Is it over for Rann?

[fish]

Maybe we should start up a "Is it over for Michelle" thread?

[Jimmy_041]

Mike likes to get his face next to every job created in South Australia, but it works both ways pal:



http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/sa-business-journal/port-lincoln-tuna-processors-to-stop-producing-john-west-cans/story-e6fredel-1225833189349

[Jimmy_041]

Last night I had a few drinks and discussion with some people who work in the mental health sector in this State - they are not happy and were quite vocal about Rann's commitment to mental health support in this State.

I did a bit of research tonight to see if what they were saying was correct, and it was:

Here is an extract from the Executive Summary of the Glenside Campus Master Plan

The transformation of the Glenside Campus will include:

> A new 129 bed, $100 million+ hospital, new health buildings, a 15 bed mental health intermediate care facility and 40 supported accommodation places. Health services on the Glenside Campus will include:
> Acute Adult Inpatient Unit (53 beds)
> Post–Natal Mental Health Facility (6 beds)
> Secure Rehabilitation Inpatient Service (40 Beds)
> Drug and Alcohol Services SA Inpatient Services (30 beds) and Outpatient Services
> Intermediate Care Services (15 beds)
> Supported Accommodation (40 beds)
> A major public cultural hub for the arts in the iconic and historic buildings
> Accessible open space including children’s play areas, new wetlands, tree-lined walkways and bicycle paths
> A village retail precinct, with shops, restaurants and cafes, together with a village square linked to the hospital, cultural hub and residential areas
> Commercial development, fostering local employment opportunities
> A residential area, including some affordable housing and supported accommodation
> New major access points to the Glenside Campus from Fullarton Road, Glen Osmond Road and Greenhill Road.

and an extract from ABC News Monday 22nd February 2010:

Mr Rann has defended the Government's Glenside redevelopment plan.

"Construction starts next month on a $130 million new mental hospital - 129 beds and supported accommodation. It seems that the Liberals must have missed that."

A prominent psychiatrist Professor Robert Goldney has questioned the Government's figures.

"That's a con because 30 of those beds are for drug and alcohol persons. Six of them for young children," he said.

Who can you trust Mike - its there in black and white

Also, do we only have 93 people in this State that need help with mental problems?

And who wins out of this? The Arts but more importantly: the SA Film Corporation

What a joke

[am Bays]

[LBT]

Typical snobby Liberal arrogance on this thread...as a low (yeah low, Im not gonna pretend to be some high paid guru like others on this site) things are good for me at the moment, I work 50 hours a week and look after a wheelchair ridden mother 40 hours a week, and believe that our state government is doing a good job. What annoys me though is people winging about items such as ...."i bought a house for $180,000 in 1990 and now i have to pay $15,000 land tax on it even thoiugh it is valued at $750,000" my heart is not bleeding.

[mick]

Typical snobby Liberal arrogance on this thread...as a low (yeah low, Im not gonna pretend to be some high paid guru like others on this site) things are good for me at the moment, I work 50 hours a week and look after a wheelchair ridden mother 40 hours a week, and believe that our state government is doing a good job. What annoys me though is people winging about items such as ...."i bought a house for $180,000 in 1990 and now i have to pay $15,000 land tax on it even thoiugh it is valued at $750,000" my heart is not bleeding.

LBT do you think rents are at a reasonable level? I am a "snobby Liberal" I just let a two bedroom house for $285 per week, the young couple renting it are on good incomes, but it is hard to see how they will get out of the rental cycle. Land-tax gets passed on to the tenants and Rann's proposed "energy audits" (est cost $1500) will also be passed on to the struggling tenant. The ALP pretends to stand up for the less well off, they seldom do in practice. To be honest I should love the ALP every time they are in power inflation/government spending goes up and the price of real assets appreciates. I also take it you are happy with the arrogance, lack of accountability and consultation with stake holders (RAH doctors & staff is a prime example) and secrecy. Rann doesn't want ICAC why? The cost of it is a drop in the ocean compared to what it might save or uncover. I'm glad that the government seems to be helping you and your mother

[redandblack]

Labor are all bad. Here's a link proving it.

Liberal are all good, here's a link proving it.

Well, for the record, i think they're both a mixture of good and bad. They both make mistakes, they've both got their good guys and bad guys, but to read this forum lately, it's total good versus total evil.

Link.

Link.

Link.

Boring.

My summary at the moment is as follows:

Rann has generally governed pretty well. I think he's got a bit removed and his minders haven't helped him one bit. He's in danger of losing - yes, losing - an election that should have been a formality, because of it. The Chantelois affair should have been faced up to on day one. It's given people a circuit-breaker to punish Rann, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the argument.

The Liberals have little idea of policy costing, but they're presenting a reasonable alternative at last. I'll do a Psyber and declare that I like Rob Lucas a lot - a genuine low-profile Blood's supporter. The electoral reality is that the Libs have a hard job to win enough seats, but you never know.

While this board has become a link-fest and is losing its civility, I'm sitting it out.

Back when that returns

End of frustrated rant

[Wedgie]

I think you conveniently missed out the pro labour links that Gozu kept supplying that seemed to kick it all off mate. A bit one sided of you!?

Personally I'd like to thank the people who provide links be they pro Labour or pro Liberal or neither as at least they're doing what we request and not copying and pating entire articles which breaches copyrights like some do in other parts of the forum. So a big well done from me all!

[wycbloods]

Mike likes to get his face next to every job created in South Australia, but it works both ways pal:



http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/sa-business-journal/port-lincoln-tuna-processors-to-stop-producing-john-west-cans/story-e6fredel-1225833189349

I wouldn't trust everything you read in the advertiser Jimmy.

There will be very minimal, if any, job losses at the Pt Lincoln Tuna Processers despite what the advertiser have reported.

Out of the 260 they have reported only about 35 are full time and the other 225 are casual and work 12-30 hours per week.

[redandblack]

I think you conveniently missed out the pro labour links that Gozu kept supplying that seemed to kick it all off mate. A bit one sided of you!?

Personally I'd like to thank the people who provide links be they pro Labour or pro Liberal or neither as at least they're doing what we request and not copying and pating entire articles which breaches copyrights like some do in other parts of the forum. So a big well done from me all!

I've already been in strife with Gozu for criticising his links previously, so that's wrong for a start. He also posts links that both praise and criticise each party. So you're wrong there also.

As for the rest, I'd prefer a bit of reasoned debate rather than tit-for-tat links showing that the other lot are demons.

I think I posted a link on here once,. so thanks for your praise, even though it was unnecessary

[Wedgie]

I think you conveniently missed out the pro labour links that Gozu kept supplying that seemed to kick it all off mate. A bit one sided of you!?

Personally I'd like to thank the people who provide links be they pro Labour or pro Liberal or neither as at least they're doing what we request and not copying and pating entire articles which breaches copyrights like some do in other parts of the forum. So a big well done from me all!

I've already been in strife with Gozu for criticising his links previously, so that's wrong for a start. He also posts links that both praise and criticise each party. So you're wrong there also.

As for the rest, I'd prefer a bit of reasoned debate rather than tit-for-tat links showing that the other lot are demons.

I think I posted a link on here once,. so thanks for your praise, even though it was unnecessary

Yeah, I just thought your comment was one sided as it seemed to only cover 2 of the 4 sorts of links posted on here as Ive seen all 4.

Labor are all bad. Here's a link proving it.

Liberal are all good, here's a link proving it.

Anyway, I like links, keep them coming all.

[Jimmy_041]

I do agree with you to a degree r&b, but you've obviously missed my point on this one and why I moved over to the Rann thread

This thread is about Rann
Rann said that this election was about trust
He misrepresented the Glenside Campus Master Plan and got caught
He is Minister for the Arts and so his portfolio has benefited from a further erosion of mental health facilities in this State

As for Gozu

He also posts links that both praise and criticise each party

500 - 10 posts is hardly balanced and most of those 10 have come in the past month

[redandblack]

Fair enough, Jimmy.

As you know, This isn't the first time I've given my opinion about links. Sometimes they're helpful and interesting, but I just think they've turned into a monotonous daily routine and everyone just retreats into a set position. That's fine, I just don't find it very stimulating. if others do, no problem, I said I'd just keep out of it.

On your specifics, Jimmy, I'm sure they're good links, but I'm just as sure that Isabel stuffed up her expressway costing big time. I'm also sure she said she wasn't in control of her own destiny.

They're big mistakes, but both sides make big mistakes.

[Jimmy_041]

Well, here's some debating points:

1. Isobel relied on 2009 statements from Pat Conlon as to costings for the expansion of the Southern Expressway, when he said thwey couldn't afford it. Does that mean he stuffed up as well and how come they can afford it now?

2. Both parties have a set agenda for releasing their policies - mainly to stop the other side from stealing them. Her problem was that she was put in a situation by her minder which she shouldn't have been - she should tazer him for that . Her fault was that she said that she wasn't in control of her own destiny meaning the timing of announcements, but it was taken the wrong way (which was only natural for everyone to do).

She was always going to make mistakes because she's not as "slick" as Rann (I love it when the media call him "slick" - very appropriate)

[Squawk]

The Liberals have little idea of policy costing

R&B

to be fair to all electoral contenders, (Cwlth and State), I've always felt that unless you are the govt of the day, you are on a hiding to nothing when it comes to costing policy proposals. The govt of the day has the benefit of the Treasury doing its costings - and Treasury doesn't always get it right either.

The ultimate democratic principle should be equality where possible and where appropriate. So for example, a set formula should be applied for staffers and media minders, so everyone gets the same to work with throughout the term of govt. Whoever is in govt at any one time always uses resource availability to maximise their political advantage, which is not good democratic process IMHO.

I also think that Treasuries should be available to all parties to cost proposals. Simply allocate Treasury staff to each party or Independent. The problem there though is that there will be pressure for leaks to all parties on the proposals being costed by others. That is not insurmountable though. After all, Parliamentary Counsel draft bills for all members of Parliament.

In terms of advertising, I think the taxpayer should fund political advertising in caretaker periods for all candidates, based on an appropriate formula. So for example, the independent candidate for the liberation of millipedes would not get the same advertising budget as a major/recognised party.

Anyway, there's a bit of food for thought. In summary, standardisation access to resources would ideally ensure that the voting public can make decisions based on clear facts, rather than saturation promotion or for the 'little guys', an inability to promote or get proposals costed in a manner consistent with the govt of the day.

[fish]

...the independent candidate for the liberation of millipedes would not get the same advertising budget as a major/recognised party.

If millipedes voted with their feet they'd be the new force in Australian politics.

[Squawk]

...the independent candidate for the liberation of millipedes would not get the same advertising budget as a major/recognised party.

If millipedes voted with their feet they'd be the new force in Australian politics.

very good!

[Psyber]

.... My summary at the moment is as follows:
Rann has generally governed pretty well. I think he's got a bit removed and his minders haven't helped him one bit. He's in danger of losing - yes, losing - an election that should have been a formality, because of it. The Chantelois affair should have been faced up to on day one. It's given people a circuit-breaker to punish Rann, regardless of the rights or wrongs of the argument.
The Liberals have little idea of policy costing, but they're presenting a reasonable alternative at last.

I agree with you here r&b, but I also agree with Wedgie's comments about your slant.
I've never been able to work out whether you really believe you are being balanced, or are just pretending.
I also agree with an earlier comment that the party in opposition is always at some disadvantage in getting costings worked out, because they don't have full access to the Treasury staff and background information.

[redandblack]

My slant, Psyber?

I post what I post. I've never claimed to be balanced, I'm clearly to the left, politically speaking. I do get a little sad when I think some posters are sometimes so one-sided as to not see anything other than evil in their opposition. That's a general comment only.

You'll excuse my mirth at being accused about my slant by you and Wedgie, of all people

On a serious note, squawk, you and Jimmy have posted interesting comments verty recently and I haven't been on-line much to respond, but they deserve a proper response, so I will soon.

[Jimmy_041]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Su3tsL-ZkY