Probably not much doing in the land of polling over Easter, but The Australian as always takes advantage of the situation to unload Newspoll’s quarterly aggregates, providing breakdowns of the combined polling so far this year by state, gender and metro/regional. The results strongly suggest the Coalition’s recent downward movement has been driven by Victoria.
Also of note:
• The Australian has results from a privately commissioned poll by MediaReach which suggests Bronwyn Bishop would suffer a heavy defeat if Dick Smith ran against her as an independent in Mackellar, as he says he will do if she again wins Liberal preselection. The poll of 877 respondents showed Smith on 54% of the primary vote, compared with just 21% for Bishop. Sixty-nine per cent of respondents said Bishop should retire, and she recorded a net favourability of minus 30% compared with plus 59% for Smith. A report in the Daily Telegraph this week said support for Bishop was rapidly waning ahead of the preselection vote on April 16.
• A poll conducted for Sky News by Omnipoll, a new venture involving former Newspoll director Martin O’Shannessy, suggests the federal government will have a difficult sell with its mooted company tax cut. Out of four budgetary options offered, this one was most favoured by 3% of respondents, compared with 46% for fixing the bottom line, 27% for spending more on education, and 25% for personal income tax cuts. Respondents also faced a forced choice question on whether Malcolm Turnbull had lived up to expectations and Prime Minister, which broke 62-38 against. A table at the Sydney Morning Herald features breakdowns by age and, interestingly and unusually, income. The results suggest the most indulgent view of Turnbull’s performance is taken by the young and the wealthy.
• An intra-Coalition stoush looms in the rural Victorian seat of Murray, following Sharman Stone’s retirement announcement on Saturday. Stone gained the seat for the Liberals upon the retirement of Nationals member Bruce Lloyd in 1996. Rebecca Urban of The Australian reports candidates for Liberal preselection will include Duncan McGauchie, “a Melbourne-based communications specialist and former policy adviser to previous Victorian premier Ted Baillieu”.
[Might we see the first negative point day?]
😀 We just might!
[What the f#ck has happened? Has Mal got an inkling of an imminent attempt to depose him or something?]
No, just trying to make it happen.
[http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-30/verrender-turnbull’s-new-tax-pitch-doesn’t-fix-the-real-issue/7284622]
Verrender giving the Turnbull Brainfart TM a good work over.
Turnbull provides the answer when Scott says ‘we haven’t got enough money”.
https://youtu.be/AsXKS8Nyu8Q
What was the test for whether Cook invaded Australia?
What are the tests?
1. Heavily armed military vessel? Tick.
2. Under command of a military officer? Tick
3. Crew under military discipline? Tick
4. Crew heavily armed and under military command and subject to military discipline when ashore? Tick
5. Resources taken without permission? Tick
6. Clear invitation to come ashore? No
7. Clear signs of welcome from the owners? No
8. Preparedness to use armed force? Tick
9. Cook under active instructions to claim territory? Tick.
10. Only known Aboriginal artefact, a fighting shield, directly linked to Cook has a bullet hole in it? Tick.
11. Did Australia exist then? No. There were a series of Indigenous nations which covered the length and breadth of what is now Australia.
Conclusion. Cook invaded a series of Aboriginal nations.
——rubbish. you can be good but not on this. cook did not even want to claim territory – he was lent on by banks at top of cape – cook was under instruction not to claim settled lands – hence bank and terra nullius – cook had no intent to settle least of all invade – even first settlement qua jail was long way from invasion – invasion came during pastoral age – i suggest categories, western discovery, first western settlement and cultural contact, clash of culture including sickness and theft, pastoral age and invasion etc … the unsw document is simplification, and history aint like that … youy dont fight one mistruth by another
A blast from the past from our old trolling buddy, TBA ( and whatever sock puppet incarnation he is now on here ) – his words are more prophetic now than when he made them back then :
TrueBlueAussie
Posted Monday, October 12, 2015 at 10:17 am | Permalink
Secretly I hope Abbott is sharpening the knives for a come back.
