Archive

Archive for the ‘The EYE-BALL MediaZone’ Category

EYE-BALL’s – “On the Hustings” – The Campaign Trail – Day 4

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
– EYE-BALL’s “On the Hustings” –
– The Campaign Trail – Day 4 –
| Author: No-Way José |8th Aug 2013 |
Policy Issue Debate: [Information on Policy issues you won’t hear during the current Election Campaign.]Previous Policy Issues: [Use links provided to read story in a new window and see relative polling data …]

  1. Day 2 Policy Issue: Corruption in Politics
  2. Day 3 Policy Issue: Judicial Appointments

Day 4 Policy Issue: Government Limit on Borrowings – i.e. Debt to GDP ratio …[EYE-BALL Guru][click on Debt/GDP chart image to enlarge in a new window.]

The debate on ‘better Economic Management’ during the campaign will rage on and it will be about ‘they said, he said’.

it will be about the economic record under Howard, and the economic record under Rudd/Gillard Governments. If any one did research on economic management from the Government’s perspective it is all after the fact.

The Australian Constitution has this to say on how a Government is allowed to manage its finances:  See PDF version … see Word Version

On Taxation: [Revenues]

Chapter I The Parliament – Part V Powers of the Parliament –

Section 53 – Powers of the Houses in respect of legislation:

Proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys, or imposing taxation, shall not originate in the Senate. But a proposed law shall not be taken to appropriate revenue or moneys, or to impose taxation, by reason only of its containing provisions for the imposition or appropriation of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand or payment or appropriation of fees for licences, or fees for services under the proposed law.

The Senate may not amend proposed laws imposing taxation, or proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government.

The Senate may not amend any proposed law so as to increase any proposed charge or burden on the people. The Senate may at any stage return to the House of Representatives any proposed law which the Senate may not amend, equesting, by message, the omission or amendment of any items or provisions therein. And the House of Representatives may, if it thinks fit, make any of such omissions or amendments, with or without modifications.

Except as provided in this section, the Senate shall have equal power with the House of Representatives in respect of all proposed laws.

Section 55 – Tax Bill:

Laws imposing taxation shall deal only with the imposition of taxation, and any provision therein dealing with any other matter shall be of no effect.

Laws imposing taxation, except laws imposing duties of customs or of excise, shall deal with one subject of taxation only; but laws imposing duties of customs shall deal with duties of customs only, and laws imposing duties of excise shall deal with duties of excise only.

On Expenditires: [Spending]

Chapter IV – Finance and Trade –

81 – Consolidated Revenue Fund

All revenues or moneys raised or received by the Executive Government of the Commonwealth shall form one Consolidated Revenue Fund, to be appropriated for the purposes of the Commonwealth in the manner and subject to the charges and liabilities imposed by this Constitution.

82 – Expenditure charged thereon

The costs, charges, and expenses incident to the collection, management, and receipt of the Consolidated Revenue Fund shall form the first charge thereon; and the revenue of the Commonwealth shall in the first instance be applied to the payment of the expenditure of the Commonwealth.

83 – Money to be appropriated by law

No money shall be drawn from the Treasury of the Commonwealth except under appropriation made by law.

But until the expiration of one month after the first meeting of the Parliament the Governor-General in Council may draw from the Treasury and expend such moneys as may be necessary for the maintenance of any department transferred to the Commonwealth and for the holding of the first elections for the Parliament.

The Constitution places all expenditure and revenue to be provided for under legislative process – meaning that all current and new expenditure is subject to existing and new laws under the Government of the day.

In other words if the Government can pass legislation through the HOR and the Senate, then there is no restrictiveness on any Government spending initiatives, nor taxation revenue collect at its own will.

The policy debate wanted is whether these rules should still apply given they were written at a time where Politicians had to get themselves elected, were deemed to be ‘of the people’ and ‘for the people’,  and acted frugally when it came to the public purse.   Since then society had changed in many ways, the advent of television and the ease in which the politician can reach the masses, and the modern method of the ‘candy store’ giveaways during election campaigns to get elected..

Since the GFC, all we know is that the world is in a debt spiral where new debt is doubling the old debt every four – five years.   Obama inherited a 2008 Bush debt of US$7 trillion – five years later the debt is above US$16 trillion.  Rudd inherited zero debt, and now we have almost $300 billion of debt, and under Bowen’s new forecasts, likely to be $4-500 billion in the near future.

Europe is a basket case where many Nations have worse debt proportions than others and the P.I.I.G.S. have GDP/Debt rations from which they cannot recover if they remain in the EuroZone.   Debt is the evil curse the Government’s have embraced to prop up ailing economies.  In fact it has been irresponsible economic management and placed future generations in the position none of us want tem to be.

Surely the prudent thing to do would be to place restrictions on the Government of the day’s borrowing capacity – force the Government to act responsibly and cut spending via Constitutional change linked to say – the Debt to GDP ratio.

What we do know and as it stands now is this:

  • Our Government of the day has no limitation to the amount of borrowing it can enter into,
  • Our Government of the day can spend public monies without limitation relative to:
    • Debt/GDP ratios,
    • Without any limitation to percentage (%) increases during its term,
    • Without any limitation to sector funding, i.e. Education, Health, Defence, Welfare … etc
    • Without any limitation to Party policy advertising,
    • Without any limitation to MP and Senator remuneration increases,
    • Without any limitation to Foreign Aid donations,
  • Our Government of the day can also cut spending at its discretion on any matter including Defence, Health, Education, Welfare and the like.

In a world where the struggle of life is ever increasing through debt explosion, and the Bank’s providing limitless lending to people already in financial trouble, the obvious answer to the question: ‘where will it all end’ … is relatively obvious – ‘badly’.

Should not Government’s impose limitations on themselves and run budgets according to economic conditions?

The problem is that ‘economic conditions’ is a subjective argument not often agreed to by opposing political party’s.

Elections are won and lost on the basis of policies promised and the balancing of the costings for those policies left to balance once in Government.   Surely we must know that this is ridiculous and makes us all look pretty stupid in accepting the ‘candy’ handouts with our vote.

In a perfect world the onus of responsible ‘economic management’ would come from the Government – but when re-election is on the agenda, or a new Government wants to take control,  responsible ‘economic management’ becomes about ‘tagging’ the other guy whilst not getting ‘tagged’ yourself on economic management.

In that scenario who do we believe, the $70 billion hole in the Coalition policies promoted by the Government, or the confessed $50 billion hole by the Government?

In either case the taxpayers and the electorate are bound to get screwed either way as they have done across the globe for the last 40 odd years.

Should the people have a say in how much the Government can borrow during at term of office?

How would an economic stimulus package as Rudd instigated in the face of the GFC work if there were limits on borrowings in place?

Should a change of strategy against election policies render a Government out-of-order, and be forced to go back to the people to get approval and seek a mandate?

One thing is true – Governments have to be made accountable for the mistakes they make in relation to managing the finances of the Nation.

The referee who makes the decision of whether the Government has overstepped their boundaries has to be the GG under our current Constitution.   Therefore when a GG is selected, are they canvassed on the matter as to whether they would be prepared to out the Government over poor economic Management, and who would they receive advice from if such a decision had to be made?

It’s all too hard one might say.

But easily fixed if it was legislated that all Government borrowings were restricted as a ratio of GDP.    Meaning that if GDP growth stalled, then no new borrowings can be assumed.  If GDP growth fell, borrowings would need to be reduced.   If GDP growth grew, then the Government has opportunity to enact new expenditure policy.

The goal being that the Government is responsible for economic growth and it has to find ways to stimulate that growth away from new Government debt spending.

For far too long Government spending has underpinned GDP growth and as a result the World has become a toxic debt explosion waiting to happen – the GFC was a tremor compared to what is still to come.

This has been coming for many decades and it is a global problem.  Debt got us into the GFC problem, and the only solution Western Governments have been able to come up with in the last five years it to increase their debt exponentially.

All with a consequence of future taxpayers being responsible for the repayment of that debt, and the resulting reduced living standards that will ensure.

Please take a minute to register your opinion in the Poll below:   [EYE-BALL Guru] …


Harry Growl’s Water Cooler Gossip: [Harry Growl] …

  • Story doing the rounds about Mr Abbott and Mr Rudd and many other male politicians concerns the new prostate test – all are taking the test to establish whether a rigid or ‘soft-cock’ awakening is an accurate measure for prostate problems …
  • Many have used the above scenario to have morning sex – politicians tweeting about this are set to rise …
  • Peter Beattie’s Federal nomination in the seat of ‘Forde’ boosts ALP chances in winning some marginal seats in QLD.   Beattie’s appearance as ‘gaunt’ and significant weight loss raised questions to his vim and vigor to a robust election campaign … perhaps he should use the test above to rule out  possible medical reasons …
  • Abbott was in Tasmania talking about State issues, and Rudd along side Beattie was in QLD talking about State issues under Newman … a new angle on Federal campaigns …
  •  Conroy, Swan, Emerson, Gillard, and other lesser members – i.e. Garrett, Clare and Lundy, and all a part of the Gillard tiger force are still absent from the campaign.   These names are obviously toxic for ALP … why has Abbott not used this to his advantage …  the NBN, Economic Management, and Trade, all portfolios under these previous Gillard Ministers and now serving as feather dusters awaiting their parliamentary pension for the rest of their lives …
  • Rudd must have counted the number of votes lost in recent days due to his ‘hair-tick’ because in front of the camera’s with Beattie, he never once touched his hair …
  • The journo’s travelling with both Leaders, Rudd and Abbott are having little games with themselves … whispers have emerged that News Fairfax Journo’s have made a pact to not sleep with anyone on the opposing team … the pool for the first journo to break ranks is growing each day … of course the incentive to break ranks for the pool is offset by a dare that is too much to publish hereto without obtaining reputable confirmations … more on this as advice comes to hand … oh .. by the way the pool is open to print and vision journo’s, all tech staff are excluded.

