Summary

 

The final week of the election campaign saw ABC online editor Jonathan Green make at least some effort to even up the bias between advocates of the Labor and Liberal sides, but not enough to prevent the fifth straight week of measurable bias to the Left at the ABC online opinion sites, The Drum and Unleashed. 

  

By my count Julia Gillard or her campaign was criticised 152 times and praised 58 times – a ratio of roughly 3:1 and Abbott criticised 119 times to 32 or about 4:1.

 

While the bias to the Left in the measured areas was more subtle this week, it is there to be seen in other areas, for example, with eight articles explicitly supporting Green policies, and none supporting the policies of say, Family First or the National Party.

 

The ShadowLands will present the full results for the five weeks of the election campaign tomorrow.

 

The analysis

 

For the week 16-21 August, we examined the articles published at the ABC online sites, The Drum and Unleashed each time noting where a sentence made a negative or positive statement about Julia Gillard (G- or G+) or Tony Abbott (A+ A-) or aspects of their campaign.

 

 http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/20/2988194.htm?site=thedrum Barrie Cassidy:

“I stepped up when I, and overwhelmingly my colleagues, came to the conclusion that the best way of the Government being in the best shape to deal with the issues that the nation faced was for me to step into this position.” Convincing? G-

But having said that, surely there was more to say to counter the accusations that came thick and fast from the public and the Coalition in equal number. G-

Yet the Government allowed Gillard’s leadership to be presented as illegitimate while Abbott’s was not. Why, when the Liberal leadership showdown was hardly ancient history, having happened just nine months ago? G- A-

In the last week, however, it didn’t have quite the same nastiness to it; the sense that something was indeed very smelly within the bowels of the party itself. G-

So as election day draws near, Labor will rue strategic errors like tossing in a peoples’ assembly as a response to a serious policy vacuum on climate change. They will wish that more meaningful discussions had been held with Rudd immediately after the “coup”, and they will debate whether there should have been better responses to the key Rudd question. G- G-

The Coalition on the other hand, will surely question policy responses to the Government’s high speed broadband and their own unnecessarily generous parental leave scheme. A-

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/19/2987609.htm?site=thedrum Michael Jenda:

Listening to the Coalition costings announcement and Julia Gillard at the Brisbane forum, both major parties were guilty of promising something as a given that the rest of the world can easily take away. G- A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2987807.htm Amanda McKenzie:

The Coalition has focused on a scare campaign around cost. A-

The Coalition, usually champions of the free market, has rejected putting a price on pollution outright. But Abbott’s cries of “A great big new tax” ring hollow. Abbott’s own policy is far more costly for the public. He proposes a massive public fund to encourage polluters to reduce their pollution. Why should taxpayers pay polluters for the damage they cause, from which they have reaped significant rewards? It is inefficient and far more costly than using a pricing mechanism. A-A-A-A-A-A-

The Labor party is not much better. They are delaying putting a price-tag on pollution until 2013 or beyond and seemingly unable to prosecute the case for action. Neither party has a comprehensive plan to reduce pollution, address climate change and ensure Australia is a prosperous, healthy country for our young people. G- A-A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2987642.htm Ben Eltham:

Labor will build a high-tech, costly, future-proofed National Broadband Network, laying fibre into the homes of nine-tenths of Australian households. The Coalition will throw $6 billion at backhaul infrastructure and hope that wireless plugs the gaps. G+A-

In contrast, the Coalition is offering a far more constrained, cost-effective and slower plan for building broadband infrastructure. It will be much more affordable, but it will only deliver speeds to around the same levels many of us can get right now on a decent ADSL2+ plan. Unsurprisingly, it’s a policy that has been roundly criticised by many prominent analysts, and it offers one of the clearest points of difference between the major parties. A-

Mark Pesce, writing here on the ABC, put the Liberal policy to the sword on the basis of nothing more than high-school physics: A-

If [Andrew Robb and Tony Smith] did their maths, they’d come to understand and accept that fibre-to-the-premises is inevitably a part of the Australian future. There’s no way that any other combination of technologies – whether copper or cable or wireless – can handle the endless demand for increasing levels of connectivity which is the singular and inescapable fact of 21st-century life … In the future-proofing sweepstakes, there is only one winner: fibre. A-A-A-

“If the Opposition had a good understanding of the issues then they could have mounted a far more effective campaign against the government’s broadband plans.” Budde makes a point few have so far picked up on, which is that the Coalition has also promised to abandon the Government’s e-health and computers-in-schools initiatives: “in effect, they are taking away the key policies that would have seen private investments moving towards the NBN.” A- A-

… the Labor Party still believes in building public infrastructure. The Liberal Party doesn’t. G+ A-

This visceral opposition to government spending on infrastructure surely underlies the Liberal Party’s vicious campaign against the second part of the Rudd Government’s stimulus package. Few political parties have cleaved to outdated ideas about the danger of government debt and deficit like the Liberal Party of Australia. A- A-

As everyone from Glenn Stevens to a group of 50 leading economists have argued, Australia doesn’t have a government debt problem. That hasn’t phased Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey. And that belief has flowed over into a general dislike of government investment – even useful and effective government investment, for instance in our nation’s primary schools. G+ A-A-

Hence, two separate inquiries that have found Julia Gillard’s schools stimulus program to be generally well-managed and cost-effective haven’t changed anyone’s minds. G+

This is why the “great, big, new tax” scare run by Tony Abbott is inherently dishonest. A-

Under Tony Abbott, the Liberal Party appears fundamentally opposed to a price on carbon, despite the sound free-market principles of user-pays economics which support it. Under Julia Gillard, this Labor Government has certainly run a long way backwards from its former commitment to a carbon price through an emissions trading scheme. But there is at least no ideological or philosophical objection. A-G+

Julia Gillard at least accepts the scientific evidence of a warming world. Tony Abbott still has genuine difficulties with this science. Gillard has pledged to work to “build a consensus” on creating a price on carbon. Abbott has unequivocally stated that “there will be no carbon price on consumers under a Coalition government, none whatsoever.” G+A-G+A-

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/20/2988558.htm  Stephen Long:

My view, for what it’s worth: Labor’s fiscal stimulus played a crucial role in preventing a deep downturn in the economy, although it was one among many factors that cushioned the shock of the GFC. G+

In this critical period, fiscal stimulus played an important role. G+

I reckon that you can attribute that in large part to the first phase of the stimulus – round one of the handouts to households, more than $10 billion maligned at the time as a wasteful “cash splash”. G+

This first round was targeted at lower income households with a high propensity to spend money and they did just that, providing a major boost to retail trade and saving jobs in the retail sector, the nation’s biggest employer. G+

Round two of the “cash splash” – $900 cheques to about 9 million households – began flowing in April 2009 and boosted the economy as the jobless rate climbed and total hours worked fell sharply. G+

But it must be acknowledged that, in the six months after the credit crash brought on by the collapse of Lehman Brothers, fiscal stimulus was not the main contribution to the economy’s performance. G-

They argue that the second prong of Labor’s fiscal stimulus – capital works programs such as the home insulation and the school renovation programs – came too late, after the threat had come and gone. But that claim sits oddly with the evidence from the national accounts. A-

Over the past year or so, it was, without a doubt, public spending that kept the economy moving forward (to borrow a phrase). G+

Far and away, the biggest contribution to GDP was public demand – driven by a huge rise in what the ABS calls “public gross fixed capital formation”, a fancy phrase for public works. G+

The myth being fashioned now is that the oddly named “Building the Education Revolution” could not have played a role in rescuing the economy, because the work didn’t really get going until a year ago, or later. But that assumes that the problems were all over by then. Not so. G+

Ask yourself: where would the economy be now if the Government had not put all that money into construction? G+

In the absence of the stimulus, the higher unemployment rate and lower tax receipts would have ensured that Australia fell into a sizeable budget deficit and amassed a public debt – but at far greater human cost. G+

Yes there were cost overruns, and building contractors milked the public purse. But in the broader scheme of things, it was a small price to pay. G- G+

Now the hindsight hecklers jeer and mock but their assessment is harsh. A-

In Australia, policy worked. G+

The Government did inherit a strong fiscal position, get a leg up from China and its sizeable fiscal stimulus, and enjoyed a deal of luck. G-

But the Labor Government and the Federal Treasury deserve more credit than they’ve been getting. G+

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2988015.htm Mike Stuchbery:

…there’s been a real lack of vision on behalf of both of the major parties. Personally, I’ve developed a eye twitch every time Julia thanks someone for their question, or Tony stutters. A- G- A- G-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2988738.htm John Hewson


The Government started the campaign with the momentum G+

Bottom line was Julia was tossed in at the deep end, where she floundered for at least the first half of the campaign, compounded by leaks, Rudd, Latham and by the unravelling of her “policy fix”, especially on asylum seekers and the citizens assembly. Even the circuit breaker, the “real Julia” strategy, frayed with time as many started to ask, “Is that all there is?” G- G-

Nevertheless, Julia did marginally better in the last couple of weeks, significantly aided by the main flaw in the Opposition’s strategy, namely being spooked about going “too hard” against Julia, the failed minister, in a failed government, and personally. G+ A-

By comparison, the personal attacks against Abbott and his record were both hard and relentless. Even in her last Press Club speech, where Julia claimed to want to escape all the negativity and to focus on her “plan” for the future, she then went on and bagged Abbott some 45 times, and her attacks during questions were defining. G- G-

My take on the campaign as a whole is that the day-to-day slog was pretty much a draw, but Abbott did marginally better, simply because he performed much better than expected. He was much more controlled, disciplined and focused than expected after the incidents in the 2007 campaign with Bernie Banton, WorkChoices, etc. and under the relentless personal attacks. A+ A+

http://blogs.abc.net.au/drumroll/2010/08/a-glorious-day-dawns-tomorrow.html Malcolm Farnsworth:

The opinion polls tell us this government is in trouble. G-

Gillard is hoping that optimism will trump fear tomorrow. G+ A-

The Labor government should be cruising to a comfortable victory in this election.  That it is facing defeat is a damning indictment of its political failures and misjudgements.  G-

With the benefit of hindsight, the government’s decline can be traced to Tony Abbott’s election as Liberal Party leader.  He immediately wrong-footed the government with his oppositionist mentality, rejecting the Emissions Trading Scheme in the Senate and embarking on a wholesale denunciation of the government’s performance.  The sheer brutality of his approach caught them all off-guard. A+ A+ A-

 

Then Kevin Rudd blinked and instead of returning to work around Australia Day and calling a double dissolution election, the government cowered in the face of the Copenhagen debacle, the Climategate emails and Abbott’s escalating depiction of the ETS as a “great big new tax”.  G-

 

Then came the insulation debacle and the mounting allegations about waste in the BER program.  It is of little consequence that these supposed scandals were mainly beat-ups. In fact, it only accentuates the powerlessness of Rudd and his ministers in handling the political crisis that began engulfing them in the summer. G- G+ G-

 

When the ETS was slyly placed on the political backburner, the government was further weakened by a crisis of identity, its political willpower now questioned by its most ardent supporters. G-

 

The ensuing debacle of the mining tax highlighted how ineffective the government was in prosecuting its policy positions. G-

 

The party panicked and decapitated Kevin Rudd, leaking to the world the unsurprising news that he was a control freak, a micro-manager, an obsessive, dismissive man running an arrogant, dysfunctional government. G-

 

And so the Gillard government began with most of its electoral strengths undercut by a failure of courage.  A government that had performed impeccably during the financial crisis – read “Shitstorm” by Taylor and Uren and be impressed – was now seen by many as unstable and unreliable.  Gillard lacked legitimacy. G- G- G-

 

Worse, it was now portrayed as under the control of mysterious factional and union leaders, ambitious members of Caucus and the soulless amoralists from the NSW branch of the Labor Party.  G- G-

 

The government’s disastrous election campaign was crippled from the start by a new leader who disappointed many of her admirers as she gambolled down the low road on asylum seekers, dog whistling as she went. No-one really believed her new spin on population.  For different reasons, voters on the left and right peeled off again. G- G- G-

 

Nothing more was said on climate change and more Labor votes bled away to the Greens. G-

 

The government’s election campaign became a joke.  The do-nothing cynicism of the climate change Citizens’ Assembly sent the polls into freefall.  New Julia emerged and cynicism became derision.  G- G-

 

The stench around the NSW government and the abysmal state of the Bligh government in Queensland appear to have done deep damage to the ALP. G-

 

Through it all, Tony Abbott has pushed a simple message of startling clarity and power. A+

 

He has offered few policies. His grasp of complex issues is questionable. He has been an Opposition Leader who opposed.  A- A- A-

 

Of course the coalition isn’t ready to return to government.  Even they don’t believe it. A- A-

 

History says Gillard. But the ALP has turned history upside down. G-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2986768.htm John Connor ():

Commentators from Graham Richardson to The Chaser have noted that Julia Gillard’s leadership was dented from the moment at which the Citizens Assembly, and delay to 2012 of any certainty on a limit and price tag on pollution, was announced. G-

What hasn’t been as well noted though is the rank hypocrisy of the Coalition’s electricity price scare campaign as they and the ALP both backed electricity price rises to bring in clean energy in terms of renewable energy target – a worthwhile measure of great long lasting benefit. A- G+

On the Pollute-O-meter the ALP trails the Coalition with those policies not subject to a review in 2012. The ALP only marginally reduces business-as-usual pollution and still sees pollution at 19% above 1990 levels by 2020. The Coalition’s Emission Reduction Fund won’t purchase the reduction they claim, instead see pollution increasing to 8% above 1990 levels by 2020. G- G- A-

For the ALP, a little decisiveness could have changed the game. Their Carbon Farming Initiative is worthwhile, but with a review of the CPRS in 2012 it is still uncertain as to whether those benefits will flow into Australia’s pollution accounts.. G- G+ G-

On our other Start Rating tool, the ALP leads the Coalition with one and a half stars out of 5 to the Coalition’s half a star. This is largely because it invests in helping build global action as well as providing more funding for research and development. G+ G+

The Coalition places all its eggs in its Emissions Reduction Fund basket. It puts at risk Australia’s global commitments and credibility by slashing funding promised under the Copenhagen Accord. This will arguably see Australia no longer able to support the Copenhagen Accord or indeed the Kyoto Protocol in its second commitment period. A- A- A-

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/19/2987385.htm Kieran Ricketts:

Jokes about Gillard’s spin du jour “moving forward” are constant…G-

A short, busty girl drinking wine from a cask and laughing maniacally reckons she “can’t trust Gillard”. G-

Perhaps most interesting, though, is her comment that “the feminist in her is disappointed” at the way Gillard needed to be installed by factions of men rather than allowing popular consensus and a natural transition to occur. G-

Queenslanders will undoubtedly find hard to attribute to a Victorian who ruthlessly executed one of their own. G-

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/19/2987075.htm Annabel Crabb:

His mastery of the form, Rooty-honed, was obvious as he flowed confidently down the steps, off the stage, to assume his customary position, mike in hand, among the people. G+

Tony fears only two kinds of questioners at these events; people who continue to be cross about WorkChoices, and people who know about broadband. A- A-

He got both last night, but managed to keep out of trouble on both counts, broadly speaking. A+

This prompted a long and enthusiastic non-abortion-related answer from Mr Abbott, whose reputation among female voters has taken another dive if Newspoll’s latest is to be believed. A-

She neatly eclipsed him in the studied-nonchalance stakes by arriving at the front with a carefully-balanced cup of tea, which she poured for herself out of an urn before abandoning it to cool on the stage. G+

The Prime Minister fears questions about Kevin in the same way Mr Abbott fears questions about megabits. G-

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/17/2985466.htm Annabel Crabb:

Then, when campaign debacle arrived at Julia Gillard’s door with its bags, the PM changed her mind, and became all interested in another debate. G-

But Mr Abbott – a man who just days earlier had flown his entire campaign contingent to Melbourne simply so that he could judge dancing poodles on Hey Hey It’s Saturday – declared that he could not rearrange his campaign schedule to oblige. A-

Last night, he too changed his mind. A-

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/16/2984500.htm Annabel Crabb:

But Ms Gillard’s task was to incorporate herself into the story of Labor reform while keeping herself out of trouble on vexed issues from the past, and that she did. G+

She welcomed her niece and nephew, Jenna and Tom, as powerful examples of education’s broad span: Tom has just finished an apprenticeship, and Jenna is doing a PhD. (So perfectly, indeed, do the pair of them suit Ms Gillard’s narrative that you almost forget they were educated largely under the Howard government.) G-

With only days to go, the public mood still seems stuck at “Yes, We Might,” and Julia Gillard needs to do a lot better than that. G-

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/16/2984337.htm Marieke Hardy:

That said, if Tony Abbott’s prime minister I’m moving to Iceland. A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2986909.htm Melissa Sweet:

Amongst other thing, it says it is regrettable the Coalition will not proceed with the myhospitals website, which would be a first step in public reporting of hospital performance. A-

The Government has announced an ambitious reform implementation timetable – with the first Medicare Locals, local hospital networks, aged care one-stop shops, an after-hours GP telephone advice line and the Independent Hospital Pricing Authority due to start operations from next July. But there are still many unanswered questions about how its reform agenda will be implemented and with what effect. G+ G-

Its reform agenda also has many gaps – notably around aged care, mental health, dental health and the broader area of health inequalities. Nor is there any apparent mechanism for ensuring the new hospital networks and Medicare Locals achieve better integration of patient care. This is a particularly important issue for those with chronic conditions and for improving quality and safety of health care. G- G- G-

But at least the Government has a plan and some modest commitment to slowly edging towards some of the structural changes that are required if we are to have a sustainable health system that makes best use of our ever-increasing health spend. G+

The Coalition, on the other hand, has won plenty of positive headlines for its $1.5 billion mental health promises, but lacks a coherent, overarching plan for creating an integrated health system for the future. A-

Its mental health promises are to be funded by dropping central elements of the Government’s reform package, including the Independent Hospital Pricing Authority and Medicare Locals, and cutting e-health and GP super clinic funding. A-

“We know what government programs they’d scrap, but what’s their vision for the future? The announcement that a Coalition government would freeze the existing e-health program is astounding. A-

“… Is the Coalition planning on ignoring the past two years of reform discussion? This would be a great shame.” A- A-

Meanwhile, the editor of Australian Doctor magazine, Dr Kerri Parnell, writes in the edition to be published on Friday that the Coalition’s policies seem based on the premise that little change is needed. A-

She said: “Looking at the Coalition’s policies, you’d think the dysfunction, duplication and waste identified by the National Health and Hospitals Reform Commission were minor, temporary glitches in an otherwise seamless system. They’re not.” A-

While the Coalition’s promises for more money for existing general practices are likely to win support from GPs, they do not address one of the problems that GP super clinics are attempting to solve – that we need to find new ways of doing things to provide services to under-served areas. A-

Public health measures generally have not been prominent during the election campaign, apart from Tony Abbott’s refusal to commit to plain cigarette packaging in response to a bizarre election intervention by the tobacco industry. A-

The Greens managed 17 out of 30, while Labor got 15 points, and the Coalition scored nine points. G+ A-

The Coalition is still in the foothills, without a defined destination, compass or map. A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2986667.htm Tim Dunlop:

