Support NeoGAF

[hidys]

I think everyone can, even if I think it's a step back I'll take it over most of the alternatives. I just hope that it can get Green/Labor support. It's exactly the sort of thing that the Greens will refuse to compromise on on principle though.

So what is the plan exactly? We wait for everyone else to do put a price on carbon and then, FINALLY we do it ourselves?

I don't think I can get behind that. Don't understand why we can't just join the EU's one now.

 

[hidys]

I have no faith they are any more likely to keep their word than the LNP. I am really hating Labor at the moment, just spineless shits who represent a slightly less awful alternative. Not actually a good alternative, just a watered down version of the shortsighted and fear filled policies of the libs.

They won't even support getting trained counsellors and mental health professionals into schools instead of fucking chaplains.

Just utterly disappointed with federal Labor. They are not providing any leadership at all, just taking LNP positions and softening them somewhat.

1) If Labor were going to vote to repeal the carbon tax they would have done so already.

2) Actually they do.

 

[Dead Man]

1) If Labor were going to vote to repeal the carbon tax they would have done so already.

2) Actually they do.

1. Still plenty of time for them to agree to broken stupid legislation to get their vote for a repeal
2.No, they fucking don't. They just want a secular option. Which is a bullshit position. Sorry.

 

[wonzo]

2) Actually they do.

https://twitter.com/PennyWrites/status/481996905816145920

 

[Arksy]

I have no faith they are any more likely to keep their word than the LNP. I am really hating Labor at the moment, just spineless shits who represent a slightly less awful alternative. Not actually a good alternative, just a watered down version of the shortsighted and fear filled policies of the libs.

They won't even support getting trained counsellors and mental health professionals into schools instead of fucking chaplains.

Just utterly disappointed with federal Labor. They are not providing any leadership at all, just taking LNP positions and softening them somewhat.

Edit: Re your edit, I don't want the tax repealled, but if it is I want as much kept as possible. Labor will just fucking fold and not fight for the rest of it.

They're operating in a power vaccum, they're a complete and utter mess right now. There's no leadership, no direction. They're basically just flailing about. I think you might be being a bit harsh but what you're saying is true....The ALP need a leader, someone like the ALP titans of old like Chifley or Curtin or Hawke or Keating who can put forth a vision for the country rather than just a collection of policies and who can get the factions to put aside their differences towards actually achieving something positive.

I don't think they'll be ready for the 2016 election, they barely have a pariliamentary caucus, they barely have enough members to form a cabinet. They need young fresh blood in parliament, they need to train the next generation of Labor MPs. They need to fight for the 2016 election and get as many Labor MPs in there as possible, hopefully one of those new MPs will be enough of a leader that the public will support. I just don't think there are many scenarios where the ALP will win 2016, not in its current state anyway and not unless the Coalition has two more obscenely negative budgets.

 

[hidys]

1. Still plenty of time for them to agree to broken stupid legislation to get their vote for a repeal
2.No, they fucking don't. They just want a secular option. Which is a bullshit position. Sorry.

1) We'll see.

2) It's a shame, but it's still better than what Abbott is proposing by a country mile. Given the option I would suspect most public schools would take the secular option anyway. I would also like to see the ALP remove funding for private schools altogether, but that isn't going to happen.

 

[Arksy]

1) We'll see.

2) It's a shame, but it's still better than what Abbott is proposing by a country mile. Given the option I would suspect most public schools would take the secular option anyway. I would also like to see the ALP remove funding for private schools altogether, but that isn't going to happen.

Not a chance in hell on the second one. Not when some absurd number of children attend a catholic school (It's somewhere between 20-30% isn't it?) and the Catholic electorate still commands an obscene amount of influence in the ALP. Which is why I'm guessing they mostly support school chaplains.

 

[hidys]

Not a chance in hell on the second one. Not when some absurd number of children attend a catholic school (It's somewhere between 20-30% isn't it?) and the Catholic electorate still commands an obscene amount of influence in the ALP. Which is why I'm guessing they mostly support school chaplains.

Not to mention the strength of the SDA in the ALP.

 

[Dryk]

So what is the plan exactly? We wait for everyone else to do put a price on carbon and then, FINALLY we do it ourselves?

I don't think I can get behind that. Don't understand why we can't just join the EU's one now.

Let me make myself perfectly clear. The only reason I think this is a good idea is because the thing we should be doing is going to be impossible for 3-6 years and this is the best outcome we can actually get.

 

[wonzo]

Let me make myself perfectly clear. The only reason I think this is a good idea is because the thing we should be doing is going to be impossible for 3-6 years and this is the best outcome we can actually get.

If in the odd chance the "carbon tax" stays it gets turned into a floating ETS next year.

 

[hidys]

Let me make myself perfectly clear. The only reason I think this is a good idea is because the thing we should be doing is going to be impossible for 3-6 years and this is the best outcome we can actually get.

I guess it is better than nothing only in the sense it is slightly, very slightly more than nothing.

Also it needs to be made clear once this goes it is likely never coming back. Even if Labor goes on to win in 2016 could anybody reasonably expect Labor to bring it back given the absolute bollocking they would get?

I guess Palmer's is the best we have. Fuck that is seriously depressing.

 

[Arksy]

I guess it is better than nothing only in the sense it is slightly, very slightly more than nothing.

Also it needs to be made clear once this goes it is likely never coming back. Even if Labor goes on to win in 2016 could anybody reasonably expect Labor to bring it back given the absolute bollocking they would get?

I guess Palmer's is the best we have. Fuck that is seriously depressing.

It's still a floating ETS, it just comes into effect when the US and China put one in...which probably won't be that far off......(Isn't it? Details seem a bit vague...)

 

[wonzo]

It's still a floating ETS, it just comes into effect when the US and China put one in...which probably won't be that far off......(Isn't it? Details seem a bit vague...)

I'm sure they'll find a way to move the goalpost into perpetuity if it's vague enough.

 

[hidys]

It's still a floating ETS, it just comes into effect when the US and China put one in...which probably won't be that far off......(Isn't it? Details seem a bit vague...)

Thanks to the Republicans the US will never have an ETS until Democrats get control of congress, which won't happen til at least 2020 given current gerrymandering. It seemed to me like it had to be ALL our major trading partners which seems like a ridiculous requirement.

 

[Dryk]

Hopefully China and the EU start applying pressure via border adjustment ASAP. Hell if I was in power I'd be actively encouraging them to do it because it lets us move to a proper ETS while softening the public fallout.

 

[Arksy]

Thanks to the Republicans the US will never have an ETS until Democrats get control of congress, which won't happen til at least 2020 given current gerrymandering. It seemed to me like it had to be ALL our major trading partners which seems like a ridiculous requirement.

It would be, but once it's in and people get used to the fact that it's coming, it won't be too much of a step for a government in the next few terms to say "alright, we're going to phase this in now." and change the initiation requirements.

Even if it's not what you want, it's a huge step from 'direct action policy, which means we're subsidising coal.'

 

[wonzo]

dont forget the sub minimum wage oh&s free alp approved ~green army~

 

[hidys]

dont forget the sub minimum wage oh&s free alp approved ~green army~

I actually don't mind the whole "bellow minimum wage" thing seeing as how this is a plan for the unemployed and is supposed to act as an incentive to get people into work. I'm more opposed to the exception of the Workplace Safety Act for these workers.

This country has poor active labour market policies generally and this green army is a piss poor attempt to address that (also won't have a huge affect on the environment). I'd much rather see something like Britain's New Deal under Blair/Brown.

 

[Jintor]

I still don't understand exactly what the 'green army' is actually doing

 

[Dryk]

It would be, but once it's in and people get used to the fact that it's coming, it won't be too much of a step for a government in the next few terms to say "alright, we're going to phase this in now." and change the initiation requirements.

