The NEXT coming Oz election thread!

Another Lib hits the dust?:

Santoro set to resign
Phillip Coorey
March 16, 2007 - 2:10PM/SMH

Speculation is rife within the Liberal Party that the Minister for Ageing, Santo Santoro, could resign from the ministry this afternoon.

Senator Santoro, from Queensland, is currently in a meeting.

Senior Coalition sources have separately told smh.com.au to "stay tuned" for an announcement this afternoon.

He has been under pressure since revelations on Tuesday that he had forgotten to declare shares in a biotechnology company after he was appointed to the ministry in January 2006.

This amounted to a breach of the ministerial code of conduct.

Senator Santoro discovered the shares in October, told the Prime Minister, John Howard, about them and immediately sold them.

He said this week he donated the $6000 profit to a charity and Mr Howard stood by him, saying it was an inadvertent mistake.

Amid Labor calls for Senator Santoro to be sacked, it emerged that the minister gave the profits not to a charity, but to the Family Council, an organisation headed by his financial adviser, Alan Baker.

It is understood Senator Santoro has been asked to resign to limit the political fallout in Queensland, a state crucial to this year's federal election.

Already, three Coalition MPs in Queensland are under investigation for the alleged misuse by at least one of them of their printing allowance.

In the last fortnight, Mr Howard has sacked Ian Campbell from the ministry for meeting a deleagtion which included Brian Burke. ... <cont>

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/santoro-set-to-resign/2007/03/16/1173722720321.html

Yep, he has resigned.:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200703/s1873761.htm

BTW, an interesting concept of a "donation to a charity", don't you think? :wink:

The thing is, if it wasn't an election year & if JH hadn't made such a big deal about "ministerial accountability" (so he could attack Kevin Rudd) I suspect the Libs would just have ridden this one out .... as JH has ridden out far more serious ministerial indiscretions & mistakes than this one.

Yep, JH has opened an uncontrollable can of worms here.

So whose head next?
I imagine there is serious dirt-digging being conducted by both sides, as I type! :wink:

Msolga.
I accept what you say, but then you are talking of now and the standards of today are completely different than my day... all I see is everyone is helped in some way or the other and in comparison to my day it's no big deal.
I'm afraid I cannot enlighten you as to the Kenneth Davidson article, I , like many others in most of that period, happened to be a very poor working man.. started in a apprenticeship as a painter and decorator at the age of 13 in England, was 19 when I started as a subcontractor in the floor covering business ( on my knees laying it ) gradually worked my way up from that.. the only interest I took in politics...was who could do the best for my family and I.... I think I can say the same for most of us at that time. I can only say that I had ( for me ) a huge debt to the bank and it was a hell of a struggle to make ends meet, but it paid off in the end... perhaps you can say the same for our political party now. I think we can safely say there are very few Ausies today who would regret their financial position in Australia, I, like everybody else, hope it will continue. But if Labour gets in, I hope to hell in the future, that the Ausie workers don't have to endure what I and many others I know, went through.

anton

Thank you for responding with such candour & honesty. (I confess I am no genius when it comes to the variety of different theories on "the economy", either! The "business" pages of my daily paper tend to numb my brain, I'm afraid. :wink: )

I wish I had more time to respond right now, but I don't. I've just read your message on the run & will reread it later, before responding.

But I think, at the very least, that it's good we can all discuss "politics" here without going for each other's jugulars!

We are rather civilized, don't you think?

That $520 Billion debt has to be serviced eventually, whether under labor or liberal...the reality is, if it is kept being put off it will come back to bite...should labor win and choose to implement policies to service this debt, then Australia's economy will likely slow...and it will hardly be the fault of Labor.

Also on the economy, last year it ran at 2.68%...so if you factor out the comodities boom (which has nothing to do with federal govt, and everything to do with the rest of the world), then our economy is stagnant.

Worse, there are signs that the comodities boom may slow...in which case Australia's economy could suffer terribly (which won't be the fault of the labor govt if it's elected)

As to many Australian's current prosperity...much of it is on the back of property booms...which is good for those with property, and bad for those without, and bad for young people (many of whom will also struggle under a HECS debt...with some degree's hitting the $250,000 mark)

And to IR WorkChoices...America is an example of what happens with 30 years or so of similar legislation...the minimum wage goes down relative to inflation, and the max wage goes up. The minimum wage earners can't afford to send their children to Uni, while the max wage workers can. The price of housing goes up, driving up the price of renting, meaning the minimum wage workers have even less in their pockets. The minimum wage workers can then only afford to live in 'bad' suburbs, and slums form. Crime rockets in those suburbs, and related social problems start appearing ....(more than they currently do that is).

I personaly don't want a country like that. While I think everyone should have a fair wage, and be paid what they are capable of earning, so I also believe that the minimum wage should be protected so that those poor have a chance to escape the poverty cycle. I do not think such things are mutually exclusive.

Msolga.

Hi, discussing politics is like arguing over the length of a piece of string... end up, tied up in knots, I find all politicions in todays era, to be more interested in pushing their political agendas than getting down and getting dirty. anyhow political party's are like eating a meal... you pick what you want and if they don't agree with you, they end up giving you the shits.

I found.. when I came to Australia many many years ago.. to be unbelievable!... when men got together they drank piss, told each other how many virgins they had bonked over the week end... and sprinkled their conversation's with colorful words like " I saw this f--ing, dickhead trying to root a bloody tree, he was as full as a fart, and the bastard didn't know **** from a sandwich... the f--ing **** ended up on his f--ing arse.. dead drunk. Jesus Christ he was a stupid prick, then f--uck me dead if he didn't get up and walk away ".... yet if a woman walked into the room, none of them would swear at all in her company, same when they were at home... they never swore. we are now rather more civilized?. Also I loved the way one could call the boss "mate" and there seemed to be little class distinction and amazed at how many opportunities there were for getting work and improving oneself.
It's still the same today to some extent, accept there seems to be so many that don't want to work... had plenty of experience with that over the last 15 years

The following was posted on a forum in the USA. I don't remember where it was but here is a portion of the post. It refers to the USA.