This implies that “Labor’s debt” is out of control, a claim not supported by any major economist, and directly repudiated by the Governor of the Reserve. G+

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2988794.htm Tim Dunlop:

I voted for change in 2007, and I’m not inclined to change back so quickly, especially when Coalition 2010 is infinitely weaker than Coalition 2007. A-

It might’ve been different if Malcolm Turnbull was Liberal leader. Not only is he a smaller-l liberal than the sedatedly conservative Tony Abbott, he also trumps him on two key issues, climate and the economy. A-

It beggars belief that Mr Abbott thinks anyone believes a word he says on climate or that the media allow him to get away with it. A-

The fact that Mr Abbott ran away from this, even refusing to show up for the launch of his own costings, is a deal breaker. If you are hiding from your own economic plan, you don’t deserve to be prime minister. You might as well wear a t-shirt that says, “I’m not up to the job”. A-A-A-

Still, as a left-of-centre voter, I am perpetually disappointed by Labor. Their stance on asylum seekers; their gutless position on gay marriage; the inanity of the net filter… god, it’s all so painful. G- G-

And the overwhelming economic achievement of the past three years has been to keep the country out of recession and people in work. G+

Maybe the Coalition would’ve achieved a similar result, though not if they’d followed the policies they themselves espoused. A-

That they were willing to condemn the country to recession and people to the unemployment queues is appalling, especially after they bellowed about Paul Keating being too slow to act in the 90s. A-

Tony Abbott can say he would do better on the economy, but he was unwilling to test that claim in a debate. Meanwhile, Labor actually kept us out of recession. A- A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2986421.htm John Quiggin:

Labor has chosen to abandon both the leader who managed the response to the crisis and the policy-driven approach to government he epitomised, in favor of focus groups and sandbagging. As a result, despite endorsing the government’s record in getting us through the crisis, and welcoming the continued role of Wayne Swan as Treasurer, I don’t regard the statement as implying that Labor should receive a first preference vote.  G- G+ G-

I’ll be voting for the Greens and putting the Liberals/Nationals last among the serious contenders. A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2987034.htm Niki Savva:

Labor to win. G+

Labor will win the election on Saturday.  Not because Julia Gillard deserves it especially, and not because Tony Abbott doesn’t. G-

Still he performed well. He showed he was across a wide range of subjects, and his best performances were in a couple of surprising areas. A+ A+

The first was on his commitment, with the help of Noel Pearson, to creating opportunities for Indigenous Australians, the second on the economy and setting the record straight on the Opposition’s support for the first stimulus package and opposition to the second. A+

Even though he promised he wouldn’t, in the twilight of this campaign there is still life in that beast. A-

Gillard learned from her mistakes in Rooty Hill, where she had walked onto the stage, sat on a stool and lectured. G+ G-

Instead she spoke for him, saying if Rudd were there he would be telling them to vote for her. Of course he would, if only he were there. G-

Both leaders have failed to inspire, convince or convert. G- A-

Gillard has pinched almost everything from the Libs, except Abbott’s budgie smugglers. G-

It will all come down to Gillard’s two clearly identifiable advantages over Abbott. Her unshakeable confidence and her sex. G+

History and romance will carry her across the line. G+

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2986220.htm Dominic Knight:

Julia Gillard had to defend her position last week both on Q&A and at the public meeting of the Rooty Hill branch of the Liberal Party, and both times she used the same formula. “What I say now is going to disappoint you”, she said, briefly allowing a moment of Realness to permeate the discussion before returning to her carefully scripted line…G-

…Labor doesn’t – why, some of its best Senators are gay. It’s just that it likes winning marginal seats a whole lot more. G-

Ultimately, she could offer no more sophisticated an argument than Pauline Hanson’s famous “I don’t like it”. G-

I’m sure she has no issue with it personally – as we know, the PM is not exactly a traditionalist when it comes to marriage. And yet, she doggedly defends the party line, albeit unconvincingly. G+ G-

Unsurprisingly, Tony Abbott’s in lockstep with the Catholic Church on this issue, A-

Abbott’s response felt more sincere than Gillard’s, unsurprisingly. “I think that there are lots of terrific gay relationships, lots of terrific commitments between gay partners, but I just don’t think that marriage is the right term to put on it,” he said. A+

Unfortunately, an awkward moment of television doesn’t prove that he’s down with the gay community the way, say, riding on a Mardi Gras tribute float featuring Speedo-clad lifesavers with giant prosthetic ears would. A-

When asked by kids last week to explain what the Liberal Party was about, Abbott’s answer was full of rhetorical liberalism. “The Liberal Party is the freedom party,” he said. For straights, that is. A true liberal would support genuine freedom for people who choose a different lifestyle from them – but Abbott only believes in the freedom of those who agree with him. A- A-

In truly free countries, governments shouldn’t restrict the actions of individuals without good reasons. If the Marriage Act’s defenders can’t mount a more convincing defence of the status quo, then Tony Abbott should be allowed to take Tony Jones’ hand in marriage, not just in a creepy little gesture on the set of Qand A. A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2985728.htm Aron Paul:

It is worth remembering after all that Latham was a man chosen by the Labor Party to become prime minister in 2004. G-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2985795.htm Ian McAuley:

We heard Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz, former chief economist of the World Bank, heap praise on the Australian Government’s response to the financial crisis. He reminded us that we have come through with very low public debt (about 6 per cent of GDP, compared with 40 to 120 per cent in other countries), low inflation and strong employment. Even the IMF, generally regarded as being on the “dry” side of economics, has praised Australia’s economic policies. And in the last few days a group of 50 prominent economists have published an open letter defending the Government against the savage propaganda campaign belittling its economic competence. G+ G+ G+ G+ A-

Rather, he referred to the huge waste of unemployment, which would have occurred had we placed debt reduction ahead of economic stability – the policy which the Coalition says should have been pursued. A-

Participants at the conference generally were supportive of the Government’s longer-term economic program. G+

While there was some criticism of the detail of the Government’s mining tax, there was also a recognition that it makes sense to take some of the bounty of present strong commodity demand to strengthen our economy so that we can thrive when the mining boom is over. And there was a strong call for a carbon price; no-one at the forum called a carbon price a “big-new-tax”. G-G+ A-A-

The Coalition, with its focus on waste and debt has tended to ignore these issues of economic structure. It is as if there is no such thing as a public asset, and no economic virtue greater than balancing the budget. The Coalition seems to be accepting of a laissez faire approach – enjoy our prosperity now, and don’t worry about the longer term consequences; the market will work itself out. A- A-

To borrow a term from another policy arena, we could describe the Coalition’s economic policy as the “Nauru solution”. We can recall that island’s spectacular prosperity in the 1970s and 1980s when its economy was based on phosphate mining. Even as their island was literally exported away, Nauruans lived for the present, and those years of plenty are now a distant memory. Nauru is now begging for economic activity: it is even willing to take up opportunities rejected by Timor Leste. It’s a dismal thought that we too may become another poor country in a prosperous region. A- A- A-

Some blame must accrue to the Government itself, for it has been remiss in engaging with the community on economic policy. It has harped on about the Charter of Budget Honesty with its emphasis on short-term fiscal costings; it’s much easier to criticise the Opposition on points of budgetary detail (where the Government always has the upper hand) than to engage in a debate about economic structure. G- G-

The political challenges of reducing tariffs, introducing competition policy and deregulating financial markets were difficult, but perhaps the difference is that those governments were not hampered by an opposition denying the need for structural reform. A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2984815.htm Leslie Cannold:

Here’s a question exercising some voters: What is worse? Casting one’s vote for a man who strongly believes in what’s awful, or for a woman who believes in nothing except getting herself elected? A- G-

Liberal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s strength is his believability. Having observed him for years as a high profile Howard government minister, we trust that he is as he appears: a conservative Catholic man guided in his political judgement by Vatican dictates on personal moral issues like abortion, stem-cell research and euthanasia, and by small government neo-liberal orthodoxy on much else. A+ A+

The consistent visibility of Abbott’s beliefs reassures us. It promises certainty with regard to the direction he would take the country. This is not just because such values direct some choices while prohibiting others but because, having held fast to these values for so long, we feel he won’t relinquish them easily. When challenged by economic hard times, boisterous community groups or international recalcitrance, we see Tony Abbott as someone who will fight for his beliefs, not cut and run. A+ A+ A+ A+

But Abbott’s strength is also his weakness. This is for the simple reason that his strongly held moral values are an anathema to most of us. For instance, reputable polls show that around 80 per cent of Australians support legal abortion, stem cell research and voluntary euthanasia. So, too, do we know that the economic agenda of the big business leaders who have his ear will leave most of us – and the public institutions and infrastructure on which we rely – worse off. A- A- A-

As personable as Abbott – when in “real Julia” mode, anyway – she remains a lesser-known quantity. Where she has distinguished herself, or been noted by others, it is most often for matters of form, not substance. She seems smart and articulate, yet we have little sense of what direction she’ll steer the country because we don’t know the things that really matter to her – what she’ll fight for and never compromise on, no matter what. G- G- G+ G-

Gillard rarely discusses the things she believes in. G-

In her short time in the top job Gillard has refused to alter the way government funds state and private schools and has expanded the school Christian chaplaincy program by a third. She opposes gay marriage and was the strongest opponent in Rudd’s kitchen cabinet of the miserly paid parental leave scheme Australian feminists battled for decades to achieve. G- G-

To make matters more confusing, when Gillard moves against what we thought she’d defend, she tends to laud her stance as proof of her metal. Does she view her willingness to screw an expected adversary – in this case, the education union – as proof of a practical even-handedness that she sees as the essence of her character? Or is this dispassionate judicial-like persona, concerned with formal process rather than substance, all she is willing to share with us, preferring to keep private the aspects of her character that would reveal her policy preferences and her heart. G- G- G-

Whatever is the case, the real problem is that Labor’s tactics have undermined any claim to evidence-based policy at every turn…Labor has done little more than hand out taxpayer funds to marginal electorates or interest groups that scream the loudest throughout the campaign. And since week three, when Gillard shook of the shackles of Labor’s election strategists, she has been in charge and doing it her way. G- G-G+

Having said this, Abbott also seems determined to undermine his own strengths on the character front. Avoiding press forums that might see him go off message, he looks at times to be visibly straining on his lead. While his pounding of the “no means no” mantra in response to Gillard’s request for a debate was widely lauded as a blunder, I suspect it did him good. It affirmed that, despite the muzzling, he remains the same man: oblivious to a feminist anti-rape slogan familiar to many 12-year-olds, and one sincere in his illogical assertion that men with daughters can’t be sexist. A- A- A-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2985254.htm Chris Berg:

After Tony Abbott’s performance on the 7:30 Report last week, you bet he regrets the previous government didn’t take broadband policy off the political table. A-

The Labor Party has taken to presenting broadband as if it is simply a giant present from government to its people, and anybody who objects to the NBN must hate the internet. And the opposition, afraid of looking too close to Telstra, is trying to ape Labor’s approach without completely surrendering its debt and deficits attack on the government. G- A-

Here the absence of a cost benefit analysis for the National Broadband Network is telling. Does anyone doubt the government wouldn’t like such an analysis (if it was flattering) to help defend their policy? G-

As the tech publisher Grahame Lynch said in The Australian last week, it is “astonishing that not one … has mustered the modest resources required to prepare a credible cost-benefit analysis that attempts to measure the claimed externalities for the NBN in areas such as telecommuting, e-learning and telemedicine that are bandied about ad nauseam.” G-

So the absence of the cost benefit analysis in the public sphere is a very strong hint the government’s broadband spend doesn’t really have much of an intellectual case. Julia Gillard and Stephen Conroy can talk all they want about how broadband will boost e-health, productivity, education, and things we haven’t imagined yet. G- G-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2984920.htm Tom Switzer:

… the Prime Minister and other senior Labor spokespeople failed to say anything meaningful about what its former leader Kevin Rudd once described as “the greatest moral challenge of our generation”. G-

I am talking, of course, about man-made global warming, and it beggars belief that in a 5,500-word keynote speech, the Prime Minister’s only reference to the subject was tucked away in the second last paragraph. G-

First, from the launch of Kevin 07 until the Copenhagen fiasco last December, Labor spokesmen – from Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd to Penny Wong and Greg Combet – deemed it blasphemy that anyone dare question their grand ambitions to rush through their legislative centrepiece of an ETS before Copenhagen. Recall the slogan: “Delay is denial.” G-

Yet, having been comprehensively wrong-footed on the issue by Tony Abbott, and in the absence of a legally binding global agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the same Labor partisans have gone soft, thrown up the white flag and ignored the issue completely. The power of Sussex Street’s u-turn and reverse gear is up to best international standards. G- G-

In this environment, why on earth would Labor strategists run away from the climate change issue? G-.

The episode is a reminder of the extent to which cynical and poll-driven factional union chiefs still control the Labor party… And it was these people who were responsible for knifing a sitting prime minister, elected by the people and for the people, on the eve of a federal election – just because, remember, their leader suddenly copped some bad polls in western Sydney and those sun-belt seats. G- G-

My point, though, is this: Labor’s cynicism is breathtaking. The ALP was not sincere about climate change when the government ran a scare campaign about the ETS in 2008-09. So who would believe their spokespeople about anything now? G- G- G-

The other point to bear in mind here is that this episode should warn honest environmentalists not to get in bed with a party that is still controlled by cynical and spineless poll-driven hacks who have done so much damage to Labor, not to mention the former premier state of NSW, at the state level. G-

Greens would be better off giving their preferences to the Coalition. For all his faults, Tony Abbott at least has a policy: it’s called Direct Action which, among other things, proposes to plant 20 million trees and store carbon in soil. And he has included in his team several highly principled environmentalists such as Greg Hunt and Malcolm Turnbull. A+ A+ A+

Nor is climate change the only issue where Labor and Julia Gillard failed so spectacularly yesterday. G-

Labor wants the Government to spend $43 billion of tax dollars to deliver 100-odd megabits to every household in the next decade, without the slightest idea of how it might be done commercially. This is economic madness, especially at a time when Labor has accumulated record debt. As the Wall Street Journal has editorialised, it requires an unwonted faith in the Nanny State to believe that Labor’s proposal can deliver the promised digital nirvana on time, on budget, or at all. G- G- G-

Never mind the resources boom which Labor’s proposed mining tax threatened to kill. Never mind that around the world, everywhere they have been tried, these sorts of Keynesian stimulus measures have comprehensively failed to turn faltering economies around. Whether it is the Japan of the 1990s or the UK or US of the past few years, pumping tax dollars into a struggling economy through government spending (as opposed to tax cuts) almost always ends up being an exercise in throwing good money after bad and leads to huge levels of debt and deficits. G- G- G-

But in its three years in power, Labor has burned through the surplus and put Australia in a position where it is borrowing $100 million a day. Far from saving us from recession, Julia Gillard and company have left Australia vulnerable to the next US downturn. And far from protecting the environment, Labor has merely used climate change to push a narrow partisan agenda. Which is why voters would be unwise to place their trust in this lot for three more years.