Turnbull is turning into a bit of a dud
I don’t know enough about Federal – State finances to make a sensible comment about whether it’s a good idea or not but I do know one thing. If Labor was proposing this and Tony Abbott was still the leader of the Liberal party he would whip up a devastating scare campaign full of three word slogans before you could bat an eyelid.
BK
[ Could this double taxation brain fart be Morrison’s opportunity to get one back on Turnbull? ]
Possibly. I never thought anything could make Morrison look like a voice of reason, but this seems to be it.
But the strangest thing is that it seems to be Mal driving it, not Morrison. Does he have a deathwish?
Likes
Tweets
John Wren
28m28 minutes ago
John Wren @JohnWren1950
.@CanberraMemes Both @sussanley and @ScottMorrisonMP took 2 steps into no-mans land today and got blown to bits. #auspol
Oh dear, what a mess Turnbull and his team is making of tax and fiscal policy. It’s starting to look terminal.
Obviously an astonishing lack of political nous has played a major role. But the groundwork for this disaster was laid by successive governments from around 1998-99.
On being elected in 1996, Howard commissioned a National Commission of Audit from a bunch of right-wingers (including Maurice Newman and now Treasury Secretary John Fraser). And, whatever one might think of its rather drastic recommended solutions, it was pretty good at identifying the long-term fiscal problem confronting governments.
And that was that, demographic changes would inevitably mean that, unless something was done to make people aged over 65 pay more of their own way in life, Federal and State Governments were going to face an increasingly intractable budgetary problem from 2020, reaching its peak in around 2040.
The problem would arise over a 20 year period in which the absolute numbers of working age people would remain static while the absolute numbers of older people paying little or no tax and drawing out a lot from government in benefits and services would steadily grow. That means that, without significant reform to the tax and welfare systems and to the provision of government services (especially health), the amount of tax contributed by working age people per capita would need to increase significantly over this period.
We are now at the start of the danger period. And what has been done over the past 20 years to address this looming problem? Bugger all really: indeed, quite a few things have been done to make the situation worse, eg:
1) Under Howard, we had almost 12 years in which no progress was made in taking forward Keating’s superannuation initiative. This was during an era of pay rises significantly above CPI across most of the workforce, leaving scope for quite a lot of this windfall to be pushed into superanuation accounts. Instead, until late in his time in office, Howard provided general tax cuts rather than ones targeted at superannuation.
2) Worse still, the superannuation industry was allowed to shift from providing defined benefit products to accumulation products which are far more likely to be used to supplement, rather than replace, the age pension. And Howard aided and abetted this process by the crazy tax changes introduced late in his time in government which were targeted almost exclusively at the rich: especially the over 60s, who were more or less completely relieved of the requirement to pay any income tax.
3) Then Rudd got in and pushed up age pension rates at a time when this wasn’t affordable.
4) Rudd also took away the private health rebate from higher income earners, which encouraged that typically lowest using group of contributors to downgrade their level of cover, thereby pushing up the costs (and therefore the amount of rebate payable) for the other, predominantly older members.
5) And then Gillard came through and funded lots of new things – NDIS, Gonski, superannuation tax concessions – without finding any funding to pay for them.
6) And then Abbott abolished the carbon tax but left in place the compensation for it, again completely unfunded.
7) And neither side of politics, at any stage, took a leaf out of Norway’s book establish a national wealth fund to invest in the future. The “Future Fund” set up by Howard was a insufficiently ambitious affair which was simply tasked with covering the costs of superannuation pensions for the Commonwealth public servants and parliamentarians who belong to the now closed defined benefit schemes. Which was nowhere near good enough.
And now the chickens are all coming home to roost on the head of Malcolm Turnbull. He’d like to cut taxes for companies and working people, but it’s basically impossible for the next few decades unless he is prepared to take away something from older Australians. Which is more or less a political no no.
The Liberal Party is now facing the consequences of a mess largely of their own making (although Rudd-Gillard-Rudd didn’t help things when they had their chance). There are no obvious solutions now: the superannuation horse bolted in the 1990s and 2000s. The demographic bulge has now mostly passed the age of 50 and, if they don’t have enough super by now, they are unlikely to do so in future (especially if, as has been suggested, Turnbull and Morrison are going to cap concessional contributions at $20k per annum).