[Harry Growl] …


General Links to Election data and Information:

AEC’s Enrollment Drive: Linked here.

Today is Day 1 of the 34 day campaign and the immediate focus of the ALP and the Greens is to get as many un-enrolled electors enrolled … the deadline is seven (7) days and the AEC link to find more information about whether you are enrolled can be found here.  [EYE-BALL.]

ABC’s Vote Compass:  Linked here.

A brilliant on-line survey presented by the ABC’s Anthony Green will prove to be an election barometer never seen before.  His 30 question survey has gone ballistic this morning with 170,000 people logging on to give their responses.  His questions will decide the election issues seen as most important and the major party’s will be keenly seeking Green’s data to help them plan their election strategies. [EYE-BALL]

Anthony Green’s Election Blog: Linked here.

Party Policy links:

Campaign Speeches:

Link to the ABC’s 2013 Election coverage:

Final Comments from EYE-BALL:

This new election commentary page is provided as a service to subscribers and readers during the 2013 election campaign.

All and any abusive comments will be deleted without notice.

Satire and witty comments are appreciated … and in all seriousness, this Nation is a bee’s dick away from disaster, and if anyone thinks that Rudd or Abbott have the goods to be our PM and lead this Nation away from that disaster, please express your thoughts and reasons in the comments section below.  You never know, your comment might just make a difference.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please use/click on your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.  Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion’s – On The Hustings …

EYE-BALL’s – “On the Hustings” – The Campaign Trail – Day 3

August 7, 2013 2 comments
The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
– EYE-BALL’s “On the Hustings” –
– The Campaign Trail – Day 3 –
| Author: No-Way José | 7th Aug 2013 |
Policy Issue Debate: [Information on Policy issues you won’t hear during the current Election Campaign.]

Previous Policy Issues:

  1. Day 2 Policy Issue: Corruption in Politics – use link to read story and see poll data …

Day 3 Policy Issue: Judicial Appointments: …[EYE-BALL]

There are many Courts under the control of the Federal Government – The highest being the ‘High Court’.

High CourtAppointments to the ‘High Court’ and other Federal Courts are made by the Federal Attorney General.  These Federal appointments are then rubber stamped by the GG.

The appointments are drawn from a short list,  after judicial reviews and assessments, and then decided upon by the Federal Government including the PM and its Cabinet process.   The Attorney General announces the appointments after the GG has signed off on them.

The current ‘High Court’ structure and appointments is contained in the table below:  [linked on-line here.]  [Click on image to see all judicial appointment data i.e. Education and Court experience, in a new window.]

One of the rules for High Court appointees require mandatory retirement at age 70 – hence the appointment tenure.

The spread of appointments of the current Justices is spread as three (3) from John Howard’s era, and four (4) from the Rudd/Gillard era.  Two new appointments are due to be made during the next Federal Government term – both were John Howard appointments.

Other Courts and tribunals controlled by Federal Government appointment include: [links to the Australian Federal Courts websites provided.]

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) is an independent body that reviews a broad range of administrative decisions made by Australian Government ministers and officials, authorities and other tribunals.Administrative Appeals Tribunal

The Australian Competition Tribunal was established in 1965. Prior to 1995, the Tribunal was known as the Trade Practices Tribunal. The Tribunal hears applications for review of determinations of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.Federal Court of Australia

The Commonwealth Courts Portal is an initiative of the Family Court of Australia, Federal Court of Australia and Federal Magistrates Court of Australia. It provides web-based services for clients to access information about cases before the courts.Family Court of Australia

Inquires into the amount of royalty payable in respect of the recording of musical works; fixes royalties or equitable remuneration in respect of compulsory licences; arbitrates disputes in relation to the terms of existing and proposed licensing schemes; and deals with applications for the granting of licences.Copyright Tribunal of Australia

The Council of Australasian Tribunals facilitates liaison and discussion between the heads of tribunals. It supports the development of best practice models and model procedural rules, standards of behaviour and conduct for members and increased capacity for training and support for members.Administrative Appeals Tribunal

The Defence Force Discipline Appeal Tribunal hears and determines appeals from courts martial and Defence Force magistrates in respect of service offences by Australian Defence Force personnel.Defence Force Discipline Appeal Tribunal

The Family Court of Australia has jurisdiction over all matrimonial causes and associated responsibilities.Family Court of Australia

The Federal Circuit Court of Australia (formerly known as the Federal Magistrates Court) was established at the end of 1999. The court is an independent federal court under the Australian Constitution. The jurisdiction of the Federal Circuit Court includes family law and child support, administrative law, admiralty law, bankruptcy, copyright, human rights, industrial law, migration, privacy and trade practices. The court shares those jurisdictions with the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Court of Australia. The objective of the Federal Magistrates Court is to provide a simpler and more accessible alternative to litigation in the superior courts and to relieve the workload of those courts.Federal Circuit Court of Australia

The Federal Court of Australia began to exercise its jurisdiction on 1 February 1977. It assumed jurisdiction formerly exercised in part by the High Court of Australia and the whole of the jurisdiction of the Australian Industrial Court and of the Federal Court of Bankruptcy.Federal Court of Australia

The High Court is the highest court in the Australian judicial system. Its functions are to interpret and apply the law of Australia; to decide cases of special federal significance including challenges to the constitutional validity of laws and to hear appeals, by special leave, from Federal, State and Territory courts.High Court of Australia

The Migration Review Tribunal (the MRT) and the Refugee Review Tribunal (the RRT) provide an independent and final merits review of decisions made in relation to visas to travel to, enter or stay in Australia. The MRT reviews decisions made in respect of general visas (e.g. visitor, student, partner, family, business, skilled visas) and the RRT deals with decisions made in respect of protection (refugee) visas.Migration Review Tribunal and Refugee Review Tribunal

The Social Security Appeals Tribunal is a statutory body established to review decisions made in relation to social security, education or training payments.Social Security Appeals Tribunal

The Veterans’ Review Board is an independent tribunal to review decisions made by the Repatriation Commission on claims for acceptance of injury or disease as war-caused or defence-caused, on claims for war widows’, war widowers’ and orphans’ pensions, on assessment of pension rate for incapacity from war-caused or defence-caused injury or disease, and on claims for the grant, or assessment of, attendant allowance.Department of Veterans’ Affairs.


The list of Current Federal Judges appointed to these courts are:

Judges based in Sydney

Judges based in Melbourne

Judges based in Brisbane

Judges based in Perth

Judges based in Adelaide

Judge based in Canberra

Judges based in Hobart


List of State Courts: [Click to enlarge in a new Window.]

All State based Courts Judges are appointed by the individual States Attorney General after the same process is pursued as for Federal Court appointments.


The Debate:

The system in place for Court Appointments has been in place since Federation and before.   If not the Government to make the appointee decision then who.   The matter comes to the debate table because of the appointment of Justice Bernard Murphy during the Julia Gillard term as Prime Minister.  The AG at the time of the appointment – 13th June 2011 – was Robert McClelland.    Nicola Roxon took over the portfolio in Dec 2011.

Robert McClelland was involve din the AWU scandal as a lawyer after the AWU sacked Slater and Gordon and transferred their legal work to Maurice Blackburn.   Nicola Roxon worked for Maurice Blackburn and it is widely acknowledged that Roxon took over the Gillard AWU file when Gillard was sacked from Slater and Gordon.

McClelland introduced into the House a speech about his knowledge of the AWU scandal and Gillard’s involvement.  Read the full text of McClellan’s comments – 21st June 2012 – in Hansard here via Andrew Bolt’s blog, or via APH here.

There is a 12 month gap between McClellan’s comments and the prior appointment of Bernard Murphy.  McClelland was sacked from the Gillard Ministry for supporting Kevin Rudd in his early 2012 Leadership spill.

You do not have to be too clever to understand McClelland’s motives for the Hansard comments.  What is interesting is that if McClelland knew about Gillard’s AWU scandal involvement, who else knew as well.  And – if the numbers of ALP MP’s and Senators were aware of Gillard’s AWU scandal involvement, why was she chosen to become PM with the chequered AWU history there for the media and public to expose?

Was the Bernard Murphy a payback by Gillard to hush up his knowledge of Gillard’s involvement in the AWU scandal – the evidence revealed to date had Murphy’s account differing with another Partner’s on the record account, and the transcript of Gillard’s recorded termination interview.

As a policy issue – if the PM abuses their office to make judicial appointments who would know?   Is there an appeals process for judicial members to appeal their case for a position they feel qualified for and want?

The concept of Governments stacking the Courts is theatre stuff … honest and genuine Governments don’t play politics with Judicial appointments, just the same as judicial appointees never bare their political persuasion when passing judgement.  That is how it is supposed to work and there are many judgements made that challenge the courts neutrality.

The media and other vested interest try time and again to make the case of bias decisions from the judiciary.   There is no case law where this has been proven.