G- G- G- G-

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2985043.htm Kevin Donnelly:

…when it comes to her record as minister for education it’s clear that Gillard’s words are empty rhetoric and political spin. While mouthing cliches about excellence and giving all students a chance to succeed the reality is that the Prime Minister is an un-reconstructed Fabian socialist of the old guard. G- G-

Instead of merit, academic ability and hard work determining who succeeds, those students the ALP government defines as belonging to victim-groups will be put at the head of the queue. G-

As a result and mirroring events in England, from where the Rudd/Gillard education revolution has been copied, students guilty of having educated parents, of living in affluent suburbs and attending non-government schools will be discriminated against. G-

Gillard’s preference for pushing equality of outcomes is understandable given her undergraduate years in the radical Australian Union of Students and her involvement in the Socialist Forum. It should not surprise that two of Gillard’s mentors are Joan Kirner (aka mother Russia and ex-premier of Victoria) and the Welsh radical Aneurin Bevan, responsible for socialising health in the UK. G- G-

Gillard’s dislike of non-government schools is proven by her refusal to guarantee, if re-elected, that under any new funding model payments to schools will be indexed on an annual basis and that government funding will not be reduced to take into account monies raised locally. G-

Attempts to disguise her Fabian contempt for non-government schools during the campaign by agreeing to keep the current funding model for one more year and postponing any decisions about a future model until 2011 should only add to misgivings felt by non-government school parents. G-

Similar to the Greens, and its policy to force non-government schools to implement its radical, left-of-centre social agenda, ALP state and federal governments during Gillard’s time as minister for education have conspired to take away the rights of non-government schools in areas like curriculum, enrolments and staffing. G-

Whereas Australian schools once had the freedom to implement the state mandated curriculum or equivalent, the new ALP designed ideologically driven, secular curriculum will be mandatory for all schools, government and non-government. G-

While sounding innocuous, the statement in the Melbourne Declaration (the blueprint that all Australian schools must follow) that schools must provide an education “free from discrimination based on gender, language, sexual orientation, pregnancy, culture, ethnicity, religion, health or disability, socioeconomic background or geographic location” forces all schools to conform to the ALP’s policies in areas like homosexuality, gay marriage and undermining Christianity and the importance of Western civilisation. G-

Non-government schools currently have the right to discriminate in relation to staffing and enrolments; if the ALP is re-elected and forms an alliance with the Greens in the Senate, expect such freedoms to be lost. Such an outcome is even more certain given the fact that Gillard’s education revolution forces schools to implement the ALP’s left-of-centre, education agenda by linking funding to implementation. G- G-

While so far escaping close analysis, Australia’s new national curriculum clearly demonstrates how successful Gillard has been in disguising her true intentions and soothing public doubts about her radical past by appearing as an educational conservative. G-

At a time of international terrorism represented by radical Islam and jihad there is no attempt to teach students about the liberal, democratic institutions and values that ensure Australia’s stability and peace. G-

The national curriculum documents are awash with platitudes and politically correct statements about embracing diversity and difference on the mistaken belief that all cultures are of equal value and worth. Christianity barley rates a mention and ignored is that there are some cultural practices that are un-Australian and abhorrent to our way of life and that values like tolerance, civility and a commitment to freedom are a characteristic of Western, liberal democracies. G- G-

… the Rudd/Gillard education revolution is centralised, bureaucratic and statist in its approach. All roads lead to Canberra and like the command and control economies of the old eastern bloc and soviet Russia, the result is an inflexible, inefficient and doctrinaire model of education – best illustrated by the implementation of the much-maligned Building the Education Revolution program. G- G-

In their rush to celebrate Gillard, journalists have also missed three Abbott-led Coalition policy initiatives that represent a true education revolution and that have the potential to raise standards and to better support schools, teachers and students. G-

The Coalition’s decision to empower principals and school communities at the local level in areas like staffing and budgets, a policy Gillard ignored during her three years as minister for education, is also innovative and at the cutting edge of school reform. Once again, best illustrated by the BER, if school communities are forced to jump to the demands of head office, waste and mismanagement follow. G- G-

Unlike Gillard and the federal Minister for Education, Simon Crean, who refuse to endorse the current socioeconomic status (SES) funding model, the Abbott-led Coalition has also promised to continue the SES model and to ensure that Catholic and in