BigBlog

While I like living in Melbourne, surely this is subjective as what makes a city or town liveable differs greatly between people.

Now that Musharraf has been forced to resign, Pakistan will again be a democracy. Many are rejoicing but I am very wary.

Musharraf tried to walk a fine line of between the interests of the west, liberals, military and Islamists and in the end made many enemies.

I think the future is dim for Pakistan, I doubt the democratic leaders will have sufficient influence over the military to crack down on the extremist.  I doubt that the democratic leaders will restore a strong and independent judiciary as there is history of corruption.

My predictions for Pakistan are:

·         Infighting – unstable ineffectual government

·         Government will not be able to control military

·         Continued violence

·         No crackdown on Islamists

·         US will run raids into Pakistan

·         Military will take over again once the government is on the nose.

The pretence that Russia invaded Georgia to protect its people is a farce.

Russia has sunk Georgia coastguard. Did Russia think Georgia was going to sail the ships overland to South Ossetia? Had Russia had the people mind, they would have also disarmed the Ossetia militia, but instead they have supported the militia who have been busy looting and kidnapping.

This has followed Russia's poisoning of a Ukraine leader and threatening Poland and other former soviet states. It seems Putin is trying to increase Russia's influence by going back to some old soviet aggression.

Russia's aggression has setback relations with the west and will have repercussions. Poland has sign agreements with the US to host US defences for America to as help boost Poland's air defence. Ukraine is now reducing Russia's access to the form soviet Navy base in the Ukraine. All the other former soviet states are in open support of Georgia.

Australia should rethink our sale of uranium to Russia with Russia's new tendencies for aggression and total disregard for other states.

The management of the Murray Darling has been responsibility of states which have Labor government for the last decade. The Labor states over allocated water rights and failed to address water wastage and the only government who tried to address the issues was the Howard government who put forward $10 billion dollars with a proposal to management the Murray-Darling nationally and buy back some Water Allocations and reduce wastage.

Rudd is continuing to blame Howard for Labor's mismanagement. I believe Rudd orchestrated Victoria's non signing of the Murray-Darling agreement for political advantage in the lead up to the election, just to reward Victoria with $1 billion to siphon water from the Murray/Darling for Melbourne. There have being multiple COAG meetings and Rudd did not even bother to discuss the Murray-Darling to the last meeting where only a few long term actions were announced.

Rudd claims he is doing all he can and has announced a step up in the water allocation buybacks. Why did he not do that before given that Howard has allocated the $10b and given the massive surplus he inherited?

After all the inaction, Penny Wong is now suggesting filling the lower lakes with salt water.

If the lower lakes does end up as acid lakes, maybe it should be renamed Rudd-Wong acid lake after its creator.

 

It's interesting what the various parties are taking on Fuel Watch.

Coalition - Against, bargain hunters will lose cheap Tuesdays and higher costs in rural areas.

The Greens - Uncommitted, which says heaps. The Greens are in favour of higher fuel prices. So one would have thought if Fuel Watch reduced the cost, The Greens would be against.

Family First - Against, harder on the smaller vendors and could lead to less competition and higher prices.

No pokies Nick - Against, will result in higher prices.

Labor - For and secretly against. Rudd sees Fuel Watch as fulfilling his commitment to address fuel prices. I have heard political reporters suggest that some Labor MP's would like to see Fuel Watch being blocked by the senate. If Fuel Watch is blocked, Rudd could claim he tried to reduce fuel prices, but was blocked by the opposition. If Fuel Watch is implemented and has no impact or worse increases fuel prices then the Rudd Government will be increasingly seen as a gimic government with little substance. If Fuel Watch is blocked, Labor can crow as if Fuel Watch was the solution and label the opposition the villains for blocking it.

 I have notice Rudd is verballing the opposition even though Family First and No Pokies Nick have the similar views, Rudd knows that he needs Family First & Nick to get his policies through the senate.

While Russia and Georgia's leaders were watching the opening ceremony, it seems they were planning their own games.

Georgia hoped to quickly overrun the insurgents in South Ossetia who are calling for independence, but it seems Russia was planning on this and has used Georgia`s action as an excuse to invade Georgia. Russia has now invaded a sovereign state under a premise of helping the people.

A Russian ambassador has acknowledged that the Russian attacks has cost civilian lives, but they say they are invading to save the Georgian civilians.

Supposedly Russia had peace keepers in South Ossetia. This seems a bit like getting a fox to guard the chickens.

It seems South Ossetia is being used by Russia to prevent Georgia joining NATO and having NATO on their door stop.

Russia blocked UN resolutions for a truce with their veto. Why do offending countries get a veto vote?

Hopefully commonsense will prevail and the UN and world opinion call for all military to exit South Ossetia.  UN to put in peace keepers and Russia/Georgia given a bill to repair the damage. Set a date in x years for a referendum on South Ossetia future.

I would like to see the government setup a multi purpose HEX type system where individuals receiving government funds get an obligation to repay the debt at progressive rate if and when their income exceeds the average income.

Some examples where this could be used:

• Sports funding
• Arts funding
• Bankruptcy debt
• Victim compensation

A sportsman can get a grant to assist with their sport career then if successful they may earn large amounts in winning/sponsorship. In this situation they should be obliged to pay back at least part of the monies received as what someone receiving a uni degree does.

The returned funds could be used to extend the funding program.

I believe there is a fund to assist the victims of crime. While the perpetrators of the crime may not any assets at the time, they too should have they debt against them so that if they do end up with a good career down the track they can then contribute to their past victims.

Rather than bankruptcy being used to wipe debt, maybe the bankruptcy debt be put on hold and again if the person earns above a certain amount that there is an obligation to repay the debt.

The opening ceremony was great. I liked all the people performing in unison. The only mild criticism was there were very few close-ups of the athletes as they came in.

Stephanie Rice swam a brilliant race with a world record time to earn her gold medal.

The Rudd government after hearing a call at the 2020 Summit for tax reform has instigated a review. But before the review has even started they have said the GST will not be reviewed, which is contrary to Labor's view for most of their time in opposition.

Labor in opposition have continually labelled the Howard Government as high taxing, but has changed its tune now saying we are low taxing.

Some of the changes being called for is the reduction of the corporate tax rate, reduction of stamp duty, payroll tax and generally to simplify the tax system. Many of these taxes are raised by the states and they will require incentives to change.

I doubt we will see much beyond a report which Rudd to use politically to say he is doing something.

I read a comment in The Australian suggesting that if Mr Rudd was unsucessfull in raising human rights with the Chinese president, that he could also setup a Tibet Watch.

China has come so far in the world and the Olympics is like a coming out party to show off China to the world.

I have been privileged to have been there 3 times and I cannot believe how much it has changed from my first visit. The only tall building in Beijing were a few hotels, most people were on push bikes and it was mainly government vehicles and taxis on the road. There was subway. Within a short walk you were into the small single story basic small homes. Some of the local wore the Mao`s plain uniforms.

Now the small houses have made way for a skyline is full of sky scrapers, many people have upgraded to scooters and cars. There are a number of subways. Everyone very well dressed and the cities are vibrant.

I found on my last trip staying with my Chinese friend that everyone I encountered was so friendly. Every day I was invited for lunch and dinners and when we travelled to friend's home town that had rarely seen westerners I was treated like a royal.

But there is also aspects of China that I do not agree with. This includes the aggressive stance with Taiwan, the annexing of Tibet and the treatment of its people. The deals with corrupt African states for oil at the expense of their people. And while the Chinese people are having an ever increasing freedom, they still have a way to go, like to allow un-vetted internet access.

While our governments are keen on fuel watch and grocery watch, the Chinese government has been going gang buster to improve the standard of living for its people. For example, In Melbourne our railways are old and still above ground, yet China is building lots of modern underground railways.

I hope you all enjoy the games.

Palestinians fleeing to Israel for protection from Hamas made a change from the normal goings on.

I can't but think that without the religious zealots there would be no reasons for partitions, walls, conflict.

Grocery Choice is just another stunt from the Rudd government. There is so much fluctuation in prices between supermarkets and from day to day that the broad basket amount for a region is virtually meaningless.

Mr Rudd is saying that at least he is acting compared with the previous government, but his action has resulted in large costs and no benefit. With Grocery Choice a nominated basket of goods are priced in each chain in each region once a month.

ACCC should have established a list of products and then required each chain to supply ACCC nightly the price for each item for each store. Consumers should then have been able to nominate the supermarkets in their suburb and get the comparison prices for varying baskets of products. The web site could list the top 20 buys for each supermarket and even allow the users to setup their own baskets for comparison.

While ACCC focused on supermarkets, we need to remember the independent Butchers, Green Grocer and Bakery. The smaller independents are more likely to source produce locally, have fresher produce and run off smaller margins. The independents also provide competition for the major chains.

If we focus just on the cheapest prices we may lose some of the independents and suffer in the long run with lower quality goods and higher prices due to lack of competition.

Politics - Are porkies Ok so long as it advantages your political party?

Church - Are church coverups Ok because one has to protect the reputation?

Government - Are fibs Ok because it is good for the public to support what the government is doing?

Business - So what's wrong with a mis-leading advert, they all do it?

Religion - As long as people have a personal relationship with Jesus, why does not matter what stories are being told?

Sport - Denying the truth is Ok if it helps out a mate?

Conflict - Is truth always the first casualty?

Environment - Anything goes as long as we save the planet?

Dating - If talking it up can get you some action, is it Ok?

At the federal election we voted for who is to represent us in parliament, but the ALP is preventing this by requiring MP's and senators to sign an agreement to always follow party lines. If a Labor MP goes against the party they are disendorsed.

The ALP have made parliament a bit of joke. There is no point debating any policy as all members will be told what their views are and how they will vote.

The politicians rather than representing us are just spruikers of government policy parroting the lines they have been given.

The federal government could save heaps on flights, accommodation, allowances etc by simply placing card-board cut-outs in parliaments and give Mr Rudd the proxies to vote on their behalf.

Depends!

I think Mr Costello is wisely biding his time before making a decision of whether to return to the fray or not. What I think Mr Costello is looking for are his colleagues to plead for him to come back and give him some loyalty as leader. I don't think Costello would be interested in being a leader of a rabble having to watch his back.

The coalition MPs are waiting on what Costello will say in his soon to be published book before showing their hand. If Costello bags Howard, then it would indicate Costello does not want to return to the fray as he would have former Howard loyalists destabilising him.  

Dr Nelson is liked by his colleagues as he is a collaborator, but this will appears to the public as being indecisive, weak, and inconsistent, attributes that the public is unlikely to support. For the Liberals to be a decent opposition and present as an alternate government they need a decisive leader and for the party to whole heartedly support that person. Mr Turnbull is decisive and progressive but does not yet command the loyalty of the party.

The economy to slowing rapidly and the ETS is going to present challenges. For the opposition to be competitive at the next election they need to offer 100% support behind Mr Costello and Mr Costello needs to drive a positive agenda and argue against Labor from an economically moral high ground rather than trying to pick up a few stray votes from disgruntled voters. If the Liberals continue to squabble and chase populists votes then Costello may as well quit politics as the Liberals will be in opposition for a long, long time.

China is discouraging protests at the Olympics by saying the Olympics is a sporting event.

While this is true for the athletes, when you consider the Olympics as a whole I think it gets a lot harder to separate the sport from the politics.

China has gone all out to present a magnificent Olympics, building magnificent stadiums, modernising Beijing, temporary closing businesses, taking off the road many cars, making huge investments in athletes and even loosening up restrictions.

If all the sports went ahead with no publicity and no TV coverage does anyone believe China would have gone the same extent?

China is showing to the world it has come of age and is now a major player. A successful Olympics will greatly boost the morale of the Chinese people and make a huge difference to how China is seen by their own people and the world. So I think the Olympics is very political.

The price the world has to pay for the Olympics is some promotion for the host country and the price for host nation beyond the cost of infrastructure is being in the spot light for a period and being accountable to world opinion.

Athletes have toiled for a many years for this opportunity, so I think to would be wrong for protests to spoil the atmosphere for the Olympics. China deserves to get some kudos from hosting the games. But in the all the commentary I also feel it is good to mention some of the issues in China as well as mentioning the highlights of China.

I disagree with all of Dr Nelson`s various stances on ETS.  It`s seems the Libs cannot make up their mind between making a principled stance and trying to play politics.

It seems the media is more interested in ridiculing Dr Nelson then scrutinising the governments policies. It is the government who is determining the ETS scheme and when it will be implemented, but the media is hounding the Liberals. It is the government who needs to provide the details of the ETS, but the media is hounding the Liberals. While the government is determined the start the ETS in 2010 we do not know the targets, the targets could be so weak that emissions are increased but the media is only concerned with Nelsons policy.

On the 7:30 report, Kerry laid into Dr Nelson for not responding to leading questions aimed to further embarrass Dr Nelson, but when interviewing Mr Rudd, Kerry lets Rudd get away never answering his questions.

There are many questions the media could ask of Mr Rudd:

• Will he adopt real targets or just claytons targets
• Why is he distancing himself from Garnaut, has he become a skeptic.
• What is the costs to consumers going to be?
• Why reward the heavy polluters
• Why penalise the clean energy
• Why does the government have no programs other than the ETS taken from Mr Howard.
• Etc.

The media needs to focus on the main game rather than the sideshow.

The government has just taken ownership of ACCC's investigation into grocery pricing from farmer to basket. I hope the government gives due consideration followed by serious reforms and just does not set up a grocery watch.

Currently manufacturers are going to great lengths to deceive the public. This includes making odd sizes packages to make price comparison difficult. Unusual shaped containers that appear larger then what it actually is. Some products seems to have a huge amount of wrapping that seems wasteful.

Some things I will be listening for in the reports are:

• 1. Farmers to get a fairer share of the end price
• 2. Unit pricing
• 3. Measure to address anti-competitive behaviour
• 4. Onus on manufacturing to minimise packaging and that packaging is recyclable. Maybe an "Environment" rating.
• 5. Remove arbitrary serve sizes
• 6. Clearer "Australian" rating
• 7. Clearer "Healthy" rating
• 8. Stronger laws for re-usable bags.

This morning on ABC radio Mr Brumby stated something like “Why would Victorians not want to take the water from the Goulbourn River, it would just end up going to Adelaide?”

This was in response to a question asking how he managed to exclude the Goulbourn River from the Murray-Darling to enable the Victorian Government to build a pipeline to siphon water from the Goulbourn to Melbourne. Mr Brumby thought it was Ok to pinch the water as the Goulbourn is not part of the Murray-Darling agreement.

The Goulbourn River is part of the Murray-Darling and any water taken from the river reduces the entitlement of irrigators. The Murray-Darling is under so much stress the Lower Lakes are drying up and likely to turn acidic.

After many years in government Brumby was labelling the opposition as alarmist and constantly denying any water shortage, now with supply down to 30 odd percent and the desalination plant still many year away Brumby has chosen the easy option of pinching the water from our farmers who have been on higher water restrictions then Melbourne.

Rather than building the costly north south pipeline, Mr Brumby should have instead focused on getting Melbourne to be self-sufficient.

Mr Brumby only managed to get away with this so easy because of wall to wall Labor and a Labor friendly media.

And why give Adelaide water?

• right thing to do
• a national river system
• help the environment
• farmers desperately needs water
• environment needs the water
• Adelaide people also need water
• Melbourne needs to be self sufficient
• It wrong to hog the water
• It`s not Victorias to give