Daniel Andrews is an economic fool

For sheer hypocritical moronic stupidity, it’s hard to beat this from Mr Lockdown Victoria about his putting the state into hock to the Chinese:

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has defended the state’s relationship with China, saying any cooling of the partnership would cost jobs.

He cannot see what’s wrong with China because they are doing just what he would do himself if he could. The people of Victoria have with blind faith in miracles, put the state’s economy into the hands of the person least capable of directing us towards growth and prosperity. The last line of the story is pure enchantment:

Mr Andrews travelled to China to sign a second BRI deal in October last year, agreeing on areas of co-operation including increasing the involvement of Chinese companies in Victoria’s $107bn infrastructure program.

Infrastructure spending – such as the tunnel and the train – literally means public spending on loss-making projects. Economic ignorance comes at a very high price and we are going to pay it. The Federal Government, if for no other reason than to protect itself never mind Australia’s future, must prevent this communist jerk from ruining the economy.

The kinds of forecasts we are dealing with seem similar to this: Australia’s coronavirus response avoided about 14,000 deaths, Chief Medical Officer says. That is the story from just today!

This entry was posted in Politics of the Left. Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Daniel Andrews is an economic fool

  1. Old School Conservative

    Infrastructure spending – such as the tunnel and the train – literally means public spending on jobs for the Bruvvas.
    And big dollars for developers, consultants, and banks.
    One of which will offer Comrade Dan a Bob Carr-like sinecure sometime down the track.

  2. stackja

    Dan giving jerks a bad name?

  3. Methinks the alphabet union that funds and totally controls Dan Their Man are the ones behind all of this.

  4. I think the headline to this piece should be edited: delete “n economic”

  5. Penguinite

    As I just opined in The Australian (if my comment gets printed) “Mr Andrews, if you’re confident of Victorian support call an election! Now!”

  6. stevem

    I think the headline to this piece should be edited: delete “n economic”

    No, definitely not. If article were to be renamed like that you’d have no idea if you’ve read the article before.
    Unless, perhaps, they were to be suffixed with a #1, #2…..

  7. Bruce of Newcastle

    I was struck by this headline this morning.

    The Obama People Turned the Whole Philosophy of the American Founding Upside Down. Not Because They’re Evil, but Because They’re Idiots.

    The problem is that Obama is clearly not an idiot. He’s very intelligent, but his agenda is not the agenda of ordinary citizens of the United States. It is a Fabian agenda.

    Dan Xi Man’s agenda is similar. Economically he is only wrong because the whole Marxist economic system is wrong. How do you detox a progressive cultist? I hope he can do that before he, and the whole of Victoria, imbibes the Kool-Aid.

  8. Robbo

    He may well be an economic fool but he is also a total wanker who is destroying the economy of Victoria without any inkling that what he is doing will be a disaster for the State. The Leader of the Opposition, Michael O’Brien needs to make it crystal clear that the Coalition he heads will never support this sellout and will, when elected to government, repudiate whatever arrangements made between the Andrews Government and China. The Chinese should be under no illusion that the cancellation of their unholy alliance comes with any kind of compensation. If they want to take the risk it is their decision.

  9. John64

    This gold-plated imbecile, who is wilfully destroying Victoria’s economy, has the hide of a rhinoceros to cite the economic and jobs imperative to defend his sellout to the CCP.

  10. AndrewWA

    Victoria is rapidly becoming Australia’s 3rd “welfare state” (following the lead of Tasmania and Sth Australia).

    Poor fella my country……..

  11. Farmer Gez

    As farmer, I’ve been shafted to the order of eighty grand because of the Chinese tariff and then have to listen to our fool of a premier praise the Chinese.
    I’m a tad pissed off.

  12. Roger

    Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has defended the state’s relationship with China, saying any cooling of the partnership would cost jobs.

    Yes, Chinese jobs. Unlike Andrews the Chinese aren’t stupid; Belt and Road sees the exporting of Chinese labour to states that sign up.

  13. Robber Baron

    Bring back the guillotine.

  14. Dasher

    Now the real BS starts to cover their backsides from the accusations (gathering momentum) that the response to COVID 19 has been a hysterical over over reaction. Oh and frankly that good doctors estimate is about as reliable as the original…….he is making it up.

  15. Dinky

    Wow these deaths avoided figures get thrown around with gay abandon don’t they? Didn’t the CMO of Queensland or NSW recently claim up to 30,000 deaths were avoided just in their state alone?

  16. DD

    I believe NSW avoided up to 7.5 million deaths.

  17. Boambee John

    Daniel Andrews is a malevolent fool.

  18. nb

    ALP branding: organ harvesting; fentanyl, viruses; debt invasion.
    ALP once associated itself with the USSR. Now it is all in with China.
    100 million civilian deaths, and counting.

  19. notafan

    Cost jobs.

    Tell that to all our local retailers and the thousands of others Red Dan has put out of work.

    Oh sorry Dan, you mean jobs for your mates.

    My bad.

  20. min

    Look at how much he pays union mates to work on his jobs , labourers getting 6 figure sums . So jobs at bigger financial cost as well as cost of doing business with the Chinese . Look at Sri Lanka and loss of port . Remember Chinese already own 49% of Melbourne Port
    friend rang office of her Labor member to ask where the money was coming from and was told Treasury Dept. of Victoria ROFL

  21. Dr Faustus

    Yes, Chinese jobs. Unlike Andrews the Chinese aren’t stupid; Belt and Road sees the exporting of Chinese labour to states that sign up.

    So does the China Australia Free Trade Agreement.

    Chinese-owned companies registered in Australia undertaking large infrastructure development projects above $150 million will be able to negotiate, similarly to Australian business, increased labour flexibilities for specific projects.

    Although they have to be paid at Australian rates.
    Thus a Chicom minimum wage wukka on $520/month + ~$200 social benefit contribution, would need to be paid at least $3,000/month in Yarragrad – around 4x home pay.

    However ChAFTA is silent on Chinese infrastructure companies charging Victorian projects Chinese bodies at award rates (a minimum of 10x home pay) – and then docking the wages back in China.

    On the upside, this is much less of a problem than owning infrastructure built to Chinese engineering and construction standards.

  22. Spurgeon Monkfish III

    But, we’ve been assured that Victoriastan will be the last jurisdiction in this country to fall to the chinese.

    So dunderhead dan signing up to the “one bat, one toad” initiative is simply not a relevant consideration.

  23. Terry

    @DD
    #3465704, posted on May 27, 2020 at 3:23 pm
    ‘I believe NSW avoided up to 7.5 million deaths.’

    Does that figure include potential economic refugees from the People’s Republic of Victoriastan?

  24. Professor Fred Lenin

    The latest story in the UK Express and Daily Mail is saying that when Michel Barnier was foreign minister of France he was responsible for sending French scientists to Wuhan to establish a lab and train Chinese to run it , this was contrary to advice from French scientists who didnt trust Chinese ethics and protestations of innocence . Seems the Chinese were experimenting with mixes of viruses ,why? Curiosity or biological warfare ? Pandemics kill people without damaging assets ,practical people the Chinese .
    Wonder if Bernier will turn up for the next round of Brexit talks ? They are a waste of time ,globalists order they dont negotiate ,like their communist mates .

  25. Leo G

    Australia’s coronavirus response avoided about 14,000 deaths, Chief Medical Officer says.

    Australia does appear to take an erratic course, we seem to have avoided the same 2000 about seven times.
    If Australia has a third of the population of the UK, epidemiology herd theories predict it would have considerably lower death rate than that one-third- arising from different margins above the critical population size and markedly different reproduction numbers (differences in population dispersion)

  26. Sirocco

    So having performed the equivalent of selling his daughter into a chinese brothel, he now complains that if he closes the brothel down, his daughter will lose her job.

  27. Kneel

    “…these deaths avoided figures…”

    yeah, well, I wonder how long we can keep avoiding the slaughter of many, if not most, of our “leaders”. Not that it would be a tragedy mind you, and such a cull is long overdue – problem is, none of the current mob (gov or op) is any better, so it may make things worse, at least for a while. More Bob Carr, anyone? Anyone? Bueller? <crickets>

  28. mareeS

    Lots of ratty things going on between CCP and Victoriastan. Cut it off, at least until they gain some sense.we in NSW still have the southern high water bank of the Murray, which means we own the water border.

  29. H B Bear

    Democracy. Good and hard.

    The de-sal plant feather bedding single handedly raised costs industry-wide while I was in Victoriastan. Clearly nothing has changed.

  30. rickw

    Infrastructure spending – such as the tunnel and the train – literally means public spending on jobs for the Bruvvas.

    One aspect overlooked is the impact of these projects with no payback on the real economy. I know of real companies struggling to locate and pay for pressure vessel welders because they’ve gone off to stick together less demanding structural steel on Dickhead Dan projects for more money.

    But where’s the end to this? Dickhead Dan for all his destruction remains untouched? Where’s the end or resolution to this short of someone sticking a bullet in him?

  31. liliana

    Everywhere I look I see entire gangs of Chinese tradies. Surely anyone with a functioning frontal lobe must realise more foreign workers = less employed locals. Why are my taxs paying for people to sit on welfare AND to import our replacements? The people who voted for comrade Dan should be cringing in a corner in shame and remorse.

    Tasmania just announced a huge construction push. I bet it’s another OBOR special deal.

  32. Alex

    Yet the Victorians love him and vote him back in. Definition of insanity “keep doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome each time”. As I say “Please Victoria secede, please”!!!!!

  33. H B Bear

    But where’s the end to this? Dickhead Dan for all his destruction remains untouched? Where’s the end or resolution to this short of someone sticking a bullet in him?

    Anyone who was in Victoriastan in the early 1990’s knows exactly where this ends.

  34. Rockdoctor

    Fed’s could close this down tomorrow invoking the foreign powers sub section of S52 and even cloak their reasons in National Security. Yeah the response from Beijing would be furious and grounds probably stretching it but from seeing Hawke’s creative interpretation over Franklin Dam am sure an ALP Gov wouldn’t hesitate if the shoe was on the other foot. Even if this all settles down after the CCP convention which I suspect, time is coming when we are going to have to choose a side…

    As for Victoria watch this space. History of the late 80’s early 90’s being repeated.

  35. Catcalling Inebriate

    China is, of course, on a path that Luttwak amusingly compares with bthe appointments immediately prior to Gorby in the USSR. That is, dumb. This much is obvious. Kates, however, seems to think we should not take their money. In which case I wonder – as I have looked up his employment – whether he is taking a stand against renminbi students at RMIT? If not, why not? Surely this is the front line?

  36. OldOzzie

    Andrews has put China above his party and his nation

    GREG SHERIDAN

    This week the federal Labor leader, Anthony Albanese, and his deputy, Richard Marles, explicitly repudiated Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews over his decision to sign up to China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

    In signing a BRI memorandum of understanding, Andrews contradicted and defied Australian foreign policy on a matter of geo-strategic importance. That is irresponsible and damages Australia’s national interests.

    Andrews contradicted federal ALP policy as well. This was more explicit when Bill Shorten was Labor leader because Shorten had decided to back bipartisan Aust­ralian policy.

    That policy is that while Australia welcomes Chinese investment in principle, it will not sign up to the BRI as a program. This is because­ the BRI is freighted with Chinese geostrategic ambition and has been highly problematic in many countries. Instead, Canberra’s view is that each Chinese investment proposal should be assesse­d individually on its merits.

    Andrews’s irresponsibility and his determination to act against the national interest and national policy should be a bigger issue. It is almost unprecedented.

    You can imagine how reluctant Albanese and Marles are to get into a policy fight with Victoria’s Labor government. But they and Labor’s foreign affairs spokeswoman Penny Wong deserve praise for the way they have stuck to Australia’s national interests in the spate of recent disputes betwee­n Canberra and Beijing.

    Albanese said in a radio interview that if he became PM he would not be signing up to the BRI and that he had never supported the Andrews government’s deal.

    Marles said in a press conference: “A future Labor government would not be signing a Belt and Road agreement with China. When it comes to Chinese investments in infrastructure projects, that’s a matter which we think should be taken on a case-by-case basis and we should proceed down that path with some caution.”

    The rebuke is clear and explicit.

    Previously, Labor frontbench senator Kimberley Kitching had, quite courageously, been the main Labor voice making the obvious case that Andrews was wrong in principle to back the BRI and set up a state foreign policy against Australia’s foreign policy. Kitching’s remarks were in support­ of what turned out to be the Albanese-Marles official federal­ Labor position. Albanese has stressed, for example, that Labor is “as one” with the Morrison government in calling for an independent inquiry into the outbreak of coronavirus.

    Victorian Treasurer Tim Pallas bizarrely argued that the federal government’s call — with which, remembe­r, Albanese is at one — “vilified” China. He blamed the Morrison government for the punitive tariffs and other restrictions Beijing has lately applied against us. Does Pallas also blame federal Labor? Andrews endorsed Pallas’s remarks.

    Labor agriculture spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon also contradicted Albanese, Marles and Wong by saying the Morrison government was responsible for the Chinese tariffs. All this shows that Labor is deeply divided and a bit all-at-sea on China, but Albanese, Wong and Marles have so far held it together pretty well at the leadership level.

    It is difficult for any opposition to offer bipartisan support to a government. Bipartisanism normally means the government wins. But both sides of polit­ics have mostly maintained a bi­part­isan position on national security.

    They do this for two reasons. One, they both genuinely value national security. And two, ­although it may not always be obviou­s, it is good politics. Mark Latham as opposition leader attacke­d George W. Bush at the height of Bush’s unpopularity. But he suffered in the polls because people thought Latham threatened our US alliance.

    A similar thing happened to Bill Hayden as opposition leader. Similarly, in government, Bob Hawke reacted furiously to KGB efforts to cultivate and compromise former senior Labor Party official­ David Combe. Hawke cut off all contact between Combe and members of the cabinet. In doing this, he convinced the whole of Australia, and international actors, that he and his government took national security seriously.

    Unusually, Hawke won votes on national security. Even if it is generally difficult for Labor to win on national security, it is nonetheless very easy for it to lose votes in enormous quantities on that issue. So Albanese, Marles and Wong, in great contrast to Andrew­s, have bolstered national security and helped keep Labor electable.

    Andrews seems to argue that the BRI has no national security element. If that is his argument, it is a remarkably ignorant one. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo added his voice this week in oppos­ition to Victoria’s BRI deal. ­He wrongly thought the deal could involve telecommunications and the US embassy had to clean up after his remarks. But his statement nonetheless underlines the fact that the BRI is a geostrat­egic issue.

    The BRI has been used to entrap­ Third World countries into unsustainable debts, which Beijing can then transform into brutal political­ leverage. Thus Beijing now owns a port in Sri Lanka. It also has a heavily fortified naval base in Djibouti.

    It has sometimes left Third World nations crippled with debt. The BRI has sometimes produced useless and shoddy infrastructure. It has sometimes involved the exclusive­ use of a Chinese workforce with no real technology transfer and little economic gain for the host country.

    We can be confident nothing like this will happen in Victoria, not because we can have confid­ence in the Andrews government, but because the federal government won’t let any such thing happen­. Any Chinese investment must be approved by the Foreign Investment Review Board. Any Chinese participation in infrastructure building will have to go through normal government procedures. Any Chinese workforce will need federal immigration approval­.

    It is possible that some Victorian firms may get a sliver of work with Chinese BRI projects in third countries.
    But if the price of getting that work is for the Victorian government to campaign against Australia in a geostrategic dispute, that is too high a price.

    The federal government and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade are adamant that advance consultation by the Victor­ians with Canberra over this deal was minuscule and meaningless.

    Andrews has set himself up as making geostrategic foreign policy decisions against Canberra. He should now answer questions on Beijing’s actions in Hong Kong, its internment of a million Uighurs, its imprisonment of human rights lawyers, its smashing up of Christian churches, its actions in the South China Sea. If his answer is that these are matters for a federal government not a state government, then that should also have been his answer on the BRI.

  37. John A

    notafan #3465723, posted on May 27, 2020, at 3:53 pm

    Cost jobs.

    Tell that to all our local retailers and the thousands of others Red Dan has put out of work.

    Oh sorry Dan, you mean jobs for your mates.

    My bad.

    No – just reverse it.

    You good; Dan Bad!

  38. Old Lefty

    I can see a rerun of the Cain-Kirner crash coming on, but I don’t see a Kennett waiting in the wings in the Liberal Party.

Comments are closed.