http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Howard-outspending-Labor-three-to-one/2007/08/07/1186252660089.html

The federal government has so far outspent Labor by almost three to one in its pre-election promises since the budget.

The Australian Financial Review reports the federal coalition has engaged in spending spree worth almost $7.5 billion compared with $2.6 billion from the opposition.

The link between government spending and interest rates is set to be a focus of federal parliament when it resumes on Tuesday.

---

Brough defends rushing indigenous laws

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Brough-defends-rushing-indigenous-laws/2007/08/07/1186252667457.html

Federal Indigenous Affairs Minister Mal Brough has defended the government's move to rush through the legislation underpinning its radical intervention into Northern Territory indigenous affairs.

The government has been criticised for trying to ram through the legislation without giving MPs enough time to consider the package, which will cost $587 million in the first 12 months.

hOWARD IS NOW TELLING US WHAT WE THINK!!! iTS NO SURPRISE REALLY-NOT COMING FROM HIM.
======================


Opinion polls are wrong, says PM Font Size: Decrease Increase Print Page: Print Matthew Franklin, Chief political correspondent | August 08, 2007
JOHN Howard has accused the Labor Party of cockiness before the federal election and shrugged off continuing poor opinion poll results as being out of step with views expressed to him by voters.

In a passionate pep-talk to government MPs and senators meeting in Canberra yesterday, Mr Howard said there was no such thing as an unwinnable election, pointing to former Labor prime minister Paul Keating's come-from-behind 1993 election victory as evidence that his Government could overcome the Labor team of Kevin Rudd.

The meeting, the first after the six-week winter parliamentary break, came after a Newspoll published in The Australian yesterday found Labor's primary vote had climbed a percentage point to 48per cent over the past fortnight with the Coalition down a point at 39per cent. The poll showed Labor holding a commanding two-party-preferred lead of 56per cent to the Coalition's 44per cent.

MPs at yesterday's meeting said Mr Howard was in a positive mood as he appealed to colleagues to maintain their unity and work rates.

A government spokesman said Mr Howard told the meeting the Labor Party was becoming cocky.

"They are thinking about the trappings of ministerial office," Mr Howard told the MPs.

"You know that we can win the election. You know that this (Labor) is not a good replacement government."

Mr Howard told his colleagues the sentiment among political commentators was that Labor was almost certain to win the approaching election, expected to be called within three months.

"This is not the read-out I have received as I have moved around the country," Mr Howard said.

He added that public disillusionment was nothing like it was when governments lost office in 1972, 1983 and 1996.

"This has been a good government," he said. "It has tackled all of (the) big issues it has faced. It will require energy, discipline and a collective will to win."

Mr Howard said that in a Newspoll a month before the 1993 election, Mr Keating's Labor team had primary support of only 39.5 per cent while the John Hewson-led Coalition had attracted 48 per cent support.

After the meeting, several Coalition MPs told The Australian they, like Mr Howard, were not seeing a reflection of polling results in their electorates.

"I'm just not hearing it," said Queensland Liberal Cameron Thompson, who holds the seat of Blair by 5.7 per cent.

"I was here in 1998 when I had guns, Pauline Hanson and the GST. That was an angry crowd and we haven't got that now."

Earlier yesterday, Assistant Treasurer Peter Dutton described Mr Rudd as "a load of crap" who had no policy substance.

"People at the moment are looking at Kevin Rudd like they look at a promo for Big Brother," Mr Dutton said as he arrived atparliament.

"It's exciting, it's fresh and when the big night comes and people actually have a closer look and they look at the detail, and they get a better understanding of what the show's actually about, they actually realise that it's a load of crap."

Quote:


They wish.

'I'm with John' tactic confounds Matthew Franklin and Sean Parnell | August 17, 2007

KEVIN Rudd has backed a new John Howard attack on Queensland Premier Peter Beattie's local government amalgamation plan, confounding the Prime Minister's attempt to turn anger over the mergers to his advantage in the federal election.

And the Labor leader has also angrily rebuked Queensland union heavyweight Bill Ludwig's attempt to have Labor federal candidates side with Mr Beattie, telling The Australian last night the right-wing faction leader should "stick to his day job".

This morning Mr Beattie said he was examining his legal options to counter federal intervention, even though he believes the prime minister's move won't work.

"Our legal advice is it's (the federal government's legislation) very flimsy," Mr Beattie told the Seven Network.

Mr Beattie said the federal bill deals with the Australian Electoral Commission's ability to conduct council plebiscites rather than local councils themselves.

"As I said, it's in the section that talks about the Australian Electoral Commission being able to offer their services for money," he said.

"It wouldn't last a High Court challenge to be honest. The issue is whether we bother to do it or not."

Mr Beattie said the prime minister's intervention on the council amalgamations was politically motivated, and the "vast majority" of Queensland councils had accepted the changes.

"John Howard is on the nose in Queensland and he knows it," Mr Beattie said.

"The polls must have really got him spooked if he is this desperate."

Mr Howard yesterday denounced Mr Beattie as arrogant and dictatorial for not listening to public opinion over his plan to scrap 84 of the state's 156 local councils.

Mr Howard declared he would amend the Electoral Act to foil legislation Mr Beattie's Government passed last week allowing him to sack councils that took advantage of an earlier offer by Mr Howard to fund local ballots over the amalgamations.

In political terms, his defence of the Queensland councils was aimed at capitalising on unpopularity of the amalgamations in parts of the state.

The Local Government Association said last week there was particular anger in the government-held federal seats of Petrie and Herbert, the new seat of Flynn and the Labor seat of Capricornia.

With Mr Rudd keenly aware that he will need to win at least three of the four affected seats to depose Mr Howard in the coming election, the Labor leader was quick to offer support for Mr Howard.

He said he had publicly opposed Mr Beattie's plans since May and had confronted him to urge a rethink. "My view ... is that people should be consulted," Mr Rudd said.

Earlier, Mr Howard vowed he would "strike down" Mr Beattie's attack on democracy. "We believe strongly that the arbitrary, jackbooted fashion in which the Queensland Government has trampled on some basic rights of people to express a view ... is quite beyond the pale," Mr Howard said.

"The target of this legislation is the outrageously undemocratic punishment of local councils for daring to want to express a view."

Openly admitting he was attempting to "shame" Mr Beattie, Mr Howard said councils were of great importance to people outside capital cities and that Queensland's challenge to the the existence of "a structure of government" had to be resisted.

"My message to the Premier of Queensland is: let your people speak, let the people of Queensland have their say," Mr Howard later told parliament.

Mr Beattie last night threatening to counter Mr Howard's move with state-initiated referendums on issues such as federal industrial relations laws, road funding and the use of nuclear power.

"The Prime Minister needs to know the people will see this for what it is, a ... stunt, and we will match it because the amalgamations will go ahead," Mr Beattie said. He said he had verbal legal advice that Queensland could challenge the move in the High Court and win and had seen opinion polls showing federal Labor would not lose votes over the issue.

But he also refused to criticise Mr Rudd for supporting Mr Howard, saying he accepted that Mr Rudd "has got to get himself elected as prime minister".

Mr Beattie said Mr Rudd had asked him during a meeting in May to postpone "aspects" of the plan until next year, but denied the federal Labor leader wanted the amalgamations shelved until after the election.

On Wednesday, Mr Ludwig, a powerful Queensland faction leader and Australian Workers Union stalwart, ordered Queensland Labor's federal candidates not to confront Mr Beattie over the amalgamations because they would not cost votes.

Mr Rudd said last night his Queensland candidates would articulate federal Labor's policy and that Mr Ludwig should keep out of the issue.

"We've got past the stage where people like Bill Ludwig can think they can just go out and issue a proclamation," Mr Rudd told The Australian.

"Bill Ludwig is wrong on this and I have already told Peter Beattie he is wrong on this.

"My candidates in Queensland will be free to articulate our policy, which is: there should not be forced amalgamations, there should be voluntary amalgamations and where forced amalgamations are proposed, they should be put tothe people."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22258976-601,00.html

Is this a bold plan or a desperate, ill considered attempt to gain some credibility with the public and create an issue that the Liberal party can gain ground on? If we were to reform the state-federal relations, would we want it to happen under these circumstances, or with a more thought out, deliberative process? Isn't any issue that involves direct interaction with local communities better handled by state governments?

PM to outline new approach to federalism

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/PM-to-outline-new-approach-to-federalism/2007/08/20/1187462102992.html

Prime Minister John Howard will continue his attack on state Labor governments with a major speech outlining more plans for federal takeovers of state responsibilities.

Calling for a new "aspirational nationalism", Mr Howard will deliver his fourth Australia Rising speech in Sydney.

The speech comes a day after Mr Howard forced Queensland Premier Peter Beattie to back down over a ban on local councils holding referendums on forced amalgamations, and two days since he flagged a federal takeover of the nation's ports.

Mr Howard used his first Australia Rising speech in January to outline the government's takeover of the Murray-Darling Basin.

In the speech, he will spell out the coalition's goals for a fifth term in office, particularly the relationship between different levels of government across the country.

"Sometimes it will involve carefully put together cooperative federalism. On other occasions it will require the Commonwealth bypassing the states altogether and dealing directly with local communities."

Mr Howard said much of the debate about commonwealth-state relations was wrongly focused on finding a balance between the respective roles.

I think it's a bit hypocritical for him to say there is too much focus on respective roles, when he is the one harping on about it. By blurring the roles, he is creating a division of responsibility that will encourage federal and state politicians to pass the blame onto each other. You get the best outcome by having clear roles.

..or is this just what the Liberal Party have become?

Is it Foolhardy and Naive to break the NPT?

Is it Foolhardy and Naive to vote for it, further?