Home > Australian politics, Media > Government has lost the media war

Government has lost the media war

It’s official.  The Government has been completely routed in the media war.  It is a triumph of the sound bite over dry facts, the beat-up over reality, and fiction over fact.

Now we all know the Government massively behind the eight ball, with a hostile media willing to make shit up to further their narrative, an Opposition willing to feed the chooks with all the 3 word slogan and sound bites they can deal with, and a largely apathetic public, but it shouldn’t have come to this.

To mind, there are a few reasons it has come to this:

  1. The disgusting media bias present in this country is just obscene at the moment.  If your opinion was formed purely by what the MSM reported you would think that the Government is taking all your money off you and pissing it up the wall with nothing to show for it. Also that they are taking every opportunity to knife you in the back and drive you into the ground.  Of course nothing could be further from the truth, but when every story on policy starts with “The Opposition says…” you know where you stand.
  2. By committing to cutting back on the obscene amounts spent on Government advertising they have effectively shot themselves in the foot.  With the MSM pissed off that they don’t have this massive stream of revenue any more and with the huge free kicks given to the LNP, you know they aren’t going to do them any favours.
  3. The “journalists” currently reporting on politics have so debased their profession that they have become glorified typists.  They no longer investigate or probe anything…if it’s juicy and given to them by the Opposition they will run it verbatim on page 1, then retract later on page 15 when the fallout happens.
  4. I hesitate to bring something this shallow up, but the Government needs to get some spokespeople with personality in front of the camera.  When the PM is speaking at a press conference I am constantly looking for a man with a box offstage because she is so robotic and affected.  The public can’t engage with them because they are simply so grey and politician-like.

Now I don’t think it’s a completely lost cause, but they need to take action quickly and strongly.

  1. Whenever an interviewer brings up a spurious talking point factoid, slap them down hard and fast.  Slam them with some short, punchy statements with salient facts and don’t be afraid to ridicule them.  I constantly find myself yelling at the screen during these situations, trying to get them to tell the person off.  A little gentle sarcasm or mocking wouldn’t go astray either…Aussies appreciate someone who doesn’t put up with shit and to watch some of them sit there and take it is just soul destroying at times.
  2. Get on live TV as much as possible.  This will eliminate the chance of unfavourable editing, plus if it is combined with 1. will make for great coverage the following day.
  3. For God’s sake inject some personality.  Everyone agrees that Julia is a fantastic performer during QT, routinely destroying the Opposition soundly but you never hear it at all.  She needs to bring this to her interviews and other media engagements.  I would love to hear her carve up some Limited News nuffie who asks her some ridiculous question about her jacket or handbag.

Any other suggestions?

PS  On a side note I had a brief discussion with a very LNP-leaning acquaintance that started with “so do you feel rich earning 150K +”?  Of course, this is the meme pushed by the MSM and he repeated their talking points verbatim.  From there we veered into the carbon tax (yes all the buttons were pushed in sequence) and he came out with something that just stopped me cold.  Even though I repeatedly told him the point of the carbon tax was that the polluters were taxed and that the money gained was passed on to us to compensate for price rises, he said that because those earning 150K were getting the family benefits cut, this meant that they would also not get full compensation from the carbon tax.  No matter how many times I tried to tell him they were completey unrelated (almost to the point of divorce from my nearby wife) he still conflated the two.

I wonder how commonplace this is?

Advertisements
  1. Feral Skeleton
    May 16, 2011 at 4:34 PM

    MassiveSpray,
    Similar points are being made by all us exasperated supporters of the good things the ALP is actually doing, or trying to do, for the country. I said on TPS today that Kristina Kenneally, if she didn’t have all her accumulated baggage from associating with the scumbags of NSW ALP, would have been ideal to fill the ALP MP personality and charisma void. What else can the ALP do but keep looking for an untainted KK.
    As for the 150k+ man, he probably got his latest conflation from a conservative virus e-mail. As they all seem to these days. Costello left the Self-Funded Retiree set very well-off with lots of time on their hands.

  2. Bilko
    May 16, 2011 at 6:30 PM

    Massive spray
    So true I have been knocking my head against a brick wall for so long now, even when I stop it still hurts. Murdoch is OUT for regime change in this country and every dirty trick is being pulled out of the hat. The government is well aware of this but are still on the back foot. Abbott says we the voters sleepwalked JWH out and he thinks we are still in that frame of mind and that he can “goebbels” us into electing his useless mob. I have often mentioned a Dennis Wheatley book “Such power is Dangerous ” which is all about media manipulation, no longer far fetched and adopting something similar to the Canadian method of ensuring TRUTH in the media plus the foreign ownership of our media also being cleaned up would be a steps in the right direction.

  3. Neil of Sydney
    May 17, 2011 at 9:37 PM

    Maybe the current $50B budget deficit during the biggest mining boom ever and best terms of trade for 140 years may have something to do with it.

    • May 18, 2011 at 8:50 AM

      Maybe the GFC had something to do with the massive reduction in revenue?

      Oh that’s right I forgot…as far as right-wing trolls are concerned it never happened.

  4. Neil of Sydney
    May 18, 2011 at 1:31 PM

    Well the GFC did have something to do with a fall in revenue.

    It still does not explain why we went from a $20B surplus to a $50B deficit during the biggest mining boom ever..

    Revenue has not fallen by $70B in one year.

  5. bobalot
    May 19, 2011 at 10:37 PM

    “Revenue has not fallen by $70B in one year.”

    That’s correct. It fell by $100 Billion. Please feel free to check the treasury website. It’s hilarious when right-wing trolls display their ignorance.

  6. Neil of Sydney
    May 20, 2011 at 6:47 AM

    Well you can read the budget receipts and expenditure here

    http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/overview/html/overview_48.htm

    It is expenditure which has blown out. Swan spent $240B more than Costello did in his first three years than Costello did in his last three.

    Spending 05-06-07 = $240B+$253+$272B= $765B

    Spending 08-09-10 = $316 + $337B + $350B = $1003B

    $1003B- $765B = $238B

    And it gets worse. Costello spent $272B in his last year whereas in 2011-12 Swan will spend $362B. Hence we have a deficit because of reckless spending.

  7. bobalot
    May 20, 2011 at 8:01 AM

    Please mate, just stop. You cherry pick data and have little understanding of economics.

    It’s like some guy looking up the mortality statistics in 1916 and concluding healthcare got worse in that year without taking into account WW1.

    Australia got hit by the GFC, and income for the government fell and cost for social expenditure rose (primarily unemployment benefits).

    The biggest contributor to the defecit is not stimulus spending but a shortfall in revenue. To stay in surplus, massive budget cuts would have been required which would have plunged Australia even further into recession.

    • May 20, 2011 at 9:02 AM

      bobalot, you shouldn’t even bother. As you can see no matter how clearly you explain things Neil from Sydney will ignore your clear logic and revert back to talking points as soon as he is caught out.

      SOP for the rightards I’m afraid.

  8. Neil of Sydney
    May 20, 2011 at 8:40 AM

    GFC does not explain why we went from a $20B surplus to a $50B deficit.

    Reckless spending and poor policy decisions by the ALP is the explanation.

    And I am not impressed that you expect me to believe your opinion.

  9. Neil of Sydney
    May 20, 2011 at 12:32 PM

    I wasn’t caught out. have you seen how much money Swan has spent?? It is going to be $362B for 2011-12. Way above Costello’s last year of $272B.

    Turnbull doesn’t believe you people either. Swan is getting enough revenue to balance the budget

    http://www.theage.com.au/business/notes-towards-a-definition-of-waste-20110427-1dwuo.html

    “Spending of $272 billion in 2007-08, the last Coalition budget year, has exploded to $352 billion in 2010-11. The 19 per cent increase in inflation-adjusted terms during Labor’s first term was the largest jump in the size of the public sector in any three years since Gough Whitlam….

    The great tragedy unfolding in front of us is that Labor is using excuse after half-truth after excuse to justify why, seven years into the largest resources boom in economic history, this government has nothing tangible to show for it.”

    • May 20, 2011 at 4:17 PM

      Neil, you do remember the GFC don’t you?

      You do remember what stimulus spending is about don’t you?

      If you’re economically illiterate you should just leave it alone. All the talking points and data cherry picking in the world can’t help against a logical discussion.

  10. Neil of Sydney
    May 20, 2011 at 6:16 PM

    How long are you guys going to blame the GFC for Swans stupidity.

    You know we had 6 refugees in detention in 2007. We now have 6,000 with detention centers being burnt to the ground.

    Do you think this was due to the GFC or changed policy???

  11. ozyman1234
    May 21, 2011 at 6:53 AM

    Or perhaps changed conditions in the source countries, Neil?

  12. Neil of Sydney
    May 21, 2011 at 11:30 AM

    Mate you lot are incredible. Swan could produce a $100B budget deficit and you would blame everything but Swan.

    Costello could produce a $50B budget surplus and you would say he just got lucky and ALP would have done the same if in power.

    People in detention go from 6 to 6,000 and it is due to outside factors not changed policy.

    • May 23, 2011 at 10:58 AM

      And if it is a “changed policy” that is the cause Neil, why would it be widely known?

      Because the Opposition are continually harping on about how soft our regulations are and how easy it is to get here. Your mob are basically rolling out the red carpet for them Neil…free advertising.

  13. Neil of Sydney
    May 23, 2011 at 2:53 PM

    Mate the smugglers worked out they were soft as soon as they heard about Rudds change in policy. I think it was broadcast to the world about how humane Australia now is in contrast to the dastardly Howard. The refugees may not know about our laws but the smugglers do. A boatload of 50 people at $10,000 each is serious money.

    The smugglers know all about our laws. Its their job.

  14. Pip
    May 24, 2011 at 2:24 AM

    Ashghebranious’ post about how News Ltd. works is a real eye-opener, even for Neil of Sydney, but he’ll deny it even though it’s been confirmed.

    http://ashghebranious.wordpress.com/2011/05/21/the-australian-baits-australians/

    Media Watch also ccovered the story.

    http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1193440.htm

    News Ltd unlimited cheek :: 06/09/2004

    News Ltd was hoping to snare Labor strategists last election with this seductive offer.

    “Re Knowledge Nation – Getting the Message Through.
    The ALP can leverage the reach of News Limited metropolitan newspaper network to explain Knowledge Nation and sell the concept to the electorate. Our newspapers can deliver this message effectively, with high credibility and precise timing.
    -News Limited letter to Melissa Horne, 22 October 2001.”

    Apparently Labor didn’t accept the offer , but it makes me wonder why Tony Abbott is being given so much oxygen.

  15. Neil of Sydney
    May 24, 2011 at 3:57 AM

    I find this sudden conversion to “truth in the media” rather strange.

    Where were you lot when most of the media were telling lies about the Howard govt before the 2007 election?? THE AGE and Michelle Gratan were basically Labor party cheer squads manipulating stories to support there lord and masters, The ALP.

    • May 24, 2011 at 8:39 AM

      What lies Neil? Please, enlighten us with examples.

  16. Neil of Sydney
    May 24, 2011 at 9:22 AM

    Well that was a long time ago. But my recollection was that I did not agree with much of what the media was saying about the Howard govt.

    This could be an example. It is a piece by Gratan published on November 16, 2007. Only a short time before the 2007 election.

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/federal-election-2007-news/sins-of-the-past-catch-up-with-coalition/2007/11/15/1194766869067.html

    I read through the audit report on the Regional Partnership Scheme and it said nothing like what Gratan said. Furthermore Gratan is too stupid to digest a 1200 page report in a short time. She just picked all the bad bits and blew them out of proportion trying to make Howard look bad and her ALP masters look good.

    I only agree with you lot in that I do not trust our media. You can actually tell which party journalists vote for after reading the first paragraph.

  17. Pip
    May 24, 2011 at 12:50 PM

    What lies Neil? Details?? I still think you can’t handle the truth :]]Neil.

