Posts by Craig Ranapia
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Re that Bill allowing police to stand for local government. It was actually a law change under the previous government (about 3 years ago I think) that took that ability away from them.
And if my memory serves, that was the most contentious (and heavily submitted on) part of the Policing Act, which went through the full dress parliamentary process.
It's moot now, but to my mind Dean Knight makes a pretty compelling case for the Policing (Involvement in Local Authority Elections) Amendment Bill being constitutionally suss law that should never have been put through under urgency.
Even on the level of sheer politics, I think National will come to regret being so damn quick to abuse urgency. It's certainly going to hard to credibly cry foul (however justly) if the next Labour-lead Government decides to grab that shabby precedent with both paws.
-
I beg to differ. I think that's brilliant politics.
I agree that it's brilliant electoral politics for the ALP who'd rather not have a contentious policy debate in election season. Whether Gillard's done jack shit for those "Aussie battlers" who pick up the tab for the mining industry's idea of a "fairer taxation environment" -- and will keep doing do while the 'consultation' is dragged out as far into the next electoral cycle as possible -- is open to question.
And how much of this consultation do you think is going to be conducted openly and transparently where the plebs can see? Based on the mining industry's previous form, their definition of "good faith" don't go that far and Gillard should be asked some hard questions about whether she's anything more than the same old bullshit with a new ribbon on the box.
-
As for the guts, one does wish the LibNats could have exhibited some in ditching the Poison Dwarf before 2007 made it academic...
By "before 2007 made it academic" I presume you mean "before those stupid peasants went to the polls and changed the government (and Prime Minister) all by themselves". What silly radical ideas are you going to come up with next?
-
But then the mining companies had time on their side this time with an election looming and the ALP was looking at a hammering in the polls if they couldnt nullify the millions of dollars of free advertising the liberals are getting from the anti-mining tax lobby so close to an election and they've just shown how badly they want to win this election.
In that case, Gillard needs to front up to the electorate and tell them how watered-down her promised carbon tax legislation will be if industry lobbyists haul arse and run another dishonest multi-million dollar smear campaign before the election. Or the ALP could grow a pair, do the hard yards and try to win an actual policy argument with actual voters instead of being a bakery full of poll-driven fruitcakes.
-
I'd wager that its a pretty safe bet (to continue the gambling theme) that Gillards "lady bits" are unlikely to be the main rationale behind the ALP's strategy in replacing an increasingly unpopular and potentially election losing PM with the current (and relatively popular) deputy prime minister...
You might be right -- though I'm sure BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto are well pleased that Gillard wasted no time in rolling over and playing dead.
Incoming prime minister Julia Gillard has pledged to cancel the government's $38 million advertising campaign aimed at countering the mining sector’s anti-tax ads in return for co-operation in discussions from the industry.
In her first press conference as Labor leader, she asked for the mining industry to cancel their ads in response as a sign of “good faith.”
Ms Gillard said Australians have a right to the revenues generated from mining but more consultation on the proposed resources super-profits tax was needed with the industry.
She promised to throw open the doors of the government to industry for consultation, if the mining sector throws open its “mind” to the views of the government.
Gillard can't be that naive, can she?
Now, who wants to bet that, as we speak, the Labour Party right are figuring out how far they can water down any carbon tax legislation while still keeping a straight face?
-
Or, y'know, you could actually have a look at their site.
I could, but like Kiwibog the reek of decomposing hack bullshit makes my eyes bleed.
the commentators over here are saying that Gillard will destroy Tony Abbott in an election.
Ah, yes... I always look to Spotsbet and the TAB for their insightful political analysis and rigorous polling methodology. Meanwhile, I don't know if "ooh look - ladybits!" is going to be any more of a election-winning strategy than it was for John McCain. We shall see. (Then again, perhaps my POV is warped by spending my adult life in a country where it isn't superfreaky to see women in positions of authority.)
-
Confess: We're all looking forward to The Standard explaining how Julia Gillard's rise to the top of the greasy pole is nothing like the ascent of that baby-eating back-stabbing hell-bitch Jenny Shipley. :)
-
I gather his indecision over an emissions trading scheme, the hostile attentions of the mining lobby, and a fairly nasty public mood over refugees all contributed, but it still seems bizarre to me.
OK, am I the only Kiwi who suspects this is just the usual Australian political party factional wars (and the Liberals are as toxic as the ALP) gone feral, public and I suspect electorally suicidal? Aussie politics is a toxic mash-up of Neighbours and I Spit On Your Grave at the best of times, but the ALP better be praying that the "Rudd can't win, Gillard can" polling that keeps being cited is right.
The only thing I'm sure of is that Tony Abbot is thanking Jesus for the early Christmas... The ALP was ruthless in exploiting divisions and ill-discipline in Howard's Coalition, don't think Abbot is not going to do the same. Karna's a bitch...
-
Have a coherent position, backed up with facts and numbers. "Free Tibet now!" is not a coherent position.
Neither is "two, four, six, eight, we don't want your racist state" a particularly coherent statement of the slightly more complex arguments around sporting contact with apatheid-era South Africa. Think you could also argue that for all the sound and fury, the protests against the '81 Tour did not hasten the fall of apartheid by a single day, let alone stop The Tour.
And the anti-tour movement's "yappy dog" routine was massively divisive, to put it mildly. (Three decades later, you can still raise the blood pressure of a lot of people on all sides of that shit fight.)
Still not sure the likes of Trevor Mallard, Helen Clark and Phil Goff would agree that they were a counter-productive failure on the part of attention-seeking nutbars.
-
I should note that I'm still not entirely sure what I think about it all ...
Neither am I, to be honest. Nice thing about PAS is that there's always an argument or two floating around you may ultimately find unconvincing, but can't dismiss out of hand.
Who knows -- perhaps Parliament and I are going through a rough patch, but things will work themselves out in the end.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 467 468 469 470 471 … 1235 Older→ First