The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - May 17, 2008

Advertisement


Advertisement


Advertisement



New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Horent Leader
2.Harpoon 4: Modern Tactical Naval Warfare
3.Empires In Arms

4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge
6.Campaigns of King David
7.Queen of the Celts
8.Danube Front '85
9.Axis and Allies: Guadalcanal
10.Guns of August

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

Utah SEO Firm

Xango

Smiley Gifts for Babies

Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
Australia Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Mr PM, being an economic conservaitive doesn't mean you have to be a pr1ck and stupid!
Aussiegunneragain    3/9/2008 8:45:35 PM
Now that the election is over and now that he has had the chance to bathe in the warm glow of the symbolic gestures of signing Kyoto and issuing an apology to the Stolen Generations, it looks Kevin Rudd is going to ditch any pretence of compassion for the vulnerable and give carers of the elderly and the disabled a right shafting in the name of fiscal prudence. Specifically, they are looking at discontinuing a $1600 carers payment that eases the burden on many carers of the elderly infirm and the disabled.

Now, I'm a big fan of fiscal prudence and believe that Rudd and his treasurer Wayne Swan are right to take the meataxe to public spending, which has gotten bloated over the last part of the Howard government years and does threaten inflation. I don't even mind if they cut the $500 seniors payment, as I don't see why people should have money thrown at them just for being old.

However, slashing the carers payment is plain heartless and also pretty bloody stupid. Carers are often extremely financially strapped and give up earning opportunities themselves to care for their loved ones, at a time when they would otherwise be saving for their own retirement. Whats more, in doing so they save the taxpayer a bucket by keeping their young ones out of public hospitals and government subsidised nursing home beds. As far as I am concerned they are a group that don't recieve enough recognition and support from the government, though this was improved over the course of the Howard government. The annual payment of $1600, which was only ever going to be spent on essentials, was a step in the right direction.

However, Rudd and Swan (incidentally, the word is out that his officials in Treasury think he is a moron and wish they had Lindsay Tanner in charge there) in their wisdom has decided that rather than making cuts to the incomes of the most vulnerable in our society a LAST resort, that they will make it their FIRST. I can think of a number of their pre-election promises that should get the axe before this does. The $2 billion dollar broadband network which is only really going to increase the productivity of the online pornography industry and which private industry will probably eventually build anyway, would be a good start. They could also reconsider banning public universities from taking full-fee paying students, which has created the need for them to compensate the institutions for the lost income.

But then again those are initiatives that are important for making the Rudd government look cool and hip to their young, trendy support base, aren't they. It is far easier to shaft truly vulnerable people who were probably more likely to have been Howard voters.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

LABOR will scrap a $500 seniors' bonus payment created by John Howard last year to help the over-65s deal with rising costs, despite a massive community backlash over plans to abolish the $1600 carers' payment in the May budget.

But as welfare advocates and unions yesterday joined the Opposition in condemning the social spending cuts, the Treasury said spending under the Howard government was unsustainable and likened its profligacy to that of the Whitlam Labor government.

A Treasury report provided crucial support for Wayne Swan's insistence on the need for deep spending cuts in the 2008-09 budget to ease pressure on inflation and interest rates.

"The recent growth in spending stands out, along with the growth in spending under Whitlam in 1974-75 and the increased spending following the recessions in 1982-83 and 1990-91," the Treasury report stated.

The Australian revealed yesterday that the Government planned to axe the $1600 carers' payment as part of its May budget savings.

As the Treasurer refused to confirm the plans yesterday, other government sources said the $500 seniors' bonus, created last year, was also in the budget razor gang's sights.

Sources said the Government maintained its determination to deliver all election promises, but that all Howard government programs faced a line-by-line search for spending cuts.

The carers' bonus was paid to 400,000 Australians for the past four years, providing up to $1600 each, while Mr Howard created the seniors' bonus last year at a cost of $1.3 billion.

Both payments were said to be one-off - meaning they were funded out of budget surpluses and were not written into the budget forward estimates.

News of the plan to axe the carers' bonus sparked widespread community anger yesterday, highlighting the political risks facing Mr Swan as he grapples with the need to reduce budget spending.

Carers Australia chief executive Joan Hughes said many family carers lived below the poverty line and used the $1600 to augment their living expenses. "It's going to be a very tough time for carers," she said.

Mental Health Council of Australia spokesman Simon Tatz said carers needed the payment to help with medication, food, transport and accessing services.

"The utilities allowance cannot substitute for what the carer bonus can buy," Mr Tatz said.

The move sparked a warning from the Australian Services Union that the Rudd Government's "social inclusion" agenda might be damaged before it had even started. The ASU covers non-government workers providing housing, counselling and other support services.

National assistant secretary Linda White said the budget would have to be carefully thought through, and that taking money from programs that helped the people on the margins of society would be counter-productive.

"Taking money out of programs in a circumstance where there is already some difficulty being experienced at the front line getting labour - there is already significant difficulty getting workers for the pay on offer - then the Government's social inclusion agenda could be in jeopardy before it starts," Ms White said.

Community and Public Sector Union national secretary Stephen Jones said his union was concerned about job losses, but was also "concerned about the impact on the most vulnerable in the community".

Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson demanded that Mr Rudd intervene to protect carers.

"Whoever it is in Mr Rudd's Government who dreamed this up needs to pick on someone their own size," Dr Nelson said.

"Anyone who thinks that Australia's carers do not deserve the support they are getting just needs to walk a mile in their shoes."

Liberal MP Chris Pearce became personal by questioning whether Mr Rudd, whose wife, Therese, is a successful businesswoman, had forgotten what life was like for non-millionaires.

Since Labor's victory in November, Mr Rudd and Mr Swan have gone to great lengths to warn about the need for spending cuts and to demonise the Howard government for reckless spending and pork-barrelling.

The Treasury study released yesterday, prepared by Kirsty Laurie and Jason McDonald of the department's budget division, made similar observations.

It said that, including spending since 2004-05 and budgeted through to 2010-11, the Howard government gained an additional $391billion as a result of increased tax revenue, resulting mainly from the resources boom.

New spending decisions and tax cuts totalled $314billion.

Most of the money had been consumed by increases in government spending, which had grown more rapidly in the past four years than at any time since the 1990 recession. Much of the money had gone on social welfare to the aged and families with dependent children.

There was a remarkable increase in the number of spending proposals announced in each of the Howard budgets, rising from 359 in the 1997-98 budget to 825 in the last election year. Most of the initiatives were small, with 90 per cent valued at less than $100 million over the forward estimates. However, the number worth between $100million and $250million grew from 16 to 49 in the past 10 years, while the number of $1billion-plus proposals jumped from one to nine.

Over the same period, the Howard government dropped the ball on savings. "In the 1997-98 budget, close to a third of all measures had a savings component whereas, more recently, savings measures have averaged around 1.5 per cent of total measures," the report says.

There was also a rapid rise in spending on industry assistance, rising at an average rate of 6 per cent a year since the commodity boom began. Treasury warned this spending could distort the allocation of resources.

www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,23338903-601,00.html

 
Quote    Reply
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2
Aussiegunneragain    typo   3/9/2008 8:49:54 PM
I meant carers were financially strapped looking after "loved ones" rather than "young ones".
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       3/9/2008 9:35:44 PM
The $2 billion dollar broadband network which is only really going to increase the productivity of the online pornography industry and which private industry will probably eventually build anyway, would be a good start.
 
I don't even think this will ultimately help all broadband users anyway. I believe that copper-to-node was going to be canned and that the increase in speeds were associated with ADSL2 and not your regular garden variety cable b'band.
 
Roll on Kevin "McNamara" Rudd...the axe wieldeth.
 
Quote    Reply

Kevin Pork       3/9/2008 10:01:18 PM

Its what you get when you put an inexperienced driver at the wheel - at the slightest sign of trouble, he has hit the brakes with both feet and yanked on the handbrake. a panic reaction.

Still its funny to see the voters bitch about reaping what they have sown and so very soon after they sowed it. the next 4 years are going to be fun.
 
Given KRudds poll driven, deer in the headlights, paniced style, I wouldn't worry too much - he'll backflip on this one.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       3/9/2008 10:34:50 PM
Interesting that the Opposition and Unions are singing the same tune on this one.
 
Is it a definite that the payment is being cut?
 
AG a $1600 handout seems pretty pathetic, sort of a political "It's the thought that counts", what would be a realistic and effective scheme that would really improve things for carers?  My personal belief has always been you should be paid for the work you do.  Would it be fair to say it would be cheaper to pay carers a tax free salary plus super equivalent to the net salary of a professional carer,than to institutionalise all of those being cared for?
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Volkodave   3/9/2008 11:07:42 PM

Interesting that the Opposition and Unions are singing the same tune on this one.

 

Is it a definite that the payment is being cut?