    Re your comments about the Budget and the GFC, it’s about horses for courses.
    You should read the ABC Boyer Lectures 2006 which covers several years of Australian and other economies. It will take up some time but MIGHT help to inform your arguments. Here’s your challenge. Will you read this and be informed, or continue to talk out of your hat:]]]]

    http://www.abc.net.au/rn/boyerlectures/stories/2006/1769905.htm

    12 November 2006
    The Search For Stability
    The 2006 Boyer lectures, delivered by Ian Macfarlane AC, are about how we have struggled to find a means of ensuring a stable growth path for the economy. We thought we had it, we lost it disastrously, we half-regained it, then we fully regained it. But is it permanent, or is there a new set of challenges waiting to trap us?

    Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia from 1996 to September 2006, Ian Macfarlane has been closely involved with the development of Australia’s monetary policy. He has taken a central role in international economic and monetary affairs as a member of the Financial Stability Forum and as part of the Group of 20 (G-20). He was inaugural chairman of the Asian Consultative Council of the Bank for International Settlements and in 2002 he was voted Central Banker of the Year by Euromoney magazine.

    http://www.abc.net.au/rn/boyerlectures/stories/2006/1769918.htm
    Lecture 1 The Golden Age
    http://www.abc.net.au/rn/boyerlectures/stories/2006/1769923.htm
    Lecture 2 From Golden Age to Stagflation
    http://www.abc.net.au/rn/boyerlectures/stories/2006/1769925.htm
    Lecture 3 Reform and Deregulation
    http://www.abc.net.au/rn/boyerlectures/stories/2006/1769927.htm
    Lecture 4 The Recession of 1990 and it’s Legacy

    http://www.abc.net.au/rn/boyerlectures/stories/2006/1769928.htm
    Lecture 5 The Long Expansion

    Lecture 5: The Long Expansion
    Listen Now – 10122006Download Audio |

    The 1990 recession returned Australia to low inflation and paved the way for the sort of stability—15 years and counting—that earlier recessions had failed to achieve. Through the 1990s sustained economic growth re-emerged, and a new approach to monetary policy based on inflation targeting and central bank independence was put in place.

    The recovery, and subsequent long expansion, is even more impressive when viewed against the performance of our OECD counterparts. Australia managed to dodge the Asian crisis, and avoided the 2001 recession that was experienced by many other developed economies. Luck has been a factor, but a range of macroeconomic initiatives—both monetary and fiscal—were more important.

    http://www.abc.net.au/rn/boyerlectures/stories/2006/1769929.htm
    Lecture 6: Challenges for the Future
    Listen Now – 17122006Download Audio |

    The evolution of demand management policies, particularly monetary policy, over the past 30 years has largely been an exercise in overcoming conflict between short-term incentive and long-term stability.

    Australia now has a better framework for handling this conflict than it has ever had.

    So has the evolution of monetary policy come to an end, or is the process of continual policy adjustment eternal? Ian Macfarlane is not so optimistic as to think that all potential hazards have been overcome, or that the economy has somehow been future-proofed. He identifies major financial instability associated with asset price booms and busts as the next challenge and wonders whether monetary policy will have the ability and the mandate to respond accordingly.

    Weel, Neil, IMHO Australia managed the GFC because of past reforms and current capabilities of the Treasury, and the Treasurer, Wayne Swan.

  18. Tom R
    May 25, 2011 at 10:21 AM

    Nice article MS. I don’t agree that tehy have ‘lost’ the war, mainly because, the war is pretty much ongoing. They are, however, being soundly beaten. Daily articles highlighting any negative conotation for the governemnt (with many flat out lies being put forward), while simultaneously completely ignoring the glaring logic fails within the opposition. It trully makes for a daunting landscape. I think that we are fortunate that there is a free and open forum such as the internet where these lies can be exposed and is then avialable to any who can access them, and has the desire to do so. (that does narrow it down a fair amount)

    Of course, even those forums are open to further examples of those self same disillusionments as shown by our friend nil, who continues his war on reason, and also comprehension. Even though it has been shown to him repeatedly that the audut report he is referring to explicitly mention rosrts in its pages, he still wants to pretend it isn’t there. He seems to exist within a bubble of his own ignorance.