The polarizing of wealth has put 90% of the wealth of this country in the hands of 1% of the people.
Up until the 1950s corporations could not donate to political campaigns.
Up until 1965 a man could work @ the mill, own a house, buy a new car every 3 yrs and the wife stayed home and raised the children.
And they wonder what has happened to education/ morality.
There's no one raising the kids. Everyone is working 60 hrs. a week so they can get another status symbol trinket cheap at Wallyworld.
Trade barriers, tariffs, unions protected the middle class.
We refused to compete with work forces that worked for one bowl of rice a day and congress did OUR bidding, not the bidding of the corporations,,so they could raise money to get re-elected.

Corporations have no conscience. Zero morality. Yet they elect our leaders and control the media. Campaign finance reform is our only hope but anyone supporting it will be portrayed as a left wing commie kook by the Rupert Murdoc, Exxon Mobil, General Electric department of information. They own about 90% of the media. Do you think they're going to let us take over the govt.? Do you think they'll make sure our standard of living is protected when they can make more money if they only give the Chinamen our jobs.

Ever play Monopoly? Once someone owns Boardwalk and Parkplace the game is over.
We can't let THIS game be over.
We've got to get our govt. back. We've got to get rid of campaign fund raisers.
Make the politicians responsible to us...make them legislate instead of eternally campaigning.

Similar has and is happening in Australia...big business donates, and governments thank them.

That's the one thing I strongly think should be changed....then a lot of other things wouldn't have happened to Australia.

Yes and yes and yes.

Why should democracy be all about who can pay the biggest bribe?

Well, well!

Today's Newspoll results:

Labor soars to 20-year high in latest Newspoll
Steve Lewis, Chief political correspondent
March 20, 2007/the AUSTRALIAN

LABOR'S primary vote has surged to a 20-year high of 52 per cent and Kevin Rudd has opened his strongest lead as preferred prime minister, after a fortnight of frontbench turmoil that included the resignation of two Howard Government ministers.

With Labor preparing a parliamentary assault against John Howard after he was forced to conduct two ministerial reshuffles in as many weeks, voter dissatisfaction with the Prime Minister has climbed to 50per cent - its highest level since November 2005.

At the same time, the Government's attempt to damage the Opposition Leader over his 2005 meetings with disgraced former West Australian premier Brian Burke have backfired, with Mr Rudd's approval ratings returning to near-record levels.

Labor has opened up a stunning lead over the Coalition - 61per cent to 39 per cent, after preferences - according to the latest Newspoll, conducted exclusively for The Australian.

The result, if replicated at the election due later this year, would see scores of Liberal Party and Nationals seats fall to Labor, in what would be the biggest electoral whitewash in 30 years.

The Coalition's primary vote has fallen to just 34 per cent, its lowest level since June 1998, when Pauline Hanson's popularity was at its peak. This compares with its 46.7 per cent primary vote at the November 2004 poll, when Mr Howard humiliated Labor's Mark Latham.

The drop in support for the Liberal Party, with its primary vote falling below 30 per cent, follows the abrupt resignation of ageing minister Santo Santoro on Friday.

Two weeks earlier, the Government suffered another embarrassment when human services minister Ian Campbell was dumped after revelations he had met with Mr Burke.

Labor, which had been on the defensive over the explosive allegations surrounding Mr Rudd's series of meetings with Mr Burke, is expected to pursue the broad issue of ministerial standards when parliament resumes today. ... <cont>

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21411788-601,00.html

FEDERAL NEWSPOLL RESULTS/March 20th:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20876,21412068-17281,00.html

COMMENTARY:

Dennis Shanahan: Circus master's run out of rabbits
ANALYSIS
March 20, 2007/the AUSTRALIAN

THE most dangerous result of the latest Newspoll figures for John Howard is that the nervousness in his own ranks will snowball.

For months, the Prime Minister has been telling his colleagues they could lose the election and that it would be a tough fight.
He's right. The fall in the Coalition's primary vote to 34per cent proves it.

But up until now, many commentators and Howard's colleagues have simply assumed the wily old master would pull a rabbit out of the hat and we would see a rerun of 2001 and 2004, when the Government was in a similar position at the same time of year and won the votes.

Kevin Rudd, however, has always been a formidable threat to Howard. In a few short months he has lifted Labor's primary vote to 52 per cent, with Labor ahead by 61 per cent to 39 per cent in two-party-preferred terms.

He has momentum he doesn't intend to surrender, and as the polls keep getting better for him, he's likely to keep high levels of support going into the election.

That's why Howard is so angry and frustrated with dumb behaviour by ministers who are forced to resign, creating the impression the wheels are falling off the Government's cart. ... <cont>

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21411784-601,00.html

Tandberg's comment on PH's "brief affair"/romance, some time ago. Full details to be revealed soon! In Pauline's soon-to-be-published book! I can't wait!

.. The real question (about the voters' brief fling with Pauline) is: was it any different, or worse even, to the voters' prolonged affair with JH & co? Amounts to pretty much the same thing to me!:

With PH's alleged "brief affair" ... 2 people get sc**wed ....
With JH and co, a very large percentage of the population get sc**wed and it's not a brief or painless !

What I found fascinating, bungie, is that Pauline H was expelled from the Liberal party for her "outrageous" utterances .... the JH proceeded to run with them for all he was worth!