Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

[dedja]

[robranisgod]

Just as bad a Keating bringing up about the British Generals when disinterring the unknown soldier in France

Did Keating drive over your cat?

Wish he'd run over my poodle

Would that make it a minced poodle instead of mincing poodle

[Q.]

And not a word over this buffoon's blunder this week...apparently the first time in history that repealing a tax will save a government money...WADH

[Strawb]

I shall leave this here.

[woodublieve12]

I shall leave this here.

he's a peanut....

[Strawb]

I shall leave this here.

he's a peanut....

Scary thing is People will Vote him into government. Then watch what he does. I don't like Gillard but I don't like this fool either.

[GWW]

He hasn't got a clue about economics. Its sad that he's likely to be our next PM.

[Strawb]

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 6261572064
please explain Mr. Abbott

[Psyber]

He hasn't got a clue about economics. Its sad that he's likely to be our next PM.

Isn't that what the Cabinet team is for?
Only Kevin Rudd in particular, some others in the ALP, and some of the media, think the PM should control everything Presidential style.

[GWW]

As leader, he should have some interest in/knowledge of it though.

From memory, he's been quoted saying economics is "boring".

[Hellboy]

He hasn't got a clue about economics. Its sad that he's likely to be our next PM.

Gillard does? Its sad she is our PM
In fact, it is disappointing that recent Treasurers don't have formal qualifications for the job.
Howard, Keating, Costello, Swan.
Willis, Dawkins, Kerin & even Hawke all had proper qualifications for the job.
Foley: well the less said, the better. As he freely admits, he has no qualifications for anything past year 11 standard

[Gozu]

He hasn't got a clue about economics. Its sad that he's likely to be our next PM.

Isn't that what the Cabinet team is for?
Only Kevin Rudd in particular, some others in the ALP, and some of the media, think the PM should control everything Presidential style.

Ironic given the control President Howard exerted over the Liberal Party.

Usually it's the Libs that have blind faith in their leader, Rudd wanted/tried to go down the Howard route in the ALP and it blew up in his face.

[Gozu]

He hasn't got a clue about economics. Its sad that he's likely to be our next PM.

Gillard does? Its sad she is our PM
In fact, it is disappointing that recent Treasurers don't have formal qualifications for the job.
Howard, Keating, Costello, Swan.
Willis, Dawkins, Kerin & even Hawke all had proper qualifications for the job.
Foley: well the less said, the better. As he freely admits, he has no qualifications for anything past year 11 standard

Treasury does the work, the Treasurer of the time just has to be across the detail and present it to the public.

Keating seemed to have a bit more influence over Treasury but got smacked down a few times where as it was known Costello was pretty "hands off" and didn't have much of a relationship with them. I'd think Swan would be in a similar position.

[Hellboy]

I think the role should be more than that though Gozu & how can you achieve that if you have to rely on the PS. You may recall the Keating/Stone non-relationship (which actually disproves my theory I'll just go over to this corner and debate with myself )
In the US, Cabinet Secretaries are appointed for their specific industry knowledge & experience. Here, it depends on whether you're a good presenter (Ian Turpie for Treasurer), what faction you're in & whether you've been a good boy.
I'm not saying all US Treasurers etc have been good, but surely its the role of the Treasurer to lead Treasury and not the other way around?

[dedja]

I suspect you misunderstand the role of government and their ministers.

What qualifications do you expect?

Does the Defence Minister have to be a 5 star general? ... or the Health Minister a health practitioner?

They provide policy leadership (allegedly), not technical operational expertise.

[Psyber]

He hasn't got a clue about economics. Its sad that he's likely to be our next PM.

Isn't that what the Cabinet team is for?
Only Kevin Rudd in particular, some others in the ALP, and some of the media, think the PM should control everything Presidential style.

Ironic given the control President Howard exerted over the Liberal Party.
Usually it's the Libs that have blind faith in their leader, Rudd wanted/tried to go down the Howard route in the ALP and it blew up in his face.

Howard didn't have control actually in the sense of undisputed power - just a general agreement to be loyal to majority decisions made in Cabinet by its members.
So you didn't get the same conflict between Howard and Costello over the leadership that showed up between Hawke and Keating, driven by ego and a sense of entitlement.

I know from discussion with him that Alexander Downer didn't entirely agree with every decision made in Cabinet.
However, he was a team player and had promised his loyalty and support for majority decisions when he stepped down from the leadership for Howard, and he kept that promise once the Cabinet voted.

The Libs tend not to have Cabinet members counting numbers in the background constantly.

The Olson and Brown rivalry in SA were something of an exception and the legacy of that dragged on a bit here.
Because of that the local media - and ALP supporters - are always muttering about potential moves to replace Isobel Redmond, but it doesn't emerge as they predict/hope.

[dedja]

The local Liberals are a special case, with the 2nd generation of family feuds still dominating the party.

Names like Wilson, Goldsworthy, Chapman, Evans, Hall, etc, etc ... the feuds have been alight for 30 years and will take many, many years (if ever) to extinguish.

It's not a media beat up, it's real ...

[Hellboy]

I suspect you misunderstand the role of government and their ministers.

What qualifications do you expect?

Does the Defence Minister have to be a 5 star general? ... or the Health Minister a health practitioner?

They provide policy leadership (allegedly), not technical operational expertise.

I would expect the Minister to have some knowledge of his portfolio so maybe you are just inured to the current situation & misunderstand what is ideal & what is the current situation.
I see your point on defence; not any easy department. I wonder how Cosgrove would go as a Minister for Defence?
Smith is a LLM and it is rumoured that he is very distant from his department.
PS: I dont think we've had a 5* General have we?

Why not have a Dr as head of Health?
Why not have an economist as Treasurer?
Why not have a diplomat / B International Studies / language speaker as Foreign Affairs (hey we have one dont we?)
Should we stick with the current situation where lawyers are Ministers for everything?
What make a lawyer so good at everything?

I just think the US system seems better. Actually having someone at the top that can understand their portfolio.
The current Australian system lends itself to Yes Minister episodes

[Gozu]

[Why not have a Dr as head of Health?
Why not have an economist as Treasurer?
Why not have a diplomat / B International Studies / language speaker as Foreign Affairs (hey we have one dont we?)
Should we stick with the current situation where lawyers are Ministers for everything?
What make a lawyer so good at everything?

I just think the US system seems better. Actually having someone at the top that can understand their portfolio.
The current Australian system lends itself to Yes Minister episodes

Because it's politics not a company. Craig Emerson would probably be the most qualified person in either party to be Treasurer but it ain't going to happen but by the same token no one would be better qualified to be Foreign Minister than Rudd (fluent manadrin speaker).

Yes, it's unfortunate how many lawyers there are in both of them and one would prefer a bit more real world experience but alas thats politics.

[Hellboy]

touche

The thing is....... most private business people aren't silly enough to go into politics