Howard challenged over IR changes

[Goldenblue]

Very indifferent from the Australian, however, a good tactic of Rudds to bring up IR so early in the campaign to neutralise the tax cuts.


KEVIN Rudd has demanded John Howard outline any future plans for WorkChoices and the Australian industrial relations system.
Campaigning in Ipswich, the Labor leader said Mr Howard should tell the Australian people what he wanted to do after being secretive before the last election.

"Before the 2004 election Mr Howard said nothing about the extreme WorkChoices laws which he introduced after the election,’’ he said.

The Government was able to introduce it wide-ranging workplace reforms because it unexpectedly one control of the Senate at the 2004 poll.

The Coalition has always maintained that the broad direction of the Government’s reforms had been always known, with John Howard campaigning on industrial relations reform all of his political life.

Finance Minister Nick Minchin told the right-wing reform group the HR Nicholls Society last year that there was always more to do in industrial relations in speech urging deregulation.

In May, the Government re-regulated some of its original 2006 changes, introducing a fairness test on individual contracts for people earning less than 75,000. That test has since identified problems with about 25,000 Australian Workplace Agreements.

Mr Rudd made the comments during a visit to Ipswich hospital in the marginal Liberal seat of Blair held by Cameron Thompson.

Mr Rudd also refused to commit to having a debate with Mr Howard on Sunday saying he was waiting for the Coalition to respond to Labor’s proposal of three debates, one of which would be on the internet and another on the ABC.

The Coalition has proposed one debate this Sunday in the Great Hall of Parliament House with audience participation and panel of journalists asking questions.

 

[camsmith]

after being secretive before the last election.

I dont understand that line, I've just been reading a book about Howard that was released in 2002 and it says it there that industrial relation reform is one of the major issues Howard wants to address and has been trying to get through the upper house but without luck because they dont have the majority.

Did people expect that if Howard did get the majority that he wouldn't continue to carry out one of his life long ambitions?

The Coalition has proposed one debate this Sunday in the Great Hall of Parliament House with audience participation and panel of journalists asking questions.

Please dont have that. Not if they're the same audience that the ABC bring in (remember that global warming Q&A anyone?)

 

[Grin]

I dont understand that line, I've just been reading a book about Howard that was released in 2002 and it says it there that industrial relation reform is one of the major issues Howard wants to address and has been trying to get through the upper house but without luck because they dont have the majority.

Did people expect that if Howard did get the majority that he wouldn't continue to carry out one of his life long ambitions?

I think you're absolutely right.
No one was forced at gun point to vote for Howard.
This is what happens when you lay down with pigs.

It seems the electorate understands this now.

 

[camsmith]

I think you're absolutely right.
No one was forced at gun point to vote for Howard.
This is what happens when you lay down with pigs.

It seems the electorate understands this now.

Huh? Whats that got to do with my post.

Yeah how stupid of the electorate not to vote in such an honourable nice chap like Mark Latham.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Very indifferent from the Australian, however, a good tactic of Rudds to bring up IR so early in the campaign to neutralise the tax cuts.


KEVIN Rudd has demanded John Howard outline any future plans for WorkChoices and the Australian industrial relations system.
Campaigning in Ipswich, the Labor leader said Mr Howard should tell the Australian people what he wanted to do after being secretive before the last election.

"Before the 2004 election Mr Howard said nothing about the extreme WorkChoices laws which he introduced after the election,’’ he said.

The Government was able to introduce it wide-ranging workplace reforms because it unexpectedly one control of the Senate at the 2004 poll.

The Coalition has always maintained that the broad direction of the Government’s reforms had been always known, with John Howard campaigning on industrial relations reform all of his political life.

Finance Minister Nick Minchin told the right-wing reform group the HR Nicholls Society last year that there was always more to do in industrial relations in speech urging deregulation.

In May, the Government re-regulated some of its original 2006 changes, introducing a fairness test on individual contracts for people earning less than 75,000. That test has since identified problems with about 25,000 Australian Workplace Agreements.

Mr Rudd made the comments during a visit to Ipswich hospital in the marginal Liberal seat of Blair held by Cameron Thompson.

Mr Rudd also refused to commit to having a debate with Mr Howard on Sunday saying he was waiting for the Coalition to respond to Labor’s proposal of three debates, one of which would be on the internet and another on the ABC.

The Coalition has proposed one debate this Sunday in the Great Hall of Parliament House with audience participation and panel of journalists asking questions.

Howard is never to be believed,he's dangerous because he lies.
If he gets back in be very afraid in 2-3 years down the track when deeeeeregulated work places will be cemented in, unions dead and
the worker, well you know the word, starts with f.

 

[JoondalupJ]

Huh? Whats that got to do with my post.

Yeah how stupid of the electorate not to vote in such an honourable nice chap like Mark Latham.

What was wrong with poor old Latham, all he did was smack a smartie in the head , and told us Geoge Dubbaya was a pea brain and he was right.

 

[Grin]

Huh? Whats that got to do with my post.

Yeah how stupid of the electorate not to vote in such an honourable nice chap like Mark Latham.

I understand your, and the electorates disdain for Latham.
But the electorate also handed the Liberals control of the senate.

I actually preferenced Liberal ahead of Labour in the Senate because of Latham. In hindsight this was a silly move and I've learned not to trust the government (any government) no matter what reasuring plattitudes they come up with during the election.

I think many of us now understand the value of a house of review as compared to a very expensive rubber stamp.

 

[camsmith]

What was wrong with poor old Latham, all he did was smack a smartie in the head , and told us Geoge Dubbaya was a pea brain and he was right.

He was a poor mans Keating.. and wouldn't have been half as good as him as PM, which isnt saying much.

 

[camsmith]

I understand your, and the electorates disdain for Latham.
But the electorate also handed the Liberals control of the senate.

I actually preferenced Liberal ahead of Labour in the Senate because of Latham. In hindsight this was a silly move and I've learned not to trust the government (any government) no matter what reasuring plattitudes they come up with during the election.

I think many of us now understand the value of a house of review as compared to a very expensive rubber stamp.

Well if thats how you feel you should do what many people do, vote for a major party in the lower house but a minor one in the senate.

 

[Grin]

Well if thats how you feel you should do what many people do, vote for a major party in the lower house but a minor one in the senate.

I almost always do.

I was really pi$$ed off on the day because the greens and the democrates weren't sharing preferences for what I thought were very silly reasons, so I thought if they don't want a seat I wont give them one (it was my little protest, knowing my single vote makes only a miniscule difference). I didn't have confidence in Labour. And it had not crossed my mind that the smaller parties and independants wouldn't hold the ballance in the senate.

Like I said. I have learned my lesson.

 

[Smell The Glove]

The Coalition has proposed one debate this Sunday in the Great Hall of Parliament House with audience participation and panel of journalists asking questions.

Weak. Howard knows that if he goes mono e mono with Rudd, he will get slaughtered. Now he want a powder puff Q & A session where he can effectively get by with fancy rhetoric. Thank heavens the little toad will be gone soon enough.

 

[medusala]

Weak. Howard knows that if he goes mono e mono with Rudd, he will get slaughtered.

what makes you think that? Howard is actually a good debater just as Costello is and Keating was.

Rudd will have a hard time trying to explain why they are keeping AWAs whent they promised to scrap them, why leave loading is anything other than nonsense and should be kept in agreements and why if he is so keen on deregulating the economy he is adding further red tape to IR via adding a no of mandatory conditions.

 

[whythelongface]

I dont understand that line, I've just been reading a book about Howard that was released in 2002 and it says it there that industrial relation reform is one of the major issues Howard wants to address and has been trying to get through the upper house but without luck because they dont have the majority.

Did people expect that if Howard did get the majority that he wouldn't continue to carry out one of his life long ambitions?

There is no doubt that IR reform has been a major goal of Howards ever since he was opposition leader - and he has stated previously that workplace reform was one of his key issues moving forward. However, the fact that he never outlined the workchoices policy prior to the last election is why the electorate now sees him as a deceptive and sneaky leader who is willing to implement any ideological changes that he sees fit. The fact that many who entrusted Howard as the "battler's friend" have felt let down by this policy and he longer has their trust. How can they trust a man that puts the interests of big business before working families? That is the crux of the issue.

 

[Dippers Donuts]

Rodent doesn't want the worm either, for obvious reasons.

He is so on the nose with the electorate who automatically view everything he says with such suspicion that watching the worm fall through the floor on the night with a live audience will not be a good look for him.

Poor old coconut just cannot take a trick.

 

[Lunchlady Doris]

what makes you think that? Howard is actually a good debater just as Costello is and Keating was.

Rudd will have a hard time trying to explain why they are keeping AWAs whent they promised to scrap them, why leave loading is anything other than nonsense and should be kept in agreements and why if he is so keen on deregulating the economy he is adding further red tape to IR via adding a no of mandatory conditions.

I thought Howard had avoided debating most of his political opponents, or done as little as possible - from the times I have seen him try, he has been very, very ordinary.