The NEXT coming Oz election thread!

I couldn't quite believe it myself. (on the ABC news last night.) What on earth had she done to warrant that?

Yes, she is. Say nothing of the other Howard stooges on the Board.
But, I guess this is JH's idea of "balance"?
I don't know how the ABC's employees (particularly those presenting news, current affairs & political content) have carried on as well as they have in the face of such open aggression from the government. That & being starved of funds. It's interesting, isn't it, this concept of imposing ministers & cronies who are hostile & completely unsupportive toward their area of responsibility (Abbott, Bishop, Andrews, Hockey etc, etc), particularly if it has anything to do with the public service or the benefit of ordinary people!

Are "aspirational targets" something like "non-core promises"? :

Govt, green groups face off over Sydney Declaration
Posted Sun Sep 9, 2007 0:30am AEST
Updated Sun Sep 9, 2007 5:31am AEST

The Federal Government and green groups are at odds over the value of the climate change declaration signed off by APEC leaders yesterday.

The 'Sydney Declaration' does not set an overall target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, but it does commit APEC members to trying to improve energy efficiency by at least 25 per cent by 2030.

John Howard made climate change consensus APEC's major focus and he is highlighting the unity of major polluters China and the US in agreeing to the need for an aspirational global emissions reduction goal.

"This declaration does transcend a number of international divisions," Mr Howard said.

"We are serious about addressing in a sensible way compatible with our different economic needs, the great challenge of climate change."

APEC members have set targets for improving energy efficiency and expanding forests, but nothing in the statement is binding and Julie-Anne Richards from the Climate Action Network says it is too lenient.

"Aspirational targets and voluntary actions just don't cut it," she said.

Labor too is unimpressed with the declaration.

Opposition environment spokesman Peter Garrett says the declaration will do little to advance the global warming agenda internationally.

"What's happened here is we've had good will, but we haven't had substantive forward movement," Mr Garrett said.

Labor argues the declaration falls short of what Mr Howard was promising.

Greens Senator Christine Milne says the Sydney Declaration fails to recognise the seriousness or the urgency needed to address climate change.

"The only good thing about it is it's a complete slap in the face for President Bush and Prime Minister Howard," she said.

"It demonstrates that the APEC countries all recognise the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change as the appropriate framework within which to talk about climate change."

http://www.abc.com.au/news/stories/2007/09/09/2027701.htm

PM says family told him to go on
September 10, 2007
The AUSTRALIAN

PRIME Minister John Howard says he discussed his future with his family last night and was urged to lead the Government into the federal election.

Mr Howard tonight also said he believed the vote would be close and the Government could win, despite predictions of a bloodbath for the Coalition.

He made the comments after a day of intense speculation over his leadership and when the election will be called.

"I've talked about my position with my own family at length last night," the Prime Minister told the Seven Network.

"They want me to continue to contribute. They support what I'm doing." ... <cont>

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22395349-12377,00.html

By which he means Janette is not so keen to move out of Kirribilli (sp?) House just yet? It seems that what Janette says, goes. After reading extracts from that biography I seriously suspect that she's the one whose been running the country for the past 11 years!:wink:
But isn't it interesting that it's never his decision?: He'll stay on "as long as the party wants me", or because his family wants him to ...
But, in answer to Kerry O'Brien's question (tonight on the 7:30 Report) about whether he'd ever asked the party if they wanted him to go (or stay), he said that no, he hadn't. He could sort of gauge the party's wishes by talking to individuals. So what are all these rumblings, which we're hearing from the Liberal side at the moment, about then?
Listening to AM this morning it was interesting to hear his explanation for why the Libs' are polling so poorly.: Too much dwelling on past achievements & not enough emphasis on the future. And <gasp> a small acknowledgement that there are some Australians who had not shared in the prosperity of the past few years. And a suggestion that perhaps a bit of consideration should be given to their concerns. A reference to the 2 million now living in poverty in Oz? It'll be interesting what, if anything, he might offer them in the last few weeks of this endless campaign. It is almost as though he's just discovered them!

I can see it now .......
bonzai .... vote for me and I will give all those below the poverty line
a super duper $1000 one-off payment ...
presto ..... election won .......

It's just a matter of time before the pork-barreling starts in earnest !

Olga touched on something of great concern to me - the dismemberment of the public service as an apolitical source of frank and fearless advice.

No-one who wants to hold onto their job in the APS would ever offer f&f.

The situation reminds me of an anecdote about Soviet Russia in the 80s, apparently a ballbearing factory was running below an acceptable level of productivity. Productivity targets were set in place with rewards and all the teams spent all their time figuring out ways of stealing ballbearings from stores and other teams rather than actually manufacturing them - productivity crashed to near zero in weeks.