The Courts are often though of as being the third (3rd) arm of Government, behind the Legislature, and the Executive. [see link here.]   Our Court Justices are charged with enforcing the Laws of the Land and as revealed with the High Court’s dismissing the Government’s Malaysian solution to asylum seekers, they are not only required to be seen to independent but they must act independently.

Please take a minute to register your opinion in the Poll below:   [EYE-BALL] …


The Day’s Updates – Media Stories: … [EYE-BALL] …

Amedia story no one is writing about is the Treasury forecasts made in May for the 2013 Budget and the $33 billion hole across the forward estimates made only 11 weeks later.

Surely the story we all want to know is how Treasury could have got it so wrong – yet again.  Remember the 2012-13 forecast in May 2012 was for a $1.5 billion surplus.  It was revised down to $500 million surplus in the mid year estimates and then in Dec 2012 it all came unstuck.

As at the May 2013 Finance Department numbers the budget is at $17 billion deficit.   So in the space of the  time from May 2012 – to Aug 2013 – the Treasury estimates have made errors in excess of $50 billion … how can the Treasury forecast modelling be trusted.

The Opposition have every right to have no confidence in handing over their policy’s for costing by Treasury.   But the question has to be asked – why have they not used the incompetence of Treasury over the past 2 odd years as the reason.

The other news story today worthy of note was the High Court decision on the MRRT challenge from Twiggy Forrest.

Please give your feedback on whether you have confidence in the Treasury modelling and the numbers presented in Chris Bowen’s amended budget forecast:  … [EYE-BALL] …


Harry Growl’s Water Cooler Gossip: [Harry Growl] …

  • Christopher Pyne had a revisit to the barber yesterday … he believed it was a rogue hair giving him a tickle behind the ear … the barber couldn’t find it so watch out over the next few days for Pyne giving his left ear a tug …
  • The Opposition candidate for Sydney seat ‘Greenway’ had a bad day on Tuesday when a Channel 10 journo opened up when the candidate struggled to find a sensible response to policy questions.   The highlight was an exposure to the Opposition vetting process … surely public speaking and an understanding of the Party’s policy should be part of the vetting process … watch out for more journo’s getting agressive with candidates …
  • David Bradbury the Assistant Treasurer is a duck out of water after Swan’s demise – he lost it on a radio talk back show yesterday – read more here
  • Listen to Joe Hockey’s speech on the interest rate reduction:
  • Listen to Chris Bowen’s comments after the Rate cut:
  • On the ‘debate’ debate … the ALP minders are saying that Abbott does not really want to debate on Rudd’s terms … the Coalition minders are saying that they are not running away from any debate contest … Malcolm Turnbull is said to have said that he should be in the debate to help Abbott do a number on Rudd …
  • Abbott also got himself in trouble when he spoke about the NSW MP involved in a sex image … read more here … why would Abbott even go there?

[Harry Growl] …


The BULLSHIT Measure:

The graphs showing the “Bullshit” measure will be updated weekly or there abouts … please if you find a story or media report that reeks of the ‘bullshit’ context, please send a link of the story text via comments section below.


General Links to Election data and Information:

AEC’s Enrollment Drive: Linked here.

Today is Day 1 of the 34 day campaign and the immediate focus of the ALP and the Greens is to get as many un-enrolled electors enrolled … the deadline is seven (7) days and the AEC link to find more information about whether you are enrolled can be found here.  [EYE-BALL.]

ABC’s Vote Compass:  Linked here.

A brilliant on-line survey presented by the ABC’s Anthony Green will prove to be an election barometer never seen before.  His 30 question survey has gone ballistic this morning with 170,000 people logging on to give their responses.  His questions will decide the election issues seen as most important and the major party’s will be keenly seeking Green’s data to help them plan their election strategies. [EYE-BALL]

Party Policy links:

Campaign Speeches:

Link to the ABC’s 2013 Election coverage:

Final Comments from EYE-BALL:

This new election commentary page is provided as a service to subscribers and readers during the 2013 election campaign.

All and any abusive comments will be deleted without notice.

Satire and witty comments are appreciated … and in all seriousness, this Nation is a bee’s dick away from disaster, and if anyone thinks that Rudd or Abbott have the goods to be our PM and lead this Nation away from that disaster, please express your thoughts and reasons in the comments section below.  You never know, your comment might just make a difference.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please use/click on your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.  Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion’s – On The Hustings …

EYE-BALL’s – “On the Hustings” – The Campaign Trail – Day 2

August 6, 2013 4 comments
The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
– EYE-BALL’s “On the Hustings” –
– The Campaign Trail – Day 2 –
| Author: No-Way José | 6th Aug 2013 |
Policy Issue Debate – Corruption in Politics: [EYE-BALL]

For most of us our biggest concern in politics is political corruption. Yet – all sides of the political divide don’t debate or put this issue front and center in any of their policy platforms.

Why Not?

With the Obeid/MacDonald ICAC revelations, the ongoing Craig Thompson saga that started in 2010, the AWU scandal on the go since the early 1990’s and both still not resolved, and then there is the Peter Slipper affair that goes back to the Howard years – political corruption and the abuse of parliamentary privileges is a big issue for the electorate.

The Gillard assist in having the Thompson and Slipper incidents waylaid to allow the Gillard minority Government to stay in power is another issue that reeks of corrupt deals – yet and nobody in politics is interested in seeking the truth or having those deals exposed.

The electorate want the debate, they want positive action to clean up the corruption issues and the longer Rudd and Abbott and other candidates hold off on the debate the more disengaged the electorate will become.

When the rorting or travel and other personal expenses is excused as in the case of the Opposition Leader, the vested self serving interests that allow these claim error hiccups to go away is not the way these matters should be dealt with.

We want the overseas trips for cooking lessons, and Test cricket junkets, the family trip to Tuscany to all stop.  We want MP’s to pay for their own lunches and stop dining on the public purse. We want them to use taxi’s, buses and rail to experience the real public transport shortcomings the public are forced to endure.

Claiming security needs and time constraints should be restricted to Cabinet Ministers – not backbenchers nor Senators.

The first candidate to take a hard-line on political corruption will set a trend that can only drag all the other candidates into the same debate.  Being soft on corruption is a great negative to any party or individual …

If this be so – then why won’t they talk or debate the issue?

Simple really – they are all a part of the problem and because they operate under a self-policing arrangement, they will not advocate for independence of the ‘watchdog’ ensuring expense claim legitimacy.  Now that would be an election issue that most voters would be very interested in.

Do you agree: [Please vote your interest below.][EYE-BALL] …


The Day’s Updates – Media Stories: … [EYE-BALL] …

The most honest of all the media stories browsed/read yesterday and overnight was a story by Peter Hatcher from “The Age” titled Both parties peddle a fiscal fairytale … lead in below:

Both parties peddle a fiscal fairytale


| Author: Peter Hatcher | Date: Aug 6th 2013 | Link to On-Line Story. |

Even after resigning two years ago as the secretary of the Treasury, Ken Henry has been a model of discretion. But that doesn’t mean he’s content with the state of politics in Australia. In fact, he’s been growing increasingly frustrated.

The man who served as Australia’s top economic adviser for a decade under Liberal and Labor governments has now spoken his mind about the performance of the two parties in recent years, and he’s not impressed.

Australia faces an “immense challenge” in paying for its needs and both political parties are failing to deal with it, says Henry.

The key problem is an ageing population and rising health costs.

The size of the problem has been clear ever since Henry spelled it out in the first Intergenerational Report, published by the Treasury under the Howard Government in 2002: “Older people are more expensive than younger people,” Henry summarises. Not only will there be fewer workers paying taxes to meet the costs of pensions, the health care bill will soar.

“We see an inexorable increase in health costs and I don’t see any party saying we have to find ways to cut health spending.

“So then the question: Are there areas of government spending that can be addressed to offset these effects?” He answers his own question: “Maybe, but are they enough to offset 5 per cent of GDP? That’s $70 billion in today’s dollars.” That’s the Treasury estimate of the extra annual cost of our ageing society 30 years from now.

“I don’t think so,” says Henry. “I really don’t think so.” … continues

Hatchers story reflects what we all know but political leaders want to take no notice of.  Who wins an election with policies that increase taxes … yet that is what is needed.

Please give your feedback on tax increases:  … [EYE-BALL] …


The Day’s Updates – Political Campaign Stories: …[EYE-BALL Guru.]…

The obvious clanger of the day is the Opposition’s claim that lower interest rates translates to poor economic management.’ Joe Hockey made the statement in relation to the expectation the RBA will reduce official interest rates to 2.5% when the RBA meets today.

This level is a record low for official interest rates and Mr Hockey made the statement that this means that the economy is not doing well.  Mr Hockey has not updated his personal website with the text of link to his comments.  However,  Mike Pasco writing for the SMH posted a story on Mr Hockey’s credentials late last week – linked here – and points out Mr Hockey has some creditability issues as the alternative Treasurer.

Searching for confirmed text and video of Hockey making his comment re the lower interest rates mean poor economic management are still eluding search and research requests.  Perhaps Hockey has killed the story and the fact that his personal website does not carry the story is indicative.

Suffice to say – interest rates go up and down in this Nation in response to the RBA’s view on inflationary pressures.  EYE-BALL Guru has made the argument countless times that this inflation targeting by the RBA is in fact one of the major causes of our weakening economy.  Interest rates should have been at these levels 3-4 years ago as they were with the rest of our major trading partners suffering under the GFC impact – see Guru charts below:

Global Central Bank Cash Rates: – [click image to enlarge in a new window.]

