Do the Liberals have any good policies?

[Ratts of Tobruk]

I'm sure we must be missing one or two, but the big ticket items seem to be:

• An extremely expensive parental leave scheme (only available at mother's pay level)
• $30Billion broadband network that asks people to pay several grand to connect to houses
• An anti-free market Direct Action policy on climate change that is more expensive than the 'Carbon tax' (for everyone saying they will break this promise post-election, note they're still committed to 5% reductions by 2020)
• A 1.5% levy on ~3000 businesses to cover less than half the cost of the parental leave scheme (they said this is temporary, so maybe longterm they'll use a 5% GST increase* to pay for all of it, so don't expect a drop in your income tax when that comes about)
• NEW: A 1.5% company tax cut for all businesses, however the levy they added to the ~3000 biggest businesses mentioned above means no change for them and shareholders (Super funds, pensioners, etc) don't get franked dividends from those 3000 companies.
• UPDATE: Abbott changed his mind and will now support Labor's agreed Gonski reforms
• A removal of the carbon tax while keeping the carbon tax compensation (despite it being a 'budget emergency' with Hockey & Robb saying $50-70 billion of savings are needed)
• Removal of 12,000 public servants through 'natural attrition', who would all have to be higher level public servants sacked immediately to equal the quoted $4.8 billion 'saving'**
• A turn-the-boats-back policy they can't mention to the Indonesians which probably won't work & will cause more scuttling of boats, endangering refugee & Customs officials' lives. UPDATE: They'll also re-organise the bureaucracy to use a 3 star general, instead of a 2-star; will expand facilities to cater for more arrivals; and cut our legal refugee intake. They have also now said they'll buy boats in Indonesia if they think they might end up being used to try to get to Christmas Island/Australia.
• Removing the MRRT, but not the PRRT
• Removing enforcement of the Fringe Benefits Tax rules (AKA restoring the no-questions-asked 20% deduction rort that was going to save taxpayers $1.8 billion)
• Creating more bureaucratic units within govt departments with more reporting requirements and ministry advisory councils in order to cut regulations (contradictory? They do have two regulation changes they've specifically outlined, but Labor are already acting on those NHMRC & environmental approvals. We're left with the plan to link senior public servants' performance pay to their ability to cut regulations)
• Bringing Deregulation and Aboriginal Affairs under direct control of the Prime Minister's department (Not actually a 'big ticket' item as it's a minor chain-of-command change dressed up as something major, but Aboriginal Affairs is a big issue so should be included)

Yeah! We finally have one good policy! HECS-style loan for apprenticeships in skill shortage areas. The miniscule apprenticeship wages have always been a big discouragement. It's $5K/year.

What have I missed? Is there an actual announced Coalition policy you would vote for? And you obviously can't say the ones that the ALP are doing already.

The community-controlled Hospital boards sounds interesting, but I can't see it removing that much bureaucracy because any govt institution requires transparency & oversight and hospitals that can't attract talented hospital administrators can't be left to suffer.

*Oh, and don't forget the GST is a consumption tax just like the carbon tax - which was apparently going to ruin Australia. Also like the GST it is applied unevenly across the economy and isn't applied to imports (if items are under $1000). Unlike the GST it benefits the environment and doesn't require businesses to collect it and fill out a bunch of paperwork.

**We should add that the full detail and costings for the Coalition policies haven't been revealed. Their budget shortfall is estimated to be $30-70 billion. This $4.8 Billion number was revealed to Peter Martin as a PBO conclusion, rather than the actual report and we don't know which budget's financial figures that was based on.

 

[rayven]

Reading between the lines of the sitting liberal MP, the coalition will most probably build a nuclear reactor in Port Augusta to hopefully convince BHP to go ahead with the expansion at Roxby Downs. They'll say its a green clean policy and that they're being environmentally responsible. They'll get away with because of the commercial media with huge ties to the nuclear industry have been controlling anything it can on nuclear matters for decades.The same factor seems (media) to be the case in all of the liberals 'policies'

I don't think SA has the room in gaols for what the protesters will have to say if that becomes the case.

 

[Gough]

Wasn't there some sort of thought bubble about a Northern Investment Zone? I also note nobody has been willing to defend this dogs breakfast of a policy suite.

 

[Docker Clint]

Wasn't there some sort of thought bubble about a Northern Investment Zone? I also note nobody has been willing to defend this dogs breakfast of a policy suite.

They're turning the north of Australia into a food bowl apparently.

I'd consider voting for the coalition if they'd drop the idiocy of wrecking the NBN. "Oh here's a plan that will deliver a slower speed, but you'll get it quicker, it's cheaper to put the infrastructure in but will cost millions more to maintain, did mention it's out of date technology?".

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Wasn't there some sort of thought bubble about a Northern Investment Zone? I also note nobody has been willing to defend this dogs breakfast of a policy suite.

I have asked this in person of friends who are Liberal voters and they haven't given a single response either. It's incredible.

 

[Docker Clint]

I have asked this in person of friends who are Liberal voters and they haven't given a single response either. It's incredible.

The PM is a redhead. That's probably enough for them

 

[Stumpy Pete]

I'll have a go at defending some of it or at least justifying why it appeals to me.

FTTN NBN - My understanding is that major insitutions will get FTTP and for private dwellings in will be FTTN with people having the option of forking out money to get FTTP. Is this frees up some billions to be redirected to priorities that I consider to be more worthwhile than FTTP to private dweillings then it makes sense to me.

I'm not sure I consider the PPL to be unaffordable. As Hockey noted in his speech in the great hall a few weeks ago. This, along with the tax on business to help pay for it, is about levelling the playing field for women and employers in all sectors. Currently small business simply cannot afford to offer PPL schemes that Government and big business can yet I can imagine they would be taken to the cleaners if there was evidence that they avoided employing women of child bearing ages because they were worried about losing training investment costs and employment churn costs associated with women leaving such employers once they fell pregnant (or were thinking about starting a family) because they were looking for an employer with a better PPL scheme.

Keeping the carbon compensation is a political decision pure and simple. It avoids claims about "cutting" pensions etc.

The turn the boats back will be a massive gamble. My take on it is that the Coalition are hoping that the short term pain of turning boats around and the risk and danger it creates for all involved will be worth it if they can present a less marketable product for people smugglers. Of course there is a massive risk that the bluff has already been called on this.

On the MRRT - given the small level of revenue now informring the budget I think this would be covered by the savings from not proceeding with the Gonski reforms.

So why am I likely to vote for the Coalition. I think they will be a better job of the boring day to day job of Governing. I'm someone who is keen for a period of unremarkable Government.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[The_Reaper]

Wasn't there some sort of thought bubble about a Northern Investment Zone? I also note nobody has been willing to defend this dogs breakfast of a policy suite.

I do think there needs to be a mechanism to encourage more people to immigrate to those areas.

 

[DeanoT]

I think they will be a better job of the boring day to day job of Governing. I'm someone who is keen for a period of unremarkable Government.

Regards

S. Pete

Sounds like the sentiments of Victorians in 1999 in the post-Kennett era. Many wanted a quiet, unassuming, no-frills Premier after Kennett, and got it in Steve Bracks, who became very successful.

 

[greennick]

I support the following policies:
- PPL scheme (though I think it should be funded as a compulsory insurance scheme - similar to worker's comp)
- Carbon tax removal - hurts our international competitiveness, why you would do that during the current economic climate makes no sense
- asylum seeker policy - bring back temporary protection visas for unapproved arrivals
- mining tax - unfair tax on the mining states when we're already losing GST revenue for royalties at 50c in the dollar

On the GST vs carbon tax - the GST explicitly is excluded from exports, however the carbon tax is not. One is directed at domestic consumption only, the other hurts our international competitiveness by not having the same direction.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

- mining tax - unfair tax on the mining states when we're already losing GST revenue for royalties at 50c in the dollar

It seems the Libs are actually keeping a "key part" of the MRRT (http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/16560108/libs-to-keep-key-plank-of-mining-tax/) so I'll update the OP.

On the GST vs carbon tax - the GST explicitly is excluded from exports, however the carbon tax is not.

I think Harvey Norman might disagree with you there!

 

[Windhover]

So why am I likely to vote for the Coalition. I think they will be a better job of the boring day to day job of Governing. I'm someone who is keen for a period of unremarkable Government.

Regards

S. Pete

I think your stated reason is informative and likely to be the primary motivation of those intending to vote Libnat. That is after 6 years of the ALP, the past 3 years with much noise* arising from the political instability of a minority government, voters are tired of change like Gonski, the NDIS, pricing carbon, the NBN even if, by and large, they embrace the changes.

As it happens I think the best electioneering tactic for the ALP is to talk not about an unfinished agenda or new policies but rather of bedding down the programs that have been implemented. And then point out that the Libnats are not conservative but reactionary. That a vote for the Libnats will see uncertain additional costs and delay in the NBN, the NDIS, Gonski reforms etc etc caused by interference with the delivery. To say nothing of the stupidity of removing a price on carbon for Direct Action - or doing nothing. In other words, if you want an "unremarkable" government, vote for bedding down ALP policies and note program-wreaking Libnats.

As for policies of the Libnats I like, I like the idea of a tax summit and with the hope that GST will go to 15% and is broad-based, including bread and milk etc but with compensation to low income earners. The States to get the GST in return for foregoing royalties tax and the implementation of a more far-reaching resource rent tax operating like the current petroleum resource rent tax.

* The noise has been over such irrelevancies as Craig Thomson, Peter Slipper and the failure to have a bipartisan approach to asylum seekers.

 

[Stumpy Pete]

I think your stated reason is informative and likely to be the primary motivation of those intending to vote Libnat. That is after 6 years of the ALP, the past 3 years with much noise* arising from the political instability of a minority government, voters are tired of change like Gonski, the NDIS, pricing carbon, the NBN even if, by and large, they embrace the changes.

As it happens I think the best electioneering tactic for the ALP is to talk not about an unfinished agenda or new policies but rather of bedding down the programs that have been implemented. And then point out that the Libnats are not conservative but reactionary. That a vote for the Libnats will see uncertain additional costs and delay in the NBN, the NDIS, Gonski reforms etc etc caused by interference with the delivery. To say nothing of the stupidity of removing a price on carbon for Direct Action - or doing nothing. In other words, if you want an "unremarkable" government, vote for bedding down ALP policies and note program-wreaking Libnats.

As for policies of the Libnats I like, I like the idea of a tax summit and with the hope that GST will go to 15% and is broad-based, including bread and milk etc but with compensation to low income earners. The States to get the GST in return for foregoing royalties tax and the implementation of a more far-reaching resource rent tax operating like the current petroleum resource rent tax.

* The noise has been over such irrelevancies as Craig Thomson, Peter Slipper and the failure to have a bipartisan approach to asylum seekers.

+1. The ALP should stop the Abbott scaremongering and campaign on "because we have unfinished business".

For those saying "Go back to Rudd" this all started with him. He pumped up the electorate with a bunch of shiny promises and sterling reivews without giving any thought that the ground may shift below his feet (ie. the GFC). When the PM took over she bought into a massive excrement-sandwich of Rudd's making. The ALP need to keep the grandstanding, celebrity pandering clown away from their party at all costs.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Stumpy Pete]

It seems the Libs are actually keeping a "key part" of the MRRT (http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/16560108/libs-to-keep-key-plank-of-mining-tax/) so I'll update the OP.

I think Harvey Norman might disagree with you there!

Indeed!

Although on this issue always strike me as amusing that the people who have a go at the wealthy for tax avoidance love to order things from overseas on the internet because they are cheaper.

Regards

S. Pete

 

[Windhover]

+1. The ALP should stop the Abbott scaremongering and campaign on "because we have unfinished business".

Not quite what I was saying. First, the ALP should campaign on "bedding down its program", not on "unfinished business" which implies more "boring" change. Secondly, the ALP should "scaremonger" that the Libnats under Abbott intend tearing down the ALP achievements with no certainty as to what might be the replacement.

For those saying "Go back to Rudd" this all started with him. He pumped up the electorate with a bunch of shiny promises and sterling reivews without giving any thought that the ground may shift below his feet (ie. the GFC). When the PM took over she bought into a massive excrement-sandwich of Rudd's making. The ALP need to keep the grandstanding, celebrity pandering clown away from their party at all costs.

Regards

S. Pete

There is nothing PMJG or the ALP can do about Rudd at this time. If there were a majority in the Lower House he could have been expelled long ago for all the destabilising leaking and plotting he has engaged in since his removal as PM. Obviously he cannot be touched from now until election day. After that I suspect that Rudd will see more shiny knives, sharper than he has ever felt before. There is no way the ALP can rebuild with "the grandstanding, celebrity pandering clown" still around the place making trouble.

 

[Docker Clint]

Christopher Pyne actually asked a question about education in QT today. Things might be looking up.

 

[greennick]

I think Harvey Norman might disagree with you there!

OK, yeah, there is no GST on imports less than $1k, a small (though growing) part of the market.

I was more referring to exports.

 

[greennick]

It seems the Libs are actually keeping a "key part" of the MRRT (http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/16560108/libs-to-keep-key-plank-of-mining-tax/) so I'll update the OP.

Just read the article. Don't like that one bit. I wonder how they will react when NSW increases their royalties on CSG.

The thing I find interesting about the argument for a MRRT is people often say the problem with a royalty scheme is that it makes some projects uneconomic at 'normal' prices, whereas an MRRT would result in little or no royalties being paid as profits aren't being earned. I would argue that it isn't entirely a bad thing if assets aren't dug out of the ground for no profit to the company and no return to the state.

 

[Dry Rot]

Direct Action and PPL are both bad jokes. Removing the silly mining tax and carbon taxes are a good idea.

Have they come out with anything new lately?

 

[Docker Clint]

Direct Action and PPL are both bad jokes. Removing the silly mining tax and carbon taxes are a good idea.

Have they come out with anything new lately?

Why is the carbon pricing scheme silly?

 

[Dry Rot]

Why is the carbon pricing scheme silly?

29 is a good start. Ridiculous unfair compensation is another. Ditto the silly $12 b slush find.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Liberals CFTN (Copper from the Node) "Broadband" network is a joke, probably not really cheaper (especially if factoring in the long term), almost certainly not any faster than continuing the current roll out, far shorter network lifetime, wont have as high a ROI if it has a ROI at all, wont be as valuable of an asset if they plan to sell it off, not capable of the speeds that will be required in the near future unlike Labors FTTH/P network.

If FTTH is the end goal just continue with Labors network FFS.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I think Harvey Norman might disagree with you there!

Their problem with the GST is with imports, not exports.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Their problem with the GST is with imports, not exports.

Yep - Greennick already corrected me on that one. Apologies. I think the answer is to apply an environmental tarrif on imports, but given our committment to FTAs it might be hard to do in legislature (it's worth noting, however, that US FTAs often still allow states to apply tariffs).

Otherwise, so far we have had a vote for removing Carbon + MRRT taxes from Dry Rot and Greennick (who also likes the PPL - so obviously and thankfully neither of them are big debt worriers) and Greennick also wants a return of TPV. I don't think that will limit arrivals, as the economic pull is still there if they can work for $ to send home, but we'll have to see.

We also have half-votes from Windohover (for a Tax Summit in the hope it may deliver tax policies he likes - a big 'if') and Stumpy Pete (your policy understanding and assumptions are too wonky for me to count as a proper backing of Coalition policies).

Hopefully more of the Liberal voters on BF will get involved soon.

 

[tandino]

Yep - Greennick already corrected me on that one. Apologies. I think the answer is to apply an environmental tarrif on imports, but given our committment to FTAs it might be hard to do in legislature (it's worth noting, however, that US FTAs often still allow states to apply tariffs).

The WTO would have a fit.