In the public service the howard government introduced accrual accounting and 'measurable' outcomes with executive bonuses tied to meeting those outcomes - and by way of getting AWAs out there started 'forcing' lower level public servants (down to at least APS4 level) to enter into AWAs.

The result? Massive effort to distort definitions and statistics to make them prove outcomes were reached (employment once meant a full time job - now its 4 hours a week of paid work - being unemployed meant not having a job, now it means not eligible or willing to claim a benefit).

Public servants slavishly do everything in the power to ensure their respective minister is not embarassed in the media - even if it means giving a 'squeaky' individual or organisation government funds without legally required audit trails and contract adherence. And no-one is allowed to give a rats about the client at the bottom of the food chain - the govt contracts out service provision so that if anything does make the paper they can raise their hands and say it was someone else's fault.

I hope John Howard lives a long time and gets many opportunities to see his legacy exposed for the corrosive influence on the Australian psyche that it is.

You might be interested in a book called 'Silencing Dissent'

Who wrote it Vikorr?

I'm about to read David Marr's 'Dark Victory' about the Howard manipulation of the Tampa tragedy. Lucky I can turn to Walking Ollie for light relief with all this darkness gathering.

Attempt to be frank & fearless in the public service? With this government? They'd be absolutely mad to!
But then, when there's some scandal involving incompetency, as you say, the responsible minister/s can always claim that they "weren't told" or didn't get the "right" advice & blame their public service advisors. As we've observed. And if any poor sod stands up & dares express an opinion contrary to the current Liberal line, they get crucified.
Trouble is, if all the government ever hears is what it wants to hear, that government ends up being completely out touch & living in an insulated bubble ... like the Libs now. Howard's way. Completely out of touch with the Australian community.

Crikey, what a wild couple of days! JH has always declared he would "stay on as long as the party wants me". Well, his most senior cabinet members were clearly telling him it would be best for the party if he stood down ... now. So what does he do? Dig in his heels & declares that he's never "walked away" from a battle. Causing some of the most embarrassing headlines for the Libs at the worst possible time & making them a laughing stock. Unbelievable stuff. They are stuck with him as long as he chooses to stay, no matter what his party wants, clearly. Are these senior Libs terrified of the man? What is it with them that causes such paralysis, time & time again? :

Yeah, sure he started it!
And those senior ministers were just trying to be helpful in those meetings!
They really, really want him to stay! They're a united team! :

I started it, says PM


Once more into the breach ... John Howard at parliament today.
Photo: Andrew Taylor

September 12, 2007 - 2:23PM

Prime Minister John Howard has defended senior ministers who actively discussed replacing him with Peter Costello to ward off electoral annihilation.

Mr Howard survived a meeting of Liberal Party MPs this morning with his leadership unchallenged after a week of secret talks between key cabinet ministers.

And Treasurer Peter Costello - who was not included in the talks - called for Coalition MPs to work as a team to defeat Labor at the impending election.

Yesterday, it was revealed that senior ministers had been canvassing ways to arrest the Government's disastrous opinion poll slide, including asking Mr Howard to step down.

But Mr Howard said the discussions had been held at his request.

"There was naturally within the party discussion about our political position, given some of the published polls,'' Mr Howard told Macquarie radio shortly after the meeting finished. "Nobody has behaved in a disloyal fashion towards me." ...<cont>

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/i-started-it-says-pm/2007/09/12/1189276757646.html

Promises, promises .... :wink: :

I'll step down: Howard
September 12, 2007 - 8:58PM
The AGE

Prime Minister John Howard says he will step down some time within the next three years if re-elected at the coming election.

Mr Howard, 68, who emerged unscathed from a Liberal Party meeting today at which his leadership was discussed, has been under pressure to commit himself to serving a full term if re-elected.

He said he loved the job but all things had to come to an end.

"Frankly, I love the job. It still stimulates and energises me. There's a lot of things I want to do for the Australian people," Mr Howard told ABC TV tonight.

"I won't find it easy, if I am re-elected, to retire. I won't find it the least bit easy because I am very committed to this job and I will not like leaving it.

"But everything comes to an end ... and we must be honest and candid and adult about it.''

Retiring 'makes sense'

Mr Howard, Australia's second longest-serving prime minister, said he intended to step down in favour of Treasurer Peter Costello late in the term if he wins his fifth consecutive election. ...<cont>

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/ill-step-down-howard/2007/09/12/1189276760332.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

Meanwhile, in Russia ...: