Break out the champagne, socialists!

This really outlines the priorities of the left.

Little time is spent describing the capabilities of the people put in power nor their policies.

Instead, you consider things such as the sex of the deputy prime minister, that the prime minister is bilingual, and that the first lady didn't take her husband's names to somehow be relevant.

Can one imagine how the stock holders of a company would react if this kind of nonsense was somehow used to bolster the credentials of a new CEO or management team?  No wonder the right runs the world.

Well, I don't think that's very fair. I know next to nothing about Aust. politics, but he seemed to outline details about why he thought the new prime minister would be good for their country.

As for the right running the world, that's just not true. It's not even true here in the 'gol ol USA. I'm shaking my head. It might be true in your world, but certainly not mine. Are we in a parallel universe???

Congrats on the new leader. I hope she is everything you expect her to be.

Congratulations Champas! I was running on the treadmill at the gym when the news was announced on TV, and almost fell off. I hope that this is a sign of good things to come.

Aye Draginol, but a country isn't a company. You don'T have the same standards for both organisation.

I was happy to hear it to when Howard conceded. I felt a bit uneasy though when I realised Tintin said 'blood' three times in his acceptance speech. That doesn't bode well.

Interesting sidenote - a great way to watch any political speech is to add 'with blood' at the end of every sentence they say - it adds a bit of honesty and occasional hilarity to the event.



Well as you're no doubt aware Tintin campaigned on a raft of 'me-too' policies, so his main differences from ickle Johnny are the cosmetic ones.

But that bilingualism is important. He's the first PM we've ever had who's culturally comfortable with both of our main superpower patrons - the US and China. It may well work to our advantage to have someone who can negotiate with Jiang in China in his own language.



Good thing Australian federal government is nothing like business then! That and it's nice to have a pm who is actually representative of the people.

I normally vote Liberal but voted for Labor this time, mainly because of the difference in their repective environment policies (principally Kyoto) and that the Liberals (though not necessarily Howard, I think you've been a bit harsh on him, although his normally reliable political judgement had left him of late) had been in power too long. The other policies either didn't affect me or were too similar to influence my vote.

While Work Choices wouldn't have affectd me if I still lived in Australia, its not something that I thought was a good idea. In this respect I think the Liberals were a victim of their own success (ie if they hadn't won control of the Senate last time they would not have been able to push it through). I hope (probably forlornly) that the new unfair dismissal laws don't get changed (I do think they are important), but I don't begrudge any people put on AWA's getting their entitlements back.

One thing that has struck me while living in London is that it was reported how far behind on climate change the debate in Australia was, since there they are still talking about ratifying Kyoto, whereas everyone else has moved on to talking about the next agreement. And I cringed with embarrassment when the BBC's Sydney correspondent talked about how painfully slow broadband in Australia was, when discussing Labor's broadband policy.

One thing I wouldn't mind your view on Champas is the Senate, now that the Democrats have been obliterated, what are your views on the Greens effectively having the balance of power? I must say it's the one thing I am disappointed about.



she is a he

Yeah, I can understand why certain types of people would be afraid of performance based pay. In this country those people are normally referred to as slackers.

Clearly. Hence why I prefer governments be as small and weak as we can get away with.

I am one happy chappy too. Wet blankets aside (Draginol) it seems as though most are very happy with the results. I am still blown away by Maxine's (potential) win in Bennelong. For a PM to lose his seat is a crushing blow.

Maxine is an outstanding candidate though. Her previous fame pretty much entirely came from being intelligent, attractive, compassionate and a hardarse when necessary. She was the perfect candidate for any electorate.

That she has a chance of winning is entirely due to her talents; we could have expected a strong shift against Howard (especially with the boundary changes) but a spill? That takes an exceptional person.

Little time is spent describing the capabilities of the people put in power nor their policies. Instead, you consider things such as the sex of the deputy prime minister, that the prime minister is bilingual, and that the first lady didn't take her husband's names to somehow be relevant.

Firstly, they are as relevant as any of that right wing Christian moral stuff we always hear from the other side. Secondly, this article is not intended to outline Kevin's policies. I have spent countless hours already discussing them and that was why I voted for the Labor Party. This is a celebratory article. Nothing else. Thirdly, having a PM who is going to have a positive view of women in business does shape your view of feminist issues. Having an understanding of other cultures shapes your view of multiculturalism and foreign affairs (which is in contrast to John Howard, who suggested slowing Asian immigration in the 1980s. I'm not saying you have to agree with Rudd's multiculturalism, but you can't say that this makes no difference to policy. Well you can, but I don't think you're that stupid). That he has a more modern view of marriage also bodes well for a raft of policies related to spousal rights.

Congrats on the new leader.

Thankyou! I'm still grinning!

Interesting sidenote - a great way to watch any political speech is to add 'with blood' at the end of every sentence they say - it adds a bit of honesty and occasional hilarity to the event.

I'll bear it in mind.

now that the Democrats have been obliterated, what are your views on the Greens effectively having the balance of power?

I voted 1 Democrats 2 Greens 3 Labor, so this is a big disappointment to me. However, last election my Greens and Dems were the other way around. The Democrats actually stand for exactly what I believe in 100% and I would ideally love Natasha as PM. I also prefer their more negotiatory style to the Greens' combative style. That said, the Greens are important and may mature from this experience. The Democrats were completely lacking in any talent ever since they got jealous and ditched Natasha. I hoped that they would remain existant so they could gain talent in the future, but alas it was not to be. It will however be good to have the Greens making sure Kevin Rudd is not tooo John Howard-like. And I stand by all my criticisms of him, in fact, I think I was kind to him.

Yeah, I can understand why certain types of people would be afraid of performance based pay. In this country those people are normally referred to as slackers.

You're the one who has time to be a Top Ten JoeUser. I work between 70 and 100 hours a week. More this week as I'm writing report cards. But the fact is I don't expect to be nearly as effective with the kids I'll be teaching next year as I have been this year. This year my kids have had some phenomenal results, and I'm very proud of them. Next year however will be tough as I'm going to a low socio-economic area, and there are just so many things to combat there. But I will work just as hard, if not harder, because that's where I want to be.

Maxine is an outstanding candidate though. Her previous fame pretty much entirely came from being intelligent, attractive, compassionate and a hardarse when necessary. She was the perfect candidate for any electorate.

Totally agree. I think Maxine is destined to be one of the absolute best in the party, up there with Bob McMullan and Kevin himself.

Also Draginol, when you go from a PM who is generally angry at society and people and a racist and a sexist to one who likes people and thinks well of them, that means we have a new era. I actually believe the same of Malcom Turnbull, who looks set to be the new Leader of The Opposition, and formidable he will be. But right now I don't care. All I care about is that Kevin Rudd is the Prime Minister!!!!!!! John Howard is unemployed!!!!!!

Congrats to the Socialists of Austrialia!

'In '04, Labor made a dreadful mistake in handing their leadership to a working class thug that the Australian people hated.'

Far be it from me to wish to compromise your celebration, Champers. I do think it's a little naive at this point to make such claims as 'We will see an end to race-based commentary on immigration and assimilation from our Government'. However, please don't get me wrong - I too am happy to see Howard out on his ear, and the likes of Rudd, Gillard, Combet, McKew et al given an opportunity to do some significant good.

I concede that Latham was a 'thug', at least intermittently. (Actually, I rather think that this was a hat he was vigorously encouraged to wear by the Labor Party and its adherents, every bit as much as (say) Keith Moon was urged to play 'the loon' by the Who's followers ... but that's a discussion for another thread.) And, eventually at any rate, yes he did become extremely unpopular with the electorate. (At which point the Labor Party turned on him with the ferocity and unexpectedness of a mother devouring her own young ... but again, that's a discussion for another time and place.)

However, what exactly is the significance of your pointing out that Latham was 'working class'? Isn't Kevin Rudd the son of a share farmer, whose family had to leave the land due to financial hardship? Does that make him somehow less fit for the role of Labor leader / Prime Minister?

Or, in the land where the 'amber nectar' is the chosen drink of the working class, is this merely a prime example of 'Champagne Socialism' in action?   

I do think it's a little naive at this point to make such claims as 'We will see an end to race-based commentary on immigration and assimilation from our Government'.

Aye, and all I can think in reading this is to compare this to his rantings in 4 years. About how they Rudd government betrayed them.

You might want to readjust your clothing, Dr Guy, your ignorance is showing. There's never been a Rudd government, and four years ago Latham was calling the crazy shots - or was it Crean? Either way Labor weren't exactly on a winner.

Rudd's a bit of a me-too kind of guy, but my reading is that it was an act - we won't know for sure for a while yet.

'But the fact is I don't expect to be nearly as effective with the kids I'll be teaching next year as I have been this year.'

I expect you to be just as effective with the kids you're teaching next year. However, they will be starting in a very different place from the nice, middle-class students with no serious problems you've had this year, and both the resources and the extent / quality of the external support they receive towards their education will be markedly different.

Education is a journey, not a a race. Consequently, the effectiveness of the teacher is a function of the journey your students have undertaken under your guidance, not of some mythical absolute finish line and how chronologically early they may or may not have managed to cross it. Any comparison of your classes must take this into account in order to be in the slightest meaningful.

I have yet to see any model of performance based pay for teachers which even acknowledges the existence of such factors, which is why I regard it as fundamentally inappropriate and inequitable to teaching. In the case of the Howard government, I would go further and argue that it was just another in a whole raft of deliberate measures - like AWAs - intended to disempower working people and further disadvantage those with the least power in the first place.

Mason, you may well be right - perhaps it is common for those who are 'afraid' of performance based pay to be referred to as slackers. That doesn't make it true though.

You may want to adjust your reading glasses as I never said there was one before, during or after. The "his" is Champas Socialist - not any Aussie Pol. Perhaps your myopia is a bit clearer now?

WHile I can see a misunderstanding based upon the sentence the "his" resides in, if you had read the last clause, you would see that it clearly could not have been referring to Rudd or any other pol, but to the object of the quoted material - in this case (unless I am mistaken) FC was referring to Champas, and thus my comments.

But I do see now how the shoe is on the other foot. Easy to bash those when you dont support them - but the hackles sure rose when you thought it was your pol.

Agreed. Given most in Bennelong have never known any other besides Howard, Maxine must be like a supercool breath of freshness in the electorate. I actually heard people say on Saturday night they believe she could be the first female PM of Australia. I wouldn't be so rash as to say this, but we'll wait and see.

Oh, happy days...

Which aren't relevant either.  But if you want to argue that your choice in candidates is as rational as some right-wing Christian extremist then be my guest.

I would be more interested in knowing what governmental policies the candidate supports (for instance) than caring whether it's a man or a woman or whether the spouse took their last name or not. What's next? Picking a candidate because you like their hair?

Would it be fair to say that Howard had a Rudd awakening?

Taken directly from Wiki;

Economics
In his first speech to parliament, Rudd stated that:

Competitive markets are massive and generally efficient generators of economic wealth. They must therefore have a central place in the management of the economy. But markets sometimes fail, requiring direct government intervention through instruments such as industry policy. There are also areas where the public good dictates that there should be no market at all.[26]

In the same speech, he praised Third Way/ordoliberal politics as "a new formulation of the nation's economic and social imperatives" and "a repudiation of Thatcherism and its Australian derivatives."

Rudd is critical of free market economists such as Friedrich Hayek,[27] although Rudd describes himself as "basically a conservative when it comes to questions of public financial management", pointing to his slashing of public service jobs as a Queensland governmental advisor.[28]


Foreign policy

Rudd supports the continued deployment of Australian troops in Iraq, but not the continued deployment of combat troops. Rudd, in his role as shadow foreign minister had written a letter in November 2003 to Prime Minister John Howard offering policy ideas after the fall of Baghdad. Among his recommendations were a deployment of trainers for the New Iraqi army, and using the Australian Electoral Commission to help Iraq stage elections.[30] However, Labor pledged in 2007 to replace 550 existing combat troops with new troops serving training and border security roles (possibly stationed in other countries around the Middle East), with a continued presence of over 1,000 Australian troops stationed in Iraq (in 2007, there were 1,575 Australian military personnel operating within Iraq). [31] Rudd is also in favour of Australia's military presence in Afghanistan.[32]

Rudd is a supporter of the road map for peace and defended Israel's right to self-defence during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, condemning Hezbollah and Hamas for "violating" Israeli territory.[33] This was seen as a step towards mending relations between the Jewish community and the ALP [34] following comments by Labor MPs Tanya Plibersek and Julia Irwin. [35]


Industrial relations
Rudd has opposed some aspects of the Howard government's WorkChoices industrial relations legislation, but indicated plans to retain significant elements of it during his election campaign.[36] The main elements of difference in Rudd's policy include the phasing out of Australian Workplace Agreements over a period of up to five years, the reestablishment of an awards system as a safety net, and the restoration of unfair dismissal laws for companies with fewer than 100 employees but more than 15 employees.[36] Rudd's plan also involves the establishment of a single industrial relations bureaucracy called Fair Work Australia.[37] All changes will be delayed until the beginning of 2010, while the award system is being simplified. The Australian Building and Construction Commission will be retained until 2010 and existing AWAs will be allowed to run their (up to five-year) course.[36]

Elements of Workchoices that a Rudd Labor government would retain include:

Secondary boycotts would remain illegal
Employers would retain the right to lock workers out
Union right of entry to workplaces would be restricted
There would be restrictions on workers' right to strike[36]

Environment
Rudd has pledged, if elected, to sign the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, which expires in 2012. However, Rudd said he would insist that any future climate change treaty must also restrict the emissions of developing nations. Prime Minister John Howard said Rudd's policy on climate change negotiations had no significant differences to his own.[38] The Liberal policy is a 15 percent cut in emissions by 2020, whilst the Labor policy plans to cut 20 percent in emissions by 2020.

Rudd supports the construction of the Bell Bay Pulp Mill in the Tamar Valley, Tasmania, and has pledged not to protect old growth forests from further logging.[39]

Yes and that the Labor victory could be called a 'Rudd-slide'...

'We will see an end to race-based commentary on immigration and assimilation from our Government'.

I don't recall any between 1983 and 1996 and I am unaware of any between 1972 and 1983.

However, what exactly is the significance of your pointing out that Latham was 'working class'?

Fair point. Probably shouldn't have raised it. I'll try and explain it anyway. His accent made him seem more thuggish, less educated or civilised. Perhaps that's a prejudice, but one which much of the Australian voting public probably subscribed to when casting their ballots. It also made us more inclined to believe he was a thug because he talked about his violent upbringing in Sydney's West.

I expect you to be just as effective with the kids you're teaching next year. However, they will be starting in a very different place from the nice, middle-class students with no serious problems you've had this year, and both the resources and the extent / quality of the external support they receive towards their education will be markedly different.

I agree with all that you've said there, and perhaps I was being inarticulate, but I don't expect the kids next year to come as far as the kids have come this year. partly because of all the external factors you outlioned that make performance pay ineffective. Partly because it's logical that if the kids have made less progress in their first few years, they will continue to do so unless I have some sort of Sidney Poitier moment.

I actually heard people say on Saturday night they believe she could be the first female PM of Australia.

It's a long way off, but there's a potential for it. Why does this matter Draginol? Because it would represent that Australia gas moved beyond the time where we wouldn't vote for a woman as Deputy PM or possibly PM. No one in Australia has put up a candidate for PM that is a female, and it has often been argued that Australians simply wouldn't vote for a woman as PM. I'd like for us to move beyond those days. I believe there are a number of women who could fulfil the role very very well, and maybe one day that will be Maxine McKew.

'His accent made him seem more thuggish, less educated or civilised.'
Let's get this straight. It's not whether Latham actually was working class, but whether he sounded like he was? Is this why Rudd is acceptable, in your eyes - because, despite his humble origins, he sounds middle class? This kind of attitude sounds suspiciously like a throwback to the days of the British Empire, Australia as a colonial outpost, and all the injustice, inequity and prejudice that entailed. (And there was me thinking naively that Australia might actually be looking to the future for once ...)

'Perhaps that's a prejudice, but one which much of the Australian voting public probably subscribed to when casting their ballots.'
I have serious problems with this argument for three reasons. Firstly, you're right - yes, it is a prejudice. Secondly, you appear to be suggesting you believe it's not policies that matter but electability. And thirdly, the last time I looked, a significant proportion of the Australian voting public were actually - * gasp * - working class themselves. In your reckoning, as is usually the case within the political machinery of Canberra, they seem to be getting short shrift.

'I don't expect the kids next year to come as far as the kids have come this year.'
But how far is that, and just what yardstick are you measuring them against? You're falling into exactly the same way of thinking as those who would instigate performance pay by imposing so-called 'objective' or 'standardised' testing across the country.