We aren’t alone in our dilemma. Britain and a number of other short-sighted OECD countries are facing exactly the same sorts of problems.
Hence the increasingly crazy ideas that Turnbull and Morrison are throwing around. Their situation is only made worse by the fact that their main enemy (which is not Shorten, but Abbott) doesn’t even understand that there’s a problem: he still thinks that all that really needs to be done is for the Libs to wave their magic wand and there’ll be budget surpluses and tax cuts coming out of everyone’s fundaments.
Given this terrible internal problem, I believe that the Liberal Party’s ability to talk sensibly about fiscal matters is probably stuffed for a long time to come. Howard and especially Abbott have wedded them to a “no losers” fiscal policy position which is unsustainable except in times of significant growth in GDP per capita.
Under Rudd/Gillard and Swan, Labor subscribed to this position as well, but have subsequently done quite well to fight themselves free from it.
But I reckon Turnbull is now almost painted into a corner. He can’t do much in terms of tax cuts, but he can’t do nothing, because Abbott will tear him to shreds from within.
What he will probably try to do is to have Morrison present a budget in which tax cuts are funded by a combination of asset sales and the intergenerationally unfair $20k cap on concessional superannuation contributions. Will he get away with it?
If he doesn’t, his party is going to start to tear itself apart.
“”That 1% of PUP supporters must be really dyed in the wool fans of the big man.””
+ some of the results of the questions are “out of this world”!.
[1350
davidwh
How is it double tax?]
I can’t believe someone as intelligent as you is asking that.
The federal government is proposing to maintain its own income tax, while allowing the states to also collect income tax, with the ability to increase it (or decrease it, unlikely as that is) as they see fit. That’s double taxation.
If the federal government also charged stamp duty, that would be double taxation. If New Zealand levied company tax on a NZ business’ profits in Australia, that’s double taxation. Turnbull is proposing that income be taxed twice. That’s double taxation!
Does that help? 😀
P1
Turnbull is giving the impression of a new management type, who comes in, sees the current system that the old management settled on – for good reason – and without comprehending the history, process or formulation of it, decides that it needs changing because “hey look, over here there’s this bit that could be optimized”. Well sure, at the expense of some other part.
I’ll be tuning into Price and Bolt on 3aw tonight. Should be very entertaining.
Darn
And I look forward to your feedback. 😀
I still feel Abbott is planning to be LOTO as the pay is better and he is good at destroying Labor governments!.
Really love this one from Essential:
What do you think is the main reason why the Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull would call an early double dissolution election?
• Because Parliament won’t restore the ABCC 14%
• Because he wants to get rid of the independents in the Senate 25%
• Because his Government is losing support and he will have a better chance of winning if the election is held early 30%
What a terrible lot of cynics we’ve become
phoenixRED
[ A blast from the past from our old trolling buddy, TBA … ]
I miss TBA. He was reliably bigoted, stupid and uninformed. The trouble with the trolls we have now is that they occasionally post something that looks vaguely coherent and sensible.
Or perhaps it is just that as the government gets stupider, the trolls begin to look like geniuses by comparison!
Is it fair to say that Howard and Costello have well and truly stuffed this country up with their lazy and desperate distribution of the passing largesse of the mining boom to those who didn’t really need it?
[I still feel Abbott is planning to be LOTO as the pay is better and he is good at destroying Labor governments!.]
Tony Abbott can destroy *any* government!
Bluey Bulletin 10. Day 10 of 103 days
Bluey reckons that the state income tax ‘proposal’, two whole elections away, is a cynical political ploy to self-absolve the Liberals of wrecking Gonski and wrecking the nation’s public health care system. Bluey reckons that Lord Pollywaffle of the Swimming Pool is all noblesse and no oblige.
Bluey notes massive swirling uncertainties about state income tax. And this is before we even go past the Treasurer and the Prime Minister: cack-handed, cack-footed and cack-brained.
Is the upfront shut up money $3 billion, $5 billion or $30 billion or $57 billion or $80 billion? Unusually for Turnbull and Morrison, this kite lasted until lunch time before bits of the kite started falling off. After lunch, PvO and KK were still talking as if the states would be able to set their own rates. This has already been knocked off by ‘sources’ according to Phil Coorey. Plus Turnbull and Morrison were saying different things. PvO reckons that Cabinet ticked off on it. So WTF was Cabinet actually ticking off? Malcolm is not in a muddle. He is Captain Chaos.
PvO later pointed out that Turnbull had contradicted himself as well.
Bluey asks what was wrong with the Australian economy in the 1930’s when state income tax was all the go? What could possibly go wrong this time around?
Bluey notes that Bullshit Barr was quick out of the blocks. Barr reckoned with a wolfish smile that the ACT having income tax powers gives the ACT Government an opportunity to screw top earners. Bluey reckons that for Barr that is everyone who is not already on the dole. He is desperate because the ACT Government has screwed the life out of every other tax already and is racking up serious debt building a slow train to nowhere.
Tasmania and the NT, by way of comparison, would be in deep merde with this one. Bluey advises occies not to translocate to LBG but to opt for the Queanbeyan River in Quenbeyan where the taxes are markedly less already. In any case, Bluey reckons that anyone who shakes on a deal with any banker had better count their fingers, especially if the banker is Turnbull. BTW, the reason some Liberals support a partial reversion of income tax to the states is to get rid of other state taxes. It is not to maintain public schools and public hospitals.
Bluey reckons that before Barr barfs up some more brainfarts he might consider the corollary of what is afoot here: the elimination of the Commonwealth Health and Education Departments. The consequences for the ACT are, ahem, drastic.
Tricky Turnbull’s gambit this time is yet another classic three card trick. We take away $80 billion in schools and health funding. We give you back $3 billion. Plus we give you a guaranteed percentage of income tax which we intend to cut over time. Oh, and anything you get by way of income tax will be matched by a reduction of Commonwealth Grants.
But it is not all negative from a Coalition perspective. The eight new state taxes are less simple, less fair, and less efficient.
So we get eight new taxes that makes no difference except that they nail the coffin lid on scads less funding for hospitals and schools and they cost more to collect and they increase business costs.
The best outcome for the Liberals is to have the state and territory premiers squabbling. Excellent cover for their ideological plan to destroy public schooling and public health. This goes hand in glove with private health insurance rapidly becoming unaffordable except for the very wealthy, the VET turning into a Spivs Playground; likewise aged care.
The MAIN THING though is that Morrison and Turnbull are ONCE AGAIN on a different page. The policy difference here is not a minor point. It is a major point of policy difference. SHAMBLES.
Labor, OTOH, was nice and definite about the eight new state taxes. No way. Bluey likes the KISS principle when communicating with voters. Bluey thought that inherent message of Shorten, Bowen and Ellis working as a tight team contrasted rather nicely with the Blue Tie Fracas.
Lout Mouffes
Hadley is being less than totally friendly to Morrison. Jones is sticking it to Turnbull. Bolt is sticking it to Turnbull. Mitchell sank the slipper on the double taxation.
The Abbattoir
Planet Janet is the latest in a stellar array of self-appointed Abbott Management Gurus. She reckons that the way for Turnbull to fix Abbott is to tell us Turnbull’s Economic Plan. Bluey prefers Reith’s idea of sooling Wharfie Dogs onto Abbott. Hewson’s idea of giving Abbott something to do was a waste of space. Abbott has already got something to do like wreck the joint. Bluey reckons get Abbott to put on a pair of budgie smugglers and get into a certain rock pool.
Bernardi trailed his Australian Conservatives Coat on 7.30.
Bronnisaurus
Terrorists world-wide are waiting in fear while BBishop continues her Mackellar political death struggle.
Corruptions Ain’t Corruptions.
Bluey reckons that the reason the Liberals do not want a Fed ICAC is because Brough, Roy, Pyne, Sinodinos and Taylor would be the first grist to the corruption mill. Fifield was on ABC 24 this morning assuring that CFMEU corruption was different from Liberal corruption. Oh, yeah.
Xenophon Rulez.
Prof McIntyre popped up and reckoned that Xenophon will get three Senators and may get three or four lower house seats. Bluey reckons that, should this happen, the Greens should enjoy their shit sandwich. After all, they buttered it with their mug deal with Lord Pollywaffle of the Swimming Pool.