Even if it's not what you want, it's a huge step from 'direct action policy, which means we're subsidising coal.'

This is a huge problem I have with the Green's attitude towards policy they don't think goes far enough. From a PR and parliamentary perspective it's a lot easier to phase these things in a little bit at a time rather than beat your head against a brick wall for eight years and then do it all at once.

 

[Arksy]

It's probably still too painful for them to realise that we would've had a full scale ETS if the Greens didn't block Rudd's proposal, and that was done during the height of his popularity when he could've introduced conscription without a credible opposition movement.

 

[lexi]

It's probably still too painful for them to realise that we would've had a full scale ETS if the Greens didn't block Rudd's proposal, and that was done during the height of his popularity when he could've introduced conscription without a credible opposition movement.

Which is why it was a good time to push for something better. Who'd have thunk the Australian Tea Party was just getting started.

 

[wonzo]

It's probably still too painful for them to realise that we would've had a full scale ETS if the Greens didn't block Rudd's proposal, and that was done during the height of his popularity when he could've introduced conscription without a credible opposition movement.

Maybe it would've if Rudd actually brought them into the room when they were working out the details.

 

[hidys]

It's probably still too painful for them to realise that we would've had a full scale ETS if the Greens didn't block Rudd's proposal, and that was done during the height of his popularity when he could've introduced conscription without a credible opposition movement.

It was a package that started out reasonably well, but the November 09 amendments were atrocious.

 

[Dryk]

Maybe it would've if Rudd actually brought them into the room when they were working out the details.

Discussion and compromise in Australian politics? Fuck that just ram shit through parliament with a majority in one house and a prayer in the other.

 

[roosters93]

I enjoyed this story

A New Zealand school student who was suspended for refusing to cut his hair has won a High Court battle to keep his locks in place.

 

[Yagharek]

1. Still plenty of time for them to agree to broken stupid legislation to get their vote for a repeal
2.No, they fucking don't. They just want a secular option. Which is a bullshit position. Sorry.

I'm with you. There are individuals within the Labor party in parliament who are socially progressive and environmentally aware and have argued for things like gay marriage, properly trained counsellors etc, but the Party as a whole seems to be averse to it.

Until they step up to those issues, the Greens will continue to keep taking their votes.

 

[Yagharek]

Which is why it was a good time to push for something better. Who'd have thunk the Australian Tea Party was just getting started.

Tea ... Party?

Less of a a party and more a work camp in Ceylon run by British aristocrats cracking the whip making sure the locals pick the tea at record pace. More productivity! No conditions! And get me an inquiry into the foreman's history I want him investigated for questioning orders. Also arrange a meeting for me with the bank manager I need some new gold fringed doilies.

 

[Elaugaufein]

I'm with you. There are individuals within the Labor party in parliament who are socially progressive and environmentally aware and have argued for things like gay marriage, properly trained counsellors etc, but the Party as a whole seems to be averse to it.

Until they step up to those issues, the Greens will continue to keep taking their votes.

There's no reason for them to step up. If the Green candidate is eliminated the preferences flow to the ALP before the LNP. If the Green candidate is elected they are much more likely to vote with the ALP than the LNP. By contrast if the ALP moves left , they could easily lose some of their more conservative (or religious) votes to the LNP. It's why triangulation / Third Way politics works, the people further along your side of the political axis have no choice but to continue voting for you, even as you sell them and everything you're supposed to stand for down the river, AND you pick up votes from the center.

 

[hidys]

There's no reason for them to step up. If the Green candidate is eliminated the preferences flow to the ALP before the LNP. If the Green candidate is elected they are much more likely to vote with the ALP than the LNP. By contrast if the ALP moves left , they could easily lose some of their more conservative (or religious) votes to the LNP. It's why triangulation / Third Way politics works, the people further along your side of the political axis have no choice but to continue voting for you, even as you sell them and everything you're supposed to stand for down the river, AND you pick up votes from the center.

Of course in Australia the Greens do sort of throw in a big wrench when it comes to the triangulation strategy.

 

[Elaugaufein]

Of course in Australia the Greens do sort of throw in a big wrench when it comes to the triangulation strategy.

Yes, they keep the ALP from moving too far right (move too far and you risk losing your base). Though not as noticeably as you might expect (it's pretty obvious that the ALP is significantly more conservative at Caucus level, than it's membership is).

The LNP seems far more resistant to moving Left, even though there's no credible Right flank.

I can see reasons for this (religious influence, money, the inherent disorganization of Progressives as compared to Conservatives*) but nothing that's really convincing.

*It's much easier to agree to stick to the current status quo (even if you want to move backwards) than to agree which of the gigallion progressive causes is most deserving of pursuit (especially since sometimes there's active conflict between causes).

 

[wonzo]

Murdoch editors told to 'kill Whitlam' in 1975

News Corporation chief Rupert Murdoch directed his editors to "kill Whitlam" some 10 months before the downfall of Gough Whitlam's Labor government, according to a newly released United States diplomatic report.

The US National Archives has just declassified a secret diplomatic telegram dated January 20, 1975 that sheds new light on Murdoch's involvement in the tumultuous events of Australia's 1975 constitutional crisis.

Entitled "Australian publisher privately turns on Prime Minister," the telegram from US Consul-General in Melbourne, Robert Brand, reported to the State Department that "Rupert Murdoch has issued [a] confidential instruction to editors of newspapers he controls to 'Kill Whitlam' ".

Describing Mr Murdoch as "the l'enfant terrible of Australian journalism," Mr Brand noted that Mr Murdoch had been "the principal publisher supporting the Whitlam election effort in 1972 Labor victory".

 

[Arksy]

Murdoch editors told to 'kill Whitlam' in 1975

His downfall was his own doing. Murdoch may have helped, but I severely doubt history would have been very different if Murdoch hadn't played a role....but that's something we'll never know I guess.

 

[Dryk]

Desperate people find desperate loopholes

Passengers claiming to be refugees say they are in a leaking boat 300 kilometres off Christmas Island after spending two weeks at sea during a non-stop journey from India.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit.../02/2014-edtrs_socialshare-all-nnn-nnn-vars-o

 

[Elaugaufein]

Desperate people find desperate loopholes



http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit.../02/2014-edtrs_socialshare-all-nnn-nnn-vars-o

I remain impressed by the Minister for the Suppression of Information's consistency in treating refugee arrivals as if they were ASIO vs CIA deathmatches.

 

[wonzo]

@GhostWhoVotes
#ReachTEL Poll Seat of Fairfax: PUP 17.7 (-8.8 compared to election) LNP 44.0 (+2.6) ALP 20.2 (+2.0) #auspol

lmfao

 

[Elaugaufein]

@GhostWhoVotes
#ReachTEL Poll Seat of Fairfax: PUP 17.7 (-8.8 compared to election) LNP 44.0 (+2.6) ALP 20.2 (+2.0) #auspol

lmfao

Okay, so he's lost some ALP voters, slightly more LNP voters, and a fair whack of undecided/other voters (~4.2%). How does that even work ? So the establishment sees him as too much of a maverick and the mavericks as too much business as usual ?

Also wow Fairfax is a far more LNP leaning seat than I'd expect given its coastal region.

 

[bobnowhere]

Okay, so he's lost some ALP voters, slightly more LNP voters, and a fair whack of undecided/other voters (~4.2%). How does that even work ? So the establishment sees him as too much of a maverick and the mavericks as too much business as usual ?

Also wow Fairfax is a far more LNP leaning seat than I'd expect given its coastal region.

I imagine it's all the retirees, the sunshine coast has been very LNP for a long time. Though I think Andrew Fisher was from up that way!

 

[Tommy DJ]

Okay, so he's lost some ALP voters, slightly more LNP voters, and a fair whack of undecided/other voters (~4.2%). How does that even work ? So the establishment sees him as too much of a maverick and the mavericks as too much business as usual ?

I think the locals see him as an MP that is only interested in himself rather than his constituents. Reportedly, he never really goes back to Fairfax to talk to his constituents ("I like the LNP candidate because he has coffee at my store") and, assuming the constituents mostly believe climate change is non-existent, his stance to kill the carbon tax but basically support everything else would rub a lot of them the wrong way. I'm assuming this poll is reflective of recent events.

 

[wonzo]

I think the locals see him as an MP that is only interested in himself rather than his constituents. Reportedly, he never really goes back to Fairfax to talk to his constituents ("I like the LNP candidate because he has coffee at my store") and, assuming the constituents mostly believe climate change is non-existent, his stance to kill the carbon tax but basically support everything else would rub a lot of them the wrong way. I'm assuming this poll is reflective of recent events.

A majority of his constituents support a price on carbon so I doubt that's it.

 

[roosters93]

Leadership failures inflate our prejudices - extracts from “The Rise and Fall of Australia” by Nick Bryant.

I've been looking forward to this book

 

[Lafiel]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-plan-to-restrict-how-young-people-spend-dole

Controlling what young people can spend their unemployment benefits on, and moving thousands of people off the disability support pension (DSP), have been flagged in the federal government’s review of the welfare system.

An interim report, titled A New System for Better Employment and Social Outcomes, has been released in the form of a discussion paper, without recommendations.

It suggests streamlining welfare payments into four categories: the age pension; the DSP; a tiered work-age payment and a child payment. There would be more conditions attached to receiving welfare payments, and sanctions that would strip people of income support, for varying lengths of time, if they did not meet the “mutual obligations” requirement.

It says young and single unemployed people should receive lower rates of payment than other unemployed people, and that rent assistance should be reformed into a subsidy scheme for both public and private housing, rather than having public housing rent based on a percentage of a person’s income.

The report also identifies single parents as needing higher rates of payment as their children get older and it is more expensive to support them.

Only people with permanent disabilities should receive the DSP, and people who have partial, or short-term, disabilities should be given unemployment benefits instead, the report suggests. In addition, income management could be expanded into a national scheme so that young, unemployed people could only spend their benefits on certain things, such as food and petrol.

The head of the review, Patrick McClure, said the present welfare system was complex and inefficient, and there were actual disincentives to work. He highlighted people with mental health problems as needing different support to what they receive at present.

“Thirty per cent of people on the disability support pension have mental-health conditions which are episodic in nature; for example, severe depression or anxiety. Experts in the field express the importance of a vocational rehabilitation approach, which links them not only to clinical intervention but also to education and work,” he said on Sunday.

The social services minister, Kevin Andrews, has repeatedly called the DSP a set-and-forget payment, but he would not put a figure on the number of people who could lose the disability pension and be moved onto unemployment benefits.

“This is about recognising that the people on the DSP are not one group; they’re not the same. One of the largest groups on the DSP … is people with psychological illnesses and [a] … lot of that is episodic. There are occasions when people can and can’t work, yet the system doesn’t recognise that at the present time,” he said.

“Will they be forced off the disability support pension? No. This is about the future, as I said, not about the current system at the present time, but about how we can structure a system in the future which will give people the opportunity for what they usually want to do, and that is to be able to work, to be able to contribute. The current system is very inadequate in that regard.”

He said the committee would consider making the unemployment payment higher for people with partial disabilities. The government would get advice on how to classify people with a permanent disability.

Andrews endorsed moving young unemployed people onto income management schemes, giving them welfare in the form of debit cards that could only be used in certain places.

“We would say, you can have a debit card that precludes certain expenditure. It could, for example, preclude expenditure on alcohol. You get a card, go to the bottle shop and they say ‘sorry, transaction declined’,” he said on Network Ten’s Bolt Report on Sunday morning.

The report says income management could be used to “build capabilities as part of a case-management approach to assist the large number of disadvantaged young people not fully engaged in either education or work”.

Andrews stressed that the government would have a consultation process before making final decisions about which welfare recipients would be subject to income management.

“The government believes that income management is important. We believe that it’s had very positive effects for quite a number of people, not the least of which are women and children in indigenous and non-indigenous communities around Australia,” he said.

“In my conversations with them I’ve received many anecdotal reports about how beneficial this has been in terms of, particularly, their ability to buy food; to provide the necessities of life; to provide for their children, etcetera, but [an] extension of this, which we think is a good principle, how you do it, and what you might do, is part of this consultation process.”

The 170-page report has four main pillars, or aims: a simpler and sustainable income-support system; strengthening individual and family capability; engaging employers; and building community capacity.

There will be six weeks’ consultation on the interim report before the government is given a final version, complete with recommendations.

The Opposition’s support for the review is not guaranteed. The shadow treasurer, Chris Bowen, attacked the government’s approach to reviewing the DSP after reading a preview of the report in the Sunday Telegraph.

“I am sick of opening the Sunday paper every week and seeing Mr Andrews demonising disabled people. Labor supports measures to help people on the disability support pension back into work, where it’s possible and appropriate,” he said on the ABC’s Insiders program.

“That's what we did in office, with quite positive and remarkable results. What we don’t support is cutting people’s benefits on disability support in some brutal and blunt effort to force them back into inappropriate jobs. We won’t support that.”

 

[A More Normal Bird]

Only people with permanent disabilities should receive the DSP, and people who have partial, or short-term, disabilities should be given unemployment benefits instead, the report suggests.

Does this include the six month waiting period and work for the dole/job search requirements?

Andrews endorsed moving young unemployed people onto income management schemes, giving them welfare in the form of debit cards that could only be used in certain places.

“We would say, you can have a debit card that precludes certain expenditure. It could, for example, preclude expenditure on alcohol. You get a card, go to the bottle shop and they say ‘sorry, transaction declined’,” he said on Network Ten’s Bolt Report on Sunday morning.

Youth unemployment wouldn't be significantly above average if they weren't all lazy drunks. Kevin Andrews knows there is a disconnect between the number of jobs available and the number of people willing to work those jobs and he knows that this disconnect exists because young people are lazy and don't want to move to rural Tasmania to pick fruit. He knows this because after he finished university he was unemployed with "not much" family support and a few dollars in the bank and covered his expenses by working two casual shifts a week at a jewellery shop and then when he started working full time worked for free for a month before getting a job.

 

[bobnowhere]

Imagine the number of public servants they would need to hire to administer a scheme such as that!

 

[Dryk]

I agree with restricting what people spend their benefits on to a degree. But cutting off people's disposable income all together is abhorrent to me. That's not going to lead to well adjusted youth, at all.

Also it sounds like they want to handle things on a more case-by-case basis... while cutting the public service. Good fucking luck with that guys.

EDIT: Also telling people what they can and can't do with their money isn't very right-wing of them 'ey?

 

[wonzo]

if theres one thing the welfare system needs more of, it's a bureaucratic system of dehumanisation of the filthy poors straight from the usa!

 

[Elaugaufein]

I agree with restricting what people spend their benefits on to a degree. But cutting off people's disposable income all together is abhorrent to me. That's not going to lead to well adjusted youth, at all.

Also it sounds like they want to handle things on a more case-by-case basis... while cutting the public service. Good fucking luck with that guys.

EDIT: Also telling people what they can and can't do with their money isn't very right-wing of them 'ey?

It's very right wing because they don't view it as their (the recipients) money (it's the tax payers' money and since the optimum amount of tax is 0 then anything that restricts the use of (and therefore need) for tax is a good thing).

 

[wonzo]

wow such crisis

 

[Yagharek]

Wait, why do LNP ministers go on Bolt's show but not 730 report? I thought Bolt Report was a news parody show like Mad as Hell.

 

[Omikron]

The title becomes ever more appropriate.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/30/morrison-silent-asylum-seeker-boats?CMP=soc_568