Lenore Taylor, political editor

Monday 1 December 2014

The prime minister used admissions on ABC cuts and a ragged recent performance to try to reset the debate, but there was little tangible change. There may be a good reason for that

Prime minister Tony Abbott speaks to the media during a press conference at Parliament House on Monday. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP

The Abbott administration has become the government that snookered itself.

The prime minister’s 45-minute media conference on Monday was a determined attempt to manoeuvre himself out of a dire political situation and reset the debate.

With even the conservative commentarial attacking his government, it was calculated to give the impression he was listening (sure, things have been a bit ragged) and making concessions (yes, ABC cuts are at odds with what I said before the election), while pointing out hand on heart that he had “guts” and “conviction” (one thing no one had ever really doubted).

But besides a minor concession on Australian Defence Force allowances and accepting the bleeding obvious about his broken promise on the ABC, there were no actual changes to give effect to the “reset”. That may be because every way the prime minister turns there’s an obstacle he put there himself.

The budget situation is deteriorating – largely because of the hit on revenue due to declining commodity prices. The government appears to have accepted advice by organisations such as the OECD not to respond with bigger spending cuts because the economy is already struggling with the end of the resources investment boom.

Except the Coalition has spent years telling us the previously forecast deficit and debt levels were a disaster and an emergency, which surely means – by its own reasoning – that bigger deficits are an even bigger disaster.

No, the prime minister says, because the budget emergency started to abate the instant a government came in and showed that it was determined to address it. “If you have a fire, the moment the fire brigade turns up, the situation starts to come under control.”

Most people would argue fire brigades work better if they actually use their hoses.

But there was also some indication on Monday that the size of the budget “blaze” is being scaled back in the government’s estimation. Now it’s less a disaster and more just a problem.

“We were saying uphill and down dale until we were blue in the face that there was a budget problem,” Abbott said. “We used very strong language prior to the election to describe the budget problem,” he said. Ah, yes prime minister, you did.

Then there are the budget savings measures stalled in the Senate. None of them appear likely to pass this week.

The government could ditch them, but then they would not be included in the mid-year economic statement as government policy, and the predicted deficits would grow even larger.

The government could put them to a vote, and if the Senate rejected them twice, seek to break the impasse in the accepted constitutional manner of a double dissolution election.

Except the government has comprehensively lost the public debate about the fairness of these very measures, and trails in the polls by 10 percentage points in two-party-preferred terms. And a double dissolution election, in which half the normal quota is required to elect Senate candidates, would assist the same minor parties and independents that are playing havoc with the government’s budget strategy at the moment.

And there’s the Victorian election result, where federal factors obviously played a role. Julie Bishop said, quite rightly, that the state parliament had a lot of problems of its own – such as the instability of being forced to to deal with the unpredictable independent Geoff Shaw. Therein may lie another lesson for her own government.

As the prime minister said, in the end “substance trumps atmospherics”. But his reset was all about the atmospherics, because on most of the substance, he seems to be snookered.

Everywhere Tony Abbott turns, there's a barrier he placed there himself | Australia news | The Guardian

Lenore Taylor, political editor

Monday 1 December 2014

Prime minister reflects on a week that culminated in a Coalition election loss in Victoria and recommits to stalled budget measures

Asked about the ballooning budget deficit, Tony Abbott said the budget emergency started to abate as soon the Coalition was elected. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

Tony Abbott thinks voters will eventually reward the Coalition for its “guts” and “strength” but admits his government’s recent performance has been “ragged”, that he broke a promise on ABC funding and that in the end the “buck” will stop with him.

The prime minister’s 45-minute Monday press conference was apparently designed to try to reset the political debate for the final week of parliamentary sittings and portray conviction to his nervous colleagues after the Coalition’s disastrous showing in the Victorian election.

But his only concession was to backtrack on reductions in defence force allowances – a move already flagged in the weekend media and rejected by Jacqui Lambie, who has said she will vote against all government legislation until the government increases its below-inflation ADF pay offer.

Despite no indication that any of the budget measures stalled in the Senate are likely to pass, Abbott revealed the government intended to take the same budget impasse into the new year.

And despite predictions the budget deficit is likely to be $5bn worse this year than the forecast in May, and despite saying he would propose “no massive additional savings”, Abbott also insisted “the budget emergency started to abate the instant the government was elected to deal with it”.

He said confidence had returned to the economy and the country as soon as the Coalition was elected, because it was like a fire engine showing up at the scene of the blaze.

Repeatedly putting his hands on his chest, the prime minister said he was “the first to admit that last week was a bit of a ragged week” but insisted “whatever faults this government has, no one can accuse us of lacking courage.”

“It’s been a year when this government has demonstrated guts, commitment and strength of character on a whole host of issues,” he said, nominating the downing of MH17 and “responding to the closure down the track of Holden and Toyota”.

Asked about the blocked budget savings, he said “we absolutely stand by them”, indicated the savings from the unlegislated measures would be included in the mid year economic budget update to be revealed later this month.

He said the government “always had and always will support” the $7 GP-co-payment – which only last week some government sources nominated as a “barnacle” that was to be shelved.

“The general rule is we persist with the budget measure as announced … until we decide that there is an alternative way forward which, under all of the circumstances, makes sense. The circumstances obviously include the particular composition of the Senate at the moment.

“Plainly there are some things which are going to have a lot of difficulty in the Senate. We stand by them,” he said.

He said he believed the government’s problems were mostly caused by “bad atmospherics” and that “in the end substance trumps atmospherics”.

“Obviously I take responsibility for everything in the end. I mean, the buck stops here. That’s the way it is in our democracy. The buck stops with the party leader. In respect of the government, the buck stops with me so I take full responsibility,” he said.

Asked about his pre-election promise that there would be “no cuts to the ABC”, Abbott said “I accept what we are doing with the ABC is at odds with what I said immediately prior to the election but things have moved on, circumstances are different. Going into that election, the then government was telling us the deficit for that year would be $18bn, it turned out to be $48 billion. I think sensible governments are not only entitled but, indeed, expected to change when the circumstances change.”

And he defended his personal office against mounting internal criticism about centralised control and poor strategy.

“The first thing to say is that I stand by my office,” he said. “It’s a very good office. My office is essentially the same office that got us from nowhere to election parity in 2010 and gave us a very strong victory in 2013.

“I stand by my office, I stand by all the senior members of my office.”

On the decision by Victorian voters to oust the Liberal state government after just one term, Abbott said the federal government’s “big contributions” to Victoria had been the $3bn promised to the East West Link road – which the victorious Labor government has promised not to build – and the royal commission into union governance and corruption.

Tony Abbott admits he broke ABC cuts promise and says 'buck stops with me' | Australia news | The Guardian

By Darrin Barnett Monday 1 December 2014

Photo: Tony Abbott currently lacks a head kicker to do the heavy lifting as the moment requires. (AAP: Daniel Munoz)

Why take the blame when you can push it onto others? Expect to see a Coalition reshuffle in which poor performers are demoted and Scott Morrison is given a position with daily access to the news cycle, writes Darrin Barnett.

Tony Abbott may well be in the Hot Seat, but does he really want to be a millionaire?

It's fair to say that November 2014 was a month of misery for the Prime Minister.

Firstly, the Victorian election result was an unmitigated disaster. Australia's second most populous state is now back in Labor hands and the Andrews Government, combined with fellow travellers in South Australia and the ACT, will now be expected to push back on a range of cuts to health, education and other social services coming out of Canberra.

Despite the best efforts of senior federal ministers to play down federal issues on Sunday, it is painfully apparent that the Abbott Government's deeply unpopular May budget sits like a millstone around the Coalition's neck at all levels.

After the Victorian poll, former federal treasurer Peter Costello said the budget was "clearly toxic in Victoria", while former Victorian premier Jeff Kennett described Mr Abbott's Government as a "shambles".

Disturbingly, the dumping of a first-term government in Victoria for the first time in nearly 60 years means part of the the federal narrative this week and beyond will be about whether Abbott will suffer the same fate.

The Prime Minister's November woes started at the G20, which turned out to be a global festival of one-upmanship with Abbott always seeming to come out one-down.

A few days later, while heads of state filed through the House of Representatives to say what a great country Australia is and to praise the wisdom and grace of their hosts, the Senate was supposed to sit as a sideshow.

Yet one of the Government's few significant achievements - the FOFA changes - were knocked off by the end of that week.

The Senate is now no guarantee to pass anything at all, and with Government revenues tumbling, house prices soaring, and wages remaining stagnant - there are tougher times ahead of us than behind us.

Last Monday's confirmation of cuts to the ABC and SBS clearly and obviously broke an election pledge, and saw the Government's credibility plunge into free fall.

Christopher Pyne's ridiculous community petition to guard against ABC cuts in his home state of South Australia when he is a cabinet minister made them look all the more sneaky and foolish.

And just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, Defence Minister David Johnston insulted Australians and confused investors by saying he would not trust the Government's shipbuilder ASC to "build a canoe".

The $7 Medicare co-payment looked set to be shelved or abandoned altogether - with senior ministers then backing it the next morning - and Abbott's signature paid parental leave policy is rumoured to be in trouble.

Things are so bad that even the Abbott cheer squad is barracking against him.

They don't think the Government has convinced anyone of a budget emergency and serious questions remain about the overall communications strategy and lack of core narrative.

"Domestic issues, especially Budget cuts and broken promises, continue to kill the Government," News Ltd columnist Andrew Bolt said.

"The Abbott Government is doomed without narrative," The Australian newspaper editorialised.

Prominent 2GB shock jock Alan Jones doesn't think the China FTA passed the "pub test", while the normally unshakeable Dennis Shanahan opined in the Australian that "Johnston's remark is part of a pattern of poor public messaging from him that also goes to the core of the political misjudgements of the Abbott government".

So what to do? Abbott could do worse than call for a Lifeline.

Fans of Channel Nine's Who Wants To Be A Millionaire will recall that you have four options.

The first is 'Ask the Audience'. This could be done via a double dissolution. Unfortunately for Abbott, the polls are disastrous, ranging from 45:55 in Newspoll (two-party preferred) - in which the Coalition has trailed in 14 consecutive samples - to 48:52 in Essential. Add to that the Victorian result, and it doesn't look like a good idea if you want to stay in the game.

The second is 'Phone a Friend'. Well, the shock jocks and News Ltd are out, so what about new BFF Clive Palmer, with whom the Government had done deals on the Future of Financial Advice (FOFA) regulations as well as ending the carbon and mining taxes?

Unfortunately, Jacqui Lambie and Ricky Muir have now formed the 'Coalition of Common Sense' and voted to disallow the FOFA changes, which had taken away the obligation for financial advisers to act in their clients' best interests. Lambie is also in direct negotiations with the Government on defence pay, having left her former party behind. In short, Clive no longer has the balance of power in the Senate and it's now a proper mess.

Could Julie Bishop be the first friend the PM is looking for on the end of the line?

At times during November, Bishop was overseas indulging in easy photo ops and puff pieces while Abbott toughed it out at home - ironically, much like Abbott did to the hapless Treasurer Joe Hockey after the budget earlier this year.

She's appeared on the covers of both Fairfax's Good Weekend and Harper's Bazaar as Woman of the Year in recent weeks, and is now among the most popular Coalition MPs for the leadership. Maybe she's not quite the mate Abbott is looking for. And as for Sunday's call by Bishop for domestic nuclear power, at worst this was a senior minister now intent on product differentiation from the leader.

Which leads us to Malcolm Turnbull, who was sent out last week to defend the ABC cuts. If got off to a good start with the Communications Minister arguing black is white and something about so-called "efficiency dividends".

Turnbull then shifted considerably by arguing that the Prime Minister was in fact clearly not a liar unless you looked at the actual quotes in question. He also admitted that the 4.9 per cent "efficiency dividend" was indeed a cut, with Abbott himself finally forced to concede "of course I made that statement", and deliver a significant victory to his political opponents.

The next Who Wants To Be A Millionaire option is the '50:50'. This is a mechanism whereby two of four possibilities are knocked out, leaving a simpler choice for the right answer. Abbott's office tried to eliminate the $7 GP co-payment and the rest of his party has its eyes on paid parental leave, which would only leave deregulation of university fees and welfare reform in the too-hard Senate basket. But any move on the co-payment hit a speed bump if not a brick wall last week, so this method doesn't look like the way forward.

Which leads us to the last option (which, for those playing at home, only lasted for a few seasons of 'Millionaire' in the mid-00s): 'Switch The Question.' And it's here that one possibility arises. Why take the blame when you can push it onto others? So head for a reshuffle.

Immigration Minister Scott Morrison, despite his self-imposed exile from the media, remains one of the Government's best media performers.

While this speaks volumes in itself, there have been rumours circling in Canberra for some time that the Government wants to clean up Morrison's image by moving him somewhere else, possibly Defence - or even Treasury.

One of the key things Abbott lacks is a head-kicker, a loyal foot soldier to go out and say undiplomatic things that move the debate closer to where he wants it.

John Howard had Abbott. He also could use Peter Reith, Alexander Downer, or even Peter Costello to do some of the heavy lifting as the moment required.

Abbott currently has no-one.

Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard both had head kickers, although they seemingly forgot who the real enemy was. It was much to the Labor Government's detriment.

But for Abbott, Morrison is that man. He's not overly liked by the Gallery, but it doesn't seem to phase him and, besides, he stopped the boats.

In addition to Defence, Abbott could easily add all things terrorism, and suddenly Morrison has daily access to the news cycle.

Treasury would also offer a high-profile, and if the upcoming MYEFO announcement turns Cabinet's worst fears to public nightmares, Hockey could find himself in a world of trouble.

So just when you thought all was lost, Senator Johnston selflessly placed his head on the chopping block, and he will be gone sooner rather than later.

The fact Abbott has declared his "full confidence" in the Minister is the best evidence yet that Johnston's time clock is ticking and a reshuffle is imminent.

Darrin Barnett is a former Canberra Press Gallery journalist and press secretary to prime minister Julia Gillard. He is now a fellow of the McKell Institute. View his full profile here.

Who will take the fall for the Coalition? - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

By James Glenday and Greg Jennett Monday 1 December 2014

Video: Economist predicts further budget write downs (ABC News)

Photo: Joe Hockey will hand down his MYEFO update later this month (AAP: Alan Porritt)

Related Story: Cuts needed to pay for defence, security spending: Hockey

A senior Government source is warning there will be a big blowout in the federal deficit.

In a grim preview to the Treasurer's Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO), Deloitte Access Economics is forecasting a 2014-15 deficit of $34.7 billion, $4.9 billion worse than Joe Hockey's most recent forecast of $29.8 billion in May.

But the ABC's AM program has been told the MYEFO figures will be worse.

The iron ore price is likely to be written down to around $60 a tonne, roughly 40 per cent lower than in the budget.

"That would carve about an extra $3 billion a year out of the budget - $2 billion this year and then rising to $3 billion every year there after," Chris Richardson from Deloitte Access Economics said.

His firm was predicting a $35 billion deficit blowout over the next four years compared to Treasury's May figures: -$27 billion in 2015-16, -$21.5 billion in 2016-17 and -$12.4 billion in 2017-18.

He now says it will be closer to $47 billion and thinks the "the budget is burning" through a combination of falling commodity prices, lower tax receipts, slow wage growth and political deadlock over savings measures.

Cheap energy threat to the economy

There will be nasty consequences for the Australian economy from the surge in cheap energy, writes Ian Verrender.

 

"We have big deficits that are not going to go away unless 'political Australia' manages to reach some compromises around this," he said.

"Both sides of politics did too much off the back of the temporary boom. We need to have a Senate that compromises its way to something better, otherwise this budget problem is not going away."

AM understands there will be no new cuts or tax increases in the mid-year budget update.

"The Abbott Government is determined Australians will have a good Christmas," the senior Government source said.

"[The Labor Party] needs to understand the budget needs repair."

Deloitte's key projections:

• Deficits in each of the next four years
• The "balanced" budget predicted for 2017/18 is "well and truly toast"
• "Profits" tax receipts falling
• Income tax receipts falling
• Good news for states: "Spending taxes" (mainly GST) outperforming May budget forecasts
• Chris Richardson: "Yes, things are bad. And Senate intransigence means they're likely to get worse."

Today marks the start of the final parliamentary sitting week of the year, and the Treasurer is expected to wait until mid-December to hand down his second MYEFO.

His first, in December last year, delivered a $17 billion increase in the 2013-14 deficit, including an almost $9 billion one-off payment to the Reserve Bank of Australia.

Mr Hockey used the 2013 MYEFO and the later Commission of Audit to prepare the ground for cuts and savings in his first budget in May this year.

By the Government's estimates, $28 billion worth of measures from that budget remain blocked in the Senate or have not even been introduced as bills, due to the stated opposition of crucial cross-bench senators.

MYEFO: Government source issues warning on falling ore price as Deloitte Access Economics warns 'the budget is burning' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Sunday 30 November 2014

Photo: Tony Abbott lends his support to Denis Napthine during a pre-election press conference in October. (Supplied: The Age)

Related Story: National Party to 'review' coalition with Liberals in Victoria

Related Story: Labor wins government in Victoria

The Federal Government must take some of the blame for the Coalition's loss in the Victorian election, former Liberal premier Jeff Kennett says.

The election post mortem is well underway the day after the Napthine Government's loss made it the first one-term government in the state in 60 years.

Vote counting will resume on Monday, but Labor is on track to win at least 47 seats in the election, enough to have a majority in the 88-seat Parliament.

The Coalition has secured at least 37 seats and the Greens won their first ever seat in the lower house.

Mr Kennett said the Federal Government's decision to introduce the fuel excise three weeks before the election, soon after an unpopular budget, made it very difficult for the Victorian Coalition.

"We hear the call for Australians to come on-board Team Australia but as far as the Federal Government has been concerned there has been no Team Liberal," he said.

Tony Abbott needs to understand that his policies and his refusal to fund public transport to fix congestion is costing the Liberals votes.

Adam Bandt

"There is no doubt their performance on a number of issues, particularly the handling of their budget has caused great concern throughout the electorate."

Federal Greens MP Adam Bandt said the outcome sent a clear message to the Prime Minister.

"Tony Abbott needs to understand that his policies and his refusal to fund public transport to fix congestion is costing the Liberals votes," he said.

"When Parliament resumes tomorrow the Greens will be moving in the Senate to call on the Abbott Government to make the $3 billion set aside for East West Link available for Doncaster rail and Melbourne Metro."

In a statement, Mr Abbott congratulated Premier-elect Daniel Andrews on the election victory, saying while a significant proportion of the vote is yet to be counted "it is clear that Victorians have voted for a change of government."

"The Commonwealth Government will work with the incoming government in the interests of all Victorians," Mr Abbott said.

Serious lessons in loss, PM's secretary says

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, Josh Frydenberg, described the result as a wake-up call for the Coalition.

"There are some very serious lessons for us. We'll go back to the drawing board," he said.

"We obviously have to look at those federal Victorian seats which are marginal and ensure that we hold on to them at the next federal election."

Federal Trade Minister, Andrew Robb, a former Liberal Party campaign director, denied suggestions that the Federal Coalition had to share the blame for the loss.

"Clearly from my experience and observation, this was a state election, overwhelmingly fought on state issues," he said.

"I don't accept that we had a big influence. Of course we'll be realistic.

"We'll have a good look at the implications but clearly from my experience and observation this was a state election overwhelmingly fought on state issues.

"I'd say the architect of this defeat is clearly Geoff Shaw."

Mr Shaw, an independent, looked unlikely to retain his seat of Frankston, after holding the balance of power in the Victorian Parliament after leaving the Parliamentary Liberal Party.

The outgoing Victorian attorney-general Robert Clark said the main reason for the Coalition's loss was the inability to effectively sell its message to voters.

He said federal factors also influenced the result.

"The Abbott Government budget has been a distraction for the Victorian Coalition in terms of us conveying our messages," he said.

"It's taken attention, it's made it more difficult for us to get across to Victorians all the benefits that we were bringing, in particular our most recent budget."

SA Liberals play down any federal impact

Meanwhile, South Australian Liberal Opposition Leader Steve Marshall was playing down suggestions that federal policies might have an impact on a by-election in the SA seat of Fisher next weekend.

"I know that (Labor Premier) Jay Weatherill wants to talk about Tony Abbott because his own performance has been so appalling," he said.

"He wants to talk about Tony Abbott I want to talk about Fisher.

"The things that are important to Fisher - jobs, lowering cost of living and the future of the next generation."

Victoria election 2014: Federal Liberals blamed for Coalition's election loss - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Daniel Hurst, political correspondent Sunday 30 November 2014

Federal MPs play down prime minister’s influence on Coalition defeat as former Labor and Liberal premiers unleash vitriol

Victorian Labor party leader Daniel Andrews celebrates his win on Saturday night. Federal MPs have played down claims that the election result was a repudiation of Abbott’s unpopular budget policies. Photograph: Joe Castro/AAP Image

Former Labor and Liberal premiers of Victoria have said Tony Abbott had a “toxic” effect in the state election, but federal ministers have sought to play down the prime minister’s influence in the Coalition’s defeat.

The federal opposition leader, Bill Shorten, seized on Victorian Labor’s victory on Saturday, saying the defeat of the state’s first one-term government since the 1950s was a repudiation of Abbott’s unpopular budget policies.

“There is no doubt Victorians used this election to send Tony Abbott a clear message – no GP tax, no $100,000 degrees and no cuts to schools and hospitals, and no more lies,” Shorten said.

In a statement issued on Sunday, Abbott congratulated the Labor leader, Daniel Andrews, saying it was “clear that Victorians have voted for a change of government”.

“The commonwealth government will work with the incoming government in the interests of all Victorians,” the prime minister said.

Abbott paid tribute to the outgoing premier, Denis Napthine, as a “man of integrity and decency” whose public service had “left Victoria a better place”.

The prime minister said he shared Napthine’s commitment to the East West Link road project and was “determined to do what I can to ensure this vital national infrastructure project proceeds to completion”.

The former Victorian Liberal premier Jeff Kennett argued Abbott had been a major factor in the defeat of Napthine’s government.

Kennett described the federal government’s domestic policies as a “shambles” and said Napthine “never called Tony Abbott to account” for “putting tax on him after tax on him”.

The former Labor premier Steve Bracks said while he did not want to overstate the federal factor in Daniel Andrews’ election victory, there was “no doubt” Abbott’s budget measures had a toxic effect in Victoria.

Bracks said people he spoke to on the campaign trail “actually thought the [Medicare] co-payment was already in” effect.

“Tony Abbott is sort of almost like a Martian here in Victoria. No one can relate to him. He is toxic,” he told Sky News.

“Tony Abbott does not resonate in Victoria. The wedge politics he plays don’t work in this state at all.”

Bracks said the Liberals knew Abbott had this effect because the prime minister rarely visited during the campaign.

But the federal trade minister, Andrew Robb, said he did not accept the Abbott government had a big influence on the result, while conceding: “We have to always look at if there are lessons”.

“Of course, we will be realistic,” Robb told the ABC’s Insiders program.

“We will have a look at the implications but, clearly, from my experience and observation, this was a state election overwhelmingly fought on state issues.”

Tony Abbott had ‘toxic’ effect on Victorian election, say former premiers | Australia news | The Guardian

Lenore Taylor, political editor Friday 28 November 2014

The Abbott government has been mired in broken promises and stalled budget measures for so long it is hard to recall what a good administration looks like

Tony Abbott’s rhetoric about budget crises and debt and deficit disasters is proving a problem now that it is facing much lower than expected revenue as did the former government. Photograph: Alan Porritt/AAP

After a week dominated by questions that answer themselves (did Tony Abbott promise not to cut the ABC?) or questions that have different answers depending on who in the government you talk to (is the GP co-payment a barnacle?) it seems like a good time to ask a bigger question. What would a good government look like? Because it’s been a while.

Abbott told his party room on Tuesday (in the same speech in which he promised to clean the barnacles and before all the confusion about what they were) that his government’s “historical mission is to show that the chaos of the Rudd/Gillard years is not the new normal”. After a truly chaotic week we can safely say that mission has not been accomplished.

1. A good government would have a clear plan

If we mute the shouting and ignore the slogans, the former government and the current government have a broadly similar understanding of Australia’s economic challenge. This may be because they have each been getting exactly the same advice from the Treasury, delivered in a sort of one-last-time-with-feeling speech by the outgoing Treasury secretary, Martin Parkinson, this week. Economic growth fuelled by resource investment boom is fading, and Australia needs to find new growth engines. Responding to the financial crisis has left the nation with too much public debt and unsustainable levels of government spending were locked in during the boom years.

The government can point to its trifecta of free trade agreements as possible generators of additional growth, but the rest of its plan is contradictory and confusing. Roads, whatever century they are built in, might save commuters time – usually if they are built in conjunction with public transport which the federal government is defunding – but they don’t actually create new industries or jobs. Nor does cutting spending on higher education, research and development concessions, science or renewable energy.

Voters, quite adept at extracting reality from rhetoric, are worried about this. As Laura Demasi, the research director for the Ipsos Mind and Mood report, told Guardian Australia recently: “People are not confident about the future. They don’t know where jobs will come from when the mining boom ends, when manufacturing companies close, when agricultural land is sold off. They are fearful about where we are headed ... and whether it means their lifestyle or their children’s lifestyle will go backwards.”

In his speech to the National Press Club this week, Labor’s leader, Bill Shorten, promised he would indeed “reach for higher ground” and “seek a mandate based on a positive plan” but apart from talking about the importance of education he didn’t let us in on what it might be.

2. The plan would be explained clearly, before an election, without hysterics or hyperbole or outright untruths

Attention this week has been on Abbott’s “verbal gymnastics” over his obvious “no cuts to the ABC” broken promise, but equally difficult for the government is its ongoing hysterical rhetoric about “budget crises” and “debt and deficit disasters” and “economic vandalism” now that it is facing much lower than expected revenue as did the former government. (The Coalition used to say revenue downgrades were a sign of government incompetence). With a large proportion of savings from the last budget stalled in the Senate, this inevitably points to bigger deficits. The Coalition’s rhetoric would suggest that means an even bigger “disaster” under its watch, but actual sensible economic advice, like that from the OECD, suggests the government should proceed cautiously with alternative budget cuts lest it damage the sluggish economy.

3. The plan would include long-term, careful budget cuts that were fair, and were seen to be fair

The government would have a far better chance of blaming Labor and a recalcitrant Senate for its disastrous budget if it had not so comprehensively lost the public debate. Modelling clearly showed the budget pain fell disproportionately on the poor. A few policies were particularly toxic – including the $7 GP co-payment and paying unemployment benefits to under-30s for only six months of the year. If these policies are not to be “barnacles” but remain as unimplemented government policy, it is hard to see how the government will escape the perceptions of unfairness. It hasn’t, and can’t, win this argument by claiming the budget is the only way to make spending cuts, because voters understand that governments have choices, and they really don’t like the choices this government has made.

Points two and three would ensure the government was trusted by its citizens. This trust would mean the government had an actual chance of implementing bigger reforms that both major parties have acknowledged are necessary. In the Sir Henry Parkes oration in October Abbott tried to start a constructive new conversation about the roles and responsibilities of the states and the commonwealth and the tax system that pays for it all.

What was needed, he said, was a “readiness to give and take with opponents of good faith … [an] ability to understand the other person’s point of view, and to concede something to it,” he said.

Which is all absolutely true, but neglects to mention that he had already begun the “give and take” in his budget by taking $80bn from the long-term funding promised to states for health and education. Labor started giving right away with a full-bore GST scare campaign. And then the government took a bit more by imposing an increase in petrol indexation – against the will of the parliament - via a tariff measure.

And if Labor wins the state election in Victoria on Saturday, the almost coast-to-coast conservative governments upon which the reform plan really relied won’t be there any more either.

So much for dreaming. Time to batten down for a final parliamentary sitting week, replete with barnacle identification and attempted bludgeoning of budget measures through the Senate. It’s unlikely to look very good.

Three things that a good government would do | Australia news | The Guardian

Jon Donnison Sydney correspondent

Australia is a successful and prosperous country, but would Donald Horne still say it was a lucky one?

It's 50 years since the publication of one of Australia's most iconic books.

The Lucky Country by Donald Horne, which came out in 1964, has gone on to become a cult classic, as well as saddling this land with an entirely misappropriated nickname.

On arriving in Australia just over a year ago, it was the first book I read having received a recommendation from my predecessor.

"That sounds upbeat," I thought, seeking inspiration for my new life down under.

It is, however, a thoroughly depressing read. A damning and bleak assessment of Australian society in the early 1960s.

The Lucky Country caused a stir when it came out in 1964

"A bucket of cold saltwater emptied onto the belly of a dreaming sunbather," is how one critic described it at the time.

The opening words of its final chapter sum up the book's thesis:

"Australia is a lucky country run mainly by second rate people who share its luck. It lives on other people's ideas, and, although its ordinary people are adaptable, most of its leaders (in all fields) so lack curiosity about the events that surround them that they are often taken by surprise."

Essentially, Horne painted a picture of a deeply conservative and unambitious country that had got to where it was by luck rather than merit, riding on the coat tails of its historical ties to Britain.

"In the lucky style we have never 'earned' our democracy. We simply went along with some British habits," Horne wrote in his 1976 follow-up, Death of a Lucky Country.

The fact that the book's title was ironic and that most people referring these days to Australia as The Lucky Country do so in a positive light, drove Horne round the bend.

In the lucky style we have never 'earned' our democracy. We simply went along with some British habits”

"I have had to sit through the most appalling rubbish as successive generations misapplied this phrase," Horne later went on to say.

In 1964 though, despite being un-optimistically received by its publisher, The Lucky Country clearly touched a nerve with the Australian public.

It sold more than 100,000 copies in its first year, an Australian record for a book of its type. It's now in its sixth edition.

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott recently described the book's publication as one of the defining moments in Australia's history.

The question for many is whether Donald Horne's assessment still applies. Does Australia remain the Lucky Country?

Comparing the stats

It is undoubtedly a successful and prosperous one.

When the world's leaders come to Brisbane in a few weeks for the G20 summit, with an agenda including trying to lift more of the global population out of poverty, they will be doing so from the five-star comfort of an incredibly affluent society.

A study by investment bank Credit Suisse recently judged Australians to be the richest people in the world, with a median Australian adult worth more than US$225,000 (A$258,000), most of that due to high property values.

Research by the Economist Intelligence Unit listed Australia as the second best country in the world to be born, beaten only by the high-flying Swiss.

Australian cities regularly pepper the top 10 of best places to live. Melbourne, Sydney, Perth and Adelaide all made it into the business end of the Economist's latest liveability index.

And before the rest of the world gets too green with envy, those cities are also among the most expensive places to set up home.

As in most wealthy countries, however, there are pockets of extreme poverty here. Australia's indigenous population fares especially badly.

Australian cities are among the best in the world to live in, but the country still suffers from poverty

Life expectancy, a key economic indicator, for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population is more than 10 years less than for the non-indigenous population.

A recent study by the Australian Council of Social Service showed that one in seven Australians live below the poverty line.

But the poverty line is Australia is considered to US$350 (A$400) a week for a single adult and US$740 (A$840) a week for a couple with two children.

That's not a lot of money to live on in Australia but it compares pretty well to the world's other wealthy nations, let alone the poor ones.

The US Census Bureau considers the poverty line to be just US$228 (A$260) a week for a single adult and US$454 (A$515) a week for a family of two adults and 2 children.

In Australia, the average wage in May 2014 before tax was US$51,383 (A$58,239) a year and US$69,413 (A$78,701) for full time workers.

In 2013 the average wage for an US individual was just US$43,041 (A$48,784) and the median wage was just US$28,031 (A$31,757).

A nation of whingers?

An Australian friend of mine joked to me the other day: "Forget the whinging poms, we've become a nation of whinging Aussies."

He suggested people in Sydney regard A$100,000 (US$88,0000) as a normal wage for a relatively successful person.

Australia has enjoyed 23 years of consecutive economic growth. It has been one of the world's few developed economies to avoid the global financial crisis.

Much of that success has been built on the country's vast mineral wealth, a mining boom that has lasted more than a decade and which arguably is still going, be it at a slower pace.

Some might argue that mineral wealth again makes Australia a lucky country; one which hasn't got rich through innovation but rather through the good fortune to sit on huge piles of coal, iron ore, copper and uranium.

Of course that's not to say that many other countries haven't profited from similar good fortune. Saudi Arabia must surely be the luckiest of them all.

But in the innovation stakes, Australia still fares pretty badly.

Despite several pledges, successive governments have failed to boost the teaching of Asian languages

The Economist's Economic Innovation Index has Australia ranked 22nd, way behind the likes of Japan, the US, Germany and Sweden.

Similarly on the magazine's Technological Readiness Index, Australia again fails to get into the top 20 - trailing behind the likes of Portugal, Belgium, Israel and Iceland.

Anyone who's experienced Australia's mind-numbingly slow internet connections can testify to that particular low score.

Australia has long been promising to embrace "the Asian Century".

The country once faced the "tyranny of distance" in terms of European export markets but now finds itself practically on the doorstep of the fast growing economies of East Asia.

Yet successive governments have still not managed to meet their pledges to increase the teaching of Asian languages in Australia's schools.

Donald Horne died in 2005 as Australia entered the peak years of its prosperity. We'll never know if he would still consider his homeland to be the Lucky Country.

All this is not to say that Australia is not a wonderful place to live. I, for one, can vouch for Sydney as being one of the world's coolest and most fabulous cities.

I feel lucky to be here. As to whether I got here on merit, I'll leave that for others to judge.

BBC News - Is Australia still the Lucky Country?

Lisa Cox National political reporter November 28, 2014

Boat load of barnacles

Watch Video

What is a Captain to do with a ship full of barnacles? By Rocco Fazzari and Denis Carnahan with apologies to drunken sailors everywhere.

Conservative commentators appear to be growing increasingly frustrated with the Abbott government, as it struggles to present a coherent message leading into the final parliamentary sitting week for the year.

The Prime Minister said this week he wanted to clear a few policy "barnacles", but by the end of the week it remained unclear which barnacles he was speaking of.

It was a difficult week for the government, which faced criticism over mixed messages about the future of its GP co-payment, its broken promise not to cut the ABC or SBS and comments from the Defence Minister mocking the government shipbuilder.

Failing the pub test? Tony Abbott with Alan Jones in 2011. Photo: Andrew Meares

Janet Albrechtsen, Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt are among the prominent conservative voices to criticise the Abbott government this week for its struggles. All three commentators were among conservative supporters of Tony Abbott who were invited to Kirribilli House last year for a private function.

But in light of the government's difficulties they have switched their aim.

"Another week. Another wasted opportunity by the Abbott government to score a political win. And another reminder of one of the simplest lessons in politics and life: respect is a two-way street. On that critical front, the Abbott government has failed time and again," Albrechtsen wrote in her column for The Australian on Tuesday.
"What should have been an effortless political win this week turned into yet another political disaster.
"But instead of working through that initial error, the government played condescending word games."

Janet Albrechtsen Photo: Robert Pearce

On Thursday, Bolt wrote for News Corporation that the government was making "the same blunders that killed Julia Gillard" when it came to the ABC.

"What is so frustrating for those who wish Abbott well is that this disaster was utterly predictable - and, indeed, predicted," Bolt wrote.

"In April, even though it killed me, I warned through gritted teeth that the government should honour its promise to the ABC."

Andrew Bolt Photo: Louie Douvis and Jesse Marlow

Earlier in the week, Bolt argued the government had developed a habit of apologising, "But apologising just signals another mistake was made. And this government apologises an awful lot, lacking confidence in its ability to prosecute an argument in the media."

In an editorial last weekend, before the government became entangled over the $7 GP fee and ABC job losses, The Australian argued that "Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey appear tongue-tied" and had to "reboot their sales job."
"Without a clear narrative, the task will be beyond him; his communications strategy is in disarray."

And in an interview after the G20 summit a fortnight ago, Jones attacked the Prime Minister over the renewable energy target and for "failing the pub test" with elements of the free trade deal with China.

"To win an election – and you're not worth two bob in opposition – to win an election, you've got to pass the pub test," he said.
"PM, you don't have a mandate for this."
"The people who vote are the masters, aren't they? They have given you whatever authority you've got – they don't agree with this."

Conservative commentators Bolt, Jones and Albrechtsen turn on Abbott

By political correspondent Greg Jennett Thursday 27 November 2014

Video: Bronwyn Bishop ejects record 18 members from Question Time

Photo: Federal Speaker Bronwyn Bishop has labelled claims she picked on Labor MPs as 'pathetic'. (AAP: Lukas Coch)

Related Story: Parliament on track to become most disorderly in history

Federal Parliament has embraced the schoolyard tradition of an "end-of-year muck-up day" setting new standards in misbehaviour.

In a raucous Question Time to end Parliament's penultimate sitting week, the Speaker, Bronwyn Bishop, suspended 18 MPs - all Labor.

With a massively depleted front and back bench behind him, a frustrated manager of Opposition business Tony Burke rose to inform the House "18 people in one Question Time is an all-time record since Federation".

An equally frustrated Leader of the House Christopher Pyne responded, describing the Opposition as "idiots", adding: "The Australian public should know that the Labor Party have run a deliberate strategy of ejection today from the House.

"They have deliberately attempted to be thrown out."

Ms Bishop agreed, noting her long list of suspensions included many Victorian MPs "who perhaps wish to go back and campaign" along with others who "may wish to have early planes" to return to their electorates for the three-day break before Parliament resumes for its final sitting week of the year.

The Speaker had indeed toiled through an unprecedented 70 minutes and re-written the record books for Australian Parliamentary history.

Bishop says claims she picked on Labor MPs 'pathetic'

She broke the previous one-day record for suspensions which had stood at 12.

The Speaker almost racked up 50 suspensions in one week, but fell short at 47.

Ms Bishop's personal total of suspensions for the 44th Parliament stands at 285.

Today's record of 18 were marched with monotonous regularity by the Speaker:

• 2:06pm - Ed Husic
• 2:07pm - Michelle Rowland
• 2:14pm - David Feeney
• 2:14pm - Richard Marles
• 2:14pm - Julie Collins
• 2:15pm - Nick Champion
• 2:26pm - Claire O'Neil
• 2:33pm - Joel Fitzgibbon
• 2:35pm - Terri Butler
• 2:38pm - Anthony Albanese
• 2:42pm - Michael Danby
• 2:47pm - Jill Hall
• 2:52pm - Kelvin Thomson
• 2:54pm - Melissa Parke
• 2:57pm - Matt Thistlethwaite
• 3:00pm - Pat Conroy
• 3:01pm - Graham Perrett
• 3:02pm - Alannah MacTiernan

Reflecting on the depleted seats to her left at the end of the Question Time, Ms Bishop was in no mind to accept Labor's suggestions she may have acted with haste or been heavy-handed.

"Simply to stand there and try and say that you all behaved like little angels and were picked on is pathetic," she told Mr Burke and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten.

Bronwyn Bishop suspends 18 MPs from Question Time, breaks Federation-era record - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Sarah Whyte Immigration correspondent November 27, 2014

Media monitor: Immigration Minister Scott Morrison. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

The Immigration Minister Scott Morrison and the Assistant Immigration Minister Michaelia Cash have spent nearly $120,000 monitoring the media for mentions of their names and the immigration portfolio, eclipsing cabinet colleagues including Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.

According to documents from the House of Representatives, Mr Morrison spent $62,484.30 in media monitoring and print clipping services, while Michaelia Cash, the assistant minister for Immigration spent $54,788.16 from September 7, 2013 and September 3, 2014. This includes monitoring newspaper clippings, television and radio transcripts through the Australian Associated Press and the media company iSentia.

This is in contrast to Ms Bishop whose office spent $6728.69 on media clippings between September 7, 2013 to September 17, 2014. According to separate documents Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews spent $2619.33 between September 1, 2013 to July 31 this year.

Labor MP Pat Conroy, who is chair of Labor's Waste Watch Committee, said it was ironic that the most "secretive minister in the history of the Commonwealth" was spending hundreds of thousands of dollars monitoring what the media was saying about him.

"Media monitoring is necessary, but how can Scott Morrison justify spending 20 times the amount Julie Bishop spends on what is presumably monitoring the same media sources," Mr Conroy said.

But iSentia spokesman Patrick Baume said media tracking was an important part of a democracy, to ensure that there is an open media and public debate is not ignored.

"Whether they do it in house or use a third party supplier, it's part of the job of all government departments to stay informed on issues that are relevant to their portfolio," Mr Baume said.

Labor's immigration spokesman Richard Marles joined the debate saying: "This is an awful lot of tax payer money to spend when you say very little."

A spokesman for Mr Morrison said: "The Coalition Government has spent less on media monitoring for the Minister and Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection than the average Labor Minister and their Parliamentary Secretary spent over their last four full financial years in Government."

It is not the first time Australian governments have been questioned about how much taxpayers' dollars is being spent on media services.

In June this year Senate documents revealed that Mr Morrison's departments hired 95 communications staff and spin doctors, costing taxpayers at least $8 million a year.

Details released showed the departments of Immigration, Border Protection and Australian Customs had 85 permanent and 10 other staff responsible for media monitoring, internal communication and public relations.

In July it was then revealed the Abbott government had created a hub of 37 communication and social media specialists to oversee media within the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, including Indigenous Affairs and the Office for Women, costing taxpayers almost $4.3 million a year.

Labor's Rudd government was heavily criticised in 2009 for spending more than $49 million on 418 media advisers, media monitoring and PR spin in his first year as Prime Minister.

Immigration Minister Scott Morrison defends media monitoring spend

By Josh Taylor | November 27, 2014

Summary: The very type of records that Attorney-General George Brandis would like Australian telecommunications companies to retain from customers for two years have been deemed too personal for release under Freedom of Information when they belong to him.

The metadata for Australian Attorney-General George Brandis has been censored for being too personal to release under Freedom of Information.

(Image: Screenshot by Josh Taylor/ZDNet)

In August, Brandis announced that the government would move ahead with plans to introduce legislation requiring Australian telecommunications companies to keep logs of their customers' calls, emails, IP addresses, and other so-called metadata for two years.

At the time, the government had not defined the set of data it wanted retained, and famously, Brandis struggled to explain in a television interview whether a history of the websites that every Australian visited would also be required to be kept.

Seeking to discover what the government's understanding of metadata is, ZDNet filed a Freedom of Information request with the Attorney-General's Department for "all of Attorney-General George Brandis' telecommunications metadata (under the government's understood definition of metadata) between September 7, 2013, and July 29, 2014".

(Image: Screenshot by Josh Taylor/ZDNet)

The department initially sought to charge over AU$600 to consider the request, but reduced the cost of processing to AU$14 when ZDNet in October narrowed the request down from 10 months to the month of July.

The request was then transferred to the attorney-general's office, and yesterday, the office released one censored 17-page Telstra bill (PDF), along with a lengthy decision for releasing, and ultimately censoring, the document.

Brandis' chief of staff Paul O'Sullivan said in the letter that the government has "no statutory definition" for metadata, and had determined the metadata from the Definition of Telecommunications Data document (PDF) circulated by the government in 2012. As a result, the Telstra bill was the only identifiable document held by the government relating to Brandis' metadata.

The decision to entirely censor the document was due to the bill containing "personal information about a number of individuals' telephone numbers", as well as the time and origin of the calls.

"Disclosure of the personal information in the document is unreasonable," O'Sullivan said, adding that who Brandis had talked to on the phone and when is not relevant information.

"I am not persuaded that the personal information is of any demonstrable relevance to the affairs of government. Indeed, I contend disclosure of the personal information may cause stress or harm to a number of third parties."

O'Sullivan said a complete list of who has the ear of the highest law maker in Australia was deemed not relevant to democracy in Australia.

"I consider that personal information from an individual minister's telephone bill is unlikely to contribute significantly to promotion of Australia's representative democracy."

O'Sullivan said that the release would "prejudice the protection of an individual's right to privacy".

Read this

Metadata: What we know and who wants it Read more

Under the government's legislation, only specified law-enforcement agencies or those approved by the attorney-general of the day can access stored telecommunications customer data. However, Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has also confirmed that third parties, such as copyright litigants, could obtain the records through the courts.

Although the legislation has been entered into the parliament, the government is still working to define an actual set of data that the telecommunications companies would be required to retain. This data set would be defined in regulation, rather than legislation, allowing the government to change the data retained without needing to pass new legislation.

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission is already pushing for the government to widen access to metadata to include the commission, writing to Finance Minister Mathias Cormann and Attorney-General George Brandis and asking to be added to the list of agencies included in the legislation.

Who Brandis called censored and deemed not relevant to democracy | ZDNet

By political correspondent Greg Jennett, staff

Thursday 27 Nov 2014

Video: Peter Dutton addresses co-payment speculation (ABC News)

Photo: Tony Abbott has accused the Labor Party of "economic vandalism". (AAP: Alan Porritt, file photo)

Related Story: Government to abandon $7 GP co-payment

Related Story: GPs press concerns about planned $7 co-payment

Federal Health Minister Peter Dutton has confirmed the Government's abandonment of the GP co-payment announced in its May budget will be short-lived, with "different options" already being considered to replace it.

Sources have told the ABC the original $7 co-payment will be dropped by the end of the year as part of what the Prime Minister calls a "barnacle clearing" exercise.

But the Government remains committed to a policy of "price signalling" on Medicare services.

"We are not ruling in or out different options that might be available to the Government and we are determined to send a price signal to make Medicare sustainable," Mr Dutton said.

The Minister would not be drawn on what "different options" were being considered.

Mr Dutton also acknowledged the original $7 co-payment announced in May appeared doomed and a second approach was needed.

"The Government is pragmatic about the situation in the Senate. We continue negotiations in good faith with the independent senators."

Is the evidence of GP co-payments as bad as Labor says?

Government Senate leader Eric Abetz confirmed a "GP co-payment remains our policy", but added: "I'm not going to speculate as to different methodologies that might be employed."

At least one Coalition backbencher spoke out against the original budget GP co-payment model.

Queensland senator Ian Macdonald said: "I don't think this scheme is the right way to go and I have advised both Mr Dutton and Mr Abbott about that and indicated that if this proposal comes forward I would be opposing it."

Opposition Leader Bill Shorten said there was "division in Government ranks".

"The Abbott Government wants to change its tactics about its GP tax, but they haven't changed their mind about the GP tax," he said.

Labor fears alternate approach to introduce co-payment

Opposition health spokeswoman Catherine King is concerned the Government will try to implement the co-payment plan through regulation rather than legislation.

"What the Government can of course do by regulation is reduce the fee the Government pays to doctors via the Medicare Benefit Schedule ... and we're been calling on them to rule that out," she said.

The suggestion the co-payment could be reshaped was immediately welcomed by Associate Professor Brian Owler from the Australian Medical Association.

"The AMA has been saying from day one of the budget that this is bad health policy," he said.

"It would be bad, particularly for vulnerable patients."

Professor Owler warned the Government against introducing any other measures to raise money, such as increasing the cost of medicines.

It is also not clear what impact the decision will have on the Government's proposed Medical Research Future Fund.

We have it in us to be better: Abbott

In an address to the National Press Club yesterday, Labor leader Bill Shorten said Australians knew the budget was unfair.

A blessing in disguise

The lesson for the Federal Government as it deals with its policy barnacles is this: if the fragmented Senate can be convinced, then so might Australians, Jonathan Green writes.

 

"Every time they scrape off a barnacle, they just reveal another hole in the hull," he said.

"A new set of talking points won't fix this budget - it's like raising the Titanic or re-marketing the Hindenburg, and that's really hard."

In an address to the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry last night, Mr Abbott focused looked to the future.

"I know that we have it in us to be better than we've been," he said.

Emboldened by the Coalition's position in the polls, several union figures now feel there is a serious chance they can help make Mr Abbott a one-term prime minister.

'Barnacle' clearing likely to extend to PPL

The Coalition was also expected to make further changes to its $5.5 billion paid parental leave scheme, a signature policy for Mr Abbott.

The policy would pay new mothers their full salary for six months.

Mr Abbott had already watered down the scheme, lowering the maximum possible payment from $75,000 to $50,000.

But Education Minister Christopher Pyne told Sky News he would not be raising the white flag on his overhaul of the university sector.

"If I was physically capable of it and had the time, I would go house-to-house if necessary to explain the importance of these reforms because they are vital," he said.

Senator Abetz said the deregulation of university fees remained "part of our agenda".

"We would like to see that resolved before the end of the year, and so we are working through that as we speak with the crossbenchers," he said.

GP co-payment: Federal Government looking at 'different options' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Shalailah Medhora and Daniel Hurst

Wednesday 26 November 2014

Labor, the Greens and majority of crossbench support censure motion against defence minister, passing it 37 to 31

David Johnston during question time in the Senate on Wednesday. Photograph: Mike Bowers for the Guardian

David Johnston was censured in the Senate on Wednesday over his “canoe” slur against a submarine maker even as the prime minister defended his conduct.

The defence minister has come under fire from Labor and from within the South Australian branch of his own party, the Liberal party, for telling the upper house he would not trust the government-owned Australian Submarine Corporation “to build a canoe”.

ASC is in charge of building air warfare destroyer planes and maintaining Australia’s fleet of Collins class submarines.

Labor, the Greens and the majority of the crossbench supported a censure motion against the senator on Wednesday afternoon, passing the motion 37 to 31. Only Family First’s Bob Day and the Liberal Democrat senator David Leyonhjelm voted with the Coalition to oppose the censure.

Although the motion has no practical effect, except increasing pressure on the already embattled Johnston, there has not been a censure motion against a cabinet minister since Amanda Vanstone in 2005. The assistant minister for health, Fiona Nash, who is not a cabinet minister, was censured in March.

The newly independent senator Jacqui Lambie, who has vowed to vote against all government legislation until a better pay deal for the defence forces is offered, supported the censure motion. She said Johnston had made “big-noting, self-serving, hypocritical speeches on Remembrance Day” but persisted in cutting pay and entitlements for the defence forces.

Tony Abbott defended his minister during a rowdy question time in the House of Representatives, saying he was “doing an outstanding job”.

“This minister does not deserve to be undermined by members opposite … just because of a slip of the tongue in the Senate yesterday,” the prime minister said. “He has my full confidence.”

Labor doggedly pursued Johnston in both houses during question time, asking Coalition frontbenchers repeatedly if the defence minister would be sacked. Ten Labor MPs were ejected by Speaker of the house, Bronwyn Bishop.

Abbott tried to redirect the debate, accusing Bill Shorten of racism for rejecting potential submarine tenders from Japan.

“The leader of the opposition says that we could have submarines as long as they have nothing to do with Japan because of what happened in world war two,” Abbott told the house. “He’s kind of like a reverse John Cleese – remember the war.

“He takes off his alternative prime minister’s cap, puts on his union leaders cap and plays the xenophobe card.”

Shorten denied making comments slamming Japanese submarine makers.

The opposition’s defence spokesman, Stephen Conroy, said the Coalition had abandoned Johnston, saying he “knows he’s going to be done like a dinner”. “The minister’s frontbench colleagues have abandoned him … The minister has no friends on his own backbench either.”

The opposition’s leader in the Senate, Penny Wong, said Johnston had compromised the procurement process for future submarine contracts by casting doubt on ASC. She told parliament that billions of dollars and thousands of jobs were in jeopardy as a result of his comments.

Johnston ridiculed the suggestion. “If we had a petulance Olympics, she would be a gold medallist,” Johnston said.

Earlier on Wednesday, Johnston made a statement to the Senate expressing regret for making the canoe comment but stopped short of apologising.

“I did not intend to cause offence and of course may I say on the record here and now that I regret that offence may have been taken,” he said. “Of course I was directing my remarks at a legacy of issues and certainly not the workers in ASC who may have in my regret taken offence at those remarks. I consider them to be world class.”

Earlier he told ABC radio the comments had been a “rhetorical flourish”.

The assistant national secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, Glenn Thompson, told Guardian Australian that he wasn’t sold on that argument.

“The minister needs to go down to ASC in Adelaide and apologise personally to the hard-working men and women there, workers who ensure that our naval personnel have the highest quality ships and submarines,” he said.

Professionals Australia, the union representing defence engineers and scientists, said Johnston’s position was untenable because he had compromised his relationship with workers.

“Significant numbers of our members have lost confidence in the capacity of the minister. He might think he can’t trust the ASC to build a canoe, but they can’t trust him to run our defence organisation,” said its director, David Smith.

“Our concern is that minister Johnston’s comments hopelessly compromise him in making a sensible decision on the future of our submarine program, which is expected in the next month. It is time for the minister to step aside and ensure that how we build submarines goes properly to competitive tender.

“In May, this minister labelled defence public servants facing job losses as ‘a bit fat and happy’, more recently he created chaos by presenting defence force personnel with an insultingly low pay deal – at a time of deployment in Iraq. This week he has seen fit to sledge our submarine builders. It is hard to imagine who might be next.”

 

Senate censures David Johnston for canoe slur against submarine builder | Australia news | The Guardian

Daniel Hurst, political correspondent

Wednesday 26 November 2014

Labor opposition leader issues a fiery denunciation of Australian prime minister and his government

Bill Shorten used an address at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday to attack Tony Abbott. Photograph: Lukas Coch/AAP

Bill Shorten has launched a scathing critique of Tony Abbott, casting the Australian prime minister as a backward-looking failure at home and “adrift” on the world stage.

The opposition leader said the government had “no prospect” of getting its higher education changes through the Senate, had lost the argument for other contentious budget proposals, and should drop the measures before next month’s economic update.

In an address to the National Press Club on Wednesday, Shorten also accused Abbott of squandering “a once in a generation” foreign policy opportunity by using the G20 summit in Brisbane to pursue domestic political complaints rather than a future-focused vision.

Abbott returned fire during parliamentary question time, describing Shorten’s Labor team as “fiscal saboteurs” and the “worst lot of wreckers and vandals in Australian history”. Labor represented “a menace to our country’s future”, the prime minister said.

The political positioning comes as the government struggles to get billions of dollars of budget savings through a hostile Senate before parliament rises next week for the Christmas break.

Abbott specifically referenced his difficulties legislating a proposed $7 co-payment on GP visits and the deregulation of university fees in a speech to world leaders at the Australian-hosted G20 meeting the weekend before last.

Shorten said it was “a weird, cringe-worthy, ‘little Australia’ lecture to the global community” and called on the government to abandon both policies before the treasurer, Joe Hockey, delivers the mid-year economic and fiscal outlook next month.

“The G20 was an unqualified failure when it should have been an unqualified success,” Shorten said. “Imagine telling the prime minister of Turkey that you’ve got problems with a GP tax when they’ve got two million refugees.”

The opposition leader vowed to stand firm against the deregulation of university fees, saying he was “not for turning” and the government had failed to muster adequate crossbench support.

He said the university bill contained “short-sighted and unfair class war changes” and the proposed 20% cut to course funding would be “the greatest act of vandalism” to higher education. The government had “a snowflake’s chance in that hot place where bad people go” of increasing interest rates on student loans.

Shorten would not specifically commit a future Labor government to unwind the Coalition’s higher education changes. “There’s a big hypothetical in that – if the government gets their changes through. At this stage there is no prospect of that,” he said.

“We believe the best thing we can do for our universities is defeat these rotten changes and we start again the process, so we are not contemplating failure on our defence of higher education.”

Shorten, who has spent the past six months campaigning against Abbott and Hockey’s “rotten” and “unfair” first budget, said the government’s problem was not the sales job but the product.

The Labor leader used his speech to lay out some markers on the importance of confronting the long-term challenges of climate change and demographic shifts, saying Australia’s future depended on a highly skilled, highly educated workforce.

Australians were concerned about where the jobs of the future would come from, Shorten said, but the nation should aim to be an innovative “services hub in the Asian century” and a “clean energy powerhouse”.

In an apparent response to Abbott’s criticism of the opposition’s blocking tactics in the Senate, Shorten said the year had been “defined by force of Labor’s resistance” but next year he would shift focus to laying out policy ideas.

Shorten said he accepted that Labor had to rebuild public trust and develop a positive plan before the 2016 election.

“We will not ask the Australian people to vote for us just because we are not the Abbott government,” he said. “At the next election Labor will offer the nation more than a list of Tony Abbott’s lies.”

Shorten is yet to spell out a detailed alternative plan for repairing the budget. He said the budget faced “pressures” and the challenge was to ensure that revenue matched spending in the medium term while not forcing the bottom half of income earners to do the heavy lifting.

Shorten pointed the finger at the Coalition for worsening the deficit shortly after it came to office last year.

He said it was still “early days” for Labor in developing its economic policies for the 2016 election, but repeated his previous suggestions that the government should “dump its Rolls-Royce paid parental leave scheme”, pursue multinational tax evaders and rethink superannuation tax breaks for the wealthy.

Shorten said if the government was having budget problems it should “stop paying polluters to pollute and introduce a market-based system” to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

Abbott did not confirm reports that he was planning to dump the yet-to-be-legislated GP co-payment, but said the government was “calmly and methodically addressing the problems that our nation faces”.

“The truth is Labor gave us a debt and deficit disaster, a fiscal deterioration unprecedented in our history,” the prime minister said during question time.

“Having created the problem, they are now trying to sabotage the solution … They are the greatest fiscal vandals in Australia’s history … They are a menace to our country’s future.”

The education minister, Christopher Pyne, said Shorten was “more concerned with cringe-worthy clichés and hysterical scare campaigns intended to turn people off university rather than engaging in a conversation about reform”.

Tony Abbott a 'backward-looking failure' adrift on world stage, says Bill Shorten | World news | The Guardian