Jocknessmonster

2004-06-21T21:57:00.000+09:30

The truth about the conservatives

As it's getting closer and closer to the election, I thought I'd set the record straight on what the conservatives in this country really stand for. First we need to look at their key constituency, that is, big business in Australia. The old industry, the old money - the business that has grown rich on Australia's past and natural bounty. The business that clings to the status quo to protect itself, the business that's afraid of change and afraid of competition. The conservatives are old business's protectors, the foot soldiers of moral indignation who resist change at all costs. Aid to Australia's old business has flowed freely since the conservatives got hold of the reigns. Just look at the health rebate and the latest energy 'policy'. It is the protection of big business is what is holding back Australia and her economy. Without the active stimulus of new industries through R&D and other measures, we will never achieve our true potential as a country, leading the world in innovative industries and the arts.

Secondly, the conservatives stand for power politics, especially in international relations. Conservatives have lived their ultimate dream through the conquest of Iraq, where they have gone to war without even a proper reason, only the chance or guess of a threat and been able to snub the UN at the same time. By ignoring those in the international community who cautioned against the war in Iraq, we have seen an insurgency that is costing many lives unnecessarily and the loss of moral leadership of western countries through the horrible images of Abu Grahib. Playing power politics at the level of current conservative governments is extremely divisive and as we have seen, creates more problems than it is supposed to solve.

Conservatives also display the curious dichotomy of champions of liberty and moral guardians of the people. The conservatives will wax lyrical about the importance of freedom and in the same breath shout down any notion of society that offends moral 'values' - especially those defined by conservatives. Take for example the recent debate on fast food - Labor sensibly proposes to ban advertising fast food to children. Unacceptably Orwellian according to a government who can't stand the sight of two lesbians on Play School.

So we can see, conservatives really don't stand for any thing at all accept timid protection of their mates in big business, their self serving brothers in the international community who despise multilateralism, libertarians and moral prudes. They only real goal they have is to win control at all costs. Not a recipe for fantastic leadership of a progressive and dynamic country that Australia truly deserves to be.

2004-06-15T20:03:00.000+09:30

Securing Australia's Polluting Future

Today, John Howard released the government's energy policy "Securing Australia's Energy Future". Once the detail has been absorbed, the only future that really has been assured is the fossil fuel industry, especially the coal industry. In a move that seems cynical at best and stupid at worst, the government plans to subsidise fossil fuel users - that's right - fossil fuel users. I admit I haven't read the government propaganda but I cannot get my head around this one. In the nearly two decades of environmental debate, I cannot remember hearing how measure would protect the environment.

There's a huge sum of money to allegedly help the coal industry use geo-sequestration to pump carbon-dioxide gas underground and therefore prevent it from entering the atmosphere. While this sounds like a great idea and would allow the continuation of fossil fuel for energy - there is no real plan or incentive for Australian Industry to build a truly renewable energy industry - or even transition to one. The failure of the government to raise the MRET to beyond its paltry present value reveals the true intentions of the government - protect the status-quo, your mates in the industry and get elected by whatever means possible.

A true energy policy would increase the MRET value to as high as possible (say 5-10%) to encourage a renewable energy industry to develop as sustainably as possible. Money for geo-sequestration research should also be matched by real R&D dollars for renewable energy alternatives. The blatant tax subsidies for off-road fuel usage and 'big-petrol trucks' should be stopped and directed towards better policy initiatives. Once again, the party that champions competition and free-enterprise has used it's advantage in government to aid its mates in the fossil fuel industry to help prop up what is ultimately a doomed enterprise. What's worse, it all reads like a cynical re-run of US energy policy as proposed by George W Bush.

2004-06-08T16:54:00.000+09:30

Clearing the Decks

Well, David Flint has finally resigned - hooray. But not after a cynically stubborn period where he refused to quit - funny how this wait allows dear David a pay rise that dramatically increases his final payout - AND he denies that he even knew about the pay rise, oh yeah David, sure. I don't know about the rest of the salary slaves out there, but if I'm going to get even a paltry rise in my salary, I sure as hell know about it and wait for it. The wacky professor's will only jump by about $10000 - so he won't even notice it in his $257000 salary.

The departure of Flinty will also neutralise a potentially sticky issue for the PM in an election year. Just another sign that the Coalition are clearing the decks for an election sometime soon - this blog reckons the August 7 poll date may still be a goer despite some other soothsayers out there. My reasoning for this is two-fold. Firstly, the recent poll bounce - if this is sustained over the next Newspoll or two, August 7 will be a dead cert. Secondly, I don't think Johnny will want to be on the hustings while a US election is going on. The election campaign of GWB is sure to stir all sorts of emotions up in the Aussie electorate - most of them bad for the PM who is probably the closest national leader to Bush in terms of support and ideology.

Keep an eye on the polls... August 7 is just around the corner.

2004-06-04T07:40:00.000+09:30

They've done it again....

Check out the Oz's front page. Howard & Co have misled us again - I wonder who is going to accept responsibility this time? Clearly, this is now becoming more than a few coincidences and a ministerial sacking is now in order.

2004-06-03T20:42:00.000+09:30

Latham's Labor

Road to Surfdom is encouraging a debate on the upcoming election and I thought I'd join in.

Usually this blog tries to remain relatively neutral but in this post I'll come clean and put the case for voting Labor. Why? First of all I don't think John Howard belongs in the top job - I don't believe he represents the average Australian and how they believe the country should be run. John Howard has consistently shown himself to be an opportunist, shamelessly using either racism, xenophobia, moral puritism or just plain fear to argue his case. This does not represent the open and courageous Australia that I know.

The Coalition relentlessly push the line that they are the only ones to be trusted with the national economy. This is complete rubbish. The Tories are lacking in any real courage in economic reform - the real heavy lifting was done by the Hawke-Keating Governments who opened the economy by floating the dollar, reducing tariffs and other ground breaking reform. It was these changes that have set up Australia's remarkable economic performance. What has the Coalition done? They introduced the GST, reduced company tax and now have desperately fiddled with tax thresholds before the election. Despite this they have ripped the most tax out of Australians than any other government and have presided over the largest accumulation of private debt ever. They have let the economy slide along, with no new initiatives for industry or any effective encouragement for business to invest in research and development.

The other piece of Coalition propaganda is the line that they are the only ones to be trusted when it comes to national security. Again, history has shown that Labor does the hard yards. It was Labor who guided Australia through World War II and wedded us to America as a new security partner. Farsighted security policy also opened up relations with China and rejected the Vietnam War. The Coalition have shown that it does not have any real policy other than to aid America when there is a conservative administration. The Coalition have also scared the living daylights out of the public service because John Howard has re-written the rules so that ministers no longer take the blame when things go wrong - in fact they know next to nothing about anything bad in their departments.

I also think Labor has a better grip on education and health and are genuinely more interested in giving all Australians these things, not just those who can pay.

So there you are - my dummy spit for a Thursday night - it mightn't be all that coherent but at least I feel better!

2004-06-02T22:04:00.000+09:30

Back on-line...

Hi there, Jock's back after spending a very nice week and a bit on holidays with only minimal net exposure.

2004-05-27T09:48:00.000+09:30

Let's get real
I must be addicted to blogging or I wouldn't take the time to write a post on holidays...

Just a quick one to point the excellent article by Paul Kelly in the Oz summarising Anthony Cordesman's submission to the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. This points out a few home truths for he US in Iraq and spells out a realisitic stance thet neither the ideological left or right can currently implement. It calls for a practical solution to Iraq, with Iraqis deciding on their fate through the support of the UN underpinned by US military and economic aid. What is most encouraging is the stance that Iraq be made to take responsibility for their country and make it clear that the world will walk away if they descend into a totalitarian regime.

It also paints a future that will be challanged by terrorism and small but important regional conficts or situations that will be need to be addressed with a range of tools, not just military.

