Unions... no wonder I hate them!

After a day of protests around Australia, I am reminded once again why I hate the union movement so much. I can understand collective bargaining, representing the workers when otherwise they maybe afraid to speak for themselves. What I don't understand, and hate with a vegence is how Unionists insist on dragging everyday life into their struggles - what idiot thinks shutting down the city of Melbourne for 3 - 4 hrs will endear people to your cause?

Just like strikes that shutdown public transport, impact services the average Australian is depending on, this demonstration just shows why the average Aussie never wants the Unions to return to the giants they once were. I don't care about your rights at work when you cause thousands of Australians to lose half their day so you can make a scene and get publicity!

I have always been employed in my working life - from age 15, and have never been 'the boss' - but it is my belief that a job is a privledge, not a right. I associate Unions with keeping inefficient and overpaid workers safe, forcing their attitudes and beliefs (through the ALP) upon far more Australians than just their members. Nothing reminds me more of why I hate Unions than the waterfront battles of the 90's, where Unions tried to save some of the most inefficient and overpaid workers in the world from having actually do their job well for a fair wage.

Once again I return to the point I made on Beazely's IR gamble - good luck keeping the anger for almost another 12 months. I will be amazed if the Unions and ALP can possibly run with IR as a major, press getting issue all the way to the election. Crowds might be gathering at protests now, but there is a long way to go - and a Nuclear debate - before Beazely gets any sight of the polling booth

Costello as PM...

Heard an interesting comment made by Pauline Hanson today - she likened Costello's arrogance to that of Paul Keating, and said she didn't think he'd ever be Prime Minister. In a way, she definitely has a point. Peter Costello and John Howard are two very different people - to be fair, Howard did have a lot of time to refine his image before returning to the front bench after some time in the wilderness.

I think that 11 years of expecting to take over the reigns from Howard any minute has kept Costello from making the hard decisions on refining his image - arrogance doesn't travel well with the electorate. It is true that a politician takes on another persona as soon as they are in the leadership of their party. What remains to be seen is if that arrogance and smug smile is swept away when Costello takes over the Coalition.

Much has been made about Howard's ability to appear modest and down to earth - 'little Johnny' has sharpened his image to appeal to his beloved 'middle' Australia. His layman's vocabulary and 'smaller than life' (he is actually a lot taller than you expect) persona are significantly different to Keating, and indeed Costello.

Costello needs to start thinking about his appeal to the electorate and doing some self anaylsis - an investment in an image consultant / personal coach would ensure he sharpens his appeal to the electorate and the backbench.

Democrats doomed...

Just looking over an old transcript from 'Enough Rope' featuring Natasha Stott-Despoja. It triggered me to think about what the senate will look like after the next election, and how her party will fare. Looking at the AEC figures for the Senate at the 2004 election, I can't see the Democrats returning 4 senators given recent performances.

In QLD alone, the Democrats recieved approximately 40,000 seats - significantly less than Family First and The Greens - both who have enjoyed increasing media profiles since 2004. In QLD we can expect to see Labor and Liberals managing 2 seats each, with the Nationals recieving at least one due to Barnaby Joyce's performance. The leftovers will see either a minor party win, or another Liberal senator.

Given the dramatic loss of public support and media attention, it will be difficult for the Democrats to return any senators apart from Natasha Stott Despoja. The Greens seem to be the biggest benefactor from the Democrat capitulation, and Family First seems to be the most likely source to take over the second minor party tag in the senate...

Time will tell if Steve Fielding has done enough to raise the profile of Family First in conservative QLD to win a senate seat.

Immigration policy

Australia's ageing population, low birth rates and a need to maintain growth in the economy all point to one thing. Our immigration policy needs to be carefully designed to place us in the best position for the next stage of globalistation - when immigration becomes critical to the 1st world. Throughout the world, developed nations face the same problem as Australia - and are our competition when trying to attract skilled migrants and their families to our shores.

We should be focusing on attracting increasing amounts of skilled and educated migrants from developing nations such as India and China - couple this with increased investment in skills development in Australia and we have the engine for continued growth.

Our economy in general should start taking a middle to long term view of the world economy and start preparing for the emergence of India as an economic superpower. We are catering well to the Chinese, but India's population does not have the ageing issues that China has. India will not get old before it gets rich - China will. Closer political and economic ties built now will deliver benefits when India emerges in 20 - 30 years.

the other battler

Just caught a repeat of one of those fine current affair television shows (note sarcasm) on teenage girls getting pregnant to get the $3000 baby bonus (soon to increase to $4000). One of the biggest issues that is emerging in Australia is to do with lower class that is becoming entrenched throughout the nation. This demographic needs to be the focus of welfare and taxation reform urgently.

The Howard years have seen great improvement in all areas of Australian society, but it doesn't change the fact the the real battlers (not Howard's aspirational middle class battler) are in need of support. My biggest concern with welfare is the fact that there is such a disadvantage for low income earning mothers to return to the workforce. The next round of tax reform needs to address this - create incentive for mothers to return to the workforce, reduce the disincentive by increasing the lowest tax rate bracket. We also need to start reducing welfare payments as soon as children reach school age, and secondary school age respectively. The end result needs to be that a working single / lower class mother's quality of life is significantly greater than a welfare dependant single / lower class mother.

Reducing disincentives on returning / joining the workforce are critical, particularly with an ageing population.

the long break

Parliament is packing up for its winter break... will be interesting to see which issues fall off the radar in the 6 weeks away from Canberra. I am particularly interested to see if the everyday Australian will still be interested in Industrial Relations next May. Beazley can definetly score points attacking some of the abuses of work choices by employers around the country - but will the voter care after 11 months of media saturation? Desensitising is bound to occur - the GST was a big issue at first, but a non issue after Australians realised it really didn't affect them that much. Only time will tell...

I was contemplating the future of the Labor party today - post Beazley. This situation would probably occur upon a 3rd defeat at the hands of Howard next year. At the moment Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd would appear to be the heir apparents - but Beazley powerbrokers such as Wayne Swan, Stephen Smith and Stephen Conroy are yet to reveal their post Beazley cards. Gillard comes across as popular with the public, but I would be dubious if that was reciprocated in the party room. Could a leader from Labor's left faction truly appeal to the voters - or simply maintain the faithful voters and labor elites?

Considering Bill Shorten will be entering parliament after the next election, it may be more likely that we see strong support for one of the 'Roosters' or a member from the right leap frog their more high profile counterparts.

Situation... no change

Once again polls out in the Australian today reveal that Australians trust Howard with the Economy, interest rates and security - three key issues for the upcoming 2007 election. Beazley's policies do nothing to change the current status quo, with Labor leading in education, health and social services. I can't see anything that the opposition is doing that will reclaim ground from the coalition - all they seem to be doing is solidifying their base (and that's not enough to win an election against Howard).

Howard's immigration legislation seems to be on the backburner until he can sort out problems from within the ranks. I can see the rebel MP's points - I don't believe that families should be housed in the same 'prison' style accommodation as singles. Christmas Island is a much better solution than sending illegal immigrants to Narau - maintain a tough stance on illegal immigration, but not at such a high cost to families, particularly children.

Gay marriage / civil unions

Just listening to a radio national talkback show on gay marriage. This is a flashpoint that won't go away anytime soon... I personally am against gay marriage, but for the current defacto agreement that exists in some states and territories. My personal opinion is one based on my Christian beliefs, in addition to strong beliefs in the protection of children's rights (adoption laws come into the picture straight away when you legislate that homosexual relationships are the same as heterosexual) and strengthening marriage, not muddying the waters.

Andrew Bolt raised an interesting argument against muddying the waters on the ABC program 'Insiders' this weekend - if the basis of marriage is only love and commitment, as the gay lobby pushes, this same argument can be applied to polygamy - a practice found in Islamic and Mormon communities in some parts of the world. The facts are that you cannot successfully water down the importance of marriage being heterosexual without also watering down being between a couple.

Ultimately, the gay lobby will not be satisfied until laws are in place that prevent discrimination against homosexuals in all areas. This has immeadiate ramifcations upon freedom of religion - Christianity (and other religions) teach homosexuality is a sin, and therefore Christians do not condone homosexuality. I fear for the day vilifaction legal proceedings being brought against Christians for speaking out their beliefs!

Beazley's Gamble

Interesting to see the latest Newspoll today in the Australian. It appears that Beazley failed to get a bounce out of his high profile policy decision to scrap AWA's. Speculation is growing that while AWA's are an issue that Australians are worried about, the vast majority of Australians don't think their personal situation is any different, or is better post work choices.

I can understand the reason Beazely has decided to make such a policy decision - in the short term it has shored up support for his struggling leadership within his party - for now. With the support of the Unions, Beazely has almost certainly guaranteed that he will contest the next election with the support of his own party. This is a policy decision that converts... the converted. Whilst the unions and traditional base of labor voters will be happy, I suspect that middle Australia will be much more sceptical.

Beazely now looks to be a man controled by the powerful influence of the union movement in his party. Middle Australia is interested with maintaining the current growth in the economy, and fears that Beazley and his union bedfellows will stagnate the economy.

I think once again Labor has made the policy decisions that pander to their base, and fail to win back the middle Australian voters that Howard has built his legacy upon.