Big Mal Turnbull gets done over by squirrelizer
Supply your own captionMonday 24 August 2009
Sunday 23 August 2009
Who'll lead the Libs at the next election? Turnbull is blowing like a gale
Bookmakers Sportingbet no longer rate Malcolm Turnbull as a raging red hot favourite to lead the Liberals at the next election.
In June, when Peter Costello announced he was heading home and would not be around for the next election, Sportingbet rated Turnbull a near certainty to lead the Libs and offered odds of $1.15. Joe Hockey was seen as the only challenger with any prospects and was rated a $4.25 chance. Other pretenders (oops!) contenders that bookies rated were Tony Abbott ($11), Julie Bishop ($13), Andrew Robb ($15) and Peter Dutton ($15).
Turnbull's odds are now out to $1.90, while Jockey has firmed to $3. Other firmers are Abbott $5.50 and Robb $7.50. Bishop is out the door at $21. Dutton is also a blower and is now $21 - perhaps Costello should have kept his mouth shut rather than singing this bloke's praises.
Fairfax's Age and Herald report that Liberal staff and MPs despair about their prospects of winning the next election and continue to canvas leadership alternatives to Malcolm Turnbull. The mood is so bad that a gathering organised by Mr Turnbull's office at the B Bar in Canberra on Wednesday night to boost morale descended into a discussion about ''saving the furniture''.
According to one Liberal who attended, the leadership question - including the merits of replacing Mr Turnbull with Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey or Andrew Robb - was loudly discussed, with four or five of Turnbull's staff nearby.
''We were not talking about crunching numbers [for a leadership vote] … but the fact that it was being so openly discussed with so many people was just extraordinary.
''The dynamic was incredibly interesting. Turnbull's staff … didn't want to talk to anyone, they just sat in their own little group.''
The source said there was widespread dissatisfaction about poor tactics from the leader's office, a lack of preparation for the next election and the absence of an overall message.
Opposition health spokesman Peter Dutton, Victorian senator and former Costello adviser Mitch Fifield, South Australian Liberal MP Jamie Briggs and NSW Liberal MP Alex Hawke were all present.
Pic credit: Fairfax
Clarence Valley Council intends to ask NSW taxpayers to fund a bigger slice of the jetty primarily being built for a privately-owned waterfront hotel
At its ordinary monthly meeting last Tuesday, after a small amount of argy-bargy, Clarence Valley Shire councillors unanimously voted to go ahead and build a jetty in front of Sedgers Reef Hotel at Iluka.
Never mind that the community preferred any new jetty to be sited elsewhere in Iluka Bay, the cost blow-out, a lack of transparency or a growing public perception that Council is doing favours for mates.
Just vote to ask New South Wales taxpayers to fork out all or part the $65,000 plus extra funds required to bring additional customers to the hotel.
For years local government has rightly complained about cost-shifting by the states and Commonwealth and called for this third tier of government to be taken seriously.
On Tuesday Clarence Valley Council voted for a good example of why local government is always a poor second-cousin twice removed; not to be taken too seriously by the rest of the political family.
So if you live elsewhere in New South Wales and are finding it hard to get additional funding for vital infrastructure like health services operating out of the local hospital, extra school sports equipment or that much needed community hall - just remember that Clarence Valley Council may have got into the Rees Government treasury ahead of you so that one North Coast hotelier can have his latest wish fulfilled.
Iluka jetty and pontoon: The Glass House revisited?
Secretary to the Treasury Ken Henry on the good, the bad and the ugly
From Dr. Ken Henry's speech to the Australian Economic Forum on 19 August 2009 concerning the Rudd Government tax review now underway:
"So what does this mean for the panel’s deliberations? As a first step, the panel is considering taxes and transfers on their individual merits, how they sit within the overall architecture of the tax-transfer system, and how they will meet the opportunities and challenges of the future. Importantly, this assessment is being undertaken without regard to the level of government which currently administers that particular tax or transfer.
The Panel’s concern is to ensure that our tax-transfer system is calibrated to emerging challenges and opportunities that arise from things like population ageing, the re-emergence of China and India and continuing technological change.
As part of its enquiry, the panel is assessing how different taxes and transfers rate against the standard policy assessment criteria – fairness, efficiency, simplicity, sustainability and coherence. These criteria will enable us to identify taxes which should be levied, taxes that are so irredeemingly poor that they should be abolished, and taxes that are reformable – the good, the bad and the ugly."
"So what does this mean for the panel’s deliberations? As a first step, the panel is considering taxes and transfers on their individual merits, how they sit within the overall architecture of the tax-transfer system, and how they will meet the opportunities and challenges of the future. Importantly, this assessment is being undertaken without regard to the level of government which currently administers that particular tax or transfer.
The Panel’s concern is to ensure that our tax-transfer system is calibrated to emerging challenges and opportunities that arise from things like population ageing, the re-emergence of China and India and continuing technological change.
As part of its enquiry, the panel is assessing how different taxes and transfers rate against the standard policy assessment criteria – fairness, efficiency, simplicity, sustainability and coherence. These criteria will enable us to identify taxes which should be levied, taxes that are so irredeemingly poor that they should be abolished, and taxes that are reformable – the good, the bad and the ugly."
Saturday 22 August 2009
Other Aussie pollies with domain names up for grabs
After the brief kefuffle over the fact that the Nats managed to corral nathanrees.com.au, I decided to have a looksee at which other Aussie pollies may be vulnerable at the next round of state and federal elections because of domain parking or cybersquatting on their names.
The first to surface was malcolmturnbull.net which is up for sale.
Followed by the rather puzzling active but restricted site kevinrudd.net (created in the USA) which was also up for eBay auction by Sean Slater in 2007.
It was still for sale just before Kevin07 won the federal title bout against John Howard.
Although NSW Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell has managed to get his dot coms all to himself, nobody in his party thought to capture barryofarrell.net or barryofarrell.org it seems.
As for NSW Nats Leader Andrew Stoner - well he has andrewstoner.com.au (andrewstoner.com is another restricted currently inactive site) but andrewstoner.net as well as andrew stoner.org appear to be up for grabs.
Which sorta makes the Nats open to a little payback after all their crowing on ABC News Radio yesterday.
And before other senior pollies start to feel smug - a fella in Los Angeles has parked on joehockey.net and tonyabbott.net is about to become available to the first taker.
Already available is tonyabbott.org.
One can almost feel the online political parodies forming out in cyberspace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
