Rudd to destroy our democracy? (1 Viewer)

[morganforrest]

By Piers Akerman
March 02, 2008 12:00am
AFTER just 99 days of the Rudd government, Australia is in the worst political position it has endured since the crisis days of the Whitlam government 33 years ago.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd went to the November 24 election claiming to have a plan to deal with all that ailed the nation.

Ninety per cent of the policies he revealed entailed agreeing with the Howard government's conservative fiscal agenda; the other 10 per cent were to be taken on trust, except for a sprinkling of gestures designed to appease the Labor Party faithful - the signing of the Kyoto Protocol, the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq and the apology to the so-called Stolen Generations.

But for all the talk, it is clear now that Rudd had no plan other than to bluff his way into office and then take the bureaucrat's favoured option and appoint committees to investigate and report on the problems.

By one accounting, the Rudd government has established a committee or review every four days, on average, since taking office. This is not leadership - it is an abject abrogation of leadership.

So, too, is the April gabfest of the best-and-brightest. Using his former Queensland government colleague Glyn Davis as the fall guy, Rudd has used his 2020 summit to duchess a number of influential Australians, who might otherwise be expected to offer reasonable criticism of his government.

In accepting invitations to the 2020 "ideas'' bazaar, they will inevitably become part of the Government's approach, whether they agree or disagree with its course.

It will be a brave individual who calls a press conference to outline his or her differences with Rudd's velvet steamroller.

In its short term in office, the Rudd government has already done more to debauch the process of parliamentary democracy than any government in Australian history, through its introduction of the non-parliamentary Friday sittings of Members in the House of Representatives.

They are not only a nonsense, they are in all probability unconstitutional and illegal, though Rudd claims to have secret legal advice - which he refuses to release - assuring otherwise.

It would appear the Clerk of the House advised Deputy Speaker Anna Burke that her position was untenable, shortly before she closed the farcical faux sitting just after 2pm on February 22.

But what other conclusion could be drawn, when she was presiding over a gathering which did not apparently require a customary Question Time - nor, indeed, even a minister to be present? A sitting at which the Government prevented votes from being taken or quorums being called?

What exactly is the point of expensively assembling the trappings of parliament when the parliament does not have the capability of voting on anything?

Any vote called for during Rudd's silly sessions will not be held until parliament sits again in a week or so, when members who were not present will be entitled to add their numbers, form a quorum and decide issues which arose last month.

The Monty Python crew could not have devised a more ridiculous situation nor one more likely to diminish the integrity of the parliamentary system.

The Opposition has correctly questioned whether the sittings are constitutional and whether they can attract the privilege accorded properly constituted parliamentary sittings.

If the Rudd government is willing to spend $1 million to stage each of these ridiculous opportunities for backbenchers to make speeches, it would be cheaper to have Hansard incorporate the papers into coverage of the regular sitting days and let the MPs return to their electorates and, hopefully, help their constituents with their problems.

Debasing the parliamentary process in this manner is not, in the short term, going to affect the lives of ordinary Australians, but it will, in the longer term, erode our nation's proud tradition of parliamentary democracy and make it easier for successive governments to whittle away the parliamentary structure until it becomes an appendix of government, not an adornment of governance.

What should not be lost upon the Australian electorate is the reality that Rudd's leadership of the ALP was entirely due to the machinations of the ALP's Victorian Left and the NSW Right.

Given the current bout of examination of links between a group of corrupt Wollongong developers and members of the NSW Right's hierarchy, that pedigree is worth keeping in mind because it is inextricably linked to a number of people who now hold senior and influential positions within the Rudd government.

The people of NSW will be unable to do anything about their government until March, 2011 and it is a safe bet that many of those close to the Wollongong disaster now will have migrated to safe havens in Canberra before then.

(In truth, what is most amazing is that NSW's Independent Commission Against Corruption has actually taken on board a reference of this nature, given the whitewash it has applied to numerous other cases of alleged corruption.)

But with parliament itself at risk, who will be able to rein in the Rudd government, born of the Victorian Left, by the NSW Right, when it takes the bit between its teeth and starts galloping?

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23302863-5001030,00.html

Discuss...

 

[williamc]

yep we are eternally fucked.

 

[Smithereens]

Yep, we all know that Piers Akerman is the most unbiased and objective journalist in Australia.

 

[jb_nc]

Piers Akerman

 

[Captain Gh3y]

when i saw this thread i was going to reply 'cue people posting 'everything in the article must be false just because piers akerman wrote it'

too late

 

[morganforrest]

when i saw this thread i was going to reply 'cue people posting 'everything in the article must be false just because piers akerman wrote it'

too late

was thinking same...

 

[Captain Gh3y]

you didn't read the first post did you?

 

[Captain Gh3y]

well out of just the first bit

AFTER just 99 days of the Rudd government, Australia is in the worst political position it has endured since the crisis days of the Whitlam government 33 years ago. FALSE

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd went to the November 24 election claiming to have a plan to deal with all that ailed the nation. TRUE

Ninety per cent of the policies he revealed entailed agreeing with the Howard government's conservative fiscal agenda; the other 10 per cent were to be taken on trust, except for a sprinkling of gestures designed to appease the Labor Party faithful - the signing of the Kyoto Protocol, the withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq and the apology to the so-called Stolen Generations. TRUE

But for all the talk, it is clear now that Rudd had no plan other than to bluff his way into office and then take the bureaucrat's favoured option and appoint committees to investigate and report on the problems. POSSIBLY TRUE

not too bad

 

[Hollieee]

Kevin Rudd looks like an icecream =)

That's more or less the only comment that I can actually be bothered to make.
Bah, how exceptionally lazy?
rofl.

 

[incentivation]

Akerman merely balances the weekend publications of the likes of Mike Carlton, Alan Ramsay or David Marr..

 

[Kirsty Xx]

But for all the talk, it is clear now that Rudd had no plan other than to bluff his way into office and then take the bureaucrat's favoured option and appoint committees to investigate and report on the problems.

TRUE

 

[Triangulum]

Yeah, Carlton and Ramsey do more than retyping the press releases of the party they support, which is Akerman's stock in trade. (Arguably, Ramsey's stock in trade is cut-and-pasting a report or speech and then adding a nasty bilious paragraph at each end, but yeah.) I particularly like Piers' directly copying the liberals' hysterical bleating about how Rudd hates democracy because there are the same number of question times and MPIs per week this year as there were last year.

 

[atreus]

what an idiot. if anyone saw that piggy akerman today on insiders they would have seen what a negative tool he is. all he is going to do is bitch and moan for the next three yrs, hoping for a lib win so that he can return to complaining about labor in opposition. he is so biased, that i find it hard to take anything he writes seriously.

as for the committees, a few points:
- the howard govt had just as many committees/reviews, etc.
- most of the time, the old govt's were on really insignificant issues, eg. beanbags, whereas rudd's cover significant areas like health.
- so, its not like these committees' results can just be brushed over. these will probably bring some huge new issues to the fore that the govt is going to have to address.

as for the 2020 summit, why is the concept of the govt asking the public for suggestions so bad? granted, it will probably be like when u open the suggestion box up in school and its all stuff that "we'll think about".
but piers' main problem seemed to be that the govt was asking for ideas in the first place. "aren't the elected representatives good enough to come up with ideas?" what a tool. of course 226 ppl are not going to cover so many areas, and none of them would have the specific expertise in all these areas. most of them are just lawyers or used to work for a politician.

 

[sam04u]

I know rubbish when I see it. And this wreaks of it.

Kevin Rudd is a good leader. We never really had serious problems in this country, so we don't need radical solutions. Just a change in the attitude, which Rudd has done brilliantly.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

There was a nice article in the Herald on Saturday about Rudd's personal generosity. It'd be nice to see Mr. Akerman mention that in a column in the future, and then relate it to the personal generosity of his hero, John Howard.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

It won't be Rudd that destroys our democracy

It will be democracy that destroys our democracy.

 

[el gwapo]

I thought something was wrong when I read the thread title...destroy the democracy

Then I saw Piers Akerman's name thrown around. It was like getting a big mac at a gourmet restaurant.

 

[chicky_pie]

Piers Ackerman > Laurie 'Labor lover' Oakes