Essential Araldited to 50/50.
Bluey is bemused that voters still rate the Liberal leadership highly.
Bluey reckons that Sportscraft must have brilliant designers because they opted for the sort of narrow stripes that do NOT work on the screen. Bluey expects that rates hospitalization for people susceptible to pattern glare will zoom during the Olympics.
Verdict: Definitive win for labor largely because of the Liberal talent for political self-immolation.
Cumulative Score: Labor 7 Liberal 3.
The difference between an invasion and a settlement.
https://twitter.com/coopesdetat/status/715026493915705349/photo/1
meher baba
An excellent ‘explainer’. Thank you.
I would just like to say a big, big thanks for everyone’s generous and helpful advice today.
The girl concerned was so surprised when my son brought her to see me that one of the white middle class (fairly) recent arrivals would have any interest in her or what happened to her. I am seeing her tomorrow – my son said she is not used to people following up – and so this will really help.
Also, thanks to Lizzie for posting the article about legal discrimination that started it all.
Now back to the salt mines – as OH says, you have not really worked in a salt mine to make that comparison, have you?
[ Player One
Posted Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 3:45 pm | Permalink
phoenixRED
A blast from the past from our old trolling buddy, TBA …
I miss TBA. He was reliably bigoted, stupid and uninformed. The trouble with the trolls we have now is that they occasionally post something that looks vaguely coherent and sensible.
]
Yep – he made no pretence of having overtones of racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, muslimophobia ….. a perfect candidate for Bernardi’s Fascist Party …. other than that he gave us a few laughs along the way
I wonder if he ever made friends with his new ‘neighbours’ – who had a M.E. heritage – across the road from his place …. maybe he gave them jobs in his thriving entrepreneurial business ?????
A couple of observations.
First, Turnbull is trying to solve the wrong problem. He is trying to solve the problem of the ‘blame game’ in regard to funding of education and health. This is a politicians’ problem. The problem he really needs to solve is how to adequately fund education and health to maximise the benefits for all Australians. On that he is clueless.
Secondly, it is a puzzle to many of us here why the Government’s standing and Turnbull’s PPM ratings have not collapsed. The answer, I think, is that the politically disconnected public are still hoping (desperately in many cases) that the smartest guy in the room has a real master plan to solve all our problems. It is what most of us, even those rusted on Laborites who were not going to cut him any slack, expected.
It’s really hard to accept that he is a solid gold dud in those circumstances. I thought that voters would face up to reality when they had to cast real votes, not just express opinions to Galaxy and IPSOS. But Turnbull is determined to accelerate the process. Whatever the merits or the details or the fine print, this proposal is like displaying a political suicide note in big neon lights. In some ways, I think it will turn out to be Malcolm’s Sir Prince Philip moment.
Conclusion. Cook invaded a series of Aboriginal nations.
G
[——rubbish. you can be good but not on this.]
The lord giveth and the lord taketh away.
[ cook did not even want to claim territory – he was lent on by banks at top of cape – cook was under instruction not to claim settled lands – hence bank and terra nullius]
Cook was a military commander who had instructions to claim land.
[ – cook had no intent to settle least of all invade – ]
There is absolutely no possible definition of invasion that requires an intent to settle.
[even first settlement qua jail was long way from invasion]
Which would be why Phillip was given control of an armed fleet and an army. It would also explain why he was speared.
[ – invasion came during pastoral age]
Tosh. Invasion started with Cook and was continued with Phillip.
[ – i suggest categories, western discovery, first western settlement and cultural contact, clash of culture including sickness and theft, pastoral age and invasion etc … the unsw document is simplification, and history aint like that … youy dont fight one mistruth by another]
I suggest grand theft continent by way of an endless series of individual murders and massacres combined with theft of the means of life which started in 1788 and continued until 1930.
They should just put tax levels to a direct vote every federal election :P.
Nicola Berkovic @NicBerko 7h7 hours ago
Family Court chief says her court does not have the resources it needs to protect children from violence #dv http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/family-court-chief-justice-diana-bryants-funding-plea/news-story/c9d5d6b8128f4e4010a12f56fd1dac85#itm=taus%7Cnews%7Caus_authors_index%7C1%7Cauthors_storyBlock_headline%7CNicola_Berkovic%7Cindex%7Cauthor&itmt=1459289372003 …
Boerwar
My admiration for Bluey grows in leaps and bounds.
Douglas and Milko
All of us may have our own opinion on issues on here but when it comes to an issue like yours we all fall in together.
Please keep us all in touch and good on you for caring so much.
[1934pc
Posted Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 3:43 pm | PERMALINK
I still feel Abbott is planning to be LOTO as the pay is better and he is good at destroying Labor governments!.]
Well he was last time. But it’s debatable whether he could do it again.
[I miss TBA. He was reliably bigoted, stupid and uninformed. The trouble with the trolls we have now is that they occasionally post something that looks vaguely coherent and sensible. ]
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
For the first time in ages I am tempted to watch a TV news program tonight, just to see how they try and portray today’s shemozzle as a yet another stroke of brilliance by Maldemort!
The more I think about it, the more I come to realise how monumentally f**king stupid this state income tax proposal is.
It only makes sense if one concludes that Turnbull is actively trying to help Labor win government.
Labor, which has always been the party of federalism, can now clearly contrast its vision for Australia’s health and education whereby we have an efficient and comprehensive system that serves everyone regardless of income or location, with that of Turnbull, who wants to double-tax the income of ordinary Australians, while turning a blind eye to tax avoidance by the rich, big Australian businesses, and multinational corporations. Furthermore he wants to bang on about “union corruption” while ignoring the corruption going on in his own party (Arthur Sinodinos, Stuart Robert, Angus Taylor etc), and ignoring corrupt behaviour in corporate Australia (e.g. financial planning).
Seriously bludgers, I think those nutty right-wing conspiracists were right: Turnbull is a Labor mole, willfully promoting the destruction of the LNP.
Apparently Kathy McGowan is ahead of Sophie Mirabella in a recent poll taken in Indi.
That’s nice
What the polling from Newspoll shows is that the Coalition is suffering its biggest swings in Queensland and Western Australia.
As others have said elsewhere, Troy Buswell, when Treasurer for Western Australia, proposed that States be able to levy income tax. The Court government, of which current Premier Barnett was a member, proposed it back in the mid-90s.
This is an idea that will play well in Western Australia, and possibly Queensland too, because it taps into their innate jingoism.
When all else fails, look to the polls for your explanations.
Geofferay – “even first settlement qua jail was long way from invasion”. Well yairssss, except that the gaol governor/military dictator purported to take possession of all of the continent to the east of 135 degrees East. With only a few sailors under his command, he didn’t have the forces to put that into effect, but the future intent was clearly stated.
See http://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/resources/transcripts/nsw2_doc_1787.pdf
D&M
I suggest the first step is to see if there is some decent pro bono legal representation around. The answer is normally yes for a deserving case.
[ kakuru
Posted Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 3:59 pm | Permalink
I miss TBA. He was reliably bigoted, stupid and uninformed. The trouble with the trolls we have now is that they occasionally post something that looks vaguely coherent and sensible.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
]
Maybe he is Donald Trumps long lost Aussie cousin ?????? …not sure if they look alike but they seemed to think alike for their respective country
What was the nature of Cook’s encounter with Australia.
Certainly not “discovery” in any meaningful sense.
I would term it “exploration”, because I think you can explore something without being the first human ever to visit it.
Was it “invasion”? Well there definitely was an invasion of Australia by the British, but it was a staged process that really didn’t finish until the mid-20th century (or, arguably, is still going on now).
I think Cook’s voyage could be seen as a precursor to this invasion: an exploration of the east coast which included the establishment of a claim of sovereignty which would have been meaningless if it had never been followed up. After Cook left, it was another 15 years before the British Government made any plans for settlement of the place.
And there’s a certain irony in whitefellas getting all guilty and politically correct about this terrible “invasion” without which, it wouldn’t be possible for us all to enjoy our wonderful lifestyles here and have the leisure to contemplate how guilty we feel.
Rudyard Kipling once pointed out to a whitefella who expressed guilt about the dispossession of the Aborigines that it was pointless as him criticising his father for engaging in sexual intercourse.
Undoubtedly we have a need to make reparation for what our forebears did to the Aborigines. But that means doing something truly meaningful beyond just making empty apologies and rewriting a bit of the constitution and doling out a bit of dosh to communities (much of which gets wasted) and “giving back” land that nobody else wants.
True, genuine reparation would mean whitefellas making a significant sacrifice. Doing things we don’t want to do and which cause us economic and personal pain: eg, vesting ownership of all of the unimproved value of all land in Australia (especially that with untapped mineral wealth) in the hands of the living descendants of the communities who occupied that land in 1788. What I mean is “unextinguishing” all extinguished native title and making the remaining Aboriginal people all filthy rich.
That would be just, but it’s never going to happen now. If something like it had ever been going to happen, it would have happened in the 1970s and 1980s when the descendants of the early white colonists still ruled the roost. However, Australia in 2016 is a nation increasingly dominated by newly-arrived migrants from all over the world, and their first and second generation offspring: people who feel little or no responsibility or even concern for what happened to the Aborigines.
So we’ll no doubt continue to do things that don’t cost us much but make us feel good: eg, calling Captain Cook an “invader”.
Big deal : if we think the invasion was wrong, we should reverse the process.
[Labor, which has always been the party of federalism]
Are you sure federalism is what you think it is? I think the word your searching for its centralism.
Apparently Cabinet signed off on the brainfart.
Tingle:
[…So if you are a government trying to find a few big ideas to pursue and define yourself – but have concluded that a tax mix switch is not going to work just now – there is a certain logic in trying to pursue the federalism issue down a burrow.
This is particularly the case since, as a government – albeit one which now has a different prime minister, you threw a lit stick of dynamite at the states in the 2014 budget and left everyone awaiting an $80 billion explosion not just in their budgets, but in your own.
Cabinet formally agreed this week to examining the idea of a tax-sharing proposal. The prime minister was given licence to explore it with the premiers in-principle.
Notably this is based on work that has been under development under the auspices of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet under its new secretary Martin Parkinson rather than Treasury – as is usually the case with COAG matters.
Senior sources say the prime minister is only looking for an in-principle agreement on Friday to discuss the idea of a rearrangement of finances and is “not going to lob a specific proposal on the table”, even if he has very clear ideas of where things should land. There is little point presenting a fixed and prescriptive proposal to the states, they say.
However, the idea is that the discussion would encapsulate health and schools funding, the income tax sharing arrangements and the question of what the states do about their own taxes.
The prime minister hasn’t put the contentious question of schools funding on the table in his informal phone conversations with state premiers but the states have been told there will be no short term accommodation on schools funding.
Two sources told The Australian Financial Review on Wednesday that schools funding was the obvious place where the federal government was likely to withdraw its involvement.]
Read more: http://www.afr.com/news/politics/election/the-subtext-of-malcolm-turnbulls-federalism-play-20160330-gnu31r#ixzz44MMbXoZG
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook
[They should just put tax levels to a direct vote every federal election :P.]
But by coupling a tax level plebiscite with an election the essential issues cannot be fully considered. There should be a separate fully funded plebiscite some time after each Federal election.
Turnbull’s latest tax brainfart will guarantee there will be Labor govt’s at state and federal level for decades to come.
Boerwar
Please thank Bluey for me.
Laura Tingle:
http://www.afr.com/news/politics/election/the-subtext-of-malcolm-turnbulls-federalism-play-20160330-gnu31r
mb
[Rudyard Kipling once pointed out to a whitefella who expressed guilt about the dispossession of the Aborigines that it was pointless as him criticising his father for engaging in sexual intercourse.]
Kipling’s son was killed during World War 1. This rather had a huge impact on his hitherto cocksure views about guilt.
M
Have done. Bluey reckons no worries.
[Mark Di Stefano @MarkDiStef · 3m3 minutes ago
The PMO has sent around a pre-recorded video called the “Federation Statement” – uploaded to Facebook also. ]