10yr and 2yr CGS v RBA Cash Rate: – [click image to enlarge in a new window.]

Both these charts reflect the RBA’s policy in how Interest rates are used to kill inflation whether there be the threat of inflation or not.  The easiest message the Opposition can use on economic Management is to ask the question why mortgage holders have had to pay A$1,000’s in forced higher interest rates compared with our trading partners?   Why have offshore investors been allowed to plunder our riches at the expense of mortgage holders?

Both these policy explanations would stump the Government – nobody thinks inflation is an issue anywhere across the globe – why is the RBA stuck in this twilight zone where 20 odd years ago, inflation was a problem for all the western world.  All political parties are stuck in the mud on this issue and claim the RBA”s independence, just like Treasury – these bureaucrats get it wrong – just look at the $33 billion hole since the MAy ’13 budget.

Of course the higher interest rates here influenced the value of the A$ and that higher value had an impact on all our export industries leading to job losses and increased domestic labour costs relative to the rest of the world. The fact that the media nor the political brains of our Nation have not made the connect and acted accordingly gives insight to the how and why we are where we are economically speaking, and in the position of being forced to prop up the car industry and spend taxpayer funds to support ailing export and domestic business’.

Mr Hockey and Mr Robb would be a worse alternative to Swan and Wong, now the ALP has Evans … oops Bowen and Wong and Mr Bowen updated us on Swan’s $33 billion ‘book-cook’ since the May budget less that three months ago.

The economy will be a big election issue – on management, on spending restraint, and on policy implementation i.e. Gonski, NBN, Disability Insurance etc … but what it won’t be about is who best understands the global market and how Australia is an island in a cyclone tempest where we live and die by the value of the A$ and the export revenues that rise and fall on the back of the stability of the A$. …[EYE-BALL Guru.]…


Harry Growl’s Water Cooler Gossip: [Harry Growl] …

  • The Kevin Rudd hair flick is now officially the worst ‘tick’ put up by any Political performer … it costs him 1,000 votes every time he does it … come on Kevin you must see the footage and see how lame it is …
  • Peter Slipper announced he is still running in the seat of Fisher … he has to be kidding right … it can only mean he is after one last grab of the taxpayer purse through electoral refunds – if he polls 4% or more he’ll get $2.51 per vote … well done Peter …
  • Milne turned up in black today after her ‘frumpy’ appearance yesterday  … eyes were also darkened and the windy outdoor press conference with Melbourne candidate Adam Brandt made for challenging conditions.   The GREENS are in trouble will latest poll data showing slippage to 9% and todays policy focus was on ‘high speed rail’ … they still think they will control the Senate … but any chance they will have a seat at the table in the HOR’s is a pipe dream … at the next Senate election the goss is they will go the way of the Democrats …
  • All the other female candidates stayed indoors today … all afraid of the wind and how it would make for a Hitchcock “BIRDS’ bad hair day …
  • Has anyone heard or see Wayne Swan outside of his Facebook page … if so please take a pulse reading and post anything that might indicate he is still running in his seat of Lilly …
  • Same for Craig Emerson … many thought he would help the new guy but the word again suggests his mobile phone bill ony has the one number being dialed … coincidently – Julia’s mobile phone bill hardly registers any calls being made …
  • Word has circulated that Stephen Conroy has be in meetings with lawyers over his starring role at the next ICAC inquiry … has anyone seen him of the ski slopes or near Obeid’s ski cabin …
  • Out of the blue – someone showed me an image of a penis in a glass of red wine and said it belonged to a NSW MP – the penis that is … not the image … apparently the USA’s Anthony Weiner texting his genitalia has set a trend … yes he did it again only recently … who said Politicians weren’t addicted to sexual fantasy … all the more reason for staffers to wear condoms …
  • Word on the ALP Victorian pre-selection wars aren’t over … Shorten and Conroy pretty much got their way, as did Gillard … but the voters and branch members are said to have formed a group to ensure the last laugh … Feeney’s decision to move from the Senate might leave egg all over his face … just the word OK …
  • Oh … watching the Milne/Brandt press conference in the background … hear is a heads up guys … when the camera is showing the teeth chattering from the cold in the pretty journalist standing next to Brandt – it’s time to realise the audience aren’t listening anymore … talk about the need for a media guru …
  • On the former Gillard media advisor McTurd – his 457 visa won’t be renewed unless he can get himself another job – the FOI request by Hedley Thomas into the efforts Gillard made to find and/or hire someone locally have been released – read the story here … this should spell more trouble for Gillard … when asked for a response she said – ‘fu_k-off’.
  • Joe Hockey has a minder with him on the campaign trail who’s sole purpose is to count his calorie intake … Joe is serious about his weight loss … he hears political mileage can be made over an expanding girth when he becomes the Treasurer and journo’s connect the ‘fat-of-the-land’ disappearing,  and the ‘fat-of-Joe’s-girth’ reappearing …
  • Bronwyn Bishop – [known on this side of the fence as ”The BEEHIVE”, and HOR ”School Mam”] – is a living parliamentary miracle.  She proves once and for all that you only have to get into Parliament to earn the right to stay in Parliament …

[Harry Growl] …


The BULLSHIT Measure:

The graphs showing the “Bullshit” measure will be updated weekly or there abouts … please if you find a story or media report that reeks of the ‘bullshit’ context, please send a link of the story text via comments section below.


General Links to Election data and Information:

AEC’s Enrollment Drive: Linked here.

Today is Day 1 of the 34 day campaign and the immediate focus of the ALP and the Greens is to get as many un-enrolled electors enrolled … the deadline is seven (7) days and the AEC link to find more information about whether you are enrolled can be found here.  [EYE-BALL.]

ABC’s Vote Compass:  Linked here.

A brilliant on-line survey presented by the ABC’s Anthony Green will prove to be an election barometer never seen before.  His 30 question survey has gone ballistic this morning with 170,000 people logging on to give their responses.  His questions will decide the election issues seen as most important and the major party’s will be keenly seeking Green’s data to help them plan their election strategies. [EYE-BALL]

Party Policy links:

Campaign Speeches:

Link to the ABC’s 2013 Election coverage:

Final Comments from EYE-BALL:

This new election commentary page is provided as a service to subscribers and readers during the 2013 election campaign.

All and any abusive comments will be deleted without notice.

Satire and witty comments are appreciated … and in all seriousness, this Nation is a bee’s dick away from disaster, and if anyone thinks that Rudd or Abbott have the goods to be our PM and lead this Nation away from that disaster, please express your thoughts and reasons in the comments section below.  You never know, your comment might just make a difference.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please use/click on your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.  Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion’s – On The Hustings …

EYE-BALL Opinion – EYE-BALL’s MediaZone Growl No: 4 – Australia’s Media Horde

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
– EYE-BALL’s MediaZone Growl No: 4 –
– Australia’s Media Horde –
| Author: EYE-BALL MediaZone | 30th July 2013 |
Hello all … frustration more than anything drives this post – frustration at our Media and the complete ineptness demonstrated in the way they report political stories and the News.How many times do you now see a story and immediately recognise the bias involved, the slant, the unasked question we all want asked, the pursuit of a desired answer to a question we all know was prompted, how many times do we see journalists behaving like dogs off their leash?The reality in how politics is being fed to the public via News broadcasters is nothing more than extended personal political battle-lines, all to a cause to serve media barons and their lust for political favours.

All political News these days holds a propaganda message designed to influence rather then inform.  A lead story on one broadcast is treated as low profile on a different broadcaster because of how it portrays the story comport.

Who’s interests were best served when the Gillard ‘police investigation’ story was rejected by the media as News, who’s interests are being served when the Abbott travel rorts for his book publishing tour were discovered and treated as a non event?

The Slipper, Thompson, Williamson, Obeid, MacDonald corruption stories – all major fraud stories and stories all given different prominence and focus by different broadcasters.

Over a long time the likes of Rupert Murdoch and his fellow media barons have demonstrated their willingness to sacrifice integrity and moral standards in the pursuit of political favour for withheld news stories.  Deals are done and trade off’s made to have stories pulled or ‘toned down’ when the media is looking for favour – be it lobby donations for a more agreeable media ownership spread, more coverage, more influence, and it sickens to imagine where it will all end.

The Media are responsible for the greatest fraud of all time – the media barons alone have destroyed the integrity of News reporting – remember Conrad Black, the Maxwell empire, and the countless other media barons over the years who have come and gone.  There is still one that has survived them all – the Murdoch press.

Globally Murdoch is the most influential media empire the world has ever seen – and still he does not have enough.

Who do we have in Australia, Kerry Stokes, Fairfax – ha … small time players and not in the same market as Murdoch.   Murdoch plays the ‘kingmaker’ … and the Australian politicians and public listen.

Neutrality of opinion has disappeared in the way journalists write their stories.  Editorials express opinions and journalists take their cue from the editors.

To highlight the most recent episodes of some non Murdoch owned or influenced TV shows – the following is presented.

The three high-profile political programs I watch are “Insiders”, “The Bolt Report”, and “Q&A” – in no particular order of preference all have highs and lows in what there serve up to the public.