Paul Kelly then asks how Australia is positioned to face this new world. In my opinion, not at all. Just listening to rhetoric of the PM at his recent Institute of Public Affairs speech makes your heart sink. Australia is signed up as a fully paid neo-con subscriber, even as the US is rapidly changeing its stance. It reveals the Australia's foreign policy is little more than a reflection or best guess at what our dear and powerful friend might like to hear. This is dangerous and completely leaves Australia at the mercy of events in the South East Asian region rather than facing them with Australia's best interests at heart, rather than the US.

2004-05-23T13:16:00.000+09:30

'K' developing fan base

Here you are 'K', words of support from the bloggosphere...

Always enjoy reading your fan mail. Good onya K. We need more straight-shooting ragers like you!

An amused fellow-fan

2004-05-22T20:06:00.000+09:30

A Taste of Freedom

Iraq has had a taste of freedom - it may only be mere morsel of a taste but it must savour none-the-less. With Saddam gone, Iraqis must be anxious about getting their country re-built and strong. Make no mistake - Iraqis are no dummies - they should have no difficulty at all in running their own affairs. The recent talk of Sunnis, Shi'ites and Kurds not able to sort things out without the help of the US smacks of paternalism and can be easily construed by the Iraqis as imperialism - whatever the motives of the Coalition.

Sure, if Iraqis were left to their own devices, inevitably some bloodshed would occur and it would be tragic. But isn't this what every nation needs to experience in order to develop into a peace loving entity? And isn't this happening already? Only the people who actually live in the country can ultimately decide its fate, so why prolong the process with endless tinkering? It can be argued that the US rebuilt Germany and Japan after WWII but these countries had governmental systems that were easy to relate to and get working again - with the will of the people.

The recent prisoner photos and unnecessary carnage have left even moderate Iraqis dismayed and distincltly anti-west. Without a massive change in the US leadership and direction, Iraqi agreement on any issue would be a difficult task. The recent raids on US supporter Chalabi represent a start in turning the US leadership direction - but it may be too little too late. The clearest signal to the Iraqis and the world that the US is serious about fixing this mess would be for Rumsfeld to be removed from office. Unfortunately, this doesn't seem likely.

A clear military withdrawal strategy is now needed to assure Iraqis that their country is really returning to them. Security is a problem but this could be handled by a multi-lateral police force under Iraqi control. Infrastructure and humanitarian assistance will be required for years but the running of the country should transition to Iraqis as soon as possible.

What about the threat of terrorism? I think terrorist acts within Iraq should be dealt with by an Iraqi controlled force as we do, the Indonesians do or any other country does. If assistance is required, then Iraq can request it but it should be in their control. And what if the country falls into 'unfriendly hands' and threatens the west? Well this isn't a new phenomenon but I think that now Iraq has had a taste of freedom, it will be very unlikely for it to slip back into totalitarianism.

2004-05-18T20:41:00.000+09:30

John Howard: Last of the Dinosaurs?

Today marks Johnny Howard's 30th year in federal parliament. It was very amusing seeing the 'young' Howard in old footage on the ABC tonight. He seems to have been working on turning into some sort of conservative 'old-soul' for his entire career.

Is it just me or do others think Johnny H. Represents one of the last of the old school of Australian Politics? His political style is one of yesteryear, with political fixes found in doling out tax dollars like lollies and maintaining the status quo at all costs. His style represents the old view of obtaining power for power's sake and then applying it as a pleasant reward for spending so much effort in achieving it.

Today's Puff Piece in the Oz was also way over the top in celebrating John Winston's career. It spoke of a leader with vision rather than the man most willing to utilise xenophobia to win an Australian election.

Let's hope that as Johnny slowly passes off of our radar, new, dynamic and courageous Australian leadership can emerge that serves all of our national interests.

2004-05-17T16:00:00.000+09:30

Time to get out?

While this Blog has always been critical of the reasons for going to war in Iraq, it has argued that a military presence was necessary for pragmatic reasons. The argument went, you can't change what has happened so you may as well get on with it and make Iraq a safe, new democracy with all the assumed trappings of human rights, healthcare, trade etc.

Unfortunately, the current American leadership has brought US moral credibility to an all-time low. The pictures of prisoner abuse look like only the start of a spiral of revelations about Rumsfeld and his gang. The beheading video was grotesque and only adds to the outrage. The recent New Yorker Magazine allegations that Rumsfeld and the Pentagon approved similar tactics will apply further pressure to the Bush Whitehouse for action. Bush looks increasingly dumbstruck on his television interviews and I can't help think that he might not know what to do if his Defence Secretary was forced to resign.

Arguments that Iraq will become chaos if the US leaves sound increasingly silly - so what is Iraq now? A well ordered society? What about US credibility? Sorry, already shattered. For the US to recover some semblance of moral leadership (absolutely necessary, in my view, to win the war on terror), they will need to sack Rumsfeld and install a completely new Defence team to handle Iraq. Sadly, this doesn't seem to be happening. If John Kerry wins the Whitehouse in November, his task is going to be enormous.

But what about Australia? Why do we need to be in Iraq? To be sure, we have a moral responsibility to help rebuild Iraq as we were one of the initial occupying powers. The argument is now what form should this responsibility take. How do we, as a nation, want to do in dealing with this issue? The current Australian position is one of a rather thoughtless, cheerleader role, as it has been for the entire Iraq mess. Australia should now exert its influence (albeit limited) in calling for a multi-lateral solution in Iraq. A UN security force would be a good start. Australia has the chance to have a leadership role in international affairs and grab for the moral high ground - sadly something we haven't had now for a number of years.

Latham's 'troops home by Christmas' slogan is now seeming rather good as events have turned this 'policy on the run' from a likely vote loser into a sensible alternative. Removing the troops would send a clear message to the US and the world that we don't like what's going on in Iraq. We should however back this up with what we want to see in Iraq - not just withdraw and let somebody else clean it up. The hard part is deciding what stance we want to take and how independent we want to be from the US.

2004-05-17T15:56:00.000+09:30

Public Holiday

Who cares about the race - with time at a premium, a day to reflect, read, spend time with family or simply relax is welcome.

2004-05-13T21:02:00.000+09:30

Budget Washup

After watching Peter Costello's "erection" budget and Latham's reply, I must say the Labor message has much more appeal. The Coalition has delivered what is clearly a cynical buy for votes, not much of a message except procreate and profit. The changes in the tax thresholds is very welcome but there is little tax relief for those who live outside the Coalition's well defined "swinging voterville".

In contrast, Latham has delivered a budget reply that is short on detail but at least has a vision for Australia and messages of hope for the population. I particulary enjoyed the rhetoric about reward for effort, limiting Government waste, you're either "earning or learning" and focussing on essential services to maximise opportunity. And the redefinition of the Menzies' "forgotten people" is a classic. BUT there isn't much detail - Latham better follow through with his promises or he'll be political toast.

2004-05-13T20:52:00.000+09:30

Iraq just gets worse...

As more gut-wrenching images flow from Iraq, America is losing more of its moral leadership. The Australian Editorial has clearly got its mind in neutral when it says "The case for invading Iraq last April remains watertight". What? No WMDs, No Al-Qaeda - and now the moral argument for war is under attack with the horrible images of prisoner abuse.

Let's hope the US can fix the situation quickly - sack Rumsfeld (clearly intelligent but lost his grip on reality in the aftermath of the Iraq ground war) - make Colin Powell Defence Secretary (he probably wants this job like a frontal lobotomy but I reckon the world needs his cool headed reasoning) and make Richard Armitage Secretary of State.

2004-05-10T18:55:00.000+09:30

Taxing time

Couple of interesting articles appearing the Australian. The first one by Johnathon West form the Harvard University's Graduate School of Business Administration.

He writes:

Australia has not innovated to achieve economic success. Rather, it has been a world-class consumer and adopter of technology overwhelmingly invented, tested and manufactured overseas. In this respect, Australia's experience stands in sharp contrast to that of other developed nations that enjoyed sustained economic success, which have done so by creating new technologies.

Does this matter?

It sure does. They don't call us the lucky (arse) country for nothing. We have managed to get away with the old dig it up or kill it and sell it philosophy for too long.

In another article, Paul Davies from the Australian Centre for Astrobiology at Macquarie University in Sydney writes:

Most Australians enjoy an enviable lifestyle, within a sharing, compassionate society. But the economic base supporting that lifestyle won't be sustained indefinitely by traditional industries. Without some radical changes, Australia will gradually become a cozy but irrelevant backwater among nations. To be a truly clever country we will need to make the necessary changes without damaging our traditional values. Transformation without decimation is the challenge that faces us.

So how do we do this? How do we start to take a chance and develop new technologies that will not only maintain our lifestyle but enhance it?

Reducing the enormous personal tax take would be a start. The sooner we reward personal effort and risk taking the better. Let's hope tomorrow night's budget will at least start to reform this sector of tax. Reducing the high tax levels would also free a considerable amount of Aussie brains from the national sport of tax minimisation that we are all obsessed with. Worried about losing out on services that we all depend on? I would argue that the increased economic activity generated by the reduction in tax revenue would more than make up for the initial loss. In any case, our time is running out and we will lose our services if we don't reform.

Another problem is Australia's extremely low-risk business and political culture. More concerned with power and prestige rather than innovation, Australian business is just not interested in developing new technologies (with the exception of a few fantastic examples that have succeeded against the odds). Only a truly radical reform of the tax system in Australia will start to change this comfortable destruction that we are in.

2004-05-06T20:56:00.000+09:30

Guess What? - Iraq's a Mess

You know things are going poorly for the Coalition of the willing when Greg Sheridan of the Australian suddenly sees sense and calls for a greater UN involvement in Iraq and world affairs. It's about time.

The horrible photo's of Iraqi prisoners being abused in US and British jails should serve as a wakeup call for all those neo-con sycophants out there - it's a bloody mess. As media reports and recent books are dissecting the war, a few facts are becoming clear. The first obvious one is that the Bush administration hunted for the right excuse to go to war with Iraq, with some pundits claiming that Bush and the gang were ready to go well before 9/11 and since then, Iraq has served as a nasty distraction from the real war on terror. The fundamental reason for going to war was wrong - Iraq was not a danger to the west and any WMD could of been contained. Maybe if they just went in for the liberation argument the situation would different now? In any case, in their eagerness to 'get' Saddam, the US now 'owns' Iraq and its 25 million occupants and surprise surprise, they don't like their liberators! The extremely myopic view of the Bush Whitehouse that they would be welcomed like heroes after some victorious battle in a B grade movie was, to say the least, optimistic.

I could go on with other examples - but probably the most unpalatable consequence of the Iraqi situation is the incredible effort that is now required to ensure world security. Now that the west has invaded - we have a moral duty to remain in Iraq and build a stable country before leaving - this will take many years and many billions of dollars. Leaving now would only pave the way for a fundamentalist, terror friendly dictator to take the reigns, one I suspect who would make Saddam look rather nice. Isn't this the situation we were trying to avoid? In their messianistic zeal to get Saddam, the allies have created an expensive, resource draining situation. To leave now would only create another terrorist threat on top of the others which, by the way, we also need to fund and fight.

2004-05-04T19:32:00.000+09:30

Hey!

Got some fan mail from 'K'...

I read some of your input Jock on your Blogspot - I agree with the Labour article. Latham will have to be careful he doesn't blow it and let Howard connive his way back and persuade people to vote for him again. Kim would be good as leader but also Kevin Rudd - anybody except Howard (and the rest of the dickhead Liberal Party) for the next Prime Minister of Australia. And I think that Allan Jones and Flint probably both rooting each other should be taken to court and charged. Perhaps you have given me an outlet for all my pent-up emotions Jock, on your Blogspot.

Looks like you have some unique insights into Australian political life. Maintain the rage 'K'.

2004-05-03T18:01:00.000+09:30

Costello gets taxpayers salivating

Peter Costello is about to hand down yet another budget - one he didn't plan on putting together twelve months ago - then again he probably didn't think he'd be doing that one either. This is an election budget too - with everyone hoping and expecting a large tax break. This expectation has been building since last May with the "sandwich and milkshake" tax cut the first sweetener for the electorate. The voting public has also been suitably encouraged with the line that we are being taxed at the highest rate in history - further raising the tax cut bar.

Costello and the Libs therefore, will be aiming to impress. The recent rise of Latham Labor will need quashing and nothing works better than excitation of the hip-pocket-nerve. What the tax cuts won't do is salve the electorate's concerns about adequate funding of services such as health, roads and education. But in a divine political checkmate, Labor will need to roll back some of the Costello tax cuts in order to fund its promises. So who wants to hand some money back to the Government? It's a neat fit of Liberal Party ideology and cunning election year strategy.

Labor will need to work extra hard for every vote and Latham will come under real pressure to deliver making the run to election an entertaining time for the pundits.

2004-05-02T21:54:00.000+09:30

Greens

You've got to hand it to the Greens - when things get tough, like climate change, salinity problems and terrorism looming everywhere - they have the right policies at the right time - Like uniform cannabis laws for all! Keep up the good work.

2004-05-01T17:30:00.000+09:30

Population Debate Welcome

The Business Council of Australia as well as Paul Kelly in the Australian have had some welcome input into the population debate. As Paul Kelly says, this usually is the reserve of the left-green end of the political spectrum who want to limit the population rather than enhance it. Jocknessmonster is of the opinion that Australia (especially the regions - NOT Sydney) should aim for increases in population to secure their future, rather than limiting it and descending into the economic doldrums. I recommend that you have a read of the above links and let me know what you think. The BCA basically calls for a population of 30 million by 2050 with concentration on the regions along with other infrastructure building.

Arguments on environmental grounds are usually put forward to limit the population. This can only be regarded as another form of fearful isolationism, similar in form the the American Hard Right, who want to hide behind missile shields and disengage from world affairs. Surely, as a nation, with all our technological ingenuity, we can develop the ways and means of living with a population of 30 million by 2050. It may even provide a new industry or two. Population limiting is also a form of responsibility shirking as our region is growing fast and we have bountiful plains to share, as they say.

It is no secret that our population is ageing and fertility is dropping. Hence, to even maintain our way of life, increased immigration is required. Recent talk of increasing the retirement age and 'working till you drop' is usually met with dry scepticism or despair - working till 70 or 80 doesn't fill most with joy.

Population boosting via increased immigration seems a sensible approach and criticism based on idealogical grounds (quasi-racism from the right and environmental retreatism on the left) should always be challanged.

2004-04-29T20:58:00.000+09:30

Mitsubishi Blues for SA
A couple of nice articles appear in the AdelaidePundit and Public Opinion blogs on the Mitsubishi Mess that's been unfolding in SA over the last 8 years. I totally agree with comments about developing new, broad based, higher tech industry base rather than maintaining the status quo as has been going on. However, we have left our run a little too late. Nothing like a challenge, eh?

What may be a good, long term solution for SA is the development of a viable Intellectual Property industry. This would not help our current set of extremely skilled manual workers but may offer a blue-print for the future. It would mean heavy investment in education and research labs and a large amount of faith in SA ingenuity but the rewards would be fantastic. Such an "industry" would provide an income through royalties from others who use the technology in their products that would be made where labour rates are low. A highly paid workforce would result, without the economic burdens of manufacturing plants with expensive assets that can become obsolete. The industry would be highly flexible as it would be constantly turning out new ideas and would eventually fall into niche areas where we would become the leaders, thereby creating the situation where we have very little competition. Money for Jam as they say. As good ideas accumulate, so would good people, ready to live and invest in the state as they would be provided with a stimulating rewarding work and a great lifestyle.

Sound fanciful? Maybe, but only we can take control of the future and we don't have to look very far to see other economic miracles that started from much more adverse conditions. Take Singapore for example, whose population were transformed from poverty to an economic tiger through embracing advanced manufacturing technology.

This may seem far-fetched to some but its at least a guiding point and possibly one of many good ideas for the future of SA.

2004-04-28T18:46:00.000+09:30

Red & Blue America
Interesting but lengthy set of articles in the Washington Post on Red and Blue America - that is the dichotomy of right-wing red suburban types and their inner city cafe loving blue cousins. While totally American, I can't help thinking that this is a ready made template for politics that some less than inventive Australian politician would love to import. You can already see the Right gay marriage debate and similar left anti-globalisation etc templates well and truely established here. It would be nice for our leaders to think for themselves and apply Australian ideas to Australian problems.

2004-04-26T21:29:00.000+09:30

Trouble for Labor Ahead
Recent events have seen Labor soar ahead in the opinion polls. Mark Latham's curious mix of popularity and policy sense has elevated it from being a lacklustre opposition to a credible alternative government.

However, recent events may spell disaster for Labor. Curiously, the departure of Dr Mahatir from Malaysian politics might be one of them. The transition to a new Prime Minister has enabled a rapid thawing of relations with Australia - leading to the invitation for Australia to be present at next ASEAN meeting and to work on a new free trade zone of South East Asia, Australia and New Zealand. Despite the fact it is yet another preferential rather than multilateral trade agreement, this new FTA will be important because of its symbolism as well as the practical benefits of increased trade. It will also represent a huge achievement for the Howard government in Australia and provide a stockpile of ammunition for the those for deride it as being anti-Asian. Thus this can only add to the perception that Labor is not the only party that can deal with Asia. Recent trade deals with China and Thailand are also examples that reinforce this perception.

Another potential show-stopper is the Latham decision to withdraw troops from Iraq by Christmas, regardless of the actual situation on the ground. While initially popular, the such a stance is at odds with a large number of western governments and oppostions, including the American Democrats and of course, Tony Blair's New Labour. The voting public may not of liked how the Iraq war was sold but they realise the obligations as an occupying power and the need to maintain the US relationship in order to ensure Australia's long term security. In uncertain times, jepordising this relationship may seem reckless.

There are some early indications of voter backlash for Labor. While a recent Morgan Poll shows Labor would win an election if held now, individuals indicated that they thought that the coalition would win despite their own voting intentions. What is this saying? Could it be that voters want the social message of Labour of better schools, hospitals, etc but don't want to sacrafice their security by voting in a leader who is anti-US?

Makes you wonder why Latham brought up Iraq at all. The next few polls will be very interesting indeed. If the polls show a serious backlash against Latham - a perfect opening would appear for Kim Beasley to return. His security credentials would placate a concerned public and the Labor machine would ensure the right social policy message was projected.

Mark Latham may be riding high at the moment but he will need to do some serious policy work in the coming months if he is stay in the top job.

2004-04-24T17:22:00.000+09:30

Internet Banking Fees

Beginning of the end of fee-free internet banking - only a matter of time...

2004-04-23T19:12:00.000+09:30

"Fake" Hostages Return to Japan
The Japanese Threesome who scared the bejesus out of Japan and the rest of the world are looking like a bunch of pranksters who went too far. Can this be real? I think I'd look scared if some large Iraqi's held a knife to my throat and asked me to be frightened. It all seems a little weird and the conspiracy theorist in all of us could say this is a massive discrediting exercise conducted by the Japanese Government. Who knows? What is weird is some of the correspondance on the Japan Today Website concerning this story, such as:

I think thy were scared that
thy would have to go back to Japan
specially the lady way past her sell by date guarded by tall
handsome Figures must have thought
i have been kidnapped and gone to heaven.
Old laddies pay big bucks to stay in North Africa middle east and be surrounded by exotic men she was doing it on the cheap

Hmmm...

2004-04-17T23:09:00.000+09:30

A Real Chance

The recent escalations of violence in Iraq are very disturbing. However, it may well become a great turning point in the war on terror and international relations generally. I think most level headed people can see that the arguments for pre-emptive war in Iraq were a farce. But it’s too late to be arguing over these things. Now is the time to prevent Iraq from developing into an impossible situation where the West is forced to retreat in defeat. This would represent a terrible failing on our part. Instead, the Iraqi situation may represent our best chance yet to get the war on terror back on track and indeed, revitalize the role of the UN in the war on terror and regain the credibility of the West in the eyes of developing and Muslim nations.

The recent Washington Post article by Democrat Presidential candidate hopeful, John Kerry, puts it best when he calls for a coordinated, intelligent approach with increased military resources on the ground. His Vietnam heritage gives him a perspective in this area that few can equal. He correctly argues that the clock can’t be turned back and the war stopped – so let’s make sure that re-building Iraq is done well, creating a genuine, free and democratic Iraq. Surely we all want this?

By recognizing that multilateral solutions are best, geopolitical change is sometimes unpredictable and requires patience, finesse and skill, a solution based on consensus may emerge. By including a majority of nations in the decision making process, extremist groups will be marginalised and their influence will gradually recede. I hope this is not just naiveté.

2004-04-16T18:20:00.000+09:30

Osama Playing Wedge Politics

Osama bin Laden's recently released "peace offer" is no more than an exercise in wedge politics. His vague demands for a peace deal are impossible to meet and serve to simply divide the western world (again), give succour to his followers and provide a trigger for yet another attack in response to the civialised world's non-caring attitude. As difficult it is to swallow, it will be a long road to peace and we can hope it is not paved in any more blood. Instead of playing Osama's tune, we need to hold our resolve and provide an exemplorary example to the muslim world while maintaining security. To be sure, the US and cohorts aren't exactly providing this in Iraq - however lets all take a breath and try and nut this thing out - we don't really have a choice.

2004-04-14T21:51:00.000+09:30

Speed Blog
Just a quick one today. Interesting Article in the Oz concerning infrastructure funding. Pointing out the ludicrous situation we have at he moment where nearly all of society's needs are to be paid for from last year's taxes. as the Oz and Fred Argy have been saying for a while - we don't expect normal Australians to live in a tent while we save for a house - why should it be any different for roads, schools and hospitals? We're all in this together - its about time we funded these things through responsible government debt and paid off over time rather than the silly situation we have now. Cheers.

2004-04-13T22:46:00.000+09:30

My Life with a Pilferer
We all have strange habits but one of the strangest habits some of us posses is Pilfering. It’s a well know art – the long linger at the stationery cupboard at work, the steely glare at the “unwanted” pile of disused equipment at work. My wife has this problem – big time. I recently caught her using some filter paper to strain some homemade hair tonic (another story). This was merely pilfered some 8-10 years ago from a university lab. Happily spending its days in our cupboard waiting for the day it would be used. Along with the purple pen set from a now decimated workplace stationery cupboard. Is this stealing? Well, yes it is actually. So why do we do it? In my wife’s case, it is clearly the thrill of the “acquisition”. She is actually trying to corrupt myself in expanding her stationery empire. Does this harm anyone? Probably not – not counting the increased blood pressure of employers across the country. So bring on the pilfering – if it makes you happy.

2004-04-13T22:29:00.000+09:30

Pre-war Intel Looking Even More ShakeyOnce again the Department of Defence is embroiled in another scandal surrounding the Iraqi conflict. This time it’s the highly regarded Defence Science and Technology Organisation. In what smells to the public like another coverup, a staff member not quite happy with bending the truth to suit its master of the day has been “sacked”. There are some strange circumstances in this case though, with the employee not working for a year before being sacked and a link with the Democrats.

However, the recently reported Bulletin Letter, from a concerned Army officer with the handling of Iraqi intelligence along with the recent public bagging of the AFP Chief leaves me at least rather non-plussed with the whole Iraq Pre-Invasion affair. A bit more responsibility for Government actions wouldn’t go astray and may even allow us to better deal with the situation facing us in Iraq.

2004-04-12T20:25:00.000+09:30

Welcome to Jocknessmonster - A new blog on the world.

2004-04-12T20:23:00.000+09:30

Welcome to Jocknessmonster.