[lonewolfny42]

Hugh.....

While I was listening to the news on the radio today, they mentioned that Saturday is election day in Australia. And that voting was mandatory....never heard of that....how do they enforce it ?
Thanks.....hope all is well....

                             Chris

[andyr]

Hugh.....

While I was listening to the news on the radio today, they mentioned that Saturday is election day in Australia. And that voting was mandatory....never heard of that....how do they enforce it ?
Thanks.....hope all is well....

                             Chris

We have to get our name crossed off the electoral roll, in the voting place.  Those people who are found not to have had their name crossed off - at any polling station in the country - and who have not sent in a postal vote ... are fined!

Of course, those who are pathologically opposed to voting - or too stupid too understand how to fill out the form - can turn up and get themselves "crossed off" and then deface the voting slip with slogans like "All politicians are bastards"  or "I have a dog called Kevin" ... and these "votes" are then not counted.

Regards,

Andy

[lonewolfny42]

Thank you Andy....

Fined....wow ....very different from the US.Thanks again....   Chris

[aurelius]

Woo hoo!!! A change of government. After 11 years... I'm so happy.

In my opinion, the compulsory voting helps moderate politics...

With volentary voting, you have to get people to the polls... means you have to speak politically to those motivated enough to get off their butts.  This tends to make politics more extreme, one way or another. 

With compulsory voting, there is a need politically to speak to the (lazy) middle ground.

[AKSA]

Y'know,

I'm thrilled meself, Mark, we now have a group of leftys, and that's fine and dandy by me.........

Chris,

Yes, compulsory voting seems very strange, doesn't it?  However, it really does dumb down the election campaigns, they become populist charades - but I think Mark is right, it does bring moderation.  Of course only about 5% actually determine who gets in;  the rest vote by tradition.  But in all my years watching these elections I've never seen such a radical swing to the left since 1972.  That's 35 years, this was extraordinary........

Cheers,

Hugh

[lonewolfny42]

Thanks Hugh....
I just read this.......

                     Chris

[stvnharr]

Hugh.....

While I was listening to the news on the radio today, they mentioned that Saturday is election day in Australia. And that voting was mandatory....never heard of that....how do they enforce it ?
Thanks.....hope all is well....

                             Chris

Chris,
Not only is voting mandatory, but you also have to vote for everyone.
It's different, to be sure.

[kyrill]

Chris
i did not know you liked a certain shag ehh..for Xmas?

[AKSA]

Chris,

I read the Reuters report on Howard's defeat and thought it was an excellent summary of his reign.  Howard was good for the economy in that he retired foreign debt, which is always step 1, but he unequivocally took a hard line with Unions, as many conservative leaders do, and he went too far.  He gave us the worst Industrial Relations laws in the western world, with one sided employment contracts and no penalty rates for shift or weekend work.  This has particularly affected the young.  At a time of relative prosperity (based on two incomes for the family, I might add) job security significantly diminished and exploitation in the workplace markedly increased;  people soon realised this was not acceptable, particularly as mergers and acquisitions seemed to intensify, notably in the food market.  His low interest rates were in fact low across much of the world, particularly at our trading partners like Japan and China, and I give him little credit for that, but low rates drove up housing prices and now a family home is the least affordable it's been in thirty years.  This has been a cruel twist, as many baby boomers realised that they would have to help their children buy homes, digging into their retirement savings.  His slavish emphasis on the booming economy, largely driven by mining companies in Western Australia, hid a terrible neglect of our Universities, Schools, and notably the hospital system, which he suggested would resolve if only people bought private health insurance and students worked as they studied.

Our health system is in transition between a largely publicly funded model to one increasingly dominated by the private options, which are very expensive.  Until now, this has made Australia a good country to get sick, but now things are approaching the US model and people here resent having to pay $2500 a year for hospital cover when many of the private hospitals lack equipment and good nurse care anyway.  The alternative, particularly for elective, age-related surgery like bypasses, joints and hernias, is to stand in line for up to five years, facing much discomfort and possible death.  The University system is now a 'learn now pay later' system, introduced by a Labor government in fact, but such has been Howard's distrust of the University system that he has deliberately underfunded it bringing it to its knees in several cases and forcing a full fee paying model for wealthy overseas students seeking an English language education.  However, it's now overpriced, with a medical degree from our best Universities costing around $US250K in fees alone (Melbourne University), more than a wealthly family from Asia would pay from a US Ivy League......  And now, an academic career is relatively poorly paid and low status compared to twenty years ago.

Howard was very badly let down by the Dept of Immigration, who kept deporting the wrong people whilst letting in the least appealing to the population, many with no English or work skills.  The Wheat Board scandal was pretty much overlooked by the voters, and probably in hindsight an inevitable part of dealing with Iraq whilst at he same time engaging with the US in large scale military intervention;  but what is worse is that one of his ministers appears to have benefited.  And the handling of the privatisation of our biggest Telecoms provider was botched badly, with many small investors quite badly burned by what has turned out to be a poorly run enterprise.

He did some good things;  paid off foreign debt, tightened up the gun laws to a point where almost no one in this country holds weapons (as an ex-soldier, I applaud that), and united conservative politics in this country, but his determination to promote the entrepreneurial spirit as he saw it brought penalties for workers, greatly diminished influence of unions, and stripping back of welfare, education and health.  All these factors reduce wages, social mobility and the heighten the insecurity of ageing, and for that he has been roundly punished.

The new prime minister is one Kevin Rudd, who speaks passable Mandarin and is married to a very wealthy woman who made her money finding work and training for the unemployed.  How he shapes up is a complete unknown;  he ran almost a one horse race, with little contribution from his front bench (whose appointments has has been vague about until very recently), and there is some evidence that his honeymoon will be brief and he may have a hostile Senate (cf. Congress) just like Bill.......  We shall see.

Cheers,

Hugh

[bhobba]

Thank you Andy....

Fined....wow ....very different from the US.Thanks again....   Chris

Its not that bad Chris.  Any reasonable reason you could not vote is good enough to avoid the fine eg with my arthritic condition waiting in the line would have been murder.  My sister was with me but if she wasn't that would have been a valid excuse.

Thanks
Bill

[Rocket]

Hi,

I had a great difficulty in deciding who to vote for yesterday.  In the end it was the IR laws that really influenced my opinion.  In my previous job I had a lot to do with state IR laws and the Federal system.  It was earlier this year the Howard government brought in the 'Fairness' test that protected lower paid workers to some degree.  However, it is very unwieldy and many AWA's have failed to pass the process.

I'm hoping that life gets better for the battler in this country.

Regards

Rod

[bhobba]

But in all my years watching these elections I've never seen such a radical swing to the left since 1972.  That's 35 years, this was extraordinary........

I don't think it was a swing to the left - people just felt the old government was tired - and I agree.  Their economic policies are almost identical.  BTW I vote labour these days, after the economic mismanagement I saw in Canberra with regard to out-souricing.  As the Auditor General said to the government - how could you be so stupid.  To me the modern labour party is much better economic mangers than the libs, who often want to just look after their mates in private enterprise - who cares if it costs the taxpayer more.
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/stories/s210008.htm

Thanks
Bill

[Tliner]

Hi All,

The morning after the election the sun came up on time and the earth did not move on its axis, all's well.

Now the question is:- How do we make the most of a new Government?. Not necessarily as individuals but as a nation.

We will have to wait to see how the new Government implements its views.

More than likely we will plod on as usual while watching for new potholes to appear.

Laurie.

[bhobba]

Our health system is in transition between a largely publicly funded model to one increasingly dominated by the private options, which are very expensive.  Until now, this has made Australia a good country to get sick, but now things are approaching the US model and people here resent having to pay $2500 a year for hospital cover when many of the private hospitals lack equipment and good nurse care anyway.  The alternative, particularly for elective, age-related surgery like bypasses, joints and hernias, is to stand in line for up to five years, facing much discomfort and possible death.  The University system is now a 'learn now pay later' system, introduced by a Labor government in fact, but such has been Howard's distrust of the University system that he has deliberately underfunded it bringing it to its knees in several cases and forcing a full fee paying model for wealthy overseas students seeking an English language education.  However, it's now overpriced, with a medical degree from our best Universities costing around $US250K in fees alone (Melbourne University), more than a wealthly family from Asia would pay from a US Ivy League......  And now, an academic career is relatively poorly paid and low status compared to twenty years ago.

The Libs are far too entranced by the idea private enterprise models are a-priori better.  A single insurer like medibank that everyone must contribute to is much more efficient than multiple insurers, each with their own administrative staff and offices often next to each other.  Also a single government insurer can negotiate hard with hospitals to reduce costs.  Multiple insureres simply raise their premiums - the government has never knocked back a premium hike and people get subsidised from the government to be in private health insurance so they don't pay the full hike anyway - the government pays most of it.  A most inefficient system whose only beneficiaries are health insurance companies.  As I say - they want to look after their mates in private enterprise - who cares if it costs more.

Thanks
Bill

[bhobba]

Multiple insureres simply raise their premiums - the government has never knocked back a premium hike and people get subsidised from the government to be in private health insurance so they don't pay the full hike anyway - the government pays most of it.  A most inefficient system whose only beneficiaries are health insurance companies.  

And of course doctors and hospitals who would hate to have to negotiate with a single insurer with real market clout and a government legislatively enforced mandate to negotiate hard and keep costs as low as possible - just like with the PBS.

Thanks
Bill

[Tabascosauce]

Hi Hugh,

Hope all is well.

Yes, compulsory voting seems very strange, doesn't it?  However, it really does dumb down the election campaigns, they become populist charades

 Have you followed many American elections?

This turned up this morning from my subscription to Crikey:

"It’s pretty clear who the biggest winner from the election is. Kevin Rudd. But the biggest loser? It’s not John Howard. It’s Peter Costello.

Howard has been humiliated, but he has had 11 and a half years in the nation’s top job. He is our second longest serving prime minister. That will look good in the history books. Lists of treasurers don’t get consulted that often. John Howard has been prime minister. Peter Costello never will.

John Howard’s stubbornness contributed to the Coalition’s defeat, but Peter Costello’s weakness is just as much to blame. He put his leadership skills on display in July last year and gave us a few days of petulance and vacillation.
All the polling suggests voters only wanted a minimal change in direction. Peter Costello was too weak to try to give them that.

He will probably be leader of the opposition for a while, but the Coalition’s only winner is Malcolm Turnbull. The Coalition ran a dismal campaign. A senior Liberal source described federal director Brian Loughnane as “a dead man walking” this morning. “I’ve never seen so many yes men,” they said of Liberal strategists.

Crikey is aware of an occasion where a major corporate tried to raise climate change as an issue with Loughnane. The response was almost Sir Joh – a “Don’t you worry about that”.

The Liberals’ troubles stretch from the Party Room in Parliament House down to the grassroots of the branches. The Lindsay pamphlet farce was a direct product of the Taliban takeover of the NSW Division. The party needs a new direction.

That could be hard to define, as public language is another loser from this election.

Howard’s and Rudd’s speeches were both utterly pedestrian – our incoming prime minister’s in particular. It contained no eloquence.


Is that a sign of the real winner of this election? Will that be process? Kevin Rudd is very much the cautious bureaucrat.

He is a bureaucrat who has only sketched the barest details of the direction he has planned for the nation and dressed it up with clichés and catchphrases.

Popular and populist oversimplification and government by mission statement and media unit drives our dismal state Labor government.

Their best and brightest will soon be moving to the Ming Wing in Canberra.

If Kevin Rudd can’t give them better direction that their current bosses, we will all be losers. "

I couldn't put it any better myself.

[lonewolfny42]

Thank you all for you helpful answers and insights...good luck....and a better future for Australia !!!

                                 Chris

[AKSA]

Chris,

A pleasure!

Tabasco,

Thank you for your contribution.  Absolutely fascinating, really enjoyed it!

Cheers,

Hugh