Federal Election

[JohnnyG]

Labor's lead now 60,000, was 80,000.

It will finish at less than that, bur comfortably in front.

I'll look forward to the banner headlines at the final result and the Opposition acknowledgement that they lied (or are thyick).

Or both

Are those other 8 seats added back in yet too? That would further increase Labor's 2 party preferred lead.

[redandblack]

They're currently adding them in, hence Labor's going from 2,000 behind, to 80,000 in front.

The last few seats are LNP strong seats, so that lead will reduce substantially, although Labor will finish with perhaps 50.1+%.

As Wedgie said a while ago, an amazingly close 2PP result.

Secondly, Newspoll can take a bow, predicting 50.2%.

[redandblack]

The vote has now been finalised.

Labor 'won' the 2PP by just over 30,000 votes.

All those journalists, LNP politicians and followers who claimed they had won the 2PP vote were.............wrong.

The only time this has been publicised was a barrage of (incorrect) headlines the only time the LNP led (briefly and by a tiny amount).

At least this time, it's the final result, so it would have to be publicised

[Psyber]

Personally I think this is understandable in the circumstances and predictable.
But I can imagine the carry on that would have appeared here had the Coalition formed government with Independent support than said this!

http://au.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/a ... s-gillard/

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has warned that key promises she made during the federal election may be broken because of the "new environment" created by the hung Parliament.

[redandblack]

Did she say 'never, ever', Psyber, or only 'core or non-core' promises

As for your other statement, nothing would have been said by our mainstream media.

[Gozu]

"Business as usual under Labor's 'new' income management":

The new system of income management designed by the federal Labor government has been progressively rolling out across the Northern Territory since the start of August.

The new system is allegedly “non-discriminatory”, applying to all welfare recipients across the NT and potentially Australia.

“They kept telling me it was good for me. That I was doing really well with my finances since being on the card. They’ve got no idea. I’ve had that much trouble with bills since they took control.

“I can speak up for myself. But the others, they’ve got no chance.”

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/09/20/bus ... anagement/

Disgraceful.

[Sojourner]

Personally I think this is understandable in the circumstances and predictable.
But I can imagine the carry on that would have appeared here had the Coalition formed government with Independent support than said this!

http://au.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/a ... s-gillard/

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has warned that key promises she made during the federal election may be broken because of the "new environment" created by the hung Parliament.

But will the Southern Expressway duplication be going ahead?

[Psyber]

But will the Southern Expressway duplication be going ahead?

I doubt it the way the SA ALP is cutting costs to fund essentials like MPs pay rises - with no objections from the other side of the House of course.
I notice SA Water's charges rose in July from 97 cents per Kilolitre to $1.28 too - just under a 32% rise.

[Gozu]

"Vic Labor MP lets loose on Gillard's 'messy, visionless campaign":

Victorian Socialist Left MP Martin Foley has penned a savage takedown of the ALP’s federal election campaign, saying the twin pillars of Labor’s traditional support base were callously abandoned by a “messy, contradictory and visionless campaign that hoped to fly under the radar of serious policy engagement.”

The ALP’s dual constituencies — progressive voters and the traditional working class — were both abandoned in the slavish service of shallow focus groups, argues Foley, and leadership and policy ideas were almost entirely lacking.

“The easy way out is the low rent, empty approach to politics solely for power’s sake. The approach reached a nadir in the 2010 campaign through abusing the focus group tool to generate lowest common denominator policies that resonated with no-one,” Foley writes.

Foley says the ALP’s shocking 38% primary vote was a “commentary by voters who had previously supported Labor going elsewhere.”

“You don’t lose 14 seats, suffer a 5.4% loss in your primary vote and end up with 38% of the primary vote when people stay with you.”

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/09/21/vic ... -campaign/

[Psyber]

About those promises on health: http://www.australiandoctor.com.au/arti ... 06EE41.asp?

Four-hour target to be ditched 10-Feb-2011 By Paul Smith

THE mandatory four-hour waiting target for public hospital emergency departments looks set to be trashed as reports suggest it will be ditched by the Federal Government in an attempt to sell its remaining health reforms to state governments next week.

The target, announced last year, was a key commitment by former prime minister Kevin Rudd and would have been phased in over four years, beginning with patients in the most urgent categories.
About 600,000 people each year - or one in three patients - wait for more than eight hours in emergency departments before being seen, according to government figures.

However, a similar mandatory target was ditched by the UK’s National Health Service last year amid long-running claims that hospital managers were compromising patient care to hit the targets. Common tactics included non-urgent patients being forced to wait in ambulances outside hospitals before being admitted into the emergency department.
The UK government replaced the four-hour targets with new performance measures, including the number of unplanned re-attendances to A&E and how patients are prioritised for treatment.

The Gillard Government's latest concession, reported in Sydney’s Daily Telegraph this morning, follows revelations earlier this week that she will also abandon her attempt to make the Commonwealth the dominant funder of public hospitals by clawing back 30% of GST from state governments.
The revamped health reforms will be pitched to state government leaders at a make-or-break Council of Australian Governments meeting on Monday.

Last year, Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon announced other U-turns on the government's health reforms - once tagged by ministers as the most ambitious since the introduction of Medicare. They included plans to shelve its voluntary registration scheme for GP practices, and capitation payments for diabetes patients.

Ms Roxon also revealed the government would delay the scrapping of after-hours Practice Incentive Payments following a backlash from GP groups.

[redandblack]

Good work, Psyber, another attempt to fix our health system scuttled by State Governments.

[Psyber]

Good work, Psyber, another attempt to fix our health system scuttled by State Governments.

True.
I was hoping the full federal takeover of health would happen,when it was first raised.
But it appears both levels of government wanted to keep the buck-passing option open.

[redandblack]

Agreed.

[Darth Vader]

people should be encouraged to buy private health insurance. To those who cry poor the social workers could perhaps offer the alternative of substituting the coin spent on pay tv, chateau cardboard, pokies, mag wheels for the car on hp and takeaway food on health cover. But I know this is unpopular with the lefties so the state has to step in and support them. Meanwhile, hardworking dilligent people with actual jobs get stuck with the bill.

[Psyber]

people should be encouraged to buy private health insurance. To those who cry poor the social workers could perhaps offer the alternative of substituting the coin spent on pay tv, chateau cardboard, pokies, mag wheels for the car on hp and takeaway food on health cover. But I know this is unpopular with the lefties so the state has to step in and support them. Meanwhile, hardworking dilligent people with actual jobs get stuck with the bill.

Prior to Gough Whitlam deciding we needed Medicare's predecessor Medibank, John Gorton had increased the subsidies for *basic level private health cover to the point that, subject to a means test, the government would fully pay for it.
All the poor had to do was fill in the form to apply for the increased subsidy.

*Basic level covered share ward and 75% of doctors' fees - and that meant 75% of the AMA fee not of a much lower fee invented by the government.
If you wanted a private room and 100% of fees you paid the extra fees for that yourself without extra subsidy.
[Most doctors accepted the 75% for the less well off patients.]

Private cover was affordable because it was administered by lodges, associations, and unions, without a big bureaucracy to support as is now needed to satisfy the government's reporting requirements.
My father, a clerical assistant in the SA Railways, was a member of two funds - the NHSA via the Druids' Lodge and the SA Railway Workers Union fund.
He had worked out that in those days he was allowed to claim medical bills from both funds and make an occasional profit when it was most needed.

One advantage of that set up, with most people having at least basic private cover, was the easy transfer of patients between public and private hospitals.
If somebody's condition deteriorated they could be transferred to the public system, and those treated in the public system could transfer to a private hospital for their convalescence.
It made sense but it got in thte way of dogma and control.