BigBlog

Australians have rated the honesty of politicians the 2nd lowest behind second hand car salesmen.

Mr Swan is yet to answer allegations of lying to parliament and favouring Mr Rudd’s mates. An official in Treasury is alledged to have faked an email. Mr Turnbull was making the Rudd/Swan accountable for their actions. But with the brilliantly dirty smear campaign, the majority of Australians now have the wrong impression that Mr Turnbull faked the email and that the government is the victim.

The Australian public has now rewarded Mr Rudd’s smear campaign with an increased approval rating and rewarded Mr Turnbull failed attempt to hold the government to account with a huge drop in approval.

Mr Rudd and his spin machine must be breaking out the bubble, smugly grinning how they got one over Turnbull and the nation.

Mr Rudd leaked immediately that the AFP investigation identified that one of the alleged emails was fake, and was quick to implicate Turnbull. If the AFP resolve that Mr Turnbull had no part in the authoring of the fake email, who is naive enough to think that Mr Rudd will leak that showing that he wrongly implicated Mr Turnbull? Any unfavourable outcome will be delayed and quietly announced.

Most Australians would consider the whole “Utegate” episode as a lot about nothing. It was quite impressive to see how Mr Rudd and Labor united to cover-up legitimate tough questions of Mr Swan’s impropriatory and refocus the media against Turnbull.

What this week showed is that the federal Labor Government has quite a bit of talent in their leadership and using the resources available to government they can spin events to achieve the outcome they desire.

We may applaud when the government makes fools of the opposition, but who is laughing when the government makes a fool of us.

The stronger the government is the more important it is that the opposition is able to keep them to account.

Mr Howard was correctly criticised for using the “Children Overboard” allegations for political ends. Mr Howard publicised the allegations before they were confirmed and then withheld the news that the initial brief on the Children Overboard actually never happened.  

What most have not realised that this politicising and manipulation of stories is continually happening.

Here are but a few examples:

1.       Mr Turnbull beating up a story about Mr Rudd’s cronyism based an unverified email

2.       Mr Swan leaking 90% of his budget before Budget night

3.       Mr Rudd squashing the reports on the cause of refugee boat that caught fire claiming No Comment until the investigation has been completed.

4.       Mr Rudd leaking details of AFP investigation barely started, because it was in his interest.

5.       Mr Rudd leaking his own announcements so he gets double the media coverage.

6.       Mr Rudd talking up the global recession when it suits to cover other other issues eg. Cash Splash, wastefull spending

7.       Mr Rudd talking down the global recession when it suits to cover up other issues

8.       Governments continual self commentary

I prefer dealing with honest people with flaws, then people who are pretending to be what they are not.

Likewise I would prefer a less capable government that is open and honest, then a government so good at spin that most Australians have no idea of what is actually going on.

Lying is not only saying statements that are knowingly false, it is also saying or doing something intended to convey a false impression.

We are all liars and amongst the best are politicians. Accusing Rudd of lying is a farce; it is like accusing an actor of not telling the truth. Well Dur!

Every word Rudd says is choreographed to spin a story to his advantage and there is no-one better at this then Rudd. I suggest nearly every public statement was full of lies.

I’m sure many would accuse me of lying, but here are some examples of Rudd lying in the attempt his defence of being accused of misleading the Australian people:

1.       Rudd said the basis of Turnbull accusations was the email from the PMO. This was not true, but it deflected the accusation from the score of valid emails, phone calls to the one email that was suspect. Rudd’s lie was effective as it caused the media to focus only on the suspect email and largely ignore the damming email trail showing Swans nepotism.  

2.       Rudd accused Turnbull for being involved in creation and distribution of the fake email. This is a lie. AFP said the email originated from Treasury and while Turnbull was aware of the email there is no proof Turnbull had a copy of it and all accounts indicated Turnbull thought the email was legitimate.

3.       Rudd falsely accused Turnbull of making his allegation solely on the fake email. No, it was based on the account of the official running the scheme made to the senate committee.

4.       Rudd is portraying Turnbull as incompetent for questioning Rudd integrity based on an email. Well that is his job. Rudd got the AFP to investigate the email, Turnbull did not have this option.

5.       Rudd blames the global recession for Swan being busy and not fully being aware of the correspondence sent to him. This was another lie trying to excuse Swan’s nepotism. If Swan was so busy why was he personally following the Grants claim and calling him personally.

6.       In media interviews, Rudd rarely answered the questions asked, instead ranted on with his prepared speech. Rudd did not answer the questions because the answers would not have looked good, so he spins his own story.

7.       Rudd claimed that there was no favouritism to his mate because Grant did not end up with any advantage. This is lie design to obfuscate. The accusation was whether there was undue interference to the process not the outcome.

There are many other examples.

Listening to the call back radio was also interesting. The arguments from callers were full of half truths obviously aimed to convince listeners to their side of politics. Liars defending Liars.

It is hard to blame politicians for lying. They are telling us what we want to hear and we reward politician accordingly with our vote.

Prior to the last federal election the economy was booming, confidence was high, we had a $22b surplus. Howard was giving cash handouts to families and pensioners and surprised us with a massive tax cut.

Mr Howard was criticised by media, Mr Rudd and reserve bank, but Mr Howard said it was the responsible thing to do to keep the economy strong with global financial storm on its way.

The Reserve Bank bagged Mr Howard and raised interest rates what 11 or 12 times. Mr Costello said the interest rate increases were not required. The increasing interest rates and an increase immediately before the election helped hand the election to Mr Rudd. Now the Reserve Bank is dropping interest rates 1% at a time. Clearly Mr Howard was correct and the reserve bank stuffed up. The inappropriate raising of interest rates forced people to sell houses and drove other to bankruptcy and for naught.

On winning the election Mr Swan and Mr Rudd trying to con the public into thinking the inherited economy was sick. Mr Swan made it seem out inflation was way out of control. In a large part due to Mr Swan we as a result got further interest rate increases. Mr Swan then released a budget to address the inflation rate. But what the Reserve Bank, Mr Rudd and Mr Swan did was slow the economy just as we were about the face the global financial crisis. This is like a huge truck applying brakes as it approaches a mountain, you lose all the momentum and then have trouble climbing the hill.

Now having slowed the economy, the Reserve Bank is now panicking and dropping the interest rates to record levels to get the economy truck moving again. Now who said the interest rates increases were not warranted.

Mr Rudd in having ridiculed Mr Howard for giving cash payments from the surplus, now finds himself doing the same, but having slowed the economy the surplus is down so Mr Rudd now has to borrow to give the cash bonuses.

Mr Rudd is very lucky in that he can blame all his financial incompetence on the global financial meltdown. When people loose work it will all be blamed on the global recession and we will not know how many job losses were caused by Labor`s rolling back of Work Choice. It ironic that many of those celebrating the demise of Work Choices will now have no work choices.

Mr Rudd is doing the right thing by having a stimulation package, but the magnitude of it is as much a political ploy then a financial strategy. If the economy was so serious and the package so important he would have consulted the opposition to ensure it got bipartisan support. No the package was designed to make the opposition irrelevant if they agree to it and to make them unpopular if they disagreed.

The states are all wrapped in the stimulation package because Mr Rudd is funding the projects the states should have been. While there are good parts of the package, I feel it should have been smaller, less of a cash bonus, more on infrastructure that would normally not be done.

Even with this package unemployment is expected to soar and growth will decline. Governments should keep some powder dry to address tomorrows challenges.

Mr Rudd is being very generous playing father Xmas handing out cash bonuses and free insulation batts etc. It is no surprise that it is popular.

But the cash bonus is not coming from a budget surplus and the government is not printing new notes to hand out. What is actually happening is Mr Rudd is organising a $200,000,000,000 loan and handing out part of that borrowed monies to us to spend. He is doing this because we collectively do not have the confidence to borrow and spend, so he is borrowing the money for us and hoping we will spend to get the economy moving.

Mr Rudd`s largess is not a gift, we as a community will be paying interest on this debt each year until it is paid. That interest will be huge and come off future budgets. Mr Rudd organised this debt in just days, but it will take decades to repay.

I am not trying to knock that Mr Rudd is putting us into debt, there are times when it is appropriate. For example it’s a good move to get a mortgage to buy a house. This government debt may be worthwhile if it can avoid a recession, provide long term assets and save jobs.

Too many of the public are simply viewing this as a cash handout, it is not. Mr Rudd is racking up a debt equivalent to $100,000 for each Australian. When we look at what the government is intending to spend this money on, we need to decide if it is good value.

In some ways Mr Rudd is taking an easy solution. Spend lots now, it will make him popular and he can claim he did all he could to stave off the recession. It will be a future government that will have to tighten the purse string to repay Mr Rudd’s massive debt, but we will blame the next responsible government and remember Mr Rudd for his largess.

Spend your children`s money wisely.

I have mixed feelings on Mr Rudd`s 2<sup>nd</sup> stimulation package. I like that Mr Rudd is proactive but I thought his address to the nation was over the top given that it was going to get plenty of media coverage anyway. Mr Rudd needs to give the public the confidence that the government is doing all it can to avoid a recession and save jobs but if it is overplayed it can re-enforce in the public`s mind that the economic situation is bad which would negate the stimulation package.

I think giving a bonus is more likely to cause us to spend then a small tax reduction, but having said that Pres. Bush gave large cash bonuses and it had little effect.

Insulating homes will reduce future energy usage which is good, but I would still prefer a more co-ordinated program to ensure house are energy efficient rather than just supplying a few bats.

I don`t know how many jobs this would save.

With small business employing the majority of people, it is appropriate to support small business.

There is a huge shortage of public housing. This will employ many builders, so I think this is a good move.

I have mixed feeling on this. Private schools already get federal funding. Maintenance of Public schools is a State responsibility. While many school could do with the funding, I`d have thought a stimulation package should not be used for recurrent state expenditure.

Expenditure on small business and public housing is good. Australia will have a huge challenge to reduce our carbon footprint, I would have preferred the stimulus to go way further then just provide insulation bats. In future debates on climate change, the government will claim they would like to do more but there are no longer the funds.

Howard inherited a huge deficit which took the sale of Telstra and many years of surpluses to clear. Mr Rudd is now planning to go back the huge deficit within his first term. If this avoids a recession is may be warranted, but much of the package is not well targeted.

With unemployment now expected to jump up to 7%, the federal government will also need to fund programs to re-train the unemployed.

I am aware of situations where governments are purchasing goods and services from overseas companies at the expense of local companies. Governments are all levels should be strongly encouraged to buy locally and from Australian companies.

With the hot temperature last week, Victoria found itself short of power and ended up with whole suburbs/towns being taken off the power grid.

State governments instead of ensuring they have the capacity to generate power to meet maximum demand, they instead now rely on interstate links and hope that neighbouring states have excess capacity in times of peak usage.

Last week Victoria had a run of 43+ degree days causing record high power consumption. Victoria could not draw from South Australia as they had hotter temperatures then us and apparently BassLink connection from Tasmania is only qualified to run up to 40 degrees, and broke down. This left Victoria short and unable to meet demand.

Being able to transfer excess capacity to other states in need is a great insurance in times of unexpected high usage, but it seems that states have used this as a cheap alternative to ensuring states have sufficient power capacity.

I am blown away on the news that BassLink only operates up to 40 degrees. Victoria power usage is at its peak when the weather is hot, but it is at this time that BassLink does not operate.

The current situation puts us at risk of increasing blackouts on hot days and when there are points of failure and if there was a major accident or attack of a power station the states would suffer great hardships. On top of this we need to be moving away from our dirty power generators eg. Coal to renewable sources.

It seems to me that state governments, Victoria in particular, have often being focused on short term goals and while some focus has been placed on renewable energy it has not been enough.

What I expect of the state governments:

·         More regulations to ban inefficient appliances

·         Programs to get people to conserve power usage.

·         Providing new renewable energy to eventually phase out dirty power

·         Provide base load power that can be turned on and off with little notice to meet peak usages

·         Ensure energy supply is distributed ensuring we have no one point of failure.

·         Apply energy efficiency test to existing premises and premises being rented.

At the local shopping centre a mother with 2 teenage children came up to me in the car park asking for money supposedly for petrol.

I have only just returned from 2 months travelling Nepal and India where I encountered thousands of the many millions of people in dire poverty and where one frequently encounters beggars, commonly a cute girl, a young mother with babe in arms, elderly lady or a physically handicapped male playing up his handicap. Most beggars had hand movements to indicate they need the money for food and facial expression to provide maximum pull on the heart strings of the tourist. The vast majority of the begging was directly solely at westerners.

We were advised by educated locals NOT to give money as much of the begging tourists encounter is organised and giving money can actually ‘cute’ children to be kidnapped or even people intentionally being maimed or just encourage begging as a career as locals can often get up to weeks wage from a generous tourist. We were also advised that while the state does not have welfare, most shrines/temples/mosques provide food for the poor.

When travelling in the poorest areas of India (Northern India) that sees few tourists, the locals had a meagre existence, and when they encountered us they were so friendly more interested in us taking their photos and there was little occurrences of begging. But the cities/towns that see more tourists one would rarely encounter children that were not asking for rupees or ‘pens’ which are sold for rupees.

I and my fellow travellers on the chance that the beggar was legit we often offered available food be it Fruit, Biscuits, pizza and delicious hot rice. Despite the indications that they were hungry the beggars often did not want the food.

I have a theory that much of the begging is a result of past well meaning tourists handing out small change (for us) to the locals for the short term benefit of the recipient and giver. While some people may be begging out of desperation, I think one may be better off sponsoring a child’s education or help a community to get running clean water or some other community venture. A local aid agency is better placed to determine which beggars are legitimately in needs and which projects are priorities.

While travelling India, a fellow traveller said there was a book claiming that the most successful beggars are not those found in India but people who we can relate to. So we are more likely to give money to a mother claiming she need it for petrol or the kids rather than a street person where one may suspect the money would just fund the next high.

So given my experience in India and being told about the success forms of begging, when this mother asked for money for petrol do I assist her? While she was explaining why she needed the money I had bells ringing that it may be a con. I could have given her the third degree and asked for more proof eg. The car with an empty fuel tank.

If I encountered begging in Australia with the frequency as in India, I would definitely need to be more discerning, but I would like to give people the benefit of the doubt, so while I had my doubts I chose to help her out. The irony is that she was likely 1000 times wealthier then the many Indian beggars I did not help out.

To see why, check out http://www.travelpod.com/members/ed.herweynen 

On Remembrance Day, Rudd declared a "War on Unemployment", like Bush`s "War on Terror".

This is not Rudd`s first war, back in January Rudd declared a "War on Inflation" after which reduced tax rates, promoted reduction of interest rates, increased energy costs, gave a $10 billion stimulus package which all promotes an increase in Inflation.

Maybe next Remembrance Day, we can also remember the casualties of Rudd`s "War on unemployed".

What reason is there for a "War on Unemployment" other than to give the public an impression that he is busy addressing the looming unemployment when actually he has one eye firmly focusing on his rising approval rating.

In a letter to the editor it was argued that the election of Obama should put to rest the myth that racism is rife in the USA.

I suggest the election of Obama is a great step forward, but is by no means an indication that there is no racism in the USA.

In an after poll survey, near 100% of blacks voted for Obama. One needs to naïve to think the colour of Obama skin did not have some bearing on their vote. Likewise the majority of whites despite the unpopularity of Bush, the wars, the financial crisis voted for McCain. In discussion forums many openly indicated they could not vote for a black person.

It is understandable why black Americans voted for Obama, but if the US wants to shed the racists label, then Americans should vote for the candidate based on their policies and not their race or gender.  

With ABC Learning in receivership, the federal government made the right move to provide $22m (hopefully as a loan) to ensure Child Care Centres stay open to the end of the year.

If ABC Learning cannot trade out of trouble the government should investigate options such as purchasing some of the centres as not for profit community child care centres, some of the more profitable centres should be able to be sold.

I would like to see government facilitate more community based child care and discourage the monopolisation by commercial companies like ABC.

The image of America will improve.

The dialog with other countries will be more sophisticated. I don't expect any "axis of evil" blunders.

The financial crisis and US recession will take its course with little change.

Australia will have a lesser profile.

Mr Rudd will not be able to play Obama as he does Bush and the Australian public.

The Democratic controlled congress/senate will push for more trade protection which will have a negative impact on Australian trade and developing countries.

Despite all the rhetoric, the US will not just leave Iraq. Troupes will be redrawn as the Iraqi security can take over which is what is happening now.

Obama will re-focus efforts on Afghanistan, but unless he can address the cesspool in northern Pakistan, I question to what end.

Obama may help reduce the ignorance of racist Americans.

Ps. I think John McCain is quite progressive and would have also been a vast improvement on the incumbent.

I expect historians will not regard George W as one of the better US Presidents.

Positives:

• Established numerous free-trade deals
• Prevented follow-up terrorist attacks on home soil

Negatives:

• Alienated the US, despite all the goodwill after Sept 11, 2001
• Iraq
• Inept handling of New Orleans floods
• Uninspiring leadership
• Does not come across as being very bright

I know of "Bush bashers" who would like to blame Bush for every woe of the last 8 years, but I feel it unfair to put everything at his feet. It was the American people who elected Bush to be president, not once but twice. The Republicans chose Bush to run 8 year ago in preference to McCain. It was the "Bible Belt" who supported Bush on religious values rather than common sense.

Many will blame Bush for the financial meltdown, and maybe he should have done more, but both sides of politics supported the free market economy and any reforming bills would not have passed congress.

I think there will be a global sigh with relief tomorrow with the announcement of a new US President. Obama has chosen a great time to run, I think the anti-Bush sentiment will way overcome the anti-black sentiments.

I disagree with capital punishment being carried out on the Bali bombers on multiple grounds.

It seems illogical punish the taking of life with taking of life.

The Bali bombers like suicide bombers welcome death as they believe they will be rewarded for their Jihad and be rewarded in heaven. The bombers have received lots of media attention to spread their extreme hatred and on their deaths will be seen as martyrs by supporters.

Rather than capital punishment, the bombers should have been kept imprisoned with no contact with media, family, and friends. They should be in a situation where they feel they have been forsaken due to their actions.

It's been so good to see Mr Rudd finally making decisions. It only took a global financial meltdown. He made a few mistakes offering unlimited guarantees and failing to provide a solution for the non-banks, but at least he took action.

The government response to climate change has been disappointing. Will it take global climate meltdown for Rudd to take decisive action?

The government is slowly watering down "The Intervention". How bad does the plight of the indigenous need to get before he takes a decisive action?

The state of the heath system is poor with huge waiting lists, closed beds etc. yet the government is make the public health worse by reducing participation of private insurance. How bad does the Health System need to get before he takes a decisive action?

Last weekend, I joined a group (RAW Travel) that walked over 50km of the Great Ocean Walk from Blanket Bay to Ryan`s Den over 3 days.

The scenery was diverse and stunning. The trek was quite challenging but very rewarding. I was fortunate to be in a group of quality people doing the trek to raise money for their charity.

Travel Blog: http://www.travelpod.com/members/ed.herweynen 

Our grandparents lived through a world war, rations, depression. Maybe immigrating with just clothes on back.

Our parents were generally hard working, quite frugal, lived through recessions.

My generation lived through Keating recession we had to have, many experienced long term unemployment, paying 17.5% interest on loans. But still the standard of living improved.

Many now in Gen X/Y have never experienced a recession, have always been able to get a job if they wanted, are given Credit Cards to live it up. Travel, cars, nightclubs, clothes, phones, drugs, PC etc.

There is an increasing apathy to financial responsibility. We get sick, there is Medicare, we don`t feel like working, there is CentreLink, want a baby there is Baby Bonus, want a Carer there is Child Care, want of Plasma TV, there is Credit Card, want to travel there is Personal Loans, want a new Sofa there is Buy Now pay (repossess) later, spend while we are young when we old we will get a pension.

It seems that many (not all) Gen X/Y do not have the same financial responsibility as shown by their parents/grand parents.

I have a concern that if Australia join the US and Europe in a recession or worse depression that many of our young will be hit hard. It seems many are getting to 30 and have no assets, huge debts. They are having fun and with work easy to come by can service the lifestyle. If work dries up, there will be debt that cannot be paid, no money to have fun. Oh well, they can always blame the government.

I recall being at "The Oval" in around 1987 in the series where against expectations the Australian Cricket Team ably lead by Allan Border defeated the favoured English 4-0. This was the start of 20 years where Australian has been leading world cricket.

Today India deservedly beat Australia by over 300 runs.

I felt over the last 20 years opposing teams lost before even a ball was balled. The Australians had this air of confidence that was very intimidating much as the West Indies has in the decade before. I now feel that opposing teams are not as intimidated by Australia and Australian does not quite have the quality of players.

I expect Australia will be soundly defeated in India, other teams will take solace in this and test matches will be more challenging for Australia. I expect on the more favourable pitches back home we will be more competitive. As confidence wains, scoring rates will decline, and the ability to intimidate and capture bonus wickets will decline.

I guess it is good for the game if other teams do well.