4
   

Oz Election Thread #4 - Gillard's Labor

 
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Jul, 2010 08:13 pm
@msolga,
I don't pretend to know what is going on with this tax thing. I have been wading through the BBC and your ABC stories. The smaller mining companies (under A$50 million in profits) are excluded from the tax, but they are not happy about the plan.
I will shut up and watch as things become clearer.
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Jul, 2010 08:36 pm
Quote:
The smaller mining companies (under A$50 million in profits) are excluded from the tax, but they are not happy about the plan.


Mostly the smaller miners are not happy about being left out of negotiations. some complaints about the losss of the 30% rebate on exploration costs that were on the table as part of the Rudd deal. Thats a bit like wingeing about losing something you never had.

Tax of 30% will apply to iron ore and coal profits after they exceed (about) 12%
Offshore petroleum resource rent tax to be extended to onshore projects and Nth west shelf.
Tax will not apply to mineral sands and nickle. (not sure yet about all the other minerals)
Companies with profits below 50 mill are exempt.

One thing that may cause a problem. Under the constitution minerals belong to the state. State governemtns already levy a royalty

Other industry sectors were to have the company tax rate reduced 1-2% using revenue from the new tax, this will not go ahead.
incrases in company funded compulsory superannuation to 12% still goes
ahead.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Jul, 2010 08:40 pm
@realjohnboy,
Quote:
I will shut up and watch as things become clearer.


So will I then! Smile

And I know that what we'll actually end up with will most likely to be a very different deal to what's been negotiated, anyway, RJB. This just the beginning of a long, tortuous tax "reform" journey, I'd say (which began with this year's federal budget). Most of the journey will occur after the election.

But at this point in time, the most important thing (as far as the ALP is concerned) is that there's a perception in the electorate that Julia has succeed where Kevin had failed. That she is a "better" leader. And that she improves Labor's performance in the opinion polls (which she's already done). Plus, of course, that she dramatically improves Labor's chances of winning election. So best, probably, that she gets us to the polling booths quickly, before there's too much close scrutiny of this deal. This "honey moon period" will not last indefinitely! Wink

0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Jul, 2010 09:08 pm
A bit of light relief before I go. From Thursday night's 7:30 Report.
Video: Clarke & Dawe: Bryan's first interview with new PM, "Julia Gillard". :


Clarke & Dawe with the new PM:
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Jul, 2010 09:23 pm
Next on Julia's agenda. Some other "troublesome" policy areas (according to the polls) for Labor to be tweaked before the election campaign.:

Quote:
... She said she would have more to say in coming days about future policies. "I've obviously said I'm concerned about the question of asylum-seekers. I understand that there are community concerns about these questions," she said.

With the freeze on processing Sri Lankan asylum-seekers due to be reviewed next week, Ms Gillard will face her first major decision on the issue and could extend the moratorium. An asylum-seeker vessel carrying 73 people - the 74th this year - was yesterday intercepted off Christmas Island.

Ms Gillard also has Climate Change Minister Penny Wong working on a climate change policy that could adopt some of Mr Abbott's "direct action" on cutting greenhouse gas emissions with far less emphasis on rising costs.

The government has also signalled it plans to resolve issues surrounding its $16.2bn Building the Education Revolution schools program, with the Treasurer and new Education Minister Simon Crean conceding there had been "some problems". .....


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/tax-done-pm-julia-gillard-turns-to-boats/story-e6frg6nf-1225887335996
jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jul, 2010 02:41 am
@msolga,
I think both sides of politics deal disgracefully with this illegal immigrants. I mean, everyone freaks out at a boatload of 70 Sri Lankans....what happens if Bangladesh succumbs to human-induced climate change and we are hit with a wave of 70 million Bangladeshis....

I don't propose an answer, really. I don't know if there is one. But hysterical fear-mongering about 'stopping the boats' is nothing but naked xenophobia and pandering to the talkback lobby.
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jul, 2010 02:58 am
@jeeprs,
jeeprs wrote:

I think both sides of politics deal disgracefully with this illegal immigrants. I mean, everyone freaks out at a boatload of 70 Sri Lankans....what happens if Bangladesh succumbs to human-induced climate change and we are hit with a wave of 70 million Bangladeshis....

I don't propose an answer, really. I don't know if there is one. But hysterical fear-mongering about 'stopping the boats' is nothing but naked xenophobia and pandering to the talkback lobby.


What worries me is that the fear is there to begin with.
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jul, 2010 07:13 am
Its a little like having a totally new community thrust upon us.
It is the pace of change that worries most people.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jul, 2010 08:48 am
@msolga,
Quote:
BRYAN DAWE: No, it's a bit early to do that.

Do you accept that you have been put there by the faceless men of the ALP faction system and that you are in debt to those power brokers?

JOHN CLARKE: No, I do not accept that, Bryan. I realise the media wishes to portray these things in that way but these people have faces, Bryan. That is how we recognise them.



msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jul, 2010 09:33 am
@dlowan,
Laughing

Yes.

Don't you think John C was sweet as Julia? I think he "got" her quite well. Smile
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jul, 2010 09:36 am
@jeeprs,
Quote:
I think both sides of politics deal disgracefully with this illegal immigrants.


What I really object to is the scare mongering for blatant political purposes. In Oz we call that "using the race card".
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jul, 2010 08:33 pm
@msolga,
As a fresh boatload of asylum seekers arrives at Christmas Island, speculation about the election date appears to be on hold for the minute:

Quote:
a government source said an election was unlikely to be held before the end of August: ''Anyone who put money on August 14 would lose their money.''


Meanwhile, here's what Julia had to say on "the asylum seekers issue". I'll be very interested in Labor's new position (if that's what actually occurs before the election), following Rudd's last comments on the subject before standing down. I'd suspect, if Julia does take a more pragmatic approach (which Rudd strongly suggested he was resisting, despite pressure) then Labor might (once again) lose some of those disaffected voters who returned to the fold (from the Greens, according to the polls) after she was installed as leader.
Either way, Abbott & the Liberals will be waiting in the wings to see what Labor's position on asylum seekers will be. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Liberals ran a strident anti-"illegals" campaign, similar to Howard's when he was in trouble in the 2001 election campaign. Remember Tampa? It worked a treat for the Libs.


Quote:
Speculation that the election could be called as soon as today was scotched by Ms Gillard, who said she needed to deal with the issues of asylum seekers and climate change before going to the polls.
''I do understand the concerns when people see boats looming on the horizon,'' Ms Gillard said in an interview yesterday. ''I also understand that there's nothing humanitarian about people being on boats and potentially at risk of losing their lives at sea.''


Ms Gillard said she wanted an honest and open debate about border security: ''I certainly dismiss labels like 'intolerant' or 'racist' because people raise concerns about border security but we've also got to be very alive to the complexity of this and that there's no quick fix.

''There's a temptation for people to use these labels and names to try and close down debate and I'm very opposed to that.'
'


But back to the mining tax .... yes, I want to know what effects of Labor's deal on the mining tax on will be on essential government services & programs, too. That's by far my main concern about the lost revenue .:

Quote:
Greens leader Bob Brown has written to Treasury asking for the full cost of the compromised mining deal, which cuts the tax rate from 40 to 30 per cent.

Senator Brown fears the cost of the compromise could be $25 billion a decade - ''billions unavailable for health and education''


http://www.smh.com.au/national/all-bets-are-off-as-gillard-ramps-up-asylum-debate-20100703-zuza.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Jul, 2010 11:38 pm
@msolga,
A four day debate? .... before the government announces the new policy? Confused

OK, I'll be in it! (I'd much prefer a bit longer, though. Wink )

Where will it be happening, exactly?:


Quote:
Prime Minister Julia Gillard has called for an open debate on asylum seekers days before the government is expected to announce a new policy on refugees.


A three-month freeze on the processing of Sri Lankan asylum seekers is due to expire on Thursday.

Ms Gillard would not be drawn on what decision the government would make or if it would apply to refugees more broadly.

However, she said people should be able to speak their mind on the issue, free from political correctness
.


http://www.smh.com.au/national/pm-calls-for-open-debate-on-asylum-seekers-20100704-zvj8.html
jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 02:19 am
@msolga,
the comment I heard on the news last hour was Gillard saying it was important that everyone be able to express their view on border protection with being accused of being xenophobic (can't recall the exact words she used). Very wise, I thought, to open it up to community debate. I am starting to think this will push out the announce date for the election till at least week beginning 12th July.

So far, I am more than impressed with Gillard (but admittedly I am not a hard-ass and I do want to see this government succeed, others may have a different view of course.)
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 02:25 am
@jeeprs,
But ...4 days of "community debate"?

What were her advisers thinking?

jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 02:29 am
@msolga,
It's a big deal, though. There are some big decisions to be made. What are we going to do? Send them to Tuvalu again? Torpedo the boats? Provide public housing? It is very easy for The Joker to say 'we will stop the boats before they arrive', perhaps they should send him over to stop the leak in the Gulf of Mexico, which would be about as likely.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 02:40 am
@jeeprs,
I KNOW it's a big deal. Make no mistake about that. And many people feel very strongly about it, one way or another ...

What I'm commenting on here is the process.

If Labor announces that they've changed the policy on refugees to this country, then they should be up-front about it. Wear the decision as their own.

Any turn-around on refugee policy should be owned by Labor. This new (if it happens) policy is what Labor stands for.

Any pretense that it has been influenced by "community consultation" (over less than 4 days!) is ridiculous. (Unless they call their own internal poll findings "community consultation".

People are not stupid.




jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 02:55 am
@msolga,
Don't know if I agree though. Rudd got in on a 'more humane approach' idea. But then due to the Afghan and Sri Lanka conflicts, there was a big upsurge of boats, and Abbott immediately began to pander to the talkback lobby. I interpreted the delay in processing Afghan and Sri Lankan visas as a concession to the right and the talkback crowd.

Gillard is on the record telling the Howard government that every arrival represented a policy failure on the Government's part. It will be very easy to throw that back at her. It is a vexing question. Although I spose I see your point about the 4-day period.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 02:58 am
@jeeprs,
Quote:
Don't know if I agree though.


On which things that I said?
jeeprs
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 Jul, 2010 03:34 am
@msolga,
about the process aspects. I suppose you can see it as not wanting to 'own the decision' as you say. It is such a divisive issue, I think allowing it to be ventilated for a few days might not hurt.
 

Related Topics

Beached As Bro - Discussion by dadpad
Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour - Discussion by msolga
Australian music - Discussion by Wilso
Oz Election Thread #6 - Abbott's LNP - Discussion by hingehead
AUstralian Philosophers - Discussion by dadpad
Australia voting system - Discussion by fbaezer
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 07:19:31