MaryCH, what are these leaks you imagine cost labor the election. No one cared about them, why are you looking for excuses. It's always the simple reason that are responsible, and that was changing PM in a backroom deal made by faceless men, then trying to foist Julia Gillard on a shocked public. Labor has always suffered because the liberal propaganda would use the bogeyman of union bosses running labor from behind the scenes. Well this played directly into their hands. Julia's vision doesn't exist, she's a tool of the right wing of the labor party, and they are exactly who the people voted against.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Monday, 23 August 2010, 02:23

  Will Julia be able to form a minority government with 3 conservative independents, or can we say with reasonable certainty that it is time to start planning for the next election?

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Monday, 23 August 2010, 02:23

  HAHA! Julia Gillard is "Lady MacBeth trying to play Mary Poppins." Who was the lawyer bloke that said that? Hillarious XD

• 

  jonathan from latham , act Monday, 23 August 2010, 01:23

  I will never stop opposing redneck, ignorant views such as yours Louisa. I'll challenge you, mock you, and downright insult you (even though I know that is not a particularly generous standpoint but frankly I'm sick to death of hearing this sort of nonsense from right wing *****ers). Your posts are composed of bile and nonsense, and little else unfortunately. If you have a cogent argument to make please let us see it. For example, I'm sure you don't have a clue (and would be aghast) that small numbers of refugees were housed in motels during the life of the previous conservative govt (govt sanctioned Immigration Dept policy). Or, that 90+% of the 'queue jumpers' whom Howard kept behind razor wire (for years in many cases) have subsequently been absorbed into Australian society. (Why only last week I was served at Woollies by a young refugee from the Sudan.Seems a lovely bloke too. It appears that he works for and he gets paid by Woollies, and unless his income falls below the tax-free threshhold, he'll be paying more tax than many wealthy Australians do. Fancy that, a refugee subsidising Aussie-borns). You must really loathe Howard for allowing that to happen, not to mention the 'massive' numbers of boats and refugees he failed to stop : http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bn/sp/BoatArrivals.htm#_Toc233686296. By the way the above article gives the lie to your claim about several hundred boats arriving during the Rudd/Gillard years, but I'm sure you won't let a few facts get in the way of a good rant. I am thankful that Australia is for the most part a tolerant, compassionate, and often generous nation and I look foward to the day it increases its foreign aid to the UN target of 0.7% GNI. And. my compliments to the good folk at the National Library who are courteous and helpful to a fault, even if they cannot please everybody. PS I commend you very good folk of Queanbeyan for your excellent choice of representation. Mike Kelly is a fine MHR and a terrific person. And keep those schnitzels, prawns and macchiatos coming chaps - you leave many establishments in beautiful Canberra far behind.

• 

  jonathan from latham , act Monday, 23 August 2010, 01:23

  I will never stop opposing redneck, ignorant views such as yours Louisa. I'll challenge you, mock you, and downright insult you (even though I know that is not a particularly generous standpoint but frankly I'm sick to death of hearing this sort of nonsense from right wing *****ers). Your posts are composed of bile and nonsense, and little else unfortunately. If you have a cogent argument to make please let us see it. For example, I'm sure you don't have a clue (and would be aghast) that small numbers of refugees were housed in motels during the life of the previous conservative govt (govt sanctioned Immigration Dept policy). Or, that 90+% of the 'queue jumpers' whom Howard kept behind razor wire (for years in many cases) have subsequently been absorbed into Australian society. (Why only last week I was served at Woollies by a young refugee from the Sudan.Seems a lovely bloke too. It appears that he works for and he gets paid by Woollies, and unless his income falls below the tax-free threshhold, he'll be paying more tax than many wealthy Australians do. Fancy that, a refugee subsidising Aussie-borns). You must really loathe Howard for allowing that to happen, not to mention the 'massive' numbers of boats and refugees he failed to stop : http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bn/sp/BoatArrivals.htm#_Toc233686296. By the way the above article gives the lie to your claim about several hundred boats arriving during the Rudd/Gillard years, but I'm sure you won't let a few facts get in the way of a good rant. I am thankful that Australia is for the most part a tolerant, compassionate, and often generous nation and I look foward to the day it increases its foreign aid to the UN target of 0.7% GNI. And. my compliments to the good folk at the National Library who are courteous and helpful to a fault, even if they cannot please everybody. PS I commend you very good folk of Queanbeyan for your excellent choice of representation. Mike Kelly is a fine MHR and a terrific person. And keep those schnitzels, prawns and macchiatos coming chaps - you leave many establishments in beautiful Canberra far behind.

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Monday, 23 August 2010, 01:23

  P.S. Please do some better research into Heather Hill's disendorsement. It was because of her dual citizenship, not her birthplace, otherwise Tony Abbott would not be eligable having being born in London. Its important for Australian leaders to renounce committment to foreign countries and we could no more have someone with dual citizenship to England then we could have someone with dual citizenship to Papua new Guinea, The Solomon Islands, Jamaica or even New Zealand. I hope you can also recognize Joe Hockey's heritage... or should I say Joe Hokeidonian?

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Monday, 23 August 2010, 00:23

  My last name is Anglo-Saxon and I can trace my Austalian heritage back at least four generations on all sides before reaching European ancestors, with Anglo-Saxon surnames, in all cases and no use of Centrelink to my knowledge. The Department of Immigration and Citizenship notes "only about 3% of Centrelink customers who were in receipt of a Newstart Allowance income support payment at 30 June 2009 held avrefugee and humanitarian or permanent protection visa" and "only about 3.5 per cent of Centrelink customers gaining access to Youth Allowance payments at 30 June 2009 held a refugee, humanitarian or permanent protection visa." The Department of Immigration and Citizenship goes on to note "that the number of refugees and humanitarian entrants receiving income support payments was modest as an overall proportion." As for the Bali 9... Are you REALLY defending heroin drug smugglers over assylum seekers?

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Sunday, 22 August 2010, 22:22

  werz51, yours is the only cogent comment on this blog. I agree wholeheartedly -- but the other members of this blog are only interested in excusing Labor's loss. The redhead stabbed Rudd in the back, that was the main reason for them losing -- and in regard to anoter blogger -- Rudd kept his job; hers is in doubt. Who is the winner?

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Sunday, 22 August 2010, 22:22

  Jonathan, from the cloistered chilly confines of the city without a soul. Couldn't expect you to entertain another viewpoint except by calling it xenophobia. I suppose you think the people at Ground Zero opposing the mosque (as seen on Datline this evening) are being xenophobic. Call it real life. Try living in Sydney -- and not in a parallel universe like Canberra, which is as synthetic as dental implants. HOW DARE YOU QUESTION THE CONTRIBUTION I MAKE TO AUSTRALIAN SOCIETY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT CONTRIBUTION DO YOU MAKE, EXCEPT AS AN APOLOGIST FOR THE LABOR PARTY. And for your information --as I notice your surname is hardly Anglo-Saxon, my ancestors came from Europe. None of them EVER received Centrelink payments -- the government was not "spending like a drunken sailor" to quote Wayne Swan in the 2007 election referring to John Howard/Peter Costello, in those days. What I am questioning is the validity of these boat people jumping the queue -- and they will, in most cases be on permanent welfare before family reunion. They are also being housed in motels at taxpayers expense. Why? Why are the Bali 9 and Schappelle Corby still in gaol and some on death row while we are giving Susilo Bambang Yudyohono $2B per annun? I am sure if the foreign aid was stopped they would be on a private plane or first class back to Australia. As a tax paying citizen of many years --- I am entitled to NO CENTRELINK PAYMENTS because I am looking after an unwell relative -- so why should queue jumpers be given precedence over people like me who have worked and paid tax for years? I would advise you to get out of your ivory tower and into the real world. Go over the border to Queanbeyan and see how the real people live -- or I suppose you would look down your national capital nose at them - maybe their macchiato isn't to your liking. The fact remains the asylum seeker issue --- and Gillard's complete dallying over it, claiming a centre would be built in Timor Eiste -- and then having it denied, was one of the driving factors of Labor losing several seats in Queensland. As was the backstabbing of Kevin Rudd by Mark Arbib, Karl Bitar, Bill Shorten (who got his job through Rudd) and others. You tree hugging apologists just have to face the facts. If you want to personally support asylum seekers bring it on. Why don't you sponsor a family? Do you remember the four terrorists that were housed on one of the several hundred boats bought into Australia since Rudd's rise and Gillard's backstabbing? Or is that just an extremist viewpoint? Wait until they bomb something in Australia Jonathan, and you will know I am right. To finish, I lived in Canberra for years and found it the *****hole of the universe -- a ripe breeding ground for rude *****holes like you. I will never return after the officious staff (in all cases) I encountered on visiting the National Gallery. So don't you DARE question my capacity or ability to comment, nor my intelligence. I think I could give you a run for your money. In addition, I am completely insulted by your stupid uninformed allegation that I have no sympathy for the disabled, handicapped and mentally ill; I have done voluntary work with many of these groups -- but Australian citizens are more entitled than ring-ins of dubious medical conditions and possible terrorist intentions. In a democratic society my views definitely have a place -- yours are ill-informed and you were obviously picked on for your ethnic origins --- you want to psychoanalyse me, I will return the favour. You Labor voters just have to learn to eat sour grapes -- Abbott won; and Gillard would have far less seats if it weren't for the dishonest deal she did with Bob Brown behind closed doors, that he won't even talk about. Also, how do you explain the late release of the Henry Review -- I'm sure you'll have a slant on that. What about the exclusion of the small miners -- and Andrew Forrest's justified anger? At least the redhead may learn some humility now. I think it's quite pertinent that a few leaks bought a Welsh born person down - who in a sane country would never have been made Prime Minister. Do you remember Heather Hill of One Nation who was disendorsed as a member because it was discovered she was born in England? There are few countries in the world that allow this ridiculous situation, America and the UK being two. So pull your head in Jonathan and don't be so free with your insults.

• 

  markob from Deer Park , Victoria Sunday, 22 August 2010, 21:22

  Of all the ALP people I saw on the tube last night, only Kevin Rudd was grinning like a Cheshire cat; I wasn't, and i'm not even a member. From what I can gather the Greens got a big swing, there are a number of anti-neoliberal, albeit conservative, independent MPs and the informal vote spiked. Abbottman failed to win office outright, even though his rise was largely manufactured by the conservative corporate elites that also got critical support from a compliant corporate media, especially the Murdoch press. Their attempt to foist Abbottman outright has failed. The Abbottman project was exactly on a par with the rich elite manufactured rise of Reagan and GW Bush in the US; even to the extent of pushing an everyman's action man in order to cover their own elite interests. I tend to believe that this all shows that Australian public opinion lies to the Left of the ALP for the first time since 1945. Tony Benn said the same of Britain after Blair's New "Labour" got up, after the first win, despite a record low voter turnout. Although, to be honest, I tend not to think that the public really supported the Hawke-Keating neoliberal reforms. During the neoliberal era the ALP has allowed itself to become disconnected from broader popular and social movements. Stackers, "policy advisers", PR gurus, apparatchiks and the like have tended to dominate the ALP. A working class party of the Left cannot be just an electoral machine; this makes it vulnerable to corporate attacks. It is no accident that the ALP has become less and less democratic precisely when it has supported neoliberal policies. Recall that the former Socialist Forum organiser, Julia Gillard, when she assumed the leadership of the FPLP, actually praised Howard and Costello for extending the free market reforms of Hawke and Keating. A democratic working class party can't support neoliberalism, that's why the factions have taken power. It keeps Labor under control and prevents the membership from putting in place an agenda at variance with the corporate friendly neoliberal policy consensus. Gough Whitlam started this process when he started the gradual taking away of power from the ALP organisation; the "faceless men" was corporate media fakery. Historically working class parties have not trusted their MPs; they might do deals with the big end of town. What's happened since the 1970s demonstrates that this theory was always spot on. A democratic working class party that aspires to being a mass based party rather than an electoral machine, that is intimately connected with old and new social movements, that advances an agenda at odds with the dominant neoliberal consensus, is one worth supporting. Australia doesn't have such a party. I see no reason why it can't though. Where is our Oskar Lafontaine?

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Sunday, 22 August 2010, 20:22

  Great summation 'hurtling'. I really believe that Julia's superior intelligence and negotiating skills will win through. The big thing now is to stay united. There will be no doubt a bit of blood letting but really Julia Gillard is a natural leader and will hopefully pull the party together. We need to claw back the votes that have slipped to The Greens. We also need to toss out the campaign strategists because whoever came up with some of the business through the election campaign are just plain dumb. Julia should have been allowed to be Julia from the start. Those responsible for the cabinet leaks should be summarily thrown out of the party for good !!!

• 

  hurtling from North Perth , WA Sunday, 22 August 2010, 18:22

  Bet we'll be hearing lots about the bottom line... (perhaps we need a few more nudist beaches). Seriously, I'm very sad that Julia was advised to spin the game so negatively. She IS a visionary, she is passionate about her agenda, she is a negotiator. Her decisions are consistent with her desire to see the visionary agenda she has developed over a lifetime of academic study and reflection, brought to fruition. Rudd was not who the Australian people thought he was, turning out to be a self opinionated self serving autocrat who made caucus redundant, giving sense to the adage "Absolute power corrupts absolutely". Unfortunately Julia's personal strengths were not allowed to come to the fore in this campaign, and they needed to. Australians needed to know what she stood for, rather than what she didn't stand for. Every speech started with the presentation of vision but ended with attacks on Tony Abbott. The backroom boys obviously believed that's the way to win government. But what they did was left her audience remembering how bad Tony Abbott would be, rather than how good Julia Gillard would be. Julia's speech last night finally showed us the qualities Australia may miss out on... the most articulate and informed prime minister this generation could wish for. Unfortunately for the electorate, that articulation of her vision has come too late. I blame the back room boys for applying a brand of naive psychology in running this campaign. They should sack their social scientists. The game is too complex for formulaic electoral strategies to be applied. Gut instinct should've told them it was the wrong way to play the game. However, the situation is now what it is. What next? Julia IS Australia's greatest parliamentary negotiator, and ultimately the only person in parliament who can give us stable government in the current context. If Abbott forms government in two weeks, the Green Senate will block his agenda of dismantling and cutting social infrastructure. Supply will be blocked, Abbott will winge, and we'll go to the polls early in a full senate election. Julia as opposition leader will have shown her qualities in the interim, articulated and reaffirmed her vision, and fought for it in the face of Abbott and Hockey's economic rationalist approach which will wedge Australia into a tiered society of deserving and not so deserving, privilege and underclass. And so because of hospitals, education, and infrastructure, Labor would win government at the next election. If Julia forms government in two weeks, she will advocate, she will persuade, she will negotiate, and she will keep the business of government moving. It would not stagnate under her leadership because she has the qualities necessary to form consensus, skills well practiced over a lifetime. Her skills in this area are obvioulsy quite awesome, engendering respect from all those who come within her orbit whatever their political persuasion. And so Julia will win the respect of the Australian populace, and next time Labor will decimate the Libs. So whatever the outcome in the next two weeks, its all good for Julia. The back room boys will have to back off and reflect, and Julia will earn the respect of the Australian people in her own right.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Sunday, 22 August 2010, 17:22

  Well, I thought Labour would actually get 72 seats after factoring in the return of the independents and holding onto a couple of seats in NSW and QLD whilst losing Melbourne to the Greens. It became clear at about 10 am on Saturday that the shift to the Greens in the cities among the 20 – 30 demography in particular was a deliberate protest vote against both major parties. What has also been clear for nearly two years is that positive action on renewable energy has been a deep seated litmus test for both major parties. The key advice has been to stop talking about climate change. The mere idea of a department of climate change or even a minister for climate change is offensive to the intelligence of the Australian public. Why? The issue is about the practical resolution of problems and not about the ivory tower debate on the scientific basis of numbers. The true debate has always been about energy ownership, energy cost and the independence and survival of communities regardless of whether these communities are in the bush or in the cities. This one national issue goes across party political boundaries and no party has comprehended the significance of it. The key to fixing this national issue has always been to address the financing of renewable energy in a way that is budget neutral and without a negative price impact on consumers. Neither party listened and no party bothered to formulate a sensible policy and a sensible implementation strategy. Even when the answer is delivered to the “Climate Change” minister on a plate she doesn’t get it, read it or maybe just does not comprehend it. That Ladies and Gentlemen, is the true concern. Does the current crop of politicians running around in Canberra pretending to represent the Australian people deserve the confidence of the people? Clearly the answer is NO! --- So let’s talk NBN! Here is another issue of national significance that cuts across political lines. Instead of capitalizing on it, the election strategy becomes one of justifying the obvious. Well, if you have no confidence and no conviction in a No brainer and you run a campaign that tells the voters that you have no confidence and conviction in a No brainer then you deserve a no brainer answer in the booth. -- Let’s talk Health and Education! Here are two more issues that cut across all political boundaries. They are also issues where the message was lost in the background noise generated by a campaign strategy that had no focus and no vision. You were advised to focus on three or four main points and weave the other issues into a coherent vision for the future. Labour forgot to listen to the people who told them the obvious for many month in advance! When it comes to playing chess this campaign was riddled with obvious mistakes and labour can thank its lucky stars that the liberals couldn’t play the game either. The best thing is that from today onwards no party will dare to present stupid serlf serving and cynically derived policy to any electorate of the future. Maybe a minority labour government will even eliminate the department of climate change and the title of climate change minister as a clear token of comprehension to the Australian People that no one will tolerate stupidity, pathetic policy, scappy strategy and poor implementation.

• 

  jonathan from latham , act Sunday, 22 August 2010, 16:22

  Xenophobia is alive and well and living in Redfern, Spacek (Louisa). I wonder what contribution you actually make to Australian society? I don't expect you have enough nous to do some research about the contribution MANY refugees and immigrants have made, and continue to make, to Australian society. Far better to stay ignorant and repeat the moronic mantra of your extremist conservative mates (you won't get much, if any, support for that nonsense from moderate conservatives thank heavens). Let me guess - you also believe that pensioners, the mentally ill, the handicapped, are all 'leaching off the system' but strangely you have no problem with middle and upper class welfare of handouts, tax breaks, special superannuation benefits, family trust rorts etc? Your extremist views have no place in a civilised society.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Sunday, 22 August 2010, 16:22

  Well, I thought Labour would actually get 72 seats after factoring in the return of the independents and holding onto a couple of seats in NSW and QLD whilst losing Melbourne to the Greens. It became clear at about 10 am on Saturday that the shift to the Greens in the cities among the 20 – 30 demography in particular was a deliberate protest vote against both major parties. What has also been clear for nearly two years is that positive action on renewable energy has been a deep seated litmus test for both major parties. The key advice has been to stop talking about climate change. The mere idea of a department of climate change or even a minister for climate change is offensive to the intelligence of the Australian public. Why? The issue is about the practical resolution of problems and not about the ivory tower debate on the scientific basis of numbers. The true debate has always been about energy ownership, energy cost and the independence and survival of communities regardless of whether these communities are in the bush or in the cities. This one national issue goes across party political boundaries and no party has comprehended the significance of it. The key to fixing this national issue has always been to address the financing of renewable energy in a way that is budget neutral and without a negative price impact on consumers. Neither party listened and no party bothered to formulate a sensible policy and a sensible implementation strategy. Even when the answer is delivered to the “Climate Change” minister on a plate she doesn’t get it, read it or maybe just does not comprehend it. That Ladies and Gentlemen, is the true concern. Does the current crop of politicians running around in Canberra pretending to represent the Australian people deserve the confidence of the people? Clearly the answer is NO! --- So let’s talk NBN! Here is another issue of national significance that cuts across political lines. Instead of capitalizing on it, the election strategy becomes one of justifying the obvious. Well, if you have no confidence and no conviction in a No brainer and you run a campaign that tells the voters that you have no confidence and conviction in a No brainer then you deserve a no brainer answer in the booth. -- Let’s talk Health and Education! Here are two more issues that cut across all political boundaries. They are also issues where the message was lost in the background noise generated by a campaign strategy that had no focus and no vision. You were advised to focus on three or four main points and weave the other issues into a coherent vision for the future. Labour forgot to listen to the people who told them the obvious for many month in advance! When it comes to playing chess this campaign was riddled with obvious mistakes and labour can thank its lucky stars that the liberals couldn’t play the game either. The best thing is that from today onwards no party will dare to present stupid serlf serving and cynically derived policy to any electorate of the future. Maybe a minority labour government will even eliminate the department of climate change and the title of climate change minister as a clear token of comprehension to the Australian People that no one will tolerate stupidity, pathetic policy, scappy strategy and poor implementation.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Sunday, 22 August 2010, 14:22

  @maureenmans--Much has been said about the (so-called) malicious leaks but nothing said about whether they were true or not. Is it considered less important for the public to know the truth that it was Gillard who voted down the ETS and questioned the increase in aged pensions, than to know who's conscience was *****ed sufficiently to reveal this information? Transparency in government is important! PM Rudd was voted down on the ETS yet the powers that be stood back and let him cop the blame.

• 

  wenvas from St. James , WA Sunday, 22 August 2010, 14:22

  @werz51--I agree wholeheartedly! This outcome has come as no surprise to me, in fact I expected it to be much worse once the curtains were raised and the true power behind the throne (the power brokers) revealed themselves; and here's silly me believing our government was run by our elected members of parliament under the leadership of our legitimately elected Prime Minister. Well my naivety was quickly dispelled as has my trust in the political system...it's an absolute farce!

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Sunday, 22 August 2010, 13:22

  MaryCH, you're deluding yourself if you think grandiose expectations had anything to do with labors defeat. The people aren't stupid, they know that many promises will prove hard to deliver or take longer than expected..Rudd kept us out of the world wide recession, his political vision was at least going to make big business share some of their profits. Instead we got the right wing of the labor party, that has done so much damage to NSW, that even an unelectable incompetent opposition will breeze in. Yet you back their decision to sack Rudd and stab the working people in the back, by give bigger than ever tax exemptions to the biggest miners. The villains of this are the idiots of the NSW right. They are so out of touch with reality they've destroyed labor by their own egotistical greed.

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Sunday, 22 August 2010, 12:22

  To all those responsible for ousting Rudd and foisting Julia Gillard upon us, then immediately calling a general election. This should have been an unloseable election, yet your incompetent Machiavellian intrigues and coup caused labor to lose. Now it's time for you to commit political Hari Kiri. We the long time labor supporters have watched you drag the labor party into political disrepute, with your dirty dealing with big business. Apologise publicly for the mess you've made and get out of politics. And take Richo with you.

• 

  maureenmans from Macedon , Victoria Sunday, 22 August 2010, 12:22

  Two reasons I've heard given by different analysts for the drop in support for Labor in the second week of the campaign are the Cabinet leaks and the mining tax. Could there be another Godwin Grech lurking? I think it is critical for the ALP to trace the source of the leaks and take action asap. As for the mining tax. The heroic deed has been done. There is no going back.

• 

  JMM1591 from Forest Lake , Queensland Sunday, 22 August 2010, 12:22

  Very sad but Labor got what it deserved, I feel. Sacking Kevin Rudd upset so many former supporters such as myself and then calling an election so early (based on their assumption of a Gillard "honeymoon" that NEVER HAPPENED) was pure folly. But those responsible just can't see the bleeding obvious. I don't see that Labor "lost its way" under Rudd - it looks much more to have lost its way under Gillard. No longer progressive, it's back to being the party of trade union bosses with massive chips on their shoulders.Can't see Labor being back in power any time soon.

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Sunday, 22 August 2010, 12:22

  P.S. Are you FINALLY going to drop that bloody INTERNET FILTER? That flaming thing killed your blasted NBN pitch at every turn! You finally picked up that Aussies were after a vision and that the NBN was the only one you had to offer, but every techy activist and surfaholic kid you aimed it at could think of nothing but CENSORSHIP!

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Sunday, 22 August 2010, 12:22

  Afghani refugee, Riz Wakil is running a happy business and paying taxes. The truth of the matter is that refugees come from many places that have poor unemployment and working conditions. The vast majority of them see great benefits in joining the unskilled labour forces or opening a small business and earning money for their familes. The majority of them certainly don't have great educations and skills, but they are all very hard workers and willing to put in the effort on any job they can. Personally I think Labor would have done better by going to the elections later with either Rudd or Julia, either giving Rudd a chance to gain back credibility, or Julia a chance to gain more familiarity with the public as the PM. Whatever the case, the message to labor is clear, that they have gone too far right and lost the confidence of the Australian people to manage themselves, much-less the country. In future Labor, don't be ashamed to aim high like Rudd and Hawke and send the message that you strive for it, even if you don't always reach it.

• 

  jayzl492 from Ipswich , QLD Sunday, 22 August 2010, 11:22

  I am deeply disappointed with the election result last night. I wonder what the recent would have been if K.Rudd was still in power. When talking to alot of people my age (26) they swung to the Greens as a protest vote on Labor - which might explain their increase in votes and their first seat in government. I think we have harmed oursleves and handed Libs the victory.

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Sunday, 22 August 2010, 11:22

  So Spacek the boat people will never pay taxes and be on welfare forever By that logic the Vietamese boat people that arrived on our shores when there was bipartisan policy about these things have never paid taxes and have continued on welfare for 30 years. Wrong !!! The Vietamese refugees are as vibrant and contributing members of society as everyone else. This demonisation of refugees is completely and utterly abhorrent.

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Sunday, 22 August 2010, 11:22

  Let's please not rewrite history. Rudd was not being listened to. Rudd was impossible to work with and Rudd had created too high expectations with his grandiose statements that were not guaranteed to be delivered. Labor would have handed the coalition a landslide if Rudd had remained as leader. Unfortunately good policy was being tainted by the Rudd brand. You only had to look at the parliamentary performances and you would see how much Rudd had slipped off his original game. Julia Gillard and the overwhelming majority of Labor MP made the correct call in replacing Rudd with Gillard. The only people in the Labor party that can be blamed for not ensuring the definite return of Labor are those responsible for leaking 1) to Oakes the business about the "deal" on the night of the 24/6 and 2) those that leaked Oakes the cabinet discussions in week 2. It was these two events that caused the trouble for Labor. Anyone that is wanting to navel gaze in any other way is completely delusional. Rudd cannot come back as leader. There is only one leader for the Australian Labor Party and that is Julia Gillard. Julia Gillard has done exceptional well given the unprecedented actions of a few disgruntled people in week 2. She managed to get Labor competitive in this environment and against an Opposition that was put under the least amount of scrutiny I have ever witnessed in Australian political history. I am confident that no matter what happens that Labor will come back from this temporary set back. There was no backstabbing of Rudd. Rudd was the one who sent his media adviser around trying to sure up the numbers when there was no threat. Gillard went to Rudd and faced him over what the difficulties has been. Rudd wasnt a man that was willing to listen others and his micro managing megalomaniac style was not going to be tolerated anymore. Labor had good policies but we all know what happened when the CPRS was voted down. Rudd had the option to call a double dissolution election on that issue once that happened BUT failed to make the correct call. It was this decision above all else that caused the problems. He was unable to counter about running around like a headless chook repeating this bulldust line about "great big tax on everything". It was Rudd inability to fix those problems that lead to him being replaced.

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Sunday, 22 August 2010, 11:22

  Watch the political games that will go on now -- I feel Julia "inherited" a poisoned chalice --Rudd will be wanting something if the Green Adam Brandt votes her in, there are more leaks than a colander - but the Leekster has less support than she thought previously - you have conservative independents in parliament and a Greenie! Parliament will never be as interesting to watch, and decisions will take an aeon. Both may get the bipartisan approach they have been vying for re boat people etc., and don't be deluded MaryCH, part of the reason the result was so utterly pathetic for Labor in Queensland was the continual influx of boat people, who will NEVER pay tax, and will be drain on our welfare system. We already have that many Australian citizens leaching off the system now with dodgy sickness benefits claims etc. Let the carnival begin! It has already been a circus, but who was the ringmaster, and who the clown -- one thing is for sure, it is now a lions den. And for those reading, I do not support all of Abbott's views, I just do not agree with most of Gillards, so this might keep the *****s honest, to quote Don Chipp (or was that an uneducated comment str8talker?) Great result! Labor will NOT GET IN for many years -- the Yank will lose NSW and Anna Bligh Queensland. Luxury!

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Sunday, 22 August 2010, 11:22

  Let's please not rewrite history. Rudd was not being listened to. Rudd was impossible to work with and Rudd had created too high expectations with his grandiose statements that were not guaranteed to be delivered. Labor would have handed the coalition a landslide if Rudd had remained as leader. Infortunately good policy was being tainted by the Rudd brand. You only had to look at the parliamentary performances and you would see how much Rudd had slipped off his original game. Julia Gillard and the overwhelming majority of Labor MP made the correct call in replacing Rudd with Gillard. The only people in the Labor party that can be blamed for not ensuring the definite return of Labor are those responsible for leaking 1) to Oakes the business about the "deal" on the night of the 24/6 and 2) those that leaked Oakes the cabinet discussions in week 2. It was these two events that caused the trouble for Labor. Anyone that is wanting to navel gaze in any other way is completely delusional. Rudd cannot come back as leader. There is only one leader for the Australian Labor Party and that is Julia Gillard. Julia Gillard has done exceptional well given the unprecedented actions of a few disgruntled people in week 2. She managed to get Labor competitive in this environment and against an Opposition that was put under the least amount of scrutiny I have ever witnessed in Australian political history. I am confident that no matter what happens that Labor will come back from this temporary set back.

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Sunday, 22 August 2010, 11:22

  If Rudd had left office on 24th June, saying "I have been ousted by the unions" the Liberals would have won Griffith. The ranga will NOT RULE -- bit of a short tenure as the first female PM -- Bill Shorten, it may be a while until you are Prime Minister. Rudd should have walked out and saved his pride -- but wants more parliamentary pension -- only makes a difference of approximately $50K annually. str8talker, how can you call me "uneducated" and then virtually agree with my previous blogs. You are obviously the uneducated one. Rudd and Howard must be cheering! How can Mystie ask me why I was concerned for Kevin -- obviously you have not heard of empathy and compassion. You'd better look them up. I am rapt that it is a hung parliament and you Labor voters can suck *****. Good on Tony Abbott -- at least he was always the "real Tony" warts and all.

• 

  jonathan from latham , act Sunday, 22 August 2010, 11:22

  "National Secretary of the Labor Party, Karl Bitar, has defended the party's federal election campaign from criticism it was confusing and lacked a central message. Instead he blamed internal disunity caused by a series of damaging cabinet leaks. "That's the major factor in this campaign, the problem around the leaks." Classic definition of self-'dill'usion (sic). Good on ya Karl, look beyond the obvious and see if you can find a scapegoat old chum. Backstabbing Rudd had nil to do with it? Nah. Nor did the pathetic administration of the school building stimulus (where were you Joolya?). Nope. Constant backflips on good policy (refugees, climate, mining tax). Zero impact no doubt. Face some facts - Labor had done a VERY good job of the economy, had easily the best plans and policies for education, health, infrastructure development, climate, environment, but still lost to an unelectable (well, he should have been), hypocritical troglodite who was an integral part of the disgraceful Howard 'government'. Okay, one concession. I have no doubt that the incompetent State Labor govts in QLD and NSW (add puerile, foolish and borderline corrupt in the case of the latter) were significant hurdles in this election. Federal Labor can only hope they are both gone sooner rather than later (in NSW's case that's as certain as death and taxes, so you may only have to worry about QLD next time). With attitudes like yours Karl i hold little hope that Labor can return to the once great (principled) party that it once was. Where is a Whitlam or a Keating (both of whom would have shown Abbott up as the vacuous, extreme conservative he is) when you need them?

• 

  peterj60 from Carina Heights , Queensland Sunday, 22 August 2010, 10:22

  I suppose now the recriminations start! As with all elections, there are lessons to be learnt, but the lessons here go beyond the way the campaign unfolded and who was leader. While the coalition vote basically shows that there is a lack of any rational thought in approximately 50% of voters (nothing new there), the rise of the Greens indicates real dissonance within the left side of politics. Perhaps this was a result of the government turning its back on real leadership qualities and policies that brought it to power in 2007, like taking action on climate change and addressing the compassionate treatment of refugees. In my own cohort, these were very important, as well as the fair treatment of all people in this country including gays. All we heard in the campaign was directed at "working families" and basically the "whats-in-it-for-me" agenda. There was no emergence of a real leader addressing anything like real issues, as much as I had hopes for the Julia (of old) to take that mantle. Bob Brown took that ground because it was there for the taking. Acknowledging that it is so easy to be idealistic when you don't have to actually govern, the Greens only too easily applied a positive message - or series of messages - because really, these were messages that had to be heard. A lot of us wanted to hear them from Labor, because the party of old actually used to stand for such things. When will major party politics actually start looking at peak oil, resource depletion, food security, carbon emissions, environmental refugees, equality within our society etc? When will they start looking at what a consumer culture is doing and nurturing in terms of the carbon-based economy? When will it see that society needs to change, that the writing has been on the wall for a while now and that spin about economic fiddles and "working families" are not going to cut it in the next 10 to 20 years? The ascension of KRudd in 2007 gave us some hope for thinking in modern day politics and positive change. It may not have gone far enough, but there was a spark of something there. That spark diminished - partly due to his own making, but well and truly consolidated by the (new) Julia and the ignorant, uninspired people who ill-advised her and virtually made her stand for nothing of real significance. Where is Labor and the union movement of 20-30 years ago? Where is the real vision for a future? I know it's there somewhere, but if is it in the Labor movement, I really can't see it.

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Sunday, 22 August 2010, 10:22

  It isn't over yet, not by a long shot... the dfuture of the country is in the hands a few people with very person gains to obtain... interesting times indeed

• 

  peterj60 from Carina Heights , Queensland Sunday, 22 August 2010, 10:22

  I suppose now the recriminations start! As with all elections, there are lessons to be learnt, but the lessons here go beyond the way the campaign unfolded and who was leader. While the coalition vote basically shows that there is a lack of any rational thought in approximately 50% of voters (nothing new there), the rise of the Greens indicates real dissonance within the left side of politics. Perhaps this was a result of the government turning its back on real leadership qualities and policies that brought it to power in 2007, like taking action on climate change and addressing the compassionate treatment of refugees. In my own cohort, these were very important, as well as the fair treatment of all people in this country including gays. All we heard in the campaign was directed at "working families" and basically the "whats-in-it-for-me" agenda. There was no emergence of a real leader addressing anything like real issues, as much as I had hopes for the Julia (of old) to take that mantle. Bob Brown took that ground because it was there for the taking. Acknowledging that it is so easy to be idealistic when you don't have to actually govern, the Greens only too easily applied a positive message - or series of messages - because really, these were messages that had to be heard. A lot of us wanted to hear them from Labor, because the party of old actually used to stand for such things. When will major party politics actually start looking at peak oil, resource depletion, food security, carbon emissions, environmental refugees, equality within our society etc? When will they start looking at what a consumer culture is doing and nurturing in terms of the carbon-based economy? When will it see that society needs to change, that the writing has been on the wall for a while now and that spin about economic fiddles and "working families" are not going to cut it in the next 10 to 20 years? The ascension of KRudd in 2007 gave us some hope for thinking in modern day politics and positive change. It may not have gone far enough, but there was a spark of something there. That spark diminished - partly due to his own making, but well and truly consolidated by the (new) Julia and the ignorant, uninspired people who ill-advised her and virtually made her stand for nothing of real significance. Where is Labor and the union movement of 20-30 years ago? Where is the real vision for a future? I know it's there somewhere, but if is it in the Labor movement, I really can't see it.

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Sunday, 22 August 2010, 10:22

  It isn't over yet, not by a long shot... the dfuture of the country is in the hands a few people with very person gains to obtain... interesting times indeed

• 

  pfleming from minnipa , sa Sunday, 22 August 2010, 10:22

  Well well well you would not listen and now we are all paying the price of your back stabbing ways. Hope you are happy now because I am not. How dare the faceless men decide who runs this country. The labor party is a joke for not listening to the people. I don't know why I am even writting this because you didn't listen before so why should you listen now just read some of the blogs you my get some idea. You will blame all sorts of other people and problems for this bad showing but it is so simple you lost because you destoyed the peoples hope in getting a man with guts enough to take on the factions and now the factions have allowed the possiblity of an Abbott win and as for the Greens I will say no more. I for one have always voted labor but not this time and if things are not fixed soon I will never again vote labor. Julia your ego has got in the way of good government by listening to little boys who had their noses put out of place when Mr Rudd was ELECTED AS OUR LEADER. We will be watching what you say and do now with interest to see if the labor party goes the way of the Democrats ( just look what happened to them and Meg Leas) for not listening to the People

• 

  str8talker from Narrabeen , NSW Sunday, 22 August 2010, 05:22

  spacek, you are uneducated...jonathan is completely correct. Labor I cannot believe you have sent us back to the dark ages because of your greed and ego-centric behaviour. How stupid to dump Kevin Rudd, and then call an election 2 months later with one of the worst run campaigns I have ever seen. So out of the touch with the public, so negative and you missed the point of clearly stating everything positive you have done. I hope that those powerbrokers who destroyed the party, and your ability to lead this country with a majority learn there lesson. The people elect the government, not you and you do not represent Australian majority with such immoral behaviour. The reality is, and none of you like to admit it with Kevin Rudd as leader you probably would of got another shot..

• 

  jonathan from latham , act Sunday, 22 August 2010, 00:22

  Congratulations to the gutless, witless Bill Shorten and lower house associates who have delivered govt to the most hypocritical and incompetent opposition leader in Australian history. You have condemned this nation to at least 3 years of moronic mediocrity. Backstabbing 'opponents' and doing deals with mates is rife in the union movement but the Australian public have shown what they think of your disgraceful act of diminishing the standing of the Prime Ministership in this nation. I'm appalled at your collective stupidity as much as I am at the prospect of Abbott leading this once great country. We are fast becoming the ignorant, selfish, ego-centric, and materialistic nation I hoped we would never become.

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Saturday, 21 August 2010, 22:21

  I'm so disappointed with labors strategy, for sacking Kevin Rudd, and bringing about this defeat for labor.

• 

  bigorangecat from mccrae , VIC Saturday, 21 August 2010, 19:21

  Why is Abbott and the Coalition obsessed with accumulating wealth in the government coffers instead of returning the taxpayers money in the form of public services and infrastructure . Abbott is so out of his depth.

• 

  bigorangecat from mccrae , VIC Saturday, 21 August 2010, 19:21

  Why is Abbott and the Coalition obsessed with accumulating wealth in the government coffers instead of returning the taxpayers money in the form of public services and infrastructure . Abbott is so out of his depth.

• 

  bigorangecat from mccrae , VIC Saturday, 21 August 2010, 19:21

  Why is Abbott and the Coalition obsessed with accumulating wealth in the government coffers instead of returning the taxpayers money in the form of public services and infrastructure . Abbott is so out of his depth.

• 

  bigorangecat from mccrae , VIC Saturday, 21 August 2010, 18:21

  Why is Abbott and the Coalition obsessed with accumulating wealth in the government coffers instead of returning the taxpayers money in the form of public services and infrastructure . Abbott is so out of his depth.

• 

  bigorangecat from mccrae , VIC Saturday, 21 August 2010, 18:21

  Why is Abbott and the Coalition obsessed with accumulating wealth in the government coffers instead of returning the taxpayers money in the form of public services and infrastructure . Abbott is so out of his depth.

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Saturday, 21 August 2010, 17:21

  Councils and State government mostly build roads, with Federal funding for larger projects. There isn't really any regulation for political signage at polling booths, just some state and council rules that AEC officials usually enforce. Campaigners for other parties will usually make a complaint to an AEC official if they believe a rule has been broken.

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Saturday, 21 August 2010, 17:21

  Two more Australian soldiers died today on a roadside in Afghanistan. A war in which 80% of the Australian public disagree. Neither of the party leaders brought up our support for US foreign policy in this election campaign, If they don't mention it, they think we won't know what they're up to.

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Saturday, 21 August 2010, 17:21

  Councils and State government mostly build roads, with Federal funding for larger projects. There isn't really any regulation for political signage at polling booths, just some state and council rules that AEC officials usually enforce. Campaigners for other parties will usually make a complaint to an AEC official if they believe a rule has been broken.

• 

  Mystie from Sunshine Coast , Qld Saturday, 21 August 2010, 17:21

  A few mantras that Australia is sick to death of hearing: "A great big new tax", "Work Choices is dead, buried and cremated" and "We'll turn back the boats". If they turned back the boats a couple of hundred years ago none of us whiteys would be here. Perhaps the country would be far better off; I know the environment would be. And we wouldn't have wiped out 38% of Australia's wildlife either.

• 

  Mystie from Sunshine Coast , Qld Saturday, 21 August 2010, 16:21

  A few mantras that Australia is sick to death of hearing: "A great big new tax", "Work Choices is dead, buried and cremated" and "We'll turn back the boats". If they turned back the boats a couple of hundred years ago none of us whiteys would be here. Perhaps the country would be far better off; I know the environment would be. And we wouldn't have wiped out 38% of Australia's wildlife either.

• 

  Mystie from Sunshine Coast , Qld Saturday, 21 August 2010, 16:21

  spacek, if the government funds the building of roads, are they to blame for all the deaths on the roads? And if you believe all the dramatising, Cloak and Dagger stuff the media and the Mad Abbott are spinning about Kevin Rudd being 'stabbed in the back', 'a midnight tap on the door by faceless men', 'an assassination' etc where's the body prey tell? Kevin Rudd seems to be alive and well. If you hate the Labor party so much then why are you so concerned about Kev's welfare, and why are you in this forum anyway?

• 

  Mystie from Sunshine Coast , Qld Saturday, 21 August 2010, 16:21

  I noticed on the Sunshine Coast (which is a very conservative 'Bjelke-Peterson' part of Australia), they had pictures of Abbotts ugly mug all over the place but I didn't see any of our PM. Also I noticed at our local polling booth there was a large anti-Labor poster right at the entrance. Are the sly ultra-cons allowed to do that, is that legal?

• 

  TheFencersYarn from Speewah Station , Black Stump Saturday, 21 August 2010, 13:21

  The problem with the mining tax is how radical and excessive it was. Its one thing to put a 10% tax on them (compare it to the %10 GST people pay and it would have been a win for voters) but %40 was just an insane amount to throw on suddenly. Kevin would have done much better to drop the tax to %10 and then increase it steadily over the years to the %40 so the industry wasn't hit so hard and suddenly but eased into it. A better move would have been to substitute it for a carbon tax estimated to roughly the same value as the profits tax. Unfortunately the Mines ran a far more effective anti-Labor/Rudd campaign than either parties have run against each other and with Rudd refusing to budge, Julia took the chance while Labor were low on support, seized the moment and gained Labor popularity by solving the mining tax dispute and as the first female PM. With that, she threw her party into an election but as we came to know her it quickly showed that she didn't have what Kevin did. Leadership. Abbott did the same with Malcolm Turnbull, throwing him down as the Libs still suffered low support from the OzCar affair with the fake e-mail and as the party split under him over the Labor CPRS bill. If Malcolm was facing down Julie, it'd be no contest as he'd cream her. Likewise if Rudd was still in, he'd be wiping the floor against Abbott, like he did with Howard, by showing leadership and vision with the issues. After years of looking no different to the Liberals, the Labor party stood out with a promise to sign Kyoto and appologise to the stolen generation among other differences which allowed the Labor party to finally "move forward" and take power. Unfortunately Julia has taken her party back to being barely different from the Liberals and is only hanging on as well as she is thanks to Abbott's own lack of leadership and vision. Personally, I don't think either leader will last long in the top position, regardless of their success or failure in the election. The winner will probably last 2 years before either handing over to, or getting booted out by, a fellow party member in the leadup to the next election. None of them are standing up for any action and they're not moving forward on anything.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Saturday, 21 August 2010, 11:21

  ‘MaryCh’, the first debate about rewriting the constitution followed the day it was written. It was not Whitlam who introduced the notion but an academic constitutional lawyer by the name of Sawer who wrote the book on the issue in the early 50’s. Having said this, ‘MaryCH’, you might like to re-read my previous post.... ‘Spacek’ seems to be getting everyone upset on this blog. It must be remembered that an alternative view is a democratic right and ‘spacek’ has the right to say what he thinks even though he may be short on knowledge and facts. -- Has anyone noticed that the other blog spot about economic mistakes has no comment at all? Doesn’t this tell people something about the handling of the debating points and an election strategy that was geared towards NSW, QLD, WA ( in that order) with little effort in Victoria, SA, Canberra, Tasmania and NT. It should also be noted that the vast majority of people ( silly us ) on the ALP site are form Vic and NSW. So Abbott’s slogans are very astute. No more boats is perfect for the bogans and rednecks in QLD. No more waste is perfect for the disaffected NSW middle class who are sick of the Labour corruption and general mafia type behaviour of NSW Labour. The significance of the “no comment on the other blog space” is then very simple to extract. The people are not convinced that either Julia or Abbott have the credentials to claim authority on political or economic leadership and vision. As a consequence the entire last week of the campaign was a waste of time because the electorate had already decided that neither side can be trusted to make responsible expenditure decisions. This leaves the labour pundits little choice but to identify the Abbott strategy as recession strategy. Simply too little and too late! So what are the key points of this confusing and directionless campaign? --- Labour hamstrung itself by deposing a non-consultative Napoleon with a Josephine who wrote the script and dallied with the army officer whilst Napoleon was advised by his 20 something advisors to spend time on cloud nine. - Booth-speak ..... now here is an idea for this site -- Port Melbourne booth speak from the 45-65 male demography is... “Seen too many second rate men replaced with second rate women who rely on a few good men to fix the mess they create. On those grounds alone Labour does not get my vote for the first time in over 30 years because the replacement of Rudd with Julia is the worst in political correctness, affirmative action, employment discrimination and the type of work place shafting that goes on in every private or public employment today.” -- Booth speak 9.45 am Saturday 21, tells us.... Be worried about the protest vote from middle class seats such as Melbourne Ports and consider that loosing Lindsay’s seat is the centre of a slide that seems to drift in a belt around the city. Labour has lost the 20-30 something demography to the Greens on the grounds of the Internet filter, the perceived invasions on freedoms and the drift to the political right and lunatic religous zealots. ( Labour has forgotten that Australians are widely travelled and comparisons with the sophisticated cultural centres of Europe predominate in the 20-40 demography). . --- This election is between 72-78 seats either way. The Greens will be in a strong position in the Senate. This makes me think that if Labour wins, a strong climate change policy that is not distilled into a sledgehammer carbon tax that will drive this country into recession will need to be considered. That is, if Labour pulls out and delivers 76 seats. If not, hold on; Abbott change the agenda the day after the election.

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Saturday, 21 August 2010, 11:21

  We are paying the price of the right wing of the labor party being in bed with big business. How dare Kevin Rudd threaten to make the big miners pay their fare share of tax. This is not allowed. The big miners will tell their mates, Shorten et al that paying taxes is not on, and not only will they not pay taxes they want a hundred billion in tax reductions from labor, and Gillard was put in as PM and delivered more than their wildest dreams. How dare Kevin Rudd say Australian troops will be pulling out of Afghanistan in two years. The Americans will tell Australia when they can remove their armed forces from Afghanistan, as Julia Gillard was obviously told before she went on TV the day of the coup against Rudd, telling the world that Australia would stand beside the US in Afghanistan, until the job is done. Committing Australian troops to be the lap dogs of American foreign policy. Wake up to yourselves labor, we now run the risk of losing this election, after only one term, because of traitors in the labor camp. We will know who lost the election for us, and should make them pay for their treachery.

• 

  werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Saturday, 21 August 2010, 10:21

  We are paying the price of the right wing of the labor party being in bed with big business. How dare Kevin Rudd threaten to make the big miners pay their fare share of tax. This is not allowed. The big miners will tell their mates, Shorten et al that paying taxes is not on, and not only will they not pay taxes they want a hundred billion in tax reductions from labor, and Gillard was put in as PM and delivered more than their wildest dreams. How dare Kevin Rudd say Australian troops will be pulling out of Afghanistan in two years. The Americans will tell Australia when they can remove their armed forces from Afghanistan, as Julia Gillard was obviously told before she went on TV the day of the coup against Rudd, telling the world that Australia would stand beside the US in Afghanistan, until the job is done. Committing Australian troops to be the lap dogs of American foreign policy. Wake up to yourselves labor, we now run the risk of losing this election, after only one term, because of traitors in the labor camp. We will know who lost the election for us, and should make them pay for their treachery.

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Saturday, 21 August 2010, 10:21

  Spacek, I am sorry you took such offence at my play on words but I hardly think "space cadet" compares to your use of the word excrement throughout you blogs. Where did I say Julia Gillard has fixed everything? This country faces big challenges and I believe we need to face the future with a government that is willing to invest properly in education, health and infrastructure. Clearly the repetition of the word 'moving forward' in her initial speech was heavily criticised. I, for one, agree with that criticism and passed that thought on through Twitters to JG. However, I dont think that mantra compares to the amount of times Abbott has repeated this utterly inane "We'll Stop the Boats" slogan every time he opened his mouth. Just what does this slogan represent I ask rhetorically ? To me it represents an appeal to narrow-minded and xenophobic racism that totally exaggerates the effect that a small number of asylum seekers that arrive in boats via Indonesia. It seeks to play on people's frustration with the lack of transport and amenity infrastructure by somehow linking the arrival of a comparatively miniscule number of refugees to these issues. I am very annoyed at Abbott about this and I am also annoyed that Gillard has not distanced herself enough with this crass appeal the dark side of the Australian psyche. I believe she needed to be clearer in disassociating the issue of refugees with sustainability.However, I do give her credit for quoting Julian Burnside in reference to refugee numbers by pointing out that at the current rate of arrival it would take 20 years to fill the MCG. At least in terms of that she did attempt to put perspective on the issue.

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Saturday, 21 August 2010, 10:21

  Spacek, I am sorry you took such offence at my play on words but I hardly think "space cadet" compares to your use of the word excrement throughout you blogs. Where did I say Julia Gillard has fixed everything? This country faces big challenges and I believe we need to face the future with a government that is willing to invest properly in education, health and infrastructure. Clearly the repetition of the word 'moving forward' in her initial speech was heavily criticised. I, for one, agree with that criticism and passed that thought on through Twitters to JG. However, I dont think that mantra compares to the amount of times Abbott has repeated this utterly inane "We'll Stop the Boats" slogan every time he opened his mouth. Just what does this slogan represent I ask rhetorically ? To me it represents an appeal to narrow-minded and xenophobic racism that totally exaggerates the effect that a small number of asylum seekers that arrive in boats via Indonesia. It seeks to play on people's frustration with the lack of transport and amenity infrastructure by somehow linking the arrival of a comparatively miniscule number of refugees to these issues. I am very annoyed at Abbott about this and I am also annoyed that Gillard has not distanced herself enough with this crass appeal the dark side of the Australian psyche. I believe she needed to be clearer in disassociating the issue of refugees with sustainability.However, I do give her credit for quoting Julian Burnside in reference to refugee numbers by pointing out that at the current rate of arrival it would take 20 years to fill the MCG. At least in terms of that she did attempt to put perspective on the issue.

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Saturday, 21 August 2010, 09:21

  I was born in 1961, so perhaps this an omen of sorts. Menzies slid into office so I think it is time Labor returned the favour - so to speak.
  
  Spacek, I have been polite with only making the suggestion you may be blinkered, I am not sure why you are so vehement in your overtures. Julia Gillard, with the vote of the Australian people will lead the government and lead it onwards into a future, where Mr Abbott chose to drag us backwards - do note he did even mention a national service type solution for the unemployed - 1950s all over again.
  
  Be wary of the polls, they are often manipulated and easily manipulated to give results other than what will happen. In SA Mike Rann, on the polls was going to be chased out of office in a landslide defeat - all the polls said this. Mr Rann is still SA's Premier and no amount of Liberal Party hijinx came off, and of that there was plenty.
  
  Unless you have anything remotely intelligent to say about the election and the value points being made, then I again say why bother here. You are making angry statements of frustration, almost shouting your indignation here. Very few people liten to anyone who shouts at them, who makes statement rather than discussion. Unlike you I do know what Labor has done in Australia, this mistakes, the problems and the hard calls all together. I am sorry to say this, but I don't want to go backwards, I don't what my kids doing millitary service, I don't want to lose PBS discounts on medications I and my family need, and for my children's future the NBN is not only desirable it is vital.
  
  

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Saturday, 21 August 2010, 02:21

  MaryCH (I would not be so indelicate as to insult you; although I could create a pseudonym from your blog name regarding excrement), how has she fixed the Mining Tax? Andrew Forrest is furious and so are several hundred miners are left out; only the big three. So how do you get off saying she has fixed everything. All we hear are "good schools" and "great teachers". And she does a great giggling act to stall for time. Tony Abbott does not have these diversions; as he would then be classed as effeminate. Also was paying Brad Augill to fix up her mistakes such a good idea -- it is costing megabucks to fix this mess and the insulation debate.

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Saturday, 21 August 2010, 01:21

  MaryCH, speaking of repetition did you not hear Julia Gillard saying "moving forward" over 20 times in her announcement speech. You must have Labor voter's hearing.Tony Abbott's "we'll stop the boats" pales into insignificance compared to this mantra. And how DARE you call me space cadet -- I am sure I have analysed more newspaper articles and viewed political programs more than you -- so I could hardly be classed as a space cadet. You vote the red headed Welsh harradin in, go for it, you will get what you deserve; just give it time. And as for boat people, do you want them residing in your house? They will also be on welfare FOREVER, and are manipulating the Australian public -- obviously tree huggers like yourself. Gillard's drone is woeful and listening to her speak is like watching paint dry. And for your information, I am well aware Tony Abbott was born in England, but his parents are Australians; not Welsh, as the Leekster's are. I have every right to be on this website; I was once a deluded Labor voter and union delegate --- and leave sangerer alone (although he has criticised me I will not sink to his level) we are obviously not all as perfect as you think you are.

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Saturday, 21 August 2010, 01:21

  Robertnstephenson, isn't that rather like a pot calling a kettle black? When you have no defence you attack. Of course I will "bother", it is my democratic right, and by "people like you" -- are you referring to Liberal voters? It would appear you Laborites can't face the face that Gillard is in deep excrement she and her stringpullers have created.Have you not seen news coverage of people abusing her and calling her a backstabber. She could expect no less. So of course I will "bother" -- how dare you imply I shouldn't. You CANNOT deny the facts I have outlined here -- or is the ivory tower that you Labor stalwarts inhabit going to defend everything your chosen people do? To reiterate, Labor will get what it deserves, if re-elected, as what will happen to Kevin Rudd after he was stabbed and then suddenly approached to help her win. In the event of an unlikely Labor win, I trust you have seen the polls, I hope it divides the party. They will NEVER recover from what they did to Rudd. It was unAustralian in the extreme, but I think true Laborites would defend Charles Manson if he were released and running for election. THOSE ARE THE FACTS! So do NOT suggest I have no right to an opinion. At least I can write a grammatically correct and correctly spelt sentence. Bring it on -- and for God's sake dislodge the Bodgie (to quote Casey Bennetto) he and his botoxed blonde bimbo are NOT required. Did you see Michael Kroger on Lateline predicting a two year term for the Leek Princess, and Bill Shorten (more skeletons than Rookwood) becoming Prime Minister? So do NOT tell me I should not bother -- the same could be said of you and your Cyclopsian viewpoint.

• 

  MaryCH from Hughesdale , VIC Saturday, 21 August 2010, 01:21

  Spacek, or more to the point space cadet, what on earth are you doing on a Labor Party blog trotting out your Liberal Party views ? The only dud in the Australian political landscape is Tony Abbott. All this bloke has said for five weeks solid is "we'll stop the boats",. "we'll stop the boats" we'll stop the boats" etc. Julia Gillard has put up a platform forward of investment in education, health, vital communications infrastructure, tax reform in the way of simplification of personal tax returns, tax cuts for business and superannuation reform. Also should I point out that Abbott himself was not born in Australia. sangerer the notion of doing away with the states was one trotted out during the Whitlam era. The thought then was to have a two tier system of government with large local government municipalities and a federal government. The only way to achieve such a change would be to do away with the current constitution and rewrite it. If you have any inkling as to how hard it is to get any referenda up, you will realise that doing that is nigh on impossible. No party in the current political landscape is contemplating this or is ever likely to do so Also, the Labor Party in Australia does not spell its name with Labour as in the British equivalent.

• 

  sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Friday, 20 August 2010, 23:20

  I don’t understand why people in this country keep referring to the Australian Federal political system as a Westminster system of government. It always seems to be the people with some sort conservative hankering for notions of Westminster conventions that are observed by the Australian Federal Parliament in both procedure and daily organizational conduct. The point being that the Australian system of government is a federal system whilst the UK Westminster system is a unitary government. That means there are no states enshrined in the English constitution and not even in the Magna Carta . Instead, the British system has large regional municipal councils. Having said this, Australia would fare much better in my view if we changed the constitution and included Local Government and simply got rid of the states. Getting rid of one tier of government would save an enormous amount of money. Enlarged local government could be funded directly from Canberra and an entire layer of health, education etc bureaucracy would simply cease to exist. Saving time and even more money! We could have uniform fire hydrants, rail gauges, property taxes, municipals bylaws, industrial relations laws and so on and so forth. We could even target our redirect population growth and infrastructure needs more directly so that regional cities could prosper. Thanks “spacek”, for your no-doubt untinted Freudian slip. Your ignorance has highlighted an important platform of Labour policy vision even though changing the constitution and eliminating states is not feasible in the near future. Would the Liberals consider a constitutional change of this nature? After all mate, you raised it. It leaves me wondering whether this one is right out of the closet just like the notion of work choices which allowed a situation to arise where workers with little or no training guarantee can be exploited and to work under unacceptable conditions for unscrupulous employers. Isn’t that the real reason why those young guys in the roof insulation scheme died? Isn’t the real reason that Labour rushed out a stimulus without ensuring that the last vestiges of liberal work choices had been truly dead and buried so that unscrupulous employers couldn’t even set up their insulation companies without meeting basic industry safety and building regulatory and compliance codes. So what and why are you whinging about , mate? Are you complaining that Labour had ensured that Liberal Party work choices and all Howard related industrial related laws and practices where truly dead and gone, or are you whinging about the fact that people can set up two bit companies without meeting building registration and certification requirements. Even that was regarded as a restriction of trade under the Howard. What do you think the $ sweets case was all about. The liberals have been chipping away for years at industrial relations laws and union OHS industry regulations so that shonky operators can put people’s lives at risk and pay below the national wage rates, or bring in overseas workers under short term work visas. This was not done by Labour. The legislation was put in place by the Howard, Costello and Abbott governments. Thanks for reminding us all why an Abbott government is not an option for Australia.

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Friday, 20 August 2010, 19:20

  spacek -- forgive this minor observation - Julia Gillard could say an range is orange and you'd still call it blue. Sorry, seen people like you all over the web for the last 6 weeks, really don't know why you bother - honestly

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Friday, 20 August 2010, 17:20

  Obviously the batts issue would not have arisen if the government had not instituted it in the first place. Greed will always exist, so that is a lame argument. Ms Gillard got in through spurious means -- unprecedented sacking of a first term prime minister, in which she was complicit, with Arbib, Shorten, Bitar, Tripodi, Obeid, et al. If Bill Shorten was concerned about the future of the Government, why didn't he consult his mother in law the GG, instead of stabbing Kevin. Labor kept threatening the double dissolution trigger, and never pulled the gun -- they were scared of losing even then before Rudd's King of Knives episode. Regarding Gillard, even Kerry O'Brien (a red ragging Labor supporter if there ever was one) made a comment when he stated "how easy was it to plant the knife", after her "elevation". She is also now saying "if I am re-elected". Funny, I don't remember voting for her -- bugger your Westminster system, Kevin 07? 2007 was a presidential-style election. I do hope your childrens' spelling is better than yours. One must remember that another Labor Minister -- Deputy Premier Carmel Tebbutt, who was Education Minister, once informed on radio that she had "seen the syllabus" -- at what point do you Labor voters (myself and my family all were Labor voters and are now voting Liberal) stop excusing the ineptitude of both state and federal governments? I am sure if a Liberal prime minister (not the Leader of the party, as you apologists for the Labor party keep trotting out) was surgically de-hanced in the back area, you would not shut up about it. Also, to compare my comments about the insulation to a car accident is a ridiculous analogy. The whole scheme was a total waste of money and effort, as was the BER, but DEATHS occurred -- I suppose you would say I would blame the government if one of their buses killed somebody. Why is she now getting the Bodgie out to help her, and has crawled to Kevin. Get real. And read the Telegraph today. Are you also not aware that in the UK and US, a foreign born leader is not permitted -- why do you think the Republicans were banging on about Obama's birthplace. I know you will respond with this Westminister system of justice -- what do you think the UK has?

• 

  robertnstephenson from Hawthorndene , SA Friday, 20 August 2010, 16:20

  interesting post spacek -- to suggest a government be sacked becuause some Australians decided to try and rip off the system and in the process got workers killed through shoddy training is a bit like blaming the govenmnet for a car accident in Sydney this morning where a driver was speeding. I believe from how you have written and stated your case is poignant in the fact you may actually know nothing about political process, political functions and what is commonly known as political chest beating.
  
  The Liberal Pary at this time is relying heavily on the nastiness of the Liberal supporting army to belittle, abbuse and generally mislead the rest of Australia.
  
  I know I am passionate about my country, as most Australians are, but I do draw the line at what I call stupidity, or the blind belief of how things are reported in the media over what is actually happening.
  
  Were you equally as vocal when Alexander Downer said 'I didn't know' when quesyioned about AWB supplying Saddam Hussein with illegal wheat shipments? John Howard closed up the investigation quick smart, yet Australia has been punnished for the breaking of the UN embargo - did you cry out then?
  
  I might also add did you cry out when Mr Abbott started decimating our health system bit by bit. Did you cry out when work choices started seeing people not only lose jobs but get forced into contracts without provisions?
  
  While it is easy for the staunch Liberal to cry foul, it does need to be noted that these same shouters of hate and vitriol also supported a government that sold just about everything we owned to big business.
  
  I still believe Julia Gillard will win and by about 5-7 seats, enough to take control of the country. Please note, I will be one of the people effected by Mr Abbotts cuts to PBS, my children will be the ones effected by his cuts to education.
  
  I wish Julia Gillard all the best for the polling day, and in my own way I hope for a better future for my children, if not for myself.

• 

  spacek from Redfern , NSW Friday, 20 August 2010, 16:20

  You should have been sacked as a government after the five deaths initially, and now eleven, through the insulation debacle. The Labor party has lied and stabbed Kevin Rudd in the back, then got him back to stop Gillard's drop in the polls. What will you do, Mark and Karl, if she doesn't measure up? Stab her too? Your party is a joke. Your broadband network will be more expensive than you admit to, and you are only trying to buy votes, with the boring redhead's, "good schools", "good teachers" prattle. What are we all illiterate? People are getting through university illiterate, astoundingly. I hope Tony Abbott is the next Prime Minister. You are duds!