A common thought about all three is that they do a great disservice to the political debate as media presentations. For example –

The Bolt Report:

Take last Sunday’s program built under promo’s in that the PM will make his first appearance on the program. Bolt invited us to see the PM squirm under his questions and revealed that the PM would answer honestly – look what happened: [Warning – watch for Bolt’s need to pursue the answer he wants – not the answer the interviewed wants to give …]

You see the point – the political Q&A is not important – only the shock value to boost Bolt’s ratings. Bolt could be called a ‘narcosis psychopath’ in the way he believes his opinion is the only one that matters. He stint on “Insiders’ was proof in his believe that his opinion was more relevant and more correct whenever he shared the panel time and question. Now his show is on commercial TV and is struggling for ratings so there is commercial value in trying to play the Bob Dwyer ‘Pick-a-Box’ theme of audience drawn into the suspense and drama of trying to trip up the PM or some other guest on the show.

Bolt’s ‘prima-donna’ performances have earned him a reputation that scares politicians. Albanese is the only other ALP Minister to have appeared on his show. Rudd’s aim was to shorten Bolt’s stature, Bolt’s aim was to get one over the PM on National TV.

How does that advance the political debate? How does that hold the Government accountable – there were so many areas Bolt could have gone to expose Rudd’s weakness – i.e. the AWU scandal and how Gillard became PM in the first place – the Peter Slipper affair as he sat on the backbenches watching it unfold – same with the Craig Thompson affair – surely Rudd’s responses to these questions would have served the Australian people so much more than questions about a new initiative in asylum seeker policy that is currently being tested by the people smugglers.

Rudd has to wear his share of responsibility as well – if he wanted to put Bolt in his place and that has to be the only reason Rudd would appear on the show – his response to Bolt’s ‘goading’ could have been so much more dismissive and to the point … it was pathetic television and a waste of time.

“The Bolt Report” gets a 2/10 rating, and Andrew Bolt gets a 1/10 rating for interview style and how he presents himself as a member of Australia’s media industry.

ABC’s “Q&A”:

Monday nights program – linked via “IView” here – was a massive disappointment – normal host Paul Jones was absent and Virginia Trioli stepped in.

The first question asked by a schoolgirl was:

Sarah Burgess asked: Can you please put Australia out of its misery and let us all know when the next election will take place? I have a school formal to plan and people have gay weddings to plan….

‘… put Australia out of its misery …’ indeed – how does a schoolgirl who is more than likely not old enough to vote get to pass a judgement about ‘political misery’?

How the researches who vet the questions allowed this to pass as in the interests of the viewers watching the program points again to program agenda as opposed to true political interest.

So much of the media today are about when the election will be called – why waste all that page and TV time on a question that will never be honestly answered …

Kate Ellis was allowed to state chapter and verse about the ALP policy successes whilst answering a question about something entirely different – why did the presenter allow this?

The most interesting guest on the program was Peter Shergold, who was Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet from 2003-2008. He was also the nation’s most senior public servant when he resigned four months into Kevin Rudd’s first term as PM.

In two decades he served in the public service he served four Prime Ministers and eight Ministers in both Labor and Coalition governments. During this time he established the Office of Multicultural Affairs, headed the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), and was Public Service Commissioner. He was secretary of several government departments, including the Department of Education, Science and Training, and the Department of Employment, Workforce Relations and Small Business.

Surely his contribution to the political debate during this program could have been better used – he hesitated on his first direct question that asked him for an opinion … the question was –

VIRGINIA TRIOLI: Just returning to the question, Peter Shergold, you’ve been down this path before, of course, being head of Prime Minister and Cabinet. Can you intuit what the Prime Minister’s strategy might be at the moment if you were to speculate?

PETER SHERGOLD: I think the major strategy is to keep us all guessing. I think that’s the key. Of course if you’re a public servant this is very exciting days, indeed, waiting for the caretaker convention to come when for four to six weeks–

VIRGINIA TRIOLI: You public servants are thrilled by such …(indistinct)…

PETER SHERGOLD: –for four to six weeks the country is in good hands, the public service, and you notice nobody notices the difference.

VIRGINIA TRIOLI: So what are you arguing for here, Peter Shergold: rule by public servants?

PETER SHERGOLD: I think it is important, actually, that public servants do recognise what their role is. It is the role of government to set the national interest. It is the role of public servants to give advice on that and then to implement the policies of the government of the day, whichever it is.

That was about the most exposing question put to Shergold – why not ask about the reason for his resignation i.e. the Rudd work ethic in those first months had the public service up in arms about the demands and hours they had to work – surely Shergold’s take on that would have audience interest in forming opinions as to why Rudd was booted by his ALP MP’s.

The rest of the program descended and Magda Szubanski’s levity was about the only reason one stayed to watch the whole program. This is a program that has the ability to get real answers to people’s concerns – the problem is that it to is in a ratings war and dictated by populists formats.

Liberal MP Josh Frydenberg had his moment of fame when he talked about the Rudd tweet about cutting himself shaving – really … is this what Frydenberg wants to introduce as his contribution to the debate …

VIRGINIA TRIOLI: Josh Frydenberg, can you explain why Kevin Rudd is so liked?

JOSH FRYDENBERG: Well, firstly, there’s no difference between Kevin Rudd Mark I and Kevin Rudd Mark II. I mean for the same reasons that Julia Gillard said a government has lost its way those reasons have not changed, namely the tax burden, namely the budget deficits, namely the border protection chaos. In terms of the celebrity of Kevin Rudd, I think it’s quite dangerous because what it is is it’s obscuring the real debate on important issues. So, for example, the day that he tweeted that photo of cutting himself shaving was the day that our unemployment numbers came out and unemployment rose to 5.7%, more than 6% in Queensland, more than 8% in Tasmania but we didn’t have a debate about that. I mean youth unemployment, an area in Kate’s area, has hit the highest level in 15 years. This is the problem. This is the problem. We need to have a debate about the policy issues and not about Kevin Rudd cutting himself shaving.

This question should have opened many doors – why did the media focus on the ‘shaving cut’ as opposed to the unemployment numbers … whatever Rudd’s purpose to tweet that he cut himself – and I’m sure it was not him that actually typed the tweet but some media staffer – the opposition chose to raise the tweet in context with the unemployment numbers. Does this not demonstrate the shallowness of Frydenberg and the rest of the panel, or the audience for allowing the comments to go unchallenged?

“Q%A” get a 2.5/10 rating, and it’s a rating that has been on the slide for some time.

ABC’s – “Insiders”: [or the Barry Cassidy ego and ALP propaganda show – watch heretranscripts here – ]

Cassidy gave Opposition Immigration spokesperson Scott Morrison a good go – unusual for Cassidy. Morrison has grown in his responsibilities and is an impressive communicator. His early days in the job prove he has come far.

The issue here is that the Rudd answer to the ‘asylum seeker’ will not prove to be a failure or success until it has had time to impact. The rush by people smugglers to get the people who have paid for transit rather then refund if people change their mind highlights the desperation these people are subjected to.

This is criminal and negligent homicide by the people smugglers and it all happens far away from our shores. It will only be in 9-12 months as to whether opinion can be gauged whether the policy has worked or not.

Rudd knows that if he finds a perceived solution to the asylum seeker invasion that he has a better chance at the election. Abbott knows also that and success to the Rudd plan means his job becomes tougher in trying to win the election.

It is understandable why the media have this focus – but they also know that short term speculation can only damage the policy as the people smugglers build a case for the Abbott response to hasten the asylum seeker exodus.

“Insiders” Rating – 4/10.

Summary:

So where does one turn to get informed political opinion?

Is the Murdoch press the only source of real journalism?

None of the above programs has any real interest in exposing the AWU scandal, nor the Craig Thompson, or Peter Slipper corruption charges.  I ponder long and hard as to why that is?

The people have a right to know why Tony Abbott’s ‘book-tour’ travel expense claims differ to those of Peter Slipper.   Why is Abbott given a free ride and Slipper hung out to dry?

Also – why the Union movement was called upon to help with the payment of Thompson’s legal expenses – all to avoid his bankruptcy and the resultant calling of an election for his seat some two years ago.

These are stories that have public interest yet none of the three above programs go near any depth of question on these matters.

The subject of a post due to be published soon is the expense accounts for Tony Abbott – as a forerunner check out this excel file imaged below to see how Mr Abbott has used his parliamentary expenditure expense account since mid 2009. [Click image to enlarge in a new window.]

Ho hum .. off we go … the $370 million spent as expenses by our 230 MP’s and Senators has an annual spread of $1.6 million per member. That is some 8 times their recent remuneration payment – before the increase it is a factor 13 times.

This $1.6 million does not include parliamentary staff cost – which can be for up to a minimum of 4 additional staff ranging in remunerations from a high of $240k to minimum’s of $65k.

The $1.6 million also does not cover the cost of the non-contributary parliamentary superannuation schemes for pre 2005 members – nor the staff expenses over and above remuneration costs – i.e. redundancy, super, and health schemes.

We are truly living in the age where public servants enjoy a ‘sense of entitlement’ that borders on is decadence …

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please use/click on your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.  Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion’s – MEDIAZONE …

EYE-BALL Opinion – EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 3 – The Australian’s – Janet Albrechtsen – Journalist

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
– EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 3 –
– The Australian’s – Janet Albrechtsen – Journalist – on a story titled –
“Man up, Labor and expel Rudd”
| Author: EYE-BALL MediaZone | 26th June 2013 |
Ihave a view that Janet Albrechtsen is a whole lot of woman and too much woman for most men – I normally enjoy reading her column from a male perspective but there are times when she gets it horribly wrong.

Albrechtsen published a story overnight that tells us more about Albrechtsen’s own brand of gender politics, and why Gillard’s misandry continues to go unchallenged by other women.

Read the story below:

Man up, Labor and expel Rudd


| Author: Janet Albrechtsen | Date: June 26th, 2013| Link to On-Line Story. |

IF the next election is lost for Labor regardless of what happens with the leadership this week, those who care about the party must start planning now how they will rebuild. Julia Gillard should exit the political stage, perhaps taking up a career lecturing about gender politics, delivering speeches about misogyny to wild cheers from disgruntled women and mentoring Emily’s List girls. That leaves what has been Labor’s biggest problem for many years now: what on earth to do about Kevin Rudd?

Of course, if Rudd becomes leader before the election (remember Bob Hawke took the leadership less than a month before the 1983 election) and leads the party to a respectable loss, the party may unite around Rudd. If, however, Gillard remains leader, Rudd will do what he does best – wreck it for those he detests and ultimately treat with contempt a great party that existed before the first parliament sat in 1901.

Indeed, for a little more than three years now, Rudd has been a man driven by a burning desire to seek redemption, revenge and a return to what he believes is his rightful place – the leadership of Labor and the country. The Rudd Problem stems from the spectacular manner in which federal Labor deposed the man from Queensland who curiously claims he’s only here to help.

Those who know Rudd should have known he would seek revenge after being removed as leader. In the days following June 24, 2010, Labor offered no real explanation. Driving a political truck through Gillard’s feeble explanation that under Rudd Labor had lost its way, the Liberal Party told a confused and stunned electorate about faceless men and a Sussex Street death squad. It conjured up images of Pinochet’s Chile, and secret assassins in the night. The damage was done in the electorate, and the seeds of retribution were sown in Rudd. Labor’s failure to come clean about Rudd allowed him to become a martyr.

It was only after Gillard’s stocks plummeted that we learned the truth about Rudd’s removal. He was a psychopath, said Steve Gibbons; he had no Labor values, said Wayne Swan; he ran a chaotic, dysfunctional government, said other ministers who also complained about Rudd deciding big policies with no consultation. Off the record, a senior Labor figure told ABC journalist Chris Uhlmann that Rudd was a narcissist, a “crypto-fascist (who) made no effort to build a base in the party”. His faction comprised poll numbers and when the polls dipped, Rudd was out.

But as the polls changed against Gillard, Rudd became even more expert in his martyrdom role. The church-going family man was more akin to a smiling assassin flying solo, trying to destroy Gillard on an almost daily basis and, in the process, necessarily, destroying the government’s electoral prospects.

Yet Rudd soon morphed into the party’s saviour, a most bizarre outcome given he was the architect of Labor’s biggest policy disaster – the arrival of more than 40,000 illegal immigrants, many hundreds of tragic deaths at sea, and billions spent trying to stem a flourishing people-smuggling industry. Gillard’s poor performance and Labor’s mismanagement of Rudd has allowed him to skate above his policy disasters. In fact, the policy-free nature of Rudd’s campaign reveals the shallowness of his claim. It is based solely on cheesy TV and radio chats and chummy hugs at shopping centres. And you have to hand it to Rudd. He rivals Peter Beattie and Tony Blair for grand master of political spin. Last week, there was Rudd stepping from his government car, political staffers carrying his work stuff, while he pretentiously clutched his sleeping bag en route to the chief executive Sleep Out for the Homeless in Sydney.

So what can Labor do about Rudd after the election?

It’s possible that Rudd will come to his senses and move on from political life. And right after that he and Mark Latham will become besties, Tim Flannery will recant his views about global warming and the ABC will announce that a conservative will host a prime-time current affairs program.

Labor is left with two choices. Make Rudd leader to satiate his desires or expel him from the party. Forget the first. It will only prolong Labor’s pain. That leaves expulsion – perhaps just as unlikely because it will require enormous courage and determination to deal with Rudd in one final, fell swoop. It’s drastic. It’s dramatic. But it is final and effective if Labor wants to rebuild its brand free from Rudd’s crazy narcissism.

Under the ALP state constitutions, any ALP member can charge another with behaviour that warrants expulsion. The federal executive can also seek expulsion. The grounds include: action or conduct contrary to the principles and solidarity of the party; behaviour that is disloyal or unworthy conduct; engaging in disruptive tactics; making public statements about internal party matters that may harm the best interests of the party; not supporting the ALP platform and rules of the party to the best of the member’s ability; or failing to vote and work for officially selected party candidates.

After the election dust has settled, a convincing case could be mounted against Rudd if the many criticisms of him are true. Take the allegations about Rudd’s leaks. They are legion. Latham details some in his book, The Latham Diaries. In Confessions of a Faceless Man, Australian Workers Union boss Paul Howes wrote about more leaks just before the 2010 election: “It seems that the same person who leaked last night’s story to Laurie Oakes has now given similar quotes to Peter Hartcher at The Sydney Morning Herald. It firms up my suspicions that Rudd is waging a dirty war against the Labor Party.” Howes wrote that he became so incensed by Rudd’s alleged behaviour that on July 30, 2010, he drafted charges against the former PM to warrant his expulsion but never filed them. Interestingly, Rudd has never taken legal action against any of these allegations of disloyalty.

Labor has expelled men greater and lesser than Rudd. Billy Hughes was expelled while PM in 1916 and Jack Lang was expelled in 1942. Each expulsion is different but in each case it’s done for the good of the party. It will be up to Labor’s future leaders – men such as Bill Shorten, Greg Combet and Howes – to find the courage to rid the party of this troublesome, capricious, vengeful, angry former PM, toothy smile and all.

If Albrechtsen possessed the necessary objectivity to be a journalist, her story about a post-election ALP should be about why a person of interest in a ‘police investigation’ into a serious fraud was promoted by Union factions to become our Prime Minister in the first place.

Albrechtsen should be writing about Gillard’s criminal charges post the September Election … and about how the Union influence in Gillard’s promotion is linked to those involved in the AWU scandal and its cover-up.

The absence of questions by Albrechtsen and other mainstream journalists into Gillard’s claims that she – ‘did nothing wrong’ – just does not satisfy the masses.   Gillard’s gender politics is her own character flow – she surrounds herself with men in power yet runs to her feminista support base when she needs a good cry about why men don’t like her.

Albrechtsen’s lack of objectivity in favour of story about Rudd’s role in trying to unseat Gillard is reason why Albrechtsen can never be rated above a ‘C’ grade journalist.  Looks and sassy style can only get you so far in the game and Albrechtsen is someone who has it in spades.  But when it comes to serious journalism – she is nothing but a misandrist at heart.

Surely any moral person with an ounce of integrity, and an open mind has to be aware of Gillard’s flawed past connected with her association and involvement in the AWU scandal, that her status as a Lawyer is compromised with good reason, and that her past sexual relations with other married ALP MP’s would be a choice that would not fly with Australia’s voting public.

Albrechtsen would rather look to Rudd for reasons why the AP is floundering.  Why would that be?

Albrechtsen writes about a post-election Gillard and how she deserves the privileges of an ex PM – she does not entertain any other thought or reasons other that why the ALP is in the mess it is in and not have to face the allegations that have dogged her every day she has been in public office.

Does Albrechtsen believe that the campaign against Gillard over her criminal past is a misogyny plot – a campaign based on the fact that Gillard is a female.  How does Albrechtsen get to hold such a role as a journalist with such a closed view?

There is no doubt Albrechtsen has misandrist tendencies when it suits her – her moral judgement against Rudd in favour of Gillard’s untenable position is the evidence …

Albrechtsen chose not to write about Gillard’s rise to become PM when she more than most with access to fellow ‘The Australian’ journalist Hedley Thomas’s research would know about Gillard’s past – why would she chose to ignore that evidence – unless it was an Editor’s pick to give the paper an angle that could only be written by a female journalist …

Failing the above scenario – Albrechtsen’s willingness to pen a story about Rudd as the destroyer is based on a ‘man-hate’ position she cannot defend …

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please use/click on your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.  Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion’s – MEDIAZONE …

EYE-BALL Opinion – EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 2 – The SMH’s – Mark Kenny … Chief Political Correspondent

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
– EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 2 –
– The SMH’s – Mark Kenny – chief political Correspondent –
– on a story titled –

“Gillard’s fine reforms slip between the gap…”
| Author: EYE-BALL MediaZone | 9th May 2013 |
The EYE-BALL MediaZone aims to highlight media content that misleads, is inaccurate in its reporting, and has an agenda other than to report the facts as they relate to the content and context of the story.Today’s story was a clanger and was to be expected from the ALP loving Fairfax Media owned Sydney Morning Herald.   Their Chief Political Correspondent Mark Kenny penned a story that told us:

‘ … The PM’s policy record holds up well. It’s her political skills that let her down, badly…’

‘…But for the bulk of Labor’s reforms, the policy progress holds up well. And often, where the final result has lacked sheen or has been a failure – as in the mining tax – it is precisely because the politics came to overwhelm the original policy…

It is a stretch by any journalist to claim that Gillard’s record – ‘holds up well’ … any journalist who does have an agenda that is in conflict with reality often writes about what troubles them most.  That is why editors are there to ensure objectivity … but what can you do when the Editors have the same problem.

What motivates a journalist to promote ‘chuck stake’ as ‘prime rib’ as Gillard is to Paul Keating, or Bob Hawke. Surely a journalist understands the difference and that they should never slant a story to promote their own political views … yet, we live in an age where the media have become mouthpieces of the message the Government wants sold.   The Media industry have become street beggars, street walkers prepared to sell their column space for an inside tip to a bigger story.  Politicians use these media whores like masters abuse their slaves … and the media keep coming back for more.

Sadly – there are not too many alternatives when trying to understand Mark Kenny’s point of view in his version of Gillard history reproduced in full below:

Gillard’s fine reforms slip between the gap


| Author: Mark Kenny | Date: May 8th, 2013| Link to On-Line Story. |

The PM’s policy record holds up well. It’s her political skills that let her down, badly.

In his first 30 days in office, an impatient Gough Whitlam introduced a vast array of reforms such as ending conscription and releasing draft-resisters, protecting crocodiles (then being hunted to extinction) and removing what some called the ”luxury tax” on female contraception. Equal pay for women was also given fresh impetus.

More reform was to come over the next three years – arguably too much. After Labor’s 23 years in the wilderness, expectations were high. It didn’t end well.

For all the arcane arguments about constitutionality, convention and chaos, the common reduction was that Whitlam tried to do too much.

Now, as the polls presage an ALP slap-down of similar proportions in September, the question arises: how will people shorthand the Gillard era once the fog of war has cleared? Perhaps this: good at policy/bad at politics.
Advertisement

Critics will bristle even at this concession, pointing to the carbon ”tax”, the mining tax, the dissembling confusion over asylum seekers, the botched media laws, the live cattle debacle and so on.

Certainly in some policy areas this government has failed to make progress – with border protection leading the field.

But for the bulk of Labor’s reforms, the policy progress holds up well. And often, where the final result has lacked sheen or has been a failure – as in the mining tax – it is precisely because the politics came to overwhelm the original policy.

Gillard’s position on same-sex marriage aside, there is a case to be made that her social reform record might rival Whitlam’s and that her economic reforms rank with those of the Hawke/Keating and Howard periods.

Sure, she didn’t start universal healthcare, float the dollar, end centralised wage fixing or deregulate the financial sector. Those things had been done. Labor’s task since 2007 was more complicated, more nuanced, yet just as urgent: modernise the economy, rescue a failing education system and, crucially, square up to the big new threats and opportunities posed by global warming and the digital age.

Measured against these weighty imperatives, the list of actual achievements stacks up well. It includes: settling the supposedly unfixable Murray-Darling Basin wrangle (remember that?); building the NBN; reforming school funding (a work in progress); establishing paid parental leave for the first time; reforming aged care; investing more in rail than all previous governments put together; articulating a new foreign policy by balancing the divergent interests of the US, China, India and Indonesia; becoming a world leader against the scourge of smoking through hard-fought reforms such as plain packaging of cigarettes; initiating a royal commission on institutional sex abuse; and, most recently, a national disability insurance scheme – itself a social and economic reform to rival any. And nearly all of this within a toxic political culture and a minority parliament. If the September 14 election goes the way it looks from here, Labor’s consolation will be the ability to point to these reforms in dinner party conversations.

Examples of the gap between the government’s reform score card on the one hand and its abysmal standing with voters on the other are legion. The past eight days alone provided another pearler in the form of two revenue downgrades, taking the shortfall from an already concerning $12 billion to an eye-popping $17 billion.

Obviously, announcing these figures was part of Labor’s carefully thought-through softening-up process in the lead-up to its toughest budget yet. But with the two numbers separated by just days, voters could be excused for concluding the budget was spinning out of control, haemorrhaging before their very eyes. What was next? What other horrors awaited?

After all, the $12 billion downgrade was supposedly the full-year figure after a previous $7.5 billion write-down for the period since the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook was published in October.

We have since learnt that the actual shortfall, for financial year 2012-13 (against Treasury forecasts in last year’s budget), is $17 billion.

The government explained, to anyone who was still listening, that this was the result of the $12 billion plus a previously unmentioned shortfall of $5 billion, booked before the MYEFO statement.

This confusing, even alarming deterioration, might have made sense to the cardigans in Treasury but it made no sense politically for Gillard to structure a public message this way. It presented another easy mark for Tony Abbott, who said: ”You can’t run the country if can’t manage the budget.”

Again, we see this gap between policy reality and political reality. An $11 billion or $12 billion deficit would not be a bad result measured against the real economy and last year’s $44.4 billion deficit. But Labor’s yardstick is the surplus that it stubbornly promised for political reasons and will not now deliver.

Read more:

When Kenny writes – [bullet points added]

‘… Measured against these weighty imperatives, the list of actual achievements stacks up well. It includes:

  • settling the supposedly unfixable Murray-Darling Basin wrangle (remember that?);
  • building the NBN;
  • reforming school funding (a work in progress);
  • establishing paid parental leave for the first time;
  • reforming aged care;
  • investing more in rail than all previous governments put together;
  • articulating a new foreign policy by balancing the divergent interests of the US, China, India and Indonesia;
  • becoming a world leader against the scourge of smoking through hard-fought reforms such as plain packaging of cigarettes;
  • initiating a royal commission on institutional sex abuse; and, most recently,
  • a national disability insurance scheme – itself a social and economic reform to rival any.

And nearly all of this within a toxic political culture and a minority parliament. If the September 14 election goes the way it looks from here, Labor’s consolation will be the ability to point to these reforms in dinner party conversations.

… I laughed my arse off – and that is no mean fit given how big it is …

Government has three main stay obligations, Welfare, Health and Education … Defence runs a distant fourth to these other three.   Collectively, Welfare, Health and Education make up 60% of all Government expenditure … add defence and the number jumps to 66%.

Any Government who understand their charter tinker with these numbers according to political views – ALP are more generous on welfare and social programs, Coalition Governments lean toward less welfare and more business incentives.   A political journalist has to know this … yet Kenny sees the NBN as a success yet Minister Conroy is yet to deliver a success story on any forecast NBN targets.

The School funding on top of the ‘Schools building Program’ fiasco where ALP loving contractors made themselves filthy rich at the taxpayers expense and all to the generosity of one Julia Eileen Gillard who was in charge of the program and had criminal history with the Thiess Contractors who won a large share of the rebuilding program.

Reforming aged care – a no brainer for a Government with an aging population and less hospital beds, less nursing home beds, and a growing need for both.   What are the reforms Mr Kenny – again you flash a policy initiative and claim it to have been a success yet you don’t produce the rhetoric that backs and supports your view.  Honest and truthful facts gets a journalist creds with readers – Kenny is but one of many Journalists inflicted with the Gillard/Swan disease – tell it like you know what you’re talking about, and then let others write about what they know … nobody writes about the facts anymore – it’s all about the illusion and the perception that every word is indeed about the message the Government wants told.

Who is Mr Kenny kidding – the intent to do good does no measure or count when all we see is ‘failure’ to honour the promise made by the Government of the day.  Implementing a policy that is funded and cost neutral at the outset,  and then due to gross incompetence, or a deliberate fraud about the numbers when the revenues raised, or the new taxes to pay for the policies fail to raise the revenues expected, does not give the Government a pass mark.

Kenny says –

‘… yet just as urgent: modernise the economy, rescue a failing education system and, crucially, square up to the big new threats and opportunities posed by global warming and the digital age …’

Global warming and the Digital age … these are crux phrases, waffle words, a macro stretch and  used by Kenny as a smoke screen for what lies beneath … the Carbon Tax – Gillard’s plan to fight global warming is in meltdown, the digital age – was here long before Gillard walked on stage …

I have no idea in what context Kenny was trying to portray Gillard as a success story in this story – and as such his article won the MediaZone Growl award for today.   Kenny’s story is about painting Gillard in positive terms when 70+% of Australia believe she is a negative for the welfare of the Nation.  What makes a journalist take on those types of odds …


The EYE-BALL Opinion plea for action:

A Note:  This site is dedicated to having Gillard as Prime Minster removed by all legal means in the shortest timeframe possible.

Gillard’s Government is poison to this Nation … how do we get rid of her now?

The message has to be sent – there are some 14 million registered voters represented by 150 MP’s – 72 of which are ALP.    If each of these 72 ALP MP’s received an e-mail, a fax, a phone call, or a letter from all the people who want her gone with a simple message like the one below –  :

This is a protest message …
GET RID OF GILLARD

… do you think it might motivate caucus …

Please – send this message to as many and as often as you can – bombard the Caucus Members with a message so clear and with weight of numbers that it will force them to act.

You could also think about sending it to the Independents, Oakeshott, Windsor, Wilkie, and Brandt,  as well … Katter already votes with the Coalition, and Slipper and Thompson are a lost cause and their fate already sealed.

Links to every MP e-mail can be found using the Australian Parliamentary Website Members and Senator links below … pick your ALP MP or Senator, or send it to all – voice your opinion now.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please use/click on your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.  Thankyou.


Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion’s – MEDIAZONE …

EYE-BALL Opinion – EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 1 – The Australian’s – Adam Creighton

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
– EYE-BALL MediaZone Growl No: 1 –
– The Australian’s – Adam Creighton on a story titled –
“Interest rates fall to record low as RBA fires first shot in currency war…”
| Author: EYE-BALL MediaZone | 8th May 2013 |

This post under the new EYE-BALL MediaZone header is the first of a new category of stories aimed at a MediaWatch type critique.  The aim is to highlight media content that misleads, is inaccurate in its reporting, and has an agenda other than to report the true facts as they relate to the content and context of the story.

The first story on what was a big day for choices is a story by Adam Creighton from the Australian.  The Title of his story is:  “Interest rates fall to record low as RBA fires first shot in currency war…” and was published on the 8th May 2013 in The Australian.   The story is reproduced below:

Interest rates fall to record low as RBA fires first shot in currency war


| Author: Adam Creighton | Date: May 8th, 2013| Link to On-Line Story. |

Click here to see video link with story:

THE Reserve Bank is being drawn reluctantly into the global currency wars, surprising economists and financial markets yesterday by cutting rates to a record low largely to take pressure off the stubbornly high Australian dollar

Governor Glenn Stevens pointed to waning economic growth and weaker than expected consumer price inflation in cutting the cash rate to 2.75 per cent yesterday, but dwelt on the prolonged high level of the local currency.

“The level of the exchange rate is playing a bigger part in the Reserve Bank’s policy settings,” said Matthew Johnson, a currency strategist at UBS, suggesting the high dollar had hobbled the effectiveness of the RBA’s series of seven rate cuts since late 2011.

Governor Glenn Stevens said the board had “judged that a further decline in the cash rate was appropriate to encourage sustainable growth in the economy”, which should drag Australia’s key lending rate to global financial crisis lows.

He said in his accompanying statement that “the exchange rate has been little changed at historically high levels over the past 18 months, which is unusual given the decline in export prices and interest rates during that time”, singling out for the first time this year Japan’s new extreme quantitative easing and fiscal stimulus, which have depreciated the yen by more than 20 per cent against the Australian dollar since December.

“Easing by other central banks increases the likelihood the Reserve Bank will have to ease policy, too,” added Mr Johnson.

The European Central Bank eased its policy rate for the first time in 10 months earlier this month to 0.5 per cent, while the US Federal Reserve has suggested it is in no rush to return policy rates to normal levels.

Rob Henderson, chief markets economist at National Australia Bank who had been expecting a cut in June, said the case for a cut had been “compelling” based on domestic economic conditions including rising unemployment.

“We’ve seen ongoing weakness in business conditions, and the strong retail figures earlier this year now appear to be consistent with other data,” he said.

The announcement at 2.30pm AEST yesterday knocked more than half a US cent off the dollar, which closed at $US1.019, down US0.82c, while the S&P/ASX 200 climbed almost half a per cent on the announcement but still finished the day 12.4 points lower at 5143.7 points.

The RBA’s controversial move followed calls from Westpac chief executive Gail Kelly, who in The Australian yesterday suggested weak consumer confidence and the high dollar should be enough to convince the Reserve to cut.

CommSec chief economist Craig James said “with the Aussie dollar still high the Reserve Bank embraced the new mantra of global central banks — ‘do whatever it takes’ to lift economic growth”.

Wayne Swan said he was pleased that all the major banks — except ANZ, which has a strict rate-setting timetable — had reacted quickly to pass the 25-basis-point reduction on in full to mortgage holders.

The Treasurer’s opposition counterpart, Joe Hockey, said the record low rate settings reflected badly on the government’s economic management.

“The government’s budget is in chaos, the Reserve Bank is now in uncharted territory and yet Wayne Swan says Australia is doing well,” Mr Hockey said.

Mr Swan said it was “utterly irresponsible” to suggest that because the cash rate was now below GFC levels it reflected a poorly performing economy.

Nationals Senate leader Barnaby Joyce welcomed the cut in rates and the fall in the dollar, pointing to falling cattle prices

“We manufacture a lot more than cars in this country and the importance of our rural sector is often overlooked,” Senator Joyce said.

“Other countries are manipulating their currencies but we’ve been standing by.”

Mr Stevens conceded that inflation had been lower than expected, and would be even lower were it not for the impact of the carbon price.

Although the Reserve Bank has now cut interest rates seven times by a total of 200 basis points since late 2011, Australia’s official cash rate remains far in excess of policy rates near zero in other advanced economies.

Markets yesterday afternoon were pricing in a 36 per cent chance of another quarter-point rate cut next month. “My guess is they’ll sit on their hands for a while to see what asset prices do,” Mr Henderson said.

Mr James said the RBA was taking a calculated risk, that “this is a new environment where rate cuts don’t spark spending and borrowing booms or higher inflation”.

Bank shares were sold off despite the rate cut, surprising brokers who expected that a cut would make them more attractive because of their high yield.

Where to start – the A$ has been above trend/average values for more than 10 years, it returned to below its mean average since 1983 during the worst of the GFC crisis late 2008 and 2009. It sold off from above parity levels to hit lows of below A$0.60c as off shore investor unwound the ‘cash and carry resource’ trade. When markets settled they returned with a vengeance and drove the value of the A$ from A$.60c levels to above parity and highs of $1.10c levels. For the past 4 years it has averaged in the $1.04 range and still some $0.30c above its mean average of $0.75c. See 1998 – current A$ v US$ Chart below for confirmation. [click on chart to enlarge in a new window.]

In the Creighton story above the author talks of the 0.25% reduction from 3.00% to 2.75% as being the RBA’s first shot in a looming currency war.  Where is the evidence to make such an assumption?

Since the GFC – European and Nth America interest rates have been at or near 0.00 -0.50%.  In all of that time the interest rate differential with Australia has allowed offshore investors to strip wealth from the Nation.  The RBA’s singular focus during that timeframe, and since the early 90’s has been to keep inflation targets within set parameters set by agreements between both sides of politics.  the RBA has never targeted currency in the time since the A$ began to rise above its 30 year mean average .

I ask the question – why is it now as reported in the story above, why has the RBA waited some 10 years to think that it can influence a high A$ value with a 0.25% interest rate reduction?

The answer is simple – the writer of the story hasn’t a clue about currency, interest rates, global investment, labour costs, or any of the other interconnected motives behind global investment.

This story does more harm than good to investors and the moms and dads readers listening to an unqualified journo reporting a story that should never have been published.

The story misrepresents the truth about the reasoning behind the .25% reduction in official interest rates.  The RBA has stated publicly that it has no interest in intervening in currency markets to stem the capital inflow to the A$ – see Oct ’12 story here.

More to the point – the RBA themselves have been targeting inflation when the rest of the world has had zero interest rates for 5 years and inflation has never been a problem.

EYE-BALL Guru has been writing about this stuff for years and it is only now when Australia’s finances and projected revenues are at a crisis level – have Government spokespersons and media commentators started to talk about the cost of the high A$.

Creighton’s “largely to take pressure off the stubbornly high Australian dollar” comment in his first paragraph has no research creditability whatsoever.  The RBA has reduced interest rates since the early part of 2009 in .25% increments and never has the move had any lasting impact on the A$.  In fact any fall on the announcement encourage more buying.   From the above comment onwards – the story has no basis in fact or truth.

In fact the RBA Governor at times during these interest rate reductions talked the A$ up giving confidence to off-shore investors to keep pouring funds into the Nation.  Sadly – the old adage remains – ‘… what went up, must and will come down…’

When Australia has become too expensive for the rest of the world, and we are on our way to being the most expensive Nation in the world – I think we were ranked 6th last time I review the rankings,  and when jobs have been exported, when farmers no longer get value for their crops, when miners are receiving a fraction of $A returns they were receiving in the early times of the mining boom, then the off-shore investors will see they have sucked us dry and look elsewhere for value investment.

Why do you thing the P.I.G.S want out of the EuroZone – they need their currency back so they can become a competitor on global markets once again.

For 10 years the Government, yes both Howard and Costello, and the idiots there now got this wrong.  The RBA and Treasury were no help as advisors – they all had a think-tank that may have been useful 20 odd years ago and none have upgraded their modeling to factor in the current global marketplace incentives .

It’s journalism like this – and there had to be an editor who approved the story mixed in there as well – that makes the Australian media at large hopeless at their jobs.

Wayne Swan’s attributed comments highlight just how insignificant he is as a financial manager – his track record on budget forecasts and the ability to explain the numbers – i.e. Nominal GDP as opposed to Real GDP shows his and the journalists ability to read the numbers and call Swan out when he is telling them porkies and misrepresenting the facts.

Creighton should take a good look at his output and ask a recognised economist of other market operative about his story.  The shock advice about his inaccuracies will do harm … and another less than qualified journalist might bite the dust.


The EYE-BALL Opinion plea for action:

A Note:  This site is dedicated to having Gillard as Prime Minster removed by all legal means in the shortest timeframe possible.

Gillard’s Government is poison to this Nation … how do we get rid of her now?

The message has to be sent – there are some 14 million registered voters represented by 150 MP’s – 72 of which are ALP.    If each of these 72 ALP MP’s received an e-mail, a fax, a phone call, or a letter from all the people who want her gone with a simple message like the one below –  :

This is a protest message …
GET RID OF GILLARD

… do you think it might motivate caucus …

Please – send this message to as many and as often as you can – bombard the Caucus Members with a message so clear and with weight of numbers that it will force them to act.

You could also think about sending it to the Independents, Oakeshott, Windsor, Wilkie, and Brandt,  as well … Katter already votes with the Coalition, and Slipper and Thompson are a lost cause and their fate already sealed.

Links to every MP e-mail can be found using the Australian Parliamentary Website Members and Senator links below … pick your ALP MP or Senator, or send it to all – voice your opinion now.

Please – if you found this story to your liking and would like to promote it to your social media contacts – i.e. Twitter, Facebook, or other icon linked account below – please use/click on your favoured Icon(s) to promote the story.  Thankyou.

Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Links to Australian Parliamentary Website – MP’s


The EYE-BALL Opinion’s – MEDIAZONE …

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 131 other followers

%d bloggers like this: