Labor’s relentless pursuit of the Coalition’s negativity

From Brisbane to Canberra and across the country, Australian Labor Party officials are keen to persuade the population of the outrageous negativity of Campbell Newman, Tony Abbott and all those other Liberal/National Party parliamentarians.

Anna Bligh’s efforts border on slander, but are not justification for limiting Bligh’s freedom of speech. She can slander all she likes, but whether the public will take to these attacks remains to be seen.

But, of course, we should be content that our Labor governments are being positive. They are practising ‘positive negativity’, not like Tony Abbott and Campbell Newman who, apparently, are just negative.

So when you see Labor attack ads on Coalition figures, you are watching enlightened and positive messages. Apparently.

When Tony Abbott criticises a Government program, however, he is being ruthlessly negative. As anyone should know, the Rudd and Gillard governments have carefully calibrated each and every policy to be cost-effective and to deliver the maximum possible benefit to the Australian people. Anyone who doesn’t accept this truth is just being negative.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Labor’s relentless pursuit of the Coalition’s negativity

  1. Thumbnail

    I am a swing voter, and a unit owner in Brisbane. Newman took a wrecking ball through the lives of unit owners, raising rates through the roof (some rates multiplied by 6), making landlords lift rents, causing working people and pensioners to sell up and leave. I personally witnessed people forced out of their homes. Newman’s record in Brisbane Central is one of social upheaval, cost increases and outright bastardry of the highest order. It took a year long fight to reverse the rates increases. http://www.brisbaneratesequity.com.au

  2. Blogstrop

    I make constructive criticisms. He is relentlessly negative. They promulgate hate speech.

  3. johno

    Are we seeing the real Anna Bligh? Dirty, mean and mighty unclean. (Apologies to Bon Scott).

    Is this a foretaste to the real Juliar who is likely to emerge in her last desperate stand at the next general election?

    I thought having more women in politics was suppose to make politics kinder and gentler. Or was that just another big fat fib from the feminists and Emily Listers?

  4. Eyrie

    Thumbnail, rates in Queensland seem to be based on unimproved land value. Council expenses depend roughly on population. In other places the unimproved value rating has been replaced by improved value rating mainly when lots of units get built with high populations. Seems fair to me, otherwise the owners of single dwellings are subsidising unit owners and renters. Not that I’d ever want to live in one of those stack-a-plebs.

  5. Token

    Thumbnail I’m sure would be aware of that Eyrie:

    The people who are the management committee of BARE are an interesting bunch:

    In the June council budget, Lord Mayor Campbell Newman introduced a new policy that was designed to force luxury unit owners to pay more in rates.

    Cr Newman argued that owners of luxury units had not been paying their fair share of rates because their rates assessment was based on State Government land valuations that did not take into account the value of buildings on the land.

  6. Rafe

    Yes we need to know if the previous administation kept the rates unreasonably low for units. In NSW Neville Wran started the run-down of infrastructure by spending capital reserves of public utilities (hollow logs) to keep rates and charges down, also he sold off land that was set aside for future transport corridors.

  7. Token

    Intersting Rafe, I’m a bit young to remember that.

    I am not too young to see we are all paying higher power bills due to the Carr,etc government doing the same with the power generation assets while ramping up the dividends.

  8. eb

    Do I sense some frustration on Samuel J’s part?

    I don’t understand why that should be. The MSM is surely simply calling it as they see it. Past Oppositions have always been co-operative with their respective Governments and it is only now, under the relentless negativity of Tony Abbott, that this wonderful bi-partisanship has broken down.

  9. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    The main fee increases that I incur on two Queensland investment units come from the slew of new ‘improving’ legislation (for example on pool water quality and safety, OHS, Fire Services, ‘green’ certification, administrative record keeping etc.) that has been put through by the busy body Bligh (Blight) Government. Council and water rates have increased due to various ‘green’ initiatives also required by legislation and compliance etc. Plus electricity costs have gone up due to these too. Rents, however, have hardly risen at all, especially on the Gold Coast area, and capital gains have fallen a lot.

    Rent-seeking businesses have arisen around these pieces of regulation and they will be hard to get rid of without causing distress now.

  10. Thumbnail

    Thanks Eyrie for asking. Newman’s “Rates Rort” policy put an artificial multiplier on the UCV (Unimproved Captial Value) called the “Parity Factor”. This factor was used to artificially inflate the UCV in our case by a factor of 5 and in other cases more. Smaller units were dealt much larger increases because the mathematical formula put the lot entitlement contribution on the denominator. So that meant that a penthouse got a multiplier of 2 whereas a small two bedroom unit got whacked with a multiplier of 5. Everyone should be treated equally. Unit owners were targeted and made to pay not on UCV, but on UCV x [Parity Factor].
    In brief, Newman made city living more expensive and alot less desirable and it was well worth the fight to have the parity formula wound back.
    I will be supporting the BCC candidate who takes the parity factor out entirely and starts treating every rate payer equally.

  11. daddy dave

    In brief, Newman made city living more expensive and alot less desirable and it was well worth the fight to have the parity formula wound back.

    City living is too expensive because governments over-regulate land use. That is all the way up the chain from councils to the Commonwealth.

  12. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    As anyone should know, the Rudd and Gillard governments have carefully calibrated each and every policy to be cost-effective and to deliver the maximum possible benefit to the Australian people. Anyone who doesn’t accept this truth is just being negative.

    And isn’t that the truth? Just like the Blight Government in Queensland.

    Thumbnail, I’m getting out of the unit market as soon as the market improves, if it ever does (except for my Sydney city home, which I like enough to take punches for), until some sort of sense, equity and uniformity comes back into the legislation and taxing agendas. At present it’s too easy to get caught in the pincers of someone’s good idea, from all sides of politics, to say nothing of the microlevel of the block’s management. And the left side gets it so wrong, so often, and won’t listen, which is the topic of the thread of course.

  13. Entropy

    As one of the rate payers in a single dwelling subsidizing your lifestyle, thumbnail, you get absolutely zero sympathy from me. Your consumption of sewerage, garbage another services would be practically the same (if not more so given the addtional strain a multiple unit dwelling would place on the local network of these services) so up to now people like me were subsidizing you to a significant extent. Welcome to the real world princess.

  14. Collecting the garbage from 50 residences at one central point would seem a lot more efficient than driving around to 50 houses, Entropy.

  15. Thumbnail

    Hi Entropy. You don’t subsidise unit owners lifestyles. We all pay rates for services, and we should all pay on the same basis: UCV. You believe the spin Newman gave. He used Alinsky type tactics to demonise unit owners and divide the city with these tactics.
    The research BARE completed showed that unit owners pay their fair share.
    Not every unit owner is a self funded retiree or a ‘millionaire’.

  16. Feral Abacus

    When it comes to utterly incompetent, deceptive, thick-as-bricks Labor governments you can never be too negative.

  17. .

    Newman sounds like a penny pinching commo.

    Vote for the LDP or BCC I say.

  18. Boris

    I conclude from this discussion that Newman’s policy was sound. Thanks, Thumbnail, for letting us know.

  19. Thumbnail

    Labor-Greens preference deals have stripped fellow Queenslanders of their civil and political rights. For parties that claim to value human rights, how could they allow urban votes to be used in this way?

    http://www.samuelgriffith.org.au/papers/html/volume17/v17chap2.html

    Labor is the party of adults here, and has used Greens pressure to enact the Vegetation Management Act.

    I do not want my vote to be used to strip people of their civil rights, their dignity and their land.

  20. .

    Labor is the party of adults here, and has used Greens pressure to enact the Vegetation Management Act.

    This is highly dubious.

    Labor in QLD have racked up 90 BILLION of DEBT.

  21. Oh come on

    How the hell did they manage to blow that much, anyway?

  22. Winston SMITH

    I fear Thumbnail has outed itself.
    Where has the $90 Billion gone?
    I really hope that Newman has a team of Forensic Accountants ready to go through the books when he gets in.
    And an empty prison to keep the bastards in.

  23. brc

    I have a unit in Brisbane, and the rates have hardly moved in the 10+ years I have owned it. I agree with the rationale of charging unit owners equivalent, but if there was a 5x increase in some places that isn’t fair.

    I do pay rates in a QLD locality that suffered a forced council merger under the Beattie government. It was also not allowed to reduce headcount of the merged councils for 3 years after the merger. At the same time all of the councils water infrastructure was forcibly acquired by the Labor state governmnent at a horrible discount to the real value, and the payment wasn’t upfront.

    As a result my combined rates + water bill has jumped by over 50% in two years.

    Add to that the 30% increase in vehicle registration and 40% increase in electricity prices over the same period, and my expenses column has jumped by about $2000 pa for the exact same service I was getting before. The council services, water, roads and electricity are exactly the same as they were before, but now I get to pay a lot more for them. Every single one is the result of a stupid policy introduced by either Bligh, or Beattie, or both.

    Now, can anyone take a guess where I reallocate that $2k from? Yes, that’s correct, the ‘discretionary spending’ column. And then people scratch their head and wonder why all the shops have ‘for lease’ signs in them. Well, I’ll give you the answer, because the stupid state government forcibly reallocated my spending from things I like to spend on (like a night out at a restaurant) into things I have no choice over, like purchasing a desalination plant that does nothing. In other words, from my local butcher, baker and candlestick maker into the hands of some unionised employees and politically connected big company that won all the fat contracts.

    They’ll then rub salt in the wounds by employing some stupid ‘small business commissioner’ as if small businesses needing anything but more customers with more discretionary income.

    It’s the Labor way.

    Saturday can’t come soon enough for me.

  24. Boris

    Thumbnail, to make my point clear, if you build a block of flats on a single block, with the ULV approach you will pay the same rate as for a single house on the same block. I do not think this is fair, because, as someone said, the amount of council services the block of flats requires is far greater than for a single house.

    The reason some people faced factor of 5 increases in rates is because they used to pay virtually nothing under ULV approach.

    Having said this, we all know what happenned when the Iron Lady tried to introduce poll tax, don’t we?

    Anyway, I understand and respect your right to campaign agaisnt the rate increases, but I do not support it.

  25. Oh come on

    Seriously. When did people start waking up to the fact that the Qld government was running up a massive debt? When did the deficits start?

  26. .

    What is the total debt position of all combined Government State, Federal and Local) at present? As a per cent proportion of GDP?

  27. Winston SMITH

    I have looked for that number for about two years, dot. It would be rather enlightening, wouldn’t it?

    Anyone got a link? I don’t have the financial sleuthing skills to find it.

  28. brc

    What is the total debt position of all combined Government State, Federal and Local) at present? As a per cent proportion of GDP?

    It’s always hard to do this, because of different figures in different years. But for a back-of-envelope calculation:

    QLD Public Debt : $80bn
    QLD Popn : 4.5 million
    QLD GSP : $243 bn

    Aus Fed Public Debt : $100 bn
    Aus Popn : 22.9 million
    Aus GDP : $1,500 billion

    QLD share of Aust. Popn : 19%
    QLD share of Fed Debt (by Popn) : $19.5 bn

    Total Qld Public Debt (Fed+State) : $99.5bn
    Debt/Capita : ~ $22,000 per person
    Debt/GSP for Combined state/Fed Debt: 41%

    So much for the ‘person earning $100,000 borrowing 6,000’ line so beloved of Swan and Gillard.

  29. brc

    Adding to the above, Greek public debt/per capita is about $38,000 per person.

  30. C.L.

    Hi Alan, I am a swing voter, and a unit owner in Brisbane…

  31. lotocoti

    When did the deficits start?

    Probably around the same time Qld Health became the third largest employer in Australia.

  32. brc

    Collecting the garbage from 50 residences at one central point would seem a lot more efficient than driving around to 50 houses, Entropy.

    Not really. It’s still the same amount of garbage. A 50 house street is about 500m long. You’re just swapping a side-load wheelie bin truck for a top-load truck. 50 small loads for 2 or 3 big loads. And that’s only the big units. The smaller units still use wheelie bins, one per dwelling, so there is no saving at all. The difference would be pretty minimal in terms of driver time/vehicle hours which are the marginal costs. Add to that the larger high rise buildings probably need two services per week instead of one, and I’d say it comes out in favour of the individual houses/small units with weekly service.

    The street/unit is still the same distance from the tip and the amount of rubbish is the same.

  33. Thumbnail

    Hi Boris,
    THANK YOU for asking that question. If land is rezoned to allow a multi level building, the UCV goes way up. So the rates charged are well in excess of what a single family dwelling’s rates are.

    For instance an apartment building built on 2,500 sq generates rates in excess of $90k per quarter, but 4 blocks of single family dwellings on the same sqm of lannd would generate rates of about $4,000 pq.

  34. Winston SMITH

    It would be very interesting to see the TA government bring in a site that is easy to find, and shows the Federal and State debt situation in a format easily understandable.
    Even more interesting would be how soon a Labor government started to fiddle with the numbers.

  35. Jim Rose

    Political discourse is unusual because it is unusual for a first term government to struggle to be re-elected.

    Most changes of governments are mercy killings; the tired and smelly three or four term government drives the electorate to vote for the other side. the old government is voted out rather than a new one voted in.

    Governing parties usually ignore the opposition because talking about them gives them free exposure and elevates their status to that of an equal.

    A turnover of power after one-term, perhaps two, leads to an unusual focus on re-justifying why the incumbents were elected. they were elected because the other side were voted out.

  36. Fisky

    Anna Bligh’s efforts border on slander, but are not justification for limiting Bligh’s freedom of speech. She can slander all she likes, but whether the public will take to these attacks remains to be seen.

    No political party has abused free speech more than Labor. For the filth they have put out in this campaign, they should be violently shut down.

  37. John Comnenus

    BRC,

    I did some similar (but not as detailed) calcs a while ago by state. I am pretty sure QLD taxpayers owe the most by State and certainly state + federal. I am pretty sure the amount owed per tax payer came out at roughly the average annual wage.

    It would have been a real pity if the ALP stuffed up the biggest resources boom ever and left the state broke, indebted and with insufficient infrastructure….Oh wait.

    Meanwhile WA which hasn’t borrowed anywhere near as much is absolutely booming.

    Thanks ALP.

  38. .

    But, but, they need to spend all of this revenue for when the boom ends (even the stuff not collected yet)…Bligh is recession proofing Queensland!

  39. wreckage

    Look, it’s a well known fact that pissing government money up the wall is far better for the economy than letting people keep that money themselves. Failure by any government to light their farts with rolls of fifties is a failure of their core economic responsibility.

  40. brc

    @john QLD average wages are a touch over $1,000/wk.

    If you take out all the non-tax paying QLD residents (children, retired, unemployed, people in the ‘arts’), then you’d easily get to a point where everyone in QLD that pays taxes owes a years worth of average wages to the combined creditors of state and federal governments.

    Take out the public sector workers who don’t really pay tax (they just churn it) and the numbers get much worse. I can’t do the numbers accurately but I wouldn’t be surprised if each productive person in QLD needs to do 2 full years worth of labour for the creditors.

    Not a nice position to be in, and for what? Do the residents of QLD have good roads and railways, cheap power, ample water, productive ports?

    I could cop some Norwegian style taxing if we got some Norwegian style infrastructure, but the state of the national highway + railway through QLD is a disgrace that 3rd world countries would get embarrassed about.

    Ports in QLD are a joke with parked ships sitting off the coastline a regular sight for anyone near the water.

    Meanwhile the bulk of politics rabbits on about climate change and protecting the wilderness and stopping people from fishing and all the rest. They are stopping to stamp on ants while the elephants are bolting.

    QLD needs to copy WA and start sticking two fingers to Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne and concentrate on building it’s own wealth. Develop the north with irrigation, expand the mines and ports under it’s own terms and keep the taxation and royalties for itself, and stop going to the begging table for GST revenue after giving up the family silver.

    QLD and WA combined have the pull to torpedo both the mining tax and the carbon tax and return the country back towards the ideas of Federation and make Canberra the one with the begging bowl for a change. That’s what I’d like to see – real competition between the states for workers and capital projects, with each bidding to lure capital instead of being neutered under the encompassing yoke of Federal control.

  41. Jim Rose

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_research for a colourful 2000 years history of negative advertising that every political junkie should read.

    Explaining why, with some foundation in fact, that your opponents are not worth voting for is basic to democracy.

    You need to define yourself as a candidate and define your opponent to the voters; and if you can be the person who defines your opponent — as opposed to your opponent defining him – or her — you can win.

    Negative advertising is used because it works.

  42. JC

    Negative advertising is used because it works.

    That’s true in of itself. It does work. However the Liars Party doesn’t understand strategy and how to use it. It’s an art form, not mathematical precision.

    They continue verbaling Abbott and that is possibly responsible for his negatives being so low. However they have hit lows while the two party preferred is staying up which means they aren’t accumulating support. In other words there are Coalition voters that may not like Abbott but still will not vote Labor come hell or high-water.

    This where their record comes in. They don’t have any that will wash with the voter, which means they go for the attack on the rich.

    They’re trying all the tricks but the two party is rock solid against them.

    Keep in mind that the Coalition hasn’t even begun its onslaught which they will around the election time. That will get the Liars Party negatives sky high.

  43. brc

    JC is right – they’ve succeeded in making sure that Abbott isn’t popular, and the fashionable position is to ridicule him, in the same way it was fashionable to ridicule Bush.

    However, without the 2nd plank in the strategy, of getting yourself to smell like roses, it’s a pointless exercise. People will clearly vote for someone they don’t particularly like if they either think that the person is good for the job anyway, or if they don’t like the other choice even more.

    At most I think the Labor party will achieve a swing away from itself to more donkey votes with this strategy.

    As already said – drop the anchor of the carbon tax and mining tax, and the ALP could recover by the next election. But they won’t, because they are stupid, stubborn and clueless and ideologically married to failed ideas.

  44. Ivan Denisovich

    When Tony Abbott criticises a Government program, however, he is being ruthlessly negative. As anyone should know, the Rudd and Gillard governments have carefully calibrated each and every policy to be cost-effective and to deliver the maximum possible benefit to the Australian people. Anyone who doesn’t accept this truth is just being negative.

    As one columnist noted recently, behind this strategy lies a tacit concession that Labor lacks a good story of its own to tell voters. It is effectively an admission that Labor is embarrassed by its record. And the fact that Labor is prepared to wear the tag of rank hypocrites, as Howard has pointed out

    “I can tell you the tale of the most negative opposition that I have ever encountered,” he told his audience, “and that was the opposition that my government faced between 1996 and 2007 and all the major decisions we took and achieved were taken and achieved with the solitary exception of gun control legislation which I regarded as a major decision, a very important decision. All of them were taken in the teeth of total and inconsistent and unrelenting opposition from the Labor Party.

    “The introduction of the GST, our industrial relations changes, our privatisation, the introduction of work for the dole, the introduction of welfare to work measures and the list goes on and on and on and there was total opposition.

    merely underlines Labor’s desperation. But I think it again highlights Labor’s collective sense of entitlement that they seem to regard any opposition to them as not merely wrong but an injustice, even an outrage. Such precious petals. Finkelstein, for one, clearly has much work to do.

  45. JC

    Oops I fucked my highs and lows.

    Should read.

    They continue verbaling Abbott and that is possibly responsible for his negatives being so high.

  46. John Comnenus

    It is amazing that the ALP is all negative, all the time. John Brogden, Peter Debnam and Barry O’Farrell run for NSW Premier – the ALP campaign is all about scaring the electorate that they will bring in work choices, privatise state assets and slash public services. In QLD, where the ALP slashed the services and privatised the assets, its been a straight smear campaign. At the Federal level it is the same.

    Has the ALP ever run a positive message campaign?

  47. Entropy

    Well there was “it’s time” with tough, and the “by 1990, no child shall live in poverty” by Hawkie. they were positive campaign messages. They just didn’t work out that well.

  48. Infidel Tiger

    Has the ALP ever run a positive message campaign?

    yes. “There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead”. I thought that a major positive at the time.

  49. JC

    Has the ALP ever run a positive message campaign?

    They’re reactionaries with splashings of psychopathic tendencies.

  50. Token

    John C, what does Labor stand for except to bring plunder home to its constituencies?

    The rhetoric of class warfare that kept them close to power throughout the last century no longer sells. They only promote economic change that is regressive. Their social policy is all about rights of select interest grops at the expense of another group.

    They jumped at Keynesianism & Green Malthusianism as they need an ideology to cling to, anything.

    In reality there are no new ideas that bring people to a better more free state. Rather all the tired ideas are reactionary, and lead to loss of freedom.

    They are like the nobles in the 1850’s trying to react to the revolutions of 1848. Constricting and reactionary.

  51. Entropy

    Hi Boris,
    THANK YOU for asking that question. If land is rezoned to allow a multi level building, the UCV goes way up. So the rates charged are well in excess of what a single family dwelling’s rates are.

    For instance an apartment building built on 2,500 sq generates rates in excess of $90k per quarter, but 4 blocks of single family dwellings on the same sqm of lannd would generate rates of about $4,000.</blockquote>
    The flaw in this argument is that the rezoned UCV goes up regardless of whether the block has apartments or a single dwelling. And the single dwelling rates reflect this new, rezoned UCV just like an apartment block would.. The relative rate revenue from the two types of dwellings on the same block seem fair enough to me. To equate the demand on council services of a set of apartment blocks with a single dwelling is just embarrassing.

  52. JC

    … lol It’s what they are. Recationaries harking back to the time of old.

    To his credit, as I don’t much like him, Brink Lindsay does a sterling job of destroying one of the leaders of the modern leftist movement.. Paul Krugman. Brink tore a couple of limbs off him.

    Nostalgianomics
    Liberal economists pine for days no liberal should want to revisit.

    http://reason.com/archives/2009/05/26/nostalgianomics

  53. Mundi

    I too appuld Newman for getting rid of the Ucv crap. It utterly ridoculous that hundreds can live on a block and pay the same as a single residence on the same size block. I had a unit in south bank that was $113 per qtr.. Smaller house in the burbs is 500… It’s laughable.

    What I can’t believe is that people use the unfairness in the system to justify not fixing it. The post up top is a classic example- complains about the 5x fold increase but never bothers to say they were underpaying by 5x for years.

    Concil budgets are over 50 engineering and road related. Paying per person is the only sane way to collect rates.

  54. Rafe

    Yes a poll tax is the fairest way to go but it was a bridge too far for Maggie Thatcher.

  55. kae

    Thumbnail

    When Beattie as a parting gift amalgamated the councils my land rates doubled. I went from paying one $800 ($700 with discount for early payment) land rate bill per annum to now paying two which are about $650 odd with the discount for early payment.

    Services have not improved or increased. The council is getting involved in building a motel.

  56. kae

    That’s two payments per annum of about $650 with the early payment discount.

  57. Leigh Lowe

    Only four more days until that slanderous slag from Brisbane South is gone.
    I hope Newman dispenses with the ‘grace in victory’ path …. the toothy trailer-trash Bligh has sailed very close to the legal wind and I hope Newman and sues her fat arse off.

    It is a source of great joy that, by Sunday, Clover Moore will be the most senior Lefty pollie up and down the East Coast (apart from Malcolm Turnbull).

  58. Leigh Lowe

    Dear Thumb-brain,

    Whilst we are on the subject of unfair imposts levied by and on behalf of incompentent regimes, please essplain why I (a Victorian) am paying a flood levy because dentures Beattie and the Slanderous Slag from Brisbane South forgot to pay the insurance premium?

  59. kae

    Leigh Low

    The premium was probably prohibitive with the chance of floods and cyclones (well, less floods and more cyclones if you believe the AGW goo-roos).

    Though what they should have done is put the premiums aside for all those years that we didn’t have disasters and have a disaster fund for such events. But nooooooo, they’ve pissed the money up against the wall like all the labor pardies in Australia always do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *