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.

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

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

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

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.

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!!!!!!

'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?   

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.

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.

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?

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]

'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.