  19. Neil of Sydney
    May 25, 2011 at 10:46 AM

    “Even though it has been shown to him repeatedly that the audut report he is referring to explicitly mention rosrts in its pages”

    Really??? 97% of the grants followed Public Service advice. That leaves you with only 3% of the grants left which I am sure there was some favouritism shown. But the media made out the whole thing was one giant pork barrel because the Coalition got the bulk of the funding. They got the bulk of the funding because they had the bulk of the seats. Gratan twists the audit report to say what she wants it to say.

    All Labor needs is some successful policies and they do not appear to have any. I think the media is telling the truth. If it smells like dung it most probably is.

  20. Tom R
    May 25, 2011 at 10:54 AM

    ‘I think the media is telling the truth. If it smells like dung it most probably is.’

    BER, Insulation, now the NBN, all portrayed in the mediua completely at odds to what the actual outcomes were. Yea, their telling the truth alright, only, it’s their version of it, with no actual link to the facts.

    Yes, and it was the public service advice that was questioned.

  21. Neil of Sydney
    May 25, 2011 at 12:16 PM

    “BER, Insulation, now the NBN, all portrayed in the mediua completely at odds to what the actual outcomes were.”

    There is no outcome with the NBN. The BER and insulation were a waste of money. Obviously some things were worthwhile but overall it was a bad spend of taxpayers money.

    “Yes, and it was the public service advice that was questioned.”

    Really?? My understanding is that all the who ha in the media about the Regional Partnerships Scheme was about the 3% of the grants Howard govt ministers overturned against PS advice. Never heard of any problems with the 97% of grants that followed PS advice.

  22. Neil of Sydney
    May 25, 2011 at 12:22 PM

    Speaking of Regional Rorts I found this.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/auditor-slams-alp-pork-barrel/story-fn59niix-1225897751622

    “JULIA Gillard has been forced to defend her government against allegations of pork-barrelling after a damning audit report found a key part of its stimulus program favoured Labor electorates and was delivered too late to protect the economy from the global financial crisis. ”

    But none of us have the time to read the Audit and to say, can we trust the reporter.

  23. Tom R
    May 25, 2011 at 1:02 PM

    ‘Obviously some things were worthwhile but overall it was a bad spend of taxpayers money.’

    Obviously you are going by what he media have said, and not what the independant reports into these schemes have found. Which kinda proves the point of this article.

    As to the other one, simply more oo bullshit nil

    http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2010/07/28/getting-anao-wrong-again/

  24. Neil of Sydney
    May 25, 2011 at 2:12 PM

    “Obviously you are going by what he media have said,”

    Nope. It is my own opinion. I do not even care how good the schemes were, they were overall a waste of taxpayers dollars. Private schools getting new assembly halls with money borrowed from China.

    And I have no sympathy for Possums comments. Where was he when Gratan was trashing the RPP. Coalition seats got 70% of the money, so it was presented by the media as a slush fund. Well the Coalition also had 70% of the seats.

    • May 26, 2011 at 8:56 AM

      Nope. It is my own opinion. I do not even care how good the schemes were, they were overall a waste of taxpayers dollars.

      That’s precisely the point…”opinion” in complete contradiction of the actual facts.
      Neil, your opinion means shit in the broad scheme of things…actual facts are what makes the world go round.

  25. Neil of Sydney
    May 26, 2011 at 9:54 AM

    What facts??

    You mean going from having no Federal govt debt and actually having $40B in the kitty earning interest to over a $100B of Federal govt debt.

    And not much to show in return for all the wasteful spending except a load of debt.

    • May 26, 2011 at 4:05 PM

      You must be deliberately obtuse…or massively stupid.

      I have directly quoted you stating that you don’t care if the facts counter your viewpoint but prefer your opinion.

      Tell me Neil, do you count an investment in infrastructure as a bad debt? So building tangile assets is a waste of time?

  26. Neil of Sydney
    May 26, 2011 at 4:23 PM

    Infrastructure?? What facts???

    You mean destroying perfection functional school buildings and replacing them with new ones??

    How is this going to help our country???

    • May 27, 2011 at 9:11 AM

      And this happened every single time??

      How’s this for a short example. A school hall can be used to generate revenue for the school by hiring it out to the community. This means that the school has extra money to sink into their own facilities, the community has another facility available for general use.
      So now for a one off investment of money we have an asset that can continue to generate revenue for an extended period of time.

      Not really that hard is it?

  27. Neil of Sydney
    May 27, 2011 at 9:23 AM

    You know I am not as stupid as you think. But you are more stupid than I thought. There is no way your example (which I had already thought of) is going to generate enough income to pay back all the money we borrowed from China. And in some cases the BER destroyed a nice little income earner.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/a-ball-short-of-a-tennis-match/story-e6frgd0x-1226062946085

    “There used to be a full tennis court at Nundah State School, a good little earner as the locals regularly hired the court. Then the Building the Education Revolution, part of the Stimulus Package, arrived……………
    …….Well, it turns out that after building the deemed essential new building, there was insufficient room to build a new tennis court.

    And so, to ensure there was a proper space between the fence and the baseline, the tennis court was built at 80 per cent the size of a tennis court. That’s right, 80 per cent. Of course, no child learns tennis on an 80 per cent court, and no local players hire it.”

    And I bet in the audit report a 80% size tennis court was not listed as a waste of money.

  28. May 27, 2011 at 2:29 PM

    You know I am not as stupid as you think.

    Neil, you will never comprehend just how stupid people think you are. It’s the way you act.

  29. Neil of Sydney
    May 27, 2011 at 9:49 PM

    “Neil, you will never comprehend just how stupid people think you are. ”

    I am glad you people think i am stupid. I am also very glad that I have nothing in common with the most deceitful people and the most stupid people I have ever had the misfortune to meet.

    Voting for the ALP is a religion. And it is a false religion with false prophets and teachers.

    Wake me up when the ALP does something useful.

  30. Bilko
    May 31, 2011 at 8:16 AM

    I have a friend who parrots NOS to a tee, he is not a bad bloke but does need a kick in the arse every now and then. He was normal then rose to some heights and it has gone to his head,although he would never admit it, never forget your roots I often think sad so many people who rise up the do just that.

  31. Neil of Sydney
    May 31, 2011 at 5:32 PM

    Well the moral superiority of you people is amazing.

    Maybe the ALP is losing the media war because they have hopeless policies.

    People in detention going from 6 to almost 7,000 now. All due to a stroke of the pen by Kevin Rudd.

    Budget going from $20B surplus to $50B deficit and money in the bank all gone. After paying off all the govt debt you retards created last time in power Costello actually had $40B in the bank earning interest. Now its all gone and we have a debt rapidly increasing thanks to Swan

    • June 1, 2011 at 8:55 AM

      Where to start?
      “6 to 7000”. Show me where there were 6 people in detention at any one time.

      Budget from 20B surplus to 50B deficit. Despite what you have been brainwashed to think, deficit is not always bad, especially when it has been used to build assets like infrastructure. Taking into account the reduced tax receipts from the GFC and you are on a hiding to nothing here.

      40B in the bank earning interest. Yeah that was well done wasn’t it…earning interest while the country’s infrastructure was crumbling just so he could pat himself on the back and perpetuate the myth that we must be in surplus. And he only got into surplus by selling Telstra off…any brain-dead knob with no understanding of economics (much like yourself) could that.

      Better scurry back to Young Liberal HQ and get the next batch of talking points…these ones don’t work any more.

  32. Neil of Sydney
    June 1, 2011 at 9:13 AM

    “And he only got into surplus by selling Telstra off…any brain-dead knob with no understanding of economics (much like yourself) could that”

    http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/overview/html/overview_48.htm

    I just added up the total money from the Costello surplus budgets. It comes to around about $100B if I have done my maths correctly. This was all used to pay off the debt you retards created last time in power.

    Money received from asset sales (e.g. Telstra) was not included in the budget as revenue. Money from asset sales was put into the Future Fund and other infrastructure funds or used to pay off debt.

    Money received from Telstra, I say again, was not included in the budget as revenue as there would have been three huge spikes in revenue when T1,T2 and T3 were sold.

  33. Neil of Sydney
    June 1, 2011 at 1:20 PM

    By the way to show you how wrong you were about Costello only getting into surplus by selling Telstra you should read this

    http://www.treasurer.gov.au/DisplayDocs.aspx?doc=pressreleases/2001/020.htm&pageID=&min=phc&Year=2001&DocType=0

    “The Commonwealth accounts do not include the proceeds of financial asset sales, such as Telstra, in the bottom line. They have not included the proceeds of financial asset sales in the bottom line since the defeat of the Labor Government in March 1996.

    One of the first decisions made by the Government, and backed by the Charter of Budget Honesty, was to exclude these asset sales from the Budget bottom line.

    If the proceeds of the privatisation of Telstra were, say, $60 billion, the Budget bottom line, instead of showing a starting point of $3.2 billion underlying cash surplus in 2001 (as shown in the Mid-year Review) would show a cash surplus of $63.2 billion. This is the way the Labor Party accounted. The Labor Party then spent the whole of the proceeds in each year of privatisation, still ran a deficit, and borrowed to fund the difference as well.

    The Government uses the proceeds of asset sales to write-down debt. Consequently, in Table F3, page 169, of the Mid-year Review, the proceeds are factored into the reduction in the Commonwealth debt position. ”

    You should apologise for speaking crap.

  34. Neil of Sydney
    June 3, 2011 at 6:09 PM

    Dear MassiveDeadbeat

    Do you know why Costello removed asset sales from general revenue???

    The Hawke/keating govt flogged off Qantas, Commonwealth bank, CSR and who knows what else and used the money for recurrent spending. Not to pay off debt. Apparently this had never happened in our history before. This made the ALP budget deficits smaller than they would have been.

    So that this would never happen again Costello removed asset sales from the budget bottom line.

    So your statement that Costello only got budget surplus by selling off Telstra is so wrong its not funny.

    • June 6, 2011 at 8:45 AM

      Neil,

      You are aware that your lord and master Costello left office with a massive structural deficit? All due to his pocketing of surpluses instead of investing in infrastructure? Face it, a semi-trained monkey (or yourself even) could have produced a surplus during that period…but a truly decent Treasurer would have done something with it instead of holding on to it for election bribes.

  35. Neil of Sydney
    June 6, 2011 at 10:09 AM

    No I don’t. That structural deficit crap was a new indicator brought out by Treasury after Howard lost office. Anyway structural deficits are easy to fix. Just eliminate middle class welfare.

    And furthermore latest Treasury figures are different to what was published earlier.

    http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/media/speeches/budget-in-reply-speech-labor-wasting-the-boom/

    “Last October the Treasury’s economic forecasters released work on the ’structural’ budget deficit suggesting that the resources boom has been delivering ever-larger revenue windfalls since around 2004. ………………………………………………………..According to the Treasury’s central case the resources boom delivered a revenue windfall of about $25 billion over the last three budgets delivered by Peter Costello. Those three budgets were in surplus by $53 billion so all of the income from the boom and more was banked, although Treasury’s central case estimate suggests the budget was in a small structural deficit in 2007-08. So much for claims that the Howard government blew the boom! ”

    Also that extra $334B in revenue that Costello was alleged to have received is also a load of crap.

  36. Neil of Sydney
    June 7, 2011 at 5:48 PM

    By the way I have never met anybody as wrong on so many topics as ALP supporters.

    Your rant about Costello only getting a budget surplus because of selling Telstra is an example. Common sense would have told you that when T1, T2 and T3 were sold those budget years would have had huge spikes in revenue and 3 huge surplus budgets.

    Costello never put revenue from asset sales into general revenue.

    You are wrong also about the alleged structural deficit.

  37. Bilko
    June 28, 2011 at 2:16 PM

    Spray it is now 28/6 nothing from you since May 16th is your can empty??

    Abbbort is now a better PPM 40-39 according to newspoll.

    They must have done the complete poll in his electorate even his street to come up with this. It confirms your original comment of May 16 the media war is lost. But I am reminded of an American Navy captain John Paul Jones challenged by the Royal Navy to surrender replied ” I have not yet begun to fight” I hope this is the case with Julia otherwise the bullet we dodged in 2007 is coming in 2013

    • July 1, 2011 at 6:21 AM

      I went into hibernation a bit Bilko. I was lulledcinto slumber by the same old stuff happening day in day out. New post up today….I’m back!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: