"For there was never yet fair woman/but she made mouths in a glass."
The Fool, Act III, Scene II, Shakespeare's 'King Lear'.
I was first introduced to this quote back in the swamps of high school life. To this day I know King Lear inside and out, and more to the point, it's the reason I love Shakespeare rather than think I should love him.
But my point is that there was never yet any woman but she made mouths in a glass. Or man for that matter. We are all some level trying to capture our own essence via the mirror, and increasingly Facebook profile pictures.
I am guilty of both. As I said, we all are. There is nothing wrong with looking in the mirror or down the lens and trying to see if who we think we are matches with the vision before us.
What worries me, and what worries many people, is that there are people who look in the mirror and point the camera and say to themselves, "I hate you. You're ugly. You are so unattractive no one will ever want you. People must recoil at the sight of you, for you are a disgrace."
It is the self-loathing that frightens me more than anything, mostly because I do not and cannot understand. Maybe I am oddly blessed in my outlook, in that I look in the mirror and go, "Yes, that will do. I am happy with that." I almost never wear make-up and despite general confusion by hairdressers and others about this point, my hair is fine, thank you, and no, I don't want it straightened. I admit that I am probably speaking from an outside perspective on physical insecurities.
But there are lot of people out there fighting to improve body-image, especially that of the teenage female, who many feel are being bombarded by sexualised, negative images and the resultant feelings of inadequacy. They say every woman should be taught to know that she is beautiful.
While I applaud their efforts in trying to redress the issue, I have to ask why 'beauty' is the chosen ideal for self-loathing young women and women in general to aspire to. They use 'beauty' in order to encompass a beautiful spirit as well, of course, but I have always felt that this is a cop out.
I don't feel beautiful, and yet I am more than happy with the way I look, and the mirror holds no terrors for me. Encouraging women, and in fact people in general, to feel that they are representative of an adjective that is stuffed full of physical connotations goes right past the actual problem.
It's not that many people of all ages and sexes don't like their bodies, it's that they don't like themselves. Too much of what is plain truth or good old-fashioned self-esteem is perceived as arrogance or conceit. Too often people feel that they can't express the good feelings that they have about themselves, and then progress to believing that the original feelings were invalid and untrue.
In short, people shouldn't walk around feeling beautiful, they should walk around being themselves, whoever that might be. Rather than looking outwardly for physical validation of themselves, they should look inward for full validation. It's about embracing the good in yourself and understanding the bad. We are as human beings inherently flawed and we should not therefore judge ourselves on our faults, or our looks. Sounds cheesy, but seriously, everyone out there, if you won't be yourself outwardly, then at least try to understand and accept who are inwardly. You will be a much more contented person for it.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Ok, so now what?
Well, this is
I think it'll probably be an Abbott minority government, not so much because I'm a staunch Liberal voter, but more due to the fact that Oakeshott, Katter and Windsor (the three independents) are representative of country electorates. Their constituents will be pretty pissed if they hand power to a party that owes what seats it has won or retained to Greens preferences and are thus beholden to that party. And Bob Brown, whatever else he calls it, wants to take employment opportunities from the struggling country areas. However you feel about coal mining, those people need it just to keep their heads above water and Rob, Bob and Tony all know that. Whatever their feelings about the Nationals (the party they were all in before becoming disenchanted and running as independents), they are people who have consistently won their electorates by actually doing the work on the ground in full sight of their community. Their image and power relies on them doing what keeps their constituents happy, and if a Labor government means an ETS and an RSPT, then it also means no mining, no jobs, no money, and more broadly, no more nicely stable economy.
And on that point of the economy, that's the other reason why the independents will probably support the Coalition. One of their major considerations is the stability of the country. Australia will not be stable if the investment of the mining corporations and the Chinese desire for iron ore is restricted. We saw that with the original announcement - mining projects were cancelled all over the place. A stable country requires a stable economy, and with Labor in power and largely indebted to the Greens, you'd be taking out the main support.
Look, I know the environment is important. I know that it is vital that we preserve it, insofar as we can, for future generations. But shouldn't we also be preserving our prosperity as a nation?
Like or not, we need mining to keep us afloat in the face of Labor's monstrous debt. Like or not, we need coal fired power stations in order for us all to have electricity. Yes, there are sustainable alternatives, but they are only sustainable in terms of the fact that the resources being used are ones that are esssentially unlimited - the sun and the wind. But they are not yet capable of actually sustaining the nation's electricity needs. The clouds will cover the sun, the wind will be still and then we'll have rolling blackouts. If we're going to switch to renewable energy sources, I would rather that we took the time and did it properly, with the certainty that these sources can actually do the enormous job they need to do.
We need the mines for our economy, we need the coal for our electricity. Until suitable replacements for these two pillars of Australian society can be found, these must be kept in operation and safeguarded, because a country where there is money in the bank is what future generations of Australians will actually need.
Incidentally, I find it very curious that the people who are furthest from nature, the city-dwellers, are those who vote most to save it in voting for the Greens. Out where there are the native animals and vast tracts of bush, the people who live off the land, the farmers, all tend to vote National, Liberal, or the independents like Oakeshott, Katter and Windsor.
But on balance, yes, I believe Tony Abbott will be our new Prime Minister. If nothing else, those seats in doubt are (except for Denison in Tassie, where it will eithe be Labor or a Labor-leaning independent) probably going to go to the Liberals, because it's going to come down to the postal vote, which is largely pensioners, who, in general terms, do one of two things - vote Liberal, or vote for the incumbent. These are people with much more traditional values, who will like the idea of a Catholic family man more than an atheist woman with a de facto partner. I'm not saying that it's the right way to choose your leader. In fact, it's almost certainly the wrong way. The people who voted for Gillard for being female should feel ashamed of themselves. Sexism is sexism, regardly of which sex is discriminating against which. But the point is, with the postal vote, the Liberals will probably scrape home in both La Trobe and Corangamite. I am biased about La Trobe because I live in it, but I also keep thinking of all those rich old men and women living in retirement villages in the middle of Berwick and feeling sure that they will probably stick to the man they know in Jason Wood, (Liberal) over Laura Smyth (Labor), who is barely a blip on the radar around the electorate. Obviously I don't have similar insights with regard to Corangamite, but Sarah Henderson, the Liberal candidate in that electorate is a rather well-known ex-ABC journo. The fact the Labor candidate is the incumbent will make it incredibly tight, but I think the Libs might snap that one up too. I believe the last electorate in doubt is Hasluck in WA. I think the Libs will get that one too, if only just barely, because Ken Wyatt will make history if elected, by being the first indigenous Member of Parliament. Though this is only came to the attention of the nation last night, one would imagine that the people of Hasluck would have had this very much in mind when voting.
There's a lot of qualifiers in this blog, a lot of maybes. It's because I don't know, and neither does anyone else. People who have been studying the Australian electoral process their entires lives don't know. I can only say what I think according to my own perspective. If it ends up being a Gillard minority government, then we're in serious trouble, because the well-intentioned Greens will be pushing and pushing for actions and policies that our economy has no ability to support.
I'll be keeping my fingers crossed for Abbott as PM. There is no other outcome that will give Australia that stable government and economy it needs.
I think it'll probably be an Abbott minority government, not so much because I'm a staunch Liberal voter, but more due to the fact that Oakeshott, Katter and Windsor (the three independents) are representative of country electorates. Their constituents will be pretty pissed if they hand power to a party that owes what seats it has won or retained to Greens preferences and are thus beholden to that party. And Bob Brown, whatever else he calls it, wants to take employment opportunities from the struggling country areas. However you feel about coal mining, those people need it just to keep their heads above water and Rob, Bob and Tony all know that. Whatever their feelings about the Nationals (the party they were all in before becoming disenchanted and running as independents), they are people who have consistently won their electorates by actually doing the work on the ground in full sight of their community. Their image and power relies on them doing what keeps their constituents happy, and if a Labor government means an ETS and an RSPT, then it also means no mining, no jobs, no money, and more broadly, no more nicely stable economy.
And on that point of the economy, that's the other reason why the independents will probably support the Coalition. One of their major considerations is the stability of the country. Australia will not be stable if the investment of the mining corporations and the Chinese desire for iron ore is restricted. We saw that with the original announcement - mining projects were cancelled all over the place. A stable country requires a stable economy, and with Labor in power and largely indebted to the Greens, you'd be taking out the main support.
Look, I know the environment is important. I know that it is vital that we preserve it, insofar as we can, for future generations. But shouldn't we also be preserving our prosperity as a nation?
Like or not, we need mining to keep us afloat in the face of Labor's monstrous debt. Like or not, we need coal fired power stations in order for us all to have electricity. Yes, there are sustainable alternatives, but they are only sustainable in terms of the fact that the resources being used are ones that are esssentially unlimited - the sun and the wind. But they are not yet capable of actually sustaining the nation's electricity needs. The clouds will cover the sun, the wind will be still and then we'll have rolling blackouts. If we're going to switch to renewable energy sources, I would rather that we took the time and did it properly, with the certainty that these sources can actually do the enormous job they need to do.
We need the mines for our economy, we need the coal for our electricity. Until suitable replacements for these two pillars of Australian society can be found, these must be kept in operation and safeguarded, because a country where there is money in the bank is what future generations of Australians will actually need.
Incidentally, I find it very curious that the people who are furthest from nature, the city-dwellers, are those who vote most to save it in voting for the Greens. Out where there are the native animals and vast tracts of bush, the people who live off the land, the farmers, all tend to vote National, Liberal, or the independents like Oakeshott, Katter and Windsor.
But on balance, yes, I believe Tony Abbott will be our new Prime Minister. If nothing else, those seats in doubt are (except for Denison in Tassie, where it will eithe be Labor or a Labor-leaning independent) probably going to go to the Liberals, because it's going to come down to the postal vote, which is largely pensioners, who, in general terms, do one of two things - vote Liberal, or vote for the incumbent. These are people with much more traditional values, who will like the idea of a Catholic family man more than an atheist woman with a de facto partner. I'm not saying that it's the right way to choose your leader. In fact, it's almost certainly the wrong way. The people who voted for Gillard for being female should feel ashamed of themselves. Sexism is sexism, regardly of which sex is discriminating against which. But the point is, with the postal vote, the Liberals will probably scrape home in both La Trobe and Corangamite. I am biased about La Trobe because I live in it, but I also keep thinking of all those rich old men and women living in retirement villages in the middle of Berwick and feeling sure that they will probably stick to the man they know in Jason Wood, (Liberal) over Laura Smyth (Labor), who is barely a blip on the radar around the electorate. Obviously I don't have similar insights with regard to Corangamite, but Sarah Henderson, the Liberal candidate in that electorate is a rather well-known ex-ABC journo. The fact the Labor candidate is the incumbent will make it incredibly tight, but I think the Libs might snap that one up too. I believe the last electorate in doubt is Hasluck in WA. I think the Libs will get that one too, if only just barely, because Ken Wyatt will make history if elected, by being the first indigenous Member of Parliament. Though this is only came to the attention of the nation last night, one would imagine that the people of Hasluck would have had this very much in mind when voting.
There's a lot of qualifiers in this blog, a lot of maybes. It's because I don't know, and neither does anyone else. People who have been studying the Australian electoral process their entires lives don't know. I can only say what I think according to my own perspective. If it ends up being a Gillard minority government, then we're in serious trouble, because the well-intentioned Greens will be pushing and pushing for actions and policies that our economy has no ability to support.
I'll be keeping my fingers crossed for Abbott as PM. There is no other outcome that will give Australia that stable government and economy it needs.
Friday, August 20, 2010
A final word on the election.
I went to sleep last night worrying somewhat about what will happen at today's end.
But I woke up this morning with a pretty clear realisation of what the whole point of an election is. At the end of the day, no such thing as a single consensus of who will best lead Australia will ever come into existence, whether at this election or in the future.
In short, it doesn't actually matter what you believe in, or who you vote for, or even who wins. What it is important about an election is that the entire nation goes out and exercises a right that we were all born to, and generations before us fought for - a say in who is in charge of the nation.
It sounds cheesy, but for one day, it is eminently clear that democracy can and does work, is in fact working as we speak. People go out to polling booths, they take their kids and their dogs and they stand in line. No one speaks, but there's an atmosphere in the primary school assembly hall that says, "What we are doing matters. Maybe we hate election campaigns and spin, and we only do this every four years, but right here, right now, this is important."
So whatever happens today, be it a Labor victory, a Liberal one, or a hung parliament, no matter your emotions about the result, I think we can all take solace in the knowledge that whoever becomes Prime Minister will be so by our will, and our votes.
But I woke up this morning with a pretty clear realisation of what the whole point of an election is. At the end of the day, no such thing as a single consensus of who will best lead Australia will ever come into existence, whether at this election or in the future.
In short, it doesn't actually matter what you believe in, or who you vote for, or even who wins. What it is important about an election is that the entire nation goes out and exercises a right that we were all born to, and generations before us fought for - a say in who is in charge of the nation.
It sounds cheesy, but for one day, it is eminently clear that democracy can and does work, is in fact working as we speak. People go out to polling booths, they take their kids and their dogs and they stand in line. No one speaks, but there's an atmosphere in the primary school assembly hall that says, "What we are doing matters. Maybe we hate election campaigns and spin, and we only do this every four years, but right here, right now, this is important."
So whatever happens today, be it a Labor victory, a Liberal one, or a hung parliament, no matter your emotions about the result, I think we can all take solace in the knowledge that whoever becomes Prime Minister will be so by our will, and our votes.
Monday, August 16, 2010
This election is getting on my nerves
Greetings all,
Have not been as prolific with this blog as I wanted to be, but it's now about to fulfil its primary function, i.e. act as a vent when the world of politics starts to get me angry.
So here's a countdown of 8 things that have been annoying me, and that you should probably think about before you vote.
8. The idea that Tony Abbott is not experienced enough to be Prime Minister
As a fairly solid Liberal voter, I naturally distrust the Labor Party and though I have no doubt that solid Labor voters feel the same about the Liberals, there are certain facts about this particular point that cannot be denied.
Number of years in power over the last 14 years: Labor, 3. Liberal, 11.
Number of years Abbott has spent as a minister or parliamentary secretary: 11
Number of years entire existing Cabinet has spent as ministers: 3.
Being in Opposition is not the same as actually being in government. In Opposition, the decisions ultimately lie in the hands of other people. Shadow ministers can make comment, and possibly support or block the government's policies, but they cannot actually make policy.
All this Labor government knew how to do before they swept to power in 2007 was to make comment, not to govern. Abbott on the other hand has more actual federal governing experience than Rudd, Gillard and Swan combined, with a little to spare.
So sorry, if you're going to talk about having the most experienced government in power, then it is not Labor.
7. That voting the Greens is a good protest vote
I know that friends of mine are planning to do this one. I can't change that, and I respect their opinions, but ultimately, a vote for the Greens IS a vote for Labor. If you really don't want your vote to go to either major party, do it some other way. (I'm not gonna do a Latham and say you donkey vote, that's in some ways worse)
The Greens look new and exciting a full of forward-thinking policy right now. Remind you of anyone? Kevin Rudd looked new and exciting and full of ideas to transform the nation, but here were are, three years later with a mountain of debt and a few empty gestures to show for it.
And actually, voting Green straight up is not really a smart choice for our economy. I know, what about the environment and climate change, etc. However, we are one of a tiny proportion of nations in the world that is isn't in the serious financial doldrums. We really are the lucky country right now, and I think we tend to forget that. I have relatives in the UK - things are still really bad there.
Put simply, now is not the time to be tearing up the proverbial carpet of Australia, which is ultimately what the Greens want - big, big changes which are really not feasible with that debt load on a reasonably stable economy that's ultimately being kept together by the mining industry.
6. Julia Gillard
Yep, just Julia. I know she came to power and people were saying, "What a victory! What a triumph for Australian women everywhere!" Yeah...no. You can't commit political assassination and keep your hands clean. You can't repeat stock phrases ad nauseam and think it passes for policy. It is ridiculous to leave your campaign launch till 5 days out from the actual day we go to the polls. And finally, you cannot, CANNOT compare yourself with Barack Obama. I mean, what a joke. Parroting 'Yes, we will' in an appalling bastardisation of a phrase and indeed a man who brought inspiration to millions not just in his own nation, but globally. What kind of arrogant person is this 'real' Julia, that she thinks can compare herself with such a man and not be harshly derided? Or more to the point, how arrogant are her minders and strategists?
5. WorkChoices
To all unions who are running various nasty advertising campaigns: It is NOT 2007 anymore. WorkChoices is not coming back under any name, shape, form, guise, or permutation. Talking about WorkChoices three years after it was dismantled and replaced is useless scaremongering. WorkChoices is a political Frankenstein raised by the unions to cow the voting public into re-electing the union-controlled Labor Party.
4. Labor saved Australia from recession
Not true. There is more evidence every day that Labor's stimulus package was a rash squandering of all the billions of surplus government money Howard and Costello built up over a decade. The money is gone, it is never coming back, and it's pretty clear that by the time the various stimulus projects got off the ground, things had already started to sort themselves out economically. This is an interesting article to read if you want to know more about this: http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2010/08/12/did_labor_really_save_australian_economy_99114.html
But the point is, they're not responsible for us doing so much better than everyone else. They can say it as much as they like, but they didn't save us. If anyone rescued this country from recession, it was probably the Reserve Bank. All that $900 Rudd gave most of us did was hand large wads of cash to the Chinese manufacturers of flatscreen televisions.
3. Labor has a good economic record
This is was another one that really set me off. I was watching Sunrise this morning and heard
Labor strategist Bruce Hawker say the following, "...we do have a strong economic record to point to on the Labor side." Ahem. How can spending billions of dollars on grossly overpriced, rorted beyond all belief schemes make for a good economic record?
The BER projects have given mind-bogglingly expensive and in many cases, unwanted or unsuitable buildings to schools, most of which aren't finished. Some haven't even begun. Furthermore, how does twice or even three times as many hot water heaters as there are showers in sport clubs even begun to suggest good fiscal management?
2. Labor has, in general, done good things for Australia
Ok, so here are a few things Rudd made really important in 2007 and its aftermath - saying sorry to Australia's indigenous population, signing the Kyoto protocol and the 2020 summit.
Number 1 was, I believe, cathartic for many people, especially (obviously) the indigenous community. But I felt at the time that as wonderful as many found that moment, did it actually do anything to tangibly improve indigenous living standards, health or education? No. What use is a good feeling if it's not a prelude to action on the issue? Fast forward to 2010 and the indigenous are somewhat angrily wondering why no-one's talking about their very important issues in this campaign.
The Kyoto protocol made Rudd look committed to action on climate change. Whatever your position on climate change, Copenhagen was all too obviously a futile talkfest. Kyoto expires in two years. Again, what good is an apparently landmark gesture if there's nothing to back it up?
Finally, the 2020 summit. It sounded lovely - a diverse meeting of the minds to make plans for the future of this nation. Not a single idea put forward at that summit has been implemented, or has even come close, and just as well, because a lot of them were just plain stupid. And the Australian public knows how stupid it was - just look at the reception Julia's 'citizen's assembly' got.
1. Labor's incompetence has killed people
That sounds melodramatic, but it's true. They were Matthew Fuller, 25, Mitchell Sweeney, 22, Marcus Wilson, 19, and Reuben Barnes, who was just 16 years old.
And there are thousands of homes across the nation with electrified insulation, thousands of home-destroying fires waiting to happen, and some where it already has. All for a scheme that aimed to provide a product a lot of people already had in the name of stopping the recession.
The scheme was rushed into effect so quickly that shonky operator after shonky operator took advantage, to the point where the deaths and dangers and rorting forced it to be axed, leaving hundreds of legitimate businesspeople pretty much destitute except for warehouses fulls of insulation they can't give away.
Four people died because Labor was in too much of a hurry to 'save' us from recession to think the policy through like a competent government. Of all their failings, that is the most unforgivable for me.
So that's my piece. I don't know if it'll make a difference to how anyone thinks, or votes for that matter. But I feel I've made my opinions on who would do a better job of running this nation pretty clear, and for me, that's enough. :)
Have not been as prolific with this blog as I wanted to be, but it's now about to fulfil its primary function, i.e. act as a vent when the world of politics starts to get me angry.
So here's a countdown of 8 things that have been annoying me, and that you should probably think about before you vote.
8. The idea that Tony Abbott is not experienced enough to be Prime Minister
As a fairly solid Liberal voter, I naturally distrust the Labor Party and though I have no doubt that solid Labor voters feel the same about the Liberals, there are certain facts about this particular point that cannot be denied.
Number of years in power over the last 14 years: Labor, 3. Liberal, 11.
Number of years Abbott has spent as a minister or parliamentary secretary: 11
Number of years entire existing Cabinet has spent as ministers: 3.
Being in Opposition is not the same as actually being in government. In Opposition, the decisions ultimately lie in the hands of other people. Shadow ministers can make comment, and possibly support or block the government's policies, but they cannot actually make policy.
All this Labor government knew how to do before they swept to power in 2007 was to make comment, not to govern. Abbott on the other hand has more actual federal governing experience than Rudd, Gillard and Swan combined, with a little to spare.
So sorry, if you're going to talk about having the most experienced government in power, then it is not Labor.
7. That voting the Greens is a good protest vote
I know that friends of mine are planning to do this one. I can't change that, and I respect their opinions, but ultimately, a vote for the Greens IS a vote for Labor. If you really don't want your vote to go to either major party, do it some other way. (I'm not gonna do a Latham and say you donkey vote, that's in some ways worse)
The Greens look new and exciting a full of forward-thinking policy right now. Remind you of anyone? Kevin Rudd looked new and exciting and full of ideas to transform the nation, but here were are, three years later with a mountain of debt and a few empty gestures to show for it.
And actually, voting Green straight up is not really a smart choice for our economy. I know, what about the environment and climate change, etc. However, we are one of a tiny proportion of nations in the world that is isn't in the serious financial doldrums. We really are the lucky country right now, and I think we tend to forget that. I have relatives in the UK - things are still really bad there.
Put simply, now is not the time to be tearing up the proverbial carpet of Australia, which is ultimately what the Greens want - big, big changes which are really not feasible with that debt load on a reasonably stable economy that's ultimately being kept together by the mining industry.
6. Julia Gillard
Yep, just Julia. I know she came to power and people were saying, "What a victory! What a triumph for Australian women everywhere!" Yeah...no. You can't commit political assassination and keep your hands clean. You can't repeat stock phrases ad nauseam and think it passes for policy. It is ridiculous to leave your campaign launch till 5 days out from the actual day we go to the polls. And finally, you cannot, CANNOT compare yourself with Barack Obama. I mean, what a joke. Parroting 'Yes, we will' in an appalling bastardisation of a phrase and indeed a man who brought inspiration to millions not just in his own nation, but globally. What kind of arrogant person is this 'real' Julia, that she thinks can compare herself with such a man and not be harshly derided? Or more to the point, how arrogant are her minders and strategists?
5. WorkChoices
To all unions who are running various nasty advertising campaigns: It is NOT 2007 anymore. WorkChoices is not coming back under any name, shape, form, guise, or permutation. Talking about WorkChoices three years after it was dismantled and replaced is useless scaremongering. WorkChoices is a political Frankenstein raised by the unions to cow the voting public into re-electing the union-controlled Labor Party.
4. Labor saved Australia from recession
Not true. There is more evidence every day that Labor's stimulus package was a rash squandering of all the billions of surplus government money Howard and Costello built up over a decade. The money is gone, it is never coming back, and it's pretty clear that by the time the various stimulus projects got off the ground, things had already started to sort themselves out economically. This is an interesting article to read if you want to know more about this: http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2010/08/12/did_labor_really_save_australian_economy_99114.html
But the point is, they're not responsible for us doing so much better than everyone else. They can say it as much as they like, but they didn't save us. If anyone rescued this country from recession, it was probably the Reserve Bank. All that $900 Rudd gave most of us did was hand large wads of cash to the Chinese manufacturers of flatscreen televisions.
3. Labor has a good economic record
This is was another one that really set me off. I was watching Sunrise this morning and heard
Labor strategist Bruce Hawker say the following, "...we do have a strong economic record to point to on the Labor side." Ahem. How can spending billions of dollars on grossly overpriced, rorted beyond all belief schemes make for a good economic record?
The BER projects have given mind-bogglingly expensive and in many cases, unwanted or unsuitable buildings to schools, most of which aren't finished. Some haven't even begun. Furthermore, how does twice or even three times as many hot water heaters as there are showers in sport clubs even begun to suggest good fiscal management?
2. Labor has, in general, done good things for Australia
Ok, so here are a few things Rudd made really important in 2007 and its aftermath - saying sorry to Australia's indigenous population, signing the Kyoto protocol and the 2020 summit.
Number 1 was, I believe, cathartic for many people, especially (obviously) the indigenous community. But I felt at the time that as wonderful as many found that moment, did it actually do anything to tangibly improve indigenous living standards, health or education? No. What use is a good feeling if it's not a prelude to action on the issue? Fast forward to 2010 and the indigenous are somewhat angrily wondering why no-one's talking about their very important issues in this campaign.
The Kyoto protocol made Rudd look committed to action on climate change. Whatever your position on climate change, Copenhagen was all too obviously a futile talkfest. Kyoto expires in two years. Again, what good is an apparently landmark gesture if there's nothing to back it up?
Finally, the 2020 summit. It sounded lovely - a diverse meeting of the minds to make plans for the future of this nation. Not a single idea put forward at that summit has been implemented, or has even come close, and just as well, because a lot of them were just plain stupid. And the Australian public knows how stupid it was - just look at the reception Julia's 'citizen's assembly' got.
1. Labor's incompetence has killed people
That sounds melodramatic, but it's true. They were Matthew Fuller, 25, Mitchell Sweeney, 22, Marcus Wilson, 19, and Reuben Barnes, who was just 16 years old.
And there are thousands of homes across the nation with electrified insulation, thousands of home-destroying fires waiting to happen, and some where it already has. All for a scheme that aimed to provide a product a lot of people already had in the name of stopping the recession.
The scheme was rushed into effect so quickly that shonky operator after shonky operator took advantage, to the point where the deaths and dangers and rorting forced it to be axed, leaving hundreds of legitimate businesspeople pretty much destitute except for warehouses fulls of insulation they can't give away.
Four people died because Labor was in too much of a hurry to 'save' us from recession to think the policy through like a competent government. Of all their failings, that is the most unforgivable for me.
So that's my piece. I don't know if it'll make a difference to how anyone thinks, or votes for that matter. But I feel I've made my opinions on who would do a better job of running this nation pretty clear, and for me, that's enough. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)