 

AG a $1600 handout seems pretty pathetic, sort of a political "It's the thought that counts", what would be a realistic and effective scheme that would really improve things for carers?  My personal belief has always been you should be paid for the work you do.  Would it be fair to say it would be cheaper to pay carers a tax free salary plus super equivalent to the net salary of a professional carer,than to institutionalise all of those being cared for?


It was definate that the payment was being cut at the time of the article, though Rudd has just said from the Solomons that his government "won't leave carers in the lurch", whatever that means.
I agree that the $1600 handout isn't much, though it is in addition to other Centrelink payments and support that they can recieve. Still, when you look at the amount of money that people are forgoing they are well and truely coming up short. Being paid as a professional carer would a long way towards alleviating that and as such I think it is a good idea which would encourage people to keep their reletives at home. It would probably save money or at least break even as compared to the costs of a well run nursing home, as the family carer wouldn't be getting paid for being available 24/7 while you have to pay staff to be on around the clock in nursing homes.The other alternative if the family member can earn more in their actual job is for the government to pay for a person to have a professional carer in their home during working hours, with the family member taking caregiving duties over out of hours.  However, it is possible that nursing homes might actualy be cheaper than this, basically because they are woefully under staffed and of rotten quality.
 
In any case, people aren't going to get paid even to the level that a professional carer would, because the government is looking to cut money and has just demonstrated that it doesn't give a sh1t about the plight of carers and the people that they look after. While the $1600 sounds pathetic to most of us who earn decent money, it was enough to make a big difference to the lives of these people to get things like a new wheelchair, or helping to pay off a modified vehicle, or even just covering the utilities bill and the car rego. Ditching it is lousy.
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

bigfella       3/9/2008 11:44:56 PM
Gee, lucky you guys hadn't already pre-judged Rudd, otherwise you might go off ranting about things that hadn't actually happened yet.
 
Being one of those crazy old fashioned socialists, I'll wait to see what is in the budget before I actually comment on it.
 
This looks to me like one of 2 things:
1) A kite flying exercise to test just how far the government can actually go in the budget. If this is the case they have definately established an 'outer limit' to spending cuts.
2) A leak from the bureacracy pissed off at their new bosses for some reason. If this is the case then the previous government has laid out an appropriate course - spend millions of dollars & waste thousands of hours of police time to track down the leakers. I assume you all councur.
 
Who knows, this might even get 'mr 7%' back into double figures.
 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       3/9/2008 11:47:18 PM
 
Gee, lucky you guys hadn't already pre-judged Rudd, otherwise you might go off ranting about things that hadn't actually happened yet.
 
He has past form in Queensland politics. He might be new to the rest of Oz but some of us from up north know of his track record.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Bigfella demonstrates socialist "compassion"   3/10/2008 12:21:59 AM

Gee, lucky you guys hadn't already pre-judged Rudd, otherwise you might go off ranting about things that hadn't actually happened yet.

Being one of those crazy old fashioned socialists, I'll wait to see what is in the budget before I actually comment on it.

This looks to me like one of 2 things:

1) A kite flying exercise to test just how far the government can actually go in the budget. If this is the case they have definately established an 'outer limit' to spending cuts.

2) A leak from the bureacracy pissed off at their new bosses for some reason. If this is the case then the previous government has laid out an appropriate course - spend millions of dollars & waste thousands of hours of police time to track down the leakers. I assume you all councur.

 Who knows, this might even get 'mr 7%' back into double figures.

Well that is just lovely. Apparently it is politically to card carrying Laborites for a "compasionate" Labor government to go on a kite flying exercise to establish whether or not the electorate will tolerate them shafting some of the most vulnerable in our society. Just as well that the Australian people maintain a strong sense of decency and let them know that they don't accept this, or Rudd, Swan and Macklin (who refused to rule the cut out, using the excuse that it hadn't been budgetted for in the future, see below) would probably deem this to be politically acceptable and go ahead with it.
 
In the meantime sick people like the guy in the following article, along with his wife, get to worry themselves sick over this until Rudd and his minions do a backflip. Just bloody lovely.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23333045-601,00.html

LABOR will scrap annual bonuses of $1600 paid to carers as its budget razor gang carves deep into welfare programs to cut spending and curb inflation.

It will replace the payments with a higher utilities allowance but will leave the sick and disabled and their carers hundreds of dollars a year worse off.

Although Families Minister Jenny Macklin refused to confirm the plan last night, she stressed the payments, created by the Howard government and paid for the past four years, had never been written into budget forward estimates and were "one-off".

As senior sources confirmed the payments were to be scrapped, Wayne Swan yesterday told a business lunch the Howard government had engaged in the "old politics" of pork-barrelling, leaving the incoming Government facing the need to make dramatic budget cuts to reduce the inflationary pressure that was driving up interest rates.

Terminally ill Queensland pensioner Ashley Norman, 73, contacted The Australian to attack the Rudd Government over its plans, saying Labor had supported the bonuses in Opposition.

"My wife gets $100 a fortnight to look after me," Mr Norman said from his home in Mackay. "She's got to do everything I did, everything she did and care for me like a baby.

"What he's (Kevin Rudd) doing is criminal. To take $1600 off us after giving it to us every year for four years, it's criminal."

Opposition frontbencher Tony Abbott accused Labor of using carers as "human shields in the fight against inflation".

"You've got this big surplus; you've got to do something with it," he said.

"Let's not victimise carers."

Mr Abbott said the cuts brought to mind a 2006 essay by the Prime Minister in The Monthly magazine entitled Howard's Brutopia: The Battle of Ideas in Australian Politics, in which Mr Rudd said Australia had become a brutopia because of the Howard government's "market fundamentalism".

"(The cuts) suggest that Rudd's essay was a political marketing exercise, not a statement of real personal belief," Mr Abbott said.

"What happened to Rudd's compassion? Rudd, it seems, is more capable of running a brutopia than Howard ever was."

Almost 400,000 Australians have received the Carer Bonus for the past four years.

The bonus paid $1000 to carer payment recipients and $600 to carer allowance recipients. Because many households received both payments, the bonus had become a regular $1600 windfall.

Ms Macklin yesterday refused to rule anything in or out in the budget, in line with the rote response being given by all ministers.

But she said the Rudd Government understood the difficulties faced by carers and was extending the Utilities Allowance to Carer Payment recipients for the first time with an increase to $500 a year, every year. "The Carer Bonus payments were only one-off payments, which the previous government never guaranteed into the budget," she said.

Carers Australia chief executive Joan Hughes said she held grave fears for the bonus. "We've already heard from various departments there's not going to be any more growth in our programs," she said.

The payment is one of at least 30 Howard government programs, worth $3.6 billion, to be dumped under Labor as it struggles to slice spending to curb inflation it blames on reckless spending and vote-buying by the previous government.

Prior to the federal election last November, Labor produced costings of its own election promises along with $5.4 billion in savings to be achieved through scrapping or modifying Howard government programs.

The razor gang is striking across all areas of government, with many slashed programs to be replaced by other new payments.

While some, such as the Carers' Bonus, will leave recipients worse off, others will be replaced by more lucrative spending schemes based on changed priorities.

For example, Mr Swan will replace the low-emission technology demonstration fund, worth $140 million over four years, with a range of climate change related spending worth significantly more.

Similarly, many old rural grants programs are to be replaced by others aimed at helping farmers adapt to climate change.

And Labor's abolition of a $359million dental health plan will be countered by more than $600 million in new spending.

Mr Swan, who has spent the months since Labor's election softening up the electorate for the spending cuts and attacking the failure of the previous government to guard against inflation, repeated the message yesterday in a speech to the Australia-Israel Chamber of Commerce.

The Treasurer said the previous government had spent public money to win elections rather than ensuring the long-term productivity of the economy.

"Our election struck a blow at old politics and left us confronted with its legacy - a legacy of the old way that elections had to be bought, spending could be reckless, there was no need to invest in the future because pork-barrelling could get you through," he said.

"Put simply, the economy hasn't been adequately equipped to meet the challenges that have come with our 17 years of expansion coupled with the terms of trade boom. The supply capacity of the economy isn't keeping pace with demand."

The Howard government has been criticised for the generosity of its middle-class welfare, but in his first major speech since the election defeat, Mr Howard last night defended his record. "The taxation system should generously recognise the cost of raising children," he told an American Enterprise Institute dinner in Washington DC. "This is not middle-class welfare. It is merely a taxation system with some semblance of social vision."

Mr Norman has spent weeks attempting to find out whether the Rudd Government would continue with the carer's payment for his wife, Patricia, 70.

He said he had written seven letters to Mr Rudd and received no reply.

Despite gasping for breath from chronic emphysema caused by laying asbestos roofs during his working life, Mr Norman has pestered anyone who would listen to him about the payment.

Yesterday he said he was told by Mr Rudd's Parliament House office that the payment would be axed. He said Ms Macklin's office told him they were considering dumping the payment while local Labor MP James Bidgood indicated there still might be a chance of saving it.

On Monday, he was admitted to Mackay Base Hospital. It was there that the doctor told him he would not have long to live. "They told me it's only a matter of time," he said.

 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       3/10/2008 12:55:23 AM
This is now a Catch 22 for Rudd.  Whether there was ever an intention to end the payment or not he can't win on this one.
 
If the payment is cut he is a heartless B@stard, if the payment remains unchanged or even if it is increased or replaced with something better he is a slimy, flip flopping, untrustworthy, poll driven toad.
 
Ah the joys of winning government.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Volkodav   3/10/2008 1:14:24 AM

This is now a Catch 22 for Rudd.  Whether there was ever an intention to end the payment or not he can't win on this one.

 If the payment is cut he is a heartless B@stard, if the payment remains unchanged or even if it is increased or replaced with something better he is a slimy, flip flopping, untrustworthy, poll driven toad.

 Ah the joys of winning government.


I don't feel sorry for him. In the context of how much they are spending on their trendy causes (a non-means tested subsidy for a laptop for every high-school student, even if they already have computer access is the other clanger that comes to mind), this as a lousy idea for his side to canvas at all. He deserves to get a good kicking for it.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain    Volkodav   3/10/2008 1:22:26 AM

This is now a Catch 22 for Rudd.  Whether there was ever an intention to end the payment or not he can't win on this one.

 If the payment is cut he is a heartless B@stard, if the payment remains unchanged or even if it is increased or replaced with something better he is a slimy, flip flopping, untrustworthy, poll driven toad.

 Ah the joys of winning government.


I don't feel sorry for him. In the context of how much they are spending on their trendy causes (a non-means tested subsidy for a laptop for every high-school student, even if they already have computer access is the other clanger that comes to mind), this as a lousy idea for his side to canvas at all. He deserves to get a good kicking for it.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       3/10/2008 2:26:32 AM

From ABC NEWS

Damage control begins, so now it is wait and see.

PM says carers, pensioners won't be worse off

Posted 47 minutes ago
Updated 8 minutes ago

Rudd guarantee: The most vulnerable in the community will be looked after.

Rudd guarantee: The most vulnerable in the community will be looked after. (ABC News: Damien Larkins)

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has moved to reassure carers and seniors, saying they will not be worse off after this year's Federal Budget.

The Federal Government has come under fire for refusing to rule out the scrapping of a $1,600 bonus for carers, and a similar $500 payment for pensioners.

Mr Rudd says while he will not discuss the Government's budget plans in detail, he can guarantee the most vulnerable in the community will be looked after.

"When it comes to the bonuses system, carers and pensioners will not be any worse off under the budget," he said.

"Beyond that what we're looking at is ways and means by which we can provide greater financial certainty for carers and pensioners into the long-term future.

"When I said that our carers and pensioners shouldn't be left in the lurch, that is precisely what I meant."

But Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson says the Government must ease community concerns and say whether or not its intending to scrap the payments.

"These are the most vulnerable, the sickest and the weakest Australians," he said.

 
Quote    Reply

Kevin Pork       3/10/2008 3:17:35 AM
a kite flying exercise that terrifies those who are busy caring for the sick or disabled, its good to see that labor is sticking by its working class 'fair go' principles.
 
so if there wasn't an outcry labor would just go ahead and shaft them? isn't that the point of political kite flying?
 
no doubt those so called 'carers' who have been bludging off the system for so long (/sarcasm) will be glad to see 2.6 mil of federal grant money going to a worthy cause, a memorial site to the founding of the ALP.
 
still, we can already see KRudd lining up for the tripple reverse pike as the polls have led the way here - its good to see that he is as decisive as he is compassionate...
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

bigfella       3/10/2008 5:27:26 AM
Now this is genuinely funny. Watching SPs' very own Kompassionate Konservatives weep crocodile tears for carers. I'll bet a bunch more people ACTUALLY got screwed a bunch worse than this under Howard to deafening silence. One rumour about Rudd's proposed cuts & suddenly the hearts of stone turn to bleeding hearts.
 
Tell me fellas, did you sound off like this when Howard invented the 'non-core promise'? I'm betting not.
 
If I was capable of taking any of you seriously I'd lose my lunch. As it is I'll just treat this low farce from a bunch of people who still think the electorate are too stupid to be trusted to choose the government. Opposition sucks, don't it?
 
I'll save my howls of dissapproval until something ACTUALLY happens.
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       3/10/2008 5:43:50 AM
I am starting to remember what it was like in 96 everything was Paul Keatings fault and John Howard was a heartless b@stard screwing the most vulnerable members of the community.
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2008StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy