The official IR reform thread! (1 Viewer)

[Generator]

No, currently it's Stealers Wheel - Stuck in the Middle With You.

Bah, you bastard . In all honesty, I didn't agree with many of the minister's statements and I thought that at times he didn't bother to respond to the actual question being sent his way, but he did remain calm and composed throughout the interview.

 

[Rafy]

how do you know what the real impacts of the reform are??

Well nobody does really do they? Thats why this Union scarmongering is unhelpful, and yes i do agree that the government advertising is in many ways the same. (However ANY government Labor/Liberal would do the same in their attempts to sell their reforms)

just because you're an economic fanboy doesn't mean they are wrong in expressing their discontent.

One again, you have misinterpreted my position. Of course they can express tehir discontent! But they should do so in a constructive, rationale manner that deals with facts, not inflated speculation.

 

[Generator]

I guess Labor told you that one?
The TRUTH is that the reforms have had the scrutinty of one of the longest periods of debates in Australian history. Even less parliamentary debate was allocated for key, and contriveral reforms of previous governments.

Thanks, deus. I may not agree with your position, but at least I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you are forming an opinion for yourself (most of the time).

No, the ALP did not tell me that, rather I noticed it for myself. The debate was gagged (people still wanted to have their say, and as such it was gagged) and the inquiry is a pathetic sop to democracy. Such facts (yes, facts) are clear enough as far I'm concerned.

 

[frog12986]

how do you know what the real impacts of the reform are??

i don't think there's anything particularly deceptive in their expression of concern over the changes. i mean if there was anything deceptive in this whole issue it is the actions of the coalition in instituting the reforms. they've spent millions of tax payer dollars on an add campaign concealing the fact that a lot of workers rights are to be stripped under the new policy.

perhaps another reason you will find that opposition is so heated is that the coalition is a particularly arrogant government. look no further than the gagged debate on this one. people are pissed off, and just because you're an economic fanboy doesn't mean they are wrong in expressing their discontent.

The impacts will only be known a short to medium period after the implementation of the policy. As for the gagged debate, pull the other one. The oppostion debated this issue in parliament for an extended period of time. The PM made the valid point, that he, unlike his predecessors in Hawke and Keating, attends every question time, and has in fact extended the duration of question time from 45 mins to over an hour. Gagged debate...the Labor party would know full well about that issue. Particularly the NSW Government..masters of the gagging of debate..

BTW only 30,000 people protested within Sydney City.. more were at the ANZAC day NRL game between the Dragons and the Roosters..

 

[walrusbear]

And Labor spent thousands on an ad that directly attacked the government.

surely to be expected given the tactics of the government??

 

[Generator]

Ah, question time isn't what has been gagged, frog. It's good to see that the PM has such a loyal follower, though.

 

[frog12986]

And surely the government tactics are valid given:

a) the inflated union campagin against the reforms
b) the complexity of such legislation
c) the confusion incited by the combined campaigns of the ALP and Unions

..any other governement would have doe the same..

 

[erawamai]

If we make a generous assumption that say 400,000 people nationwide have protested, that equates to around 17% of the 2.3 million union members within the workforce population, and around 4% of the 9.2 million people in the Australian workforce...massive numbers..

You incorrectly assume that everyone votes on the basis of economic ideology. That is obviously not the case. Where the unskilled worker who is NOT going to benefit from the reforms may vote for the Howard government on the basis of its social policy.

Whereas a skilled worker (say a lawyer, doctor, commerce graduate) who will benefit from the reforms (as they have skills to bargainwith) may not vote for the Howard government because of its social policy.

You also seem to assume that everyone who believes in something protests about it. Which again is clearly not the case.

 

[walrusbear]

Well nobody does really do they? Thats why this Union scarmongering is unhelpful, and yes i do agree that the government advertising is in many ways the same. (However ANY government Labor/Liberal would do the same in their attempts to sell their reforms)



One again, you have misinterpreted my position. Of course they can express tehir discontent! But they should do so in a constructive, rationale manner that deals with facts, not inflated speculation.

well i thought debate in parliament was a good venue for constructive opposition but it didn't yield anything.
the strikes are constructive in a way because they highlights the strong dissent in the country that is left ignored by the government.
i believe any hyperbolic arguments are used, in this context, to rally support for opposition. and if you believe that the unions/Labor shouldn't be allowed to employ this then you should also demand Kevin Andrews and the government to cease their rhetoric as well. instead they should provide us with constructive and rational facts as to how these policies WONT be socially damaging.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

edit: Damn you NCAP forum!

 

[walrusbear]

And surely the government tactics are valid given:

a) the inflated union campagin against the reforms
b) the complexity of such legislation
c) the confusion incited by the combined campaigns of the ALP and Unions

..any other governement would have doe the same..

the government advertising hardly accounts for the complexity of the legislation
if anything it added to confusion with poor propaganda

 

[walrusbear]

edit: Damn you NCAP forum!

hahahahaha
that's scary

 

[frog12986]

Ah, question time isn't what has been gagged, frog. It's good to see that the PM has such a loyal follower, though.

Indeed. More loyal followers than any recent leader of the ALP.

In fact this leads me to another point. Mr Beazely has completely dismissed his predecessors standing and claims that his platform is different, unique and will yield results for the Labor party. If this is so, then why has the Labor party platform, established under Mr Lathams leadership, not been dissolved and a new model established. Obviously, it is kind of difficult to gain following when your stance and positioning on issues are so profusely ambiguous that noone really understands your leadership and party direction..

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Obviously, it is kind of difficult to gain following when your stance and positioning on issues are so profusely ambiguous that noone really understands your leadership and party direction..

They do have problems on some issues... but at the moment I would say the ALP base is fired up more than ever. They are all against the proposed changes and big kim is stepping up to the plate for them.

 

[erawamai]

Obviously, it is kind of difficult to gain following when your stance and positioning on issues are so profusely ambiguous that noone really understands your leadership and party direction..

You would well know, if you knew you Liberal party history, that it is difficult for any party to maintain an identity in opposition. I'm thinking, Howard Number 1, Downer, Peacock et al (when the Liberal party couldn't decide if it was very wet or very dry)

Especially in a time of instability. An opposition, no matter who they are, is going to have trouble.

 

[frog12986]

You incorrectly assume that everyone votes on the basis of economic ideology. That is obviously not the case. Where the unskilled worker who is NOT going to benefit from the reforms may vote for the Howard government on the basis of its social policy.

Whereas a skilled worker (say a lawyer, doctor, commerce graduate) who will benefit from the reforms (as they have skills to bargainwith) may not vote for the Howard government because of its social policy.

You also seem to assume that everyone who believes in something protests about it. Which again is clearly not the case.

I did not make reference to voting intentions and the factors that entice people to vote one way or another. The unions and media are promoting this deep-seated opposition to the reforms, however these numbers do not reflect this assertion. Indeed many people do not condone protesting, however surely numbers would be a little more weighted than these figures.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

You would well know, if you knew you Liberal party history, that it is difficult for any party to maintain an identity in opposition. I'm thinking, Howard Number 1, Downer, Peacock et al.

I'd say there would still be huge problems for labor. For instance in the libs, the biggest divide would be between religious social conservatives and economic rationalists. Whereas in the Labor party, I think their unions/workers have been somewhat diminished, with alot going to the Liberals... meanwhile the intellectuals and environmental voters have gained more weight in the Labor party.

 

[erawamai]

however these numbers do not reflect this assertion. Indeed many people do not condone protesting, however surely numbers would be a little more weighted than these figures.

Well because not everyone gets out there to protest do they. \

You can't say that because x number of people protest and that because this is only a small proportion of the population the position of the protestors isn't widely supported...especially when you acknowledge that not everyone gets out there to protest.

 

[frog12986]

You would well know, if you knew you Liberal party history, that it is difficult for any party to maintain an identity in opposition. I'm thinking, Howard Number 1, Downer, Peacock et al (when the Liberal party couldn't decide if it was very wet or very dry)

Especially in a time of instability. An opposition, no matter who they are, is going to have trouble.

I did not deny that fact. My point was based around the number of people who 'follow' John Howard in comparison to Mr Beazely due to those aformentioned factors...

 

[Rafy]

IR protesters block Sydney's M4

More than 3,000 transport workers marched towards the motorway after voting to block all lanes .
More than 15 freight trucks blocked traffic in both directions.

And what exactly did that achieve?