The mathematics of Tony Abbott's dishonesty Telling people they can't have government money. Harder for Joe Hockey when he's going ahead with PPL One Term Governments are rare but the spring in the opposition step might be justified
If you are like me, you have probably had it with this ‘debt and deficit disaster’
mantra that is peddled incessantly by the Prime Minister, the Treasurer
and the rest of this disorganised, ideological rabble who call
themselves a government.
Is it too much to ask that they tell the truth and stop deceiving the
Australian people into believing that running the economy of a country
is the same as running the economy of a household?
The number of times I read and hear comments from people along the
lines, “Labor left us with a humongous debt and now the Liberals have to
clean up the mess,” is extraordinary, but more importantly, utterly
ignorant of the truth. Can we really be that stupid? Yes we can. Yes we
are.
When
I explain to them the ‘debt’ they are referring to, is actually the
ongoing issuance of Commonwealth Government Bonds, Indexed Treasury
Bonds and Short Term Treasury Notes, they look at me dumbfounded.
When I explain, in words of one syllable, that these bonds and notes
have been the means by which successive governments have controlled the
flow of money for, at least, the past 100 years, their jaws move, their
mouths open, but no sound is forthcoming.
Then, when I tell them that the Howard government authorised the
Reserve Bank to continue issuing bonds even when the government didn’t
need the money, their eyes blink, their noses twitch, the jaws move, the
mouth opens but still no sound comes forth.
When I tell them that it’s to maintain the overnight inter-bank
lending rate, something that will continue for the next 100 years, they
nod slowly as if to indicate their understanding of the situation. But
they don’t really.
When I tell them that the Howard government did not leave the economy
“debt” free, that the total amount of bonds and notes on issue in 2007
when the Howard government was defeated was $96 billion, they gulp but
again, nothing. Only when I tell them that by September 2013, when Labor
lost government the total amount of bonds and notes on issue was $284
billion do they seem to agree. When I tell them that as of today, in
late November 2014, the total amount of bonds and notes on issue is $344
billion they shake their heads, open and close their mouths, turn away,
scratch their noses, but are back to playing dumbstruck.
I’d like to tell them that these bonds will never need repaying, but I fear the shock would be too great.
So I tell them that this is what Joe Hockey calls the “national debt.”
If
Hockey, and the rest of them want to call it debt, they have to
acknowledge that they have been borrowing at the rate of $1 billion a
week since coming to government. But, if you were to ask them to
acknowledge that, I’m betting they will just say it’s all Labor’s fault.
But the truth is, it isn’t anyone’s fault. That money has kept tens of
thousands in work.
It has kept businesses viable. It has maintained a healthy economy.
It isn’t debt at all. It is how a country’s economy works. It is the way
the Reserve Bank controls and keeps a properly regulated banking system
viable, enabling banks to create money, keeping businesses in business,
keeping people employed.
It’s not just Hockey deceiving us, all Treasurers do it, Liberal and
Labor. Which indicates that none of them know how this “debt” works. Or,
they don’t want us to know. Well, it’s high time they either learned,
or came clean and it’s high time we stopped referring to bonds, indexed
bonds and treasury notes by this utterly fictitious name. They are not
debt, they are Commonwealth Government Securities.
The one redeeming factor is that at least Labor governments are not frightened by them.
The big difference between the two parties in the way that they
approach this matter is that Labor governments know, that whatever they
are called, they stimulate growth which reduces unemployment. They know
that they provide infrastructure that adds value in the movement of
domestic produce to market and in the facilitation of our export
industries. They know that they contribute to a high standard of living,
of health and the education of our children who are our country’s
future.
People like Tony Abbott aren’t looking that far ahead. Tony Abbott can’t see 16 years ahead.
He probably can’t see beyond today. Neither can his government. That’s
why organisations like the IPA have such a huge influence over them. The
IPA acts as their counsellor, like parents to untrained children. But
the IPA and like-minded groups have a quite different, more sinister
agenda.
They
know that things like full employment, a highly educated nation and a
more equal society where everyone enjoys the benefits of a strong Gross
Domestic Product (GDP), actually threaten the super-rich, threaten their
influence and threaten their power. A more equal society means less
wealth, less power, for the super-rich.
These exclusive groups know that avoiding calling “national debt” by its proper name of “Commonwealth Government Securities”
and concealing what those securities actually achieve for all of us,
they can continue to further the aims and the objectives that keep all
the power in the hands of the already powerful one per cent, the
super-rich.
They want unemployment to continue because it keeps a lid on wages
growth which is the biggest threat to their increased wealth. One only
has to look at the root causes of the GFC to see the damage an
unregulated banking framework will create. Greed, excessive greed and
obscene greed are the root causes.
It is high time this deception was exposed for what it is. And we can
start exposing it by replacing the words “government debt” and
referring to the issuance of bonds and treasury notes by what they
really are, “Commonwealth Government Securities.”
Then
maybe, just maybe, some of the more illiterate, moronic, ill-informed
cretins who slavishly follow the LNP in the mistaken belief that they
are the better financial managers, will wake up and realise that the LNP
has played them and conned them.
Following on from the grilling Alan Jones
gave Tony Abbott on his talkback program. Andrew Bolt decided on
Tuesday to weigh into the discussion about the poor performance of the
government. At first glance one might say, fair enough. Putting aside
the fact that Bolt and Jones write on the basis of payment for
controversy, Bolt does make some valid points. He covers a wide range of
topics from foreign policy to media bias. I think I agree more often
than not. Did I just say that?
But there is one glaring omission. The Prime Minister seems to be responsible for nothing. It’s everyone’s fault but Abbott’s. How can this be?
What follows is a transcript from Bolt’s blog. My comments are in italics.
The Abbott Government falls further behind in Newspoll:
In two-party-preferred terms, based on preference flows from last
year’s election, Labor leads by 55 per cent to 45 per cent. The ALP’s
third consecutive rise in two-party terms means the opposition has been
in front of the -Coalition on this measure for 14 successive Newspolls.
I still believe this overstates the margin, and the reality is
somewhere between Newspoll and Essential Media’s 48 to 52 per cent. But
there is no disputing the Government has a serious problem.
At this stage in the election cycle polls are meaningless
as to a pointer to who might win. However as a current form guide of
performance they are illuminating. Why all of a sudden Newspoll is
shadowing Morgan is a mystery. Perhaps they are calling mobiles. Given
there will not be much joy in any LNP future announcements these figures
will continue for months to come.
So to repeat:
– the Government’s foreign policy successes don’t much impress
voters. They are important, some critical, but they will increasingly
look to voters like evasive action. A smokescreen from what they’d
consider their most immediate concerns.
Bolt is correct here. Abbott has looked as though he has
vacated domestic policy in favour of the perception he is some sort of
international statesman. Which he aint. THE G20 meeting gave him a
powerful stage to articulate his vision for Australia. So he spoke about
his inability to pass his unfair budget. Now that’s statesmanship for
you. And what intelligent Prime Minister PM would say.
“As for Australia, I’m focusing not on what might happen in 16 years’ time, I’m focusing on what we’re
doing now and we’re not talking, we’re acting,”
What would an intelligent 18-year-old about to vote for the first time think of this statement by the PM.
As Malcolm Farr said on insiders. ‘’He shouldn’t be left in charge of his own mouth’’
- the domestic issues, especially Budget cuts and broken promises, continue to kill the Government.
In trying to sell the perception that the budget was in
crisis while adding to the deficit (they are still doing it) themselves
only served to highlight Abbott’s capacity for lying. If things continue
the deficit will double by the time of next year’s budget. Whatever
spin Abbott and his ministers put on it, he told lies to gain power and
is now suffering credibility deficiency syndrome.
– weak economic growth and Budget blowouts undermine the Government’s entire argument for being.
There are reasons for the weak economic growth resulting
in a drop in revenues. These could be addressed but for Abbott’s blind
ideological political philosophy. Its better that the poor should pay.
– a ferocious onslaught by the media Left, especially the ABC
behemoth, against the Government generally and Abbott personally, means
the Government struggles to sell even its strengths.
What a ridiculously incoherent argument. The right
control the vast bulk of media influence. The left have no shock jocks
like Jones, Hadley, Smith and others. They have no journalists of the
venom of Piers Akerman, Janet Albrechtson, Miranda Devine, Dennis
Shanahan, Paul Kelly, Chris Kenny and Tom Switzer.Gerard Henderson Paul
Sheehan, Miranda Divine. They control 70% of the distribution of newspapers in the
major cities. The ABC is not biased. It has a charter to uphold and is
always under scrutiny to do so. Commercial stations don’t have one. It
is but one TV channel against many. Given that the commercial media has
vacated truthful reporting in favour of biased opinion. It is a bit rich
for the most biased journalist in Australia to accuse the ABC of
anything let alone bias. In any case 70% of Australians think it
trustworthy. Ever watched the Bolt report?
– the Government’s media strategy is poor, too often defensive and
reactive. Abbott still lacks a senior media strategist in his office – a
critical and telling absence.
A media strategist will not resolve the issue of Abbott’s
lying directly and by omission. Here is an example from Wednesday. When
asked about the Green Fund at a joint press conference with French
President Hollande the PM said that we already had a Direct Action fund
of 2.5 Billion and a Clean Energy Finance Corp 10 Billion fund. The only
thing wrong with the answer was that the first won’t work and it is
Government policy to abolish the second. His lying knows no bounds.
– the Government has bought the myth that deeds speak for themselves
and playing nice wins respect. A cameo: Tony Abbott in welcoming
President Xi Jinping to Parliament yesterday praised Labor leaders Gough
Whitlam and Neville Wran for fostering China ties; Bill Shorten in his
welcome praised Whitlam, noted Labor leaders had worked on the free
trade deal before Abbott and praised China for its global warming “deal”
and the sending of doctors to treat ebola patients – all digs at
bipartisan Abbott and his policies. The Government is getting killed in
bare-knuckle politics.
What gratuitous nonsense. Trying to make out that Abbott
is the personification of niceness when in fact he is a gutter
politician of many years standing. A political thug who the pubic, it
would seem, have finally woken up to. A man who has broken every
parliamentary convention when it comes to the niceties of diplomacy. For
a person such as Abbott, with his record, to solicit bipartisan
cooperation is hypocrisy in the extreme.
– Treasurer Joe Hockey isn’t getting cut-through in the most
important portfolio. A Treasurer who can’t dominate the agenda leaves a
Government fatally weakened.
Totality correct Andrew. What a terrible indictment of
the Treasurer of the country. Of course when he said that Global Warming
and Economics don’t co-exist it was like saying blood has nothing to do
with bodily function .He has no creditability what so ever. On the plus
side you have to give him credit for owning up to the fact that the GFC
did actually happen.
– the Government doesn’t have an effective headkicker. It lacks
mongrel. Another cameo: Barack Obama won huge and positive coverage in
the media for belting Abbott over global warming. The Government looked
properly reprimanded, a punching bag, when it should have blasted back
and won points for at least seeming tough.
The headkicker they had as Opposition Leader was good at
it. As PM it is now not the done thing. All Obama did was to raise an
issue of vital importance to the world. He was supported by the
President of the world’s most populous nation. I think they made their
point. Is Andrew suggesting our PM should have shirtfronted both of
them.
– internal jealousies mean the Government’s most successful minister,
Immigration Minister Scott Morrison, has been given not a single new
problem to solve since stopping the boats, while strugglers are pushed
in front of the TV cameras week after week.
(a single new problem to solve) Is there a daily list?
Morrison’s appeal is to those in the community who are sympathetic to
the demonization of people and would probably favor no immigration at
all. There is nothing to suggest he would be popular in another
ministry. Maybe Tourism, or perhaps I’d better not go there.
– the Government’s second most successor minister, Julie Bishop, is
in a portfolio which lets her shine but does not win the government any
votes.
True. Remember she had another portfolio once and got the sack for incompetence.
- the minister most admired by the Left-wing media,
Malcolm Turnbull, is in a portfolio in which there is little call for
him to use his undoubted influence and charm to sell the Government to
its media critics. Instead, as Communications Minister he is more likely
to protect the media critics from the Government. Malcolm might have made a decent Treasurer but he is
unlikely to be given the job because it comes with too much influence
and power. Consequently it would make Abbott vulnerable.
– the Government has not developed a moral message – an inspiring
cause – other than the constitutional recognition of Aborigines, which
will actually prove marginal and divisive, not least with its own base.
That agenda will also be thankless: witness Mick Dodson’s mean-spirited
attack on Abbott last week. Where is the evangelism?
There he goes on the aboriginal thing again. The rotating
writer. Global warming, asylum seekers, Muslims and Labor in whatever
order. Abbott was the most successful Opposition Leader this country has
ever seen.(depending on your mode of measurement) He won office by
lying and barking negativity like a mad dog for four years. During that
time he never ventured into the formulation of good public policy. As a
consequence he came to power with a zeal for undoing, not doing.
– the Government has been poor in developing the “Greek chorus”
effect that collectivists like Labor do so well. Too often it seems
friendless. Business is slow to support it, and too rarely are the Prime
Minister and his ministers seen surrounded by happy supporters. Obvious
example?: the Government couldn’t or wouldn’t find hundreds of
scientists and medicos to even back its huge medical research fund.
The ‘’Greek Chorus’’ or collective voices saw the total
unfairness of everything conservative. Why would you expect scientists
to support a medical research program while he was denouncing science
with a vengeance and ridiculing it in terms of the Climate? A
determination by government to limit the amount of sugar, fat and salt
in processed food would achieve a similar outcome as a research fund.
– the Government can’t or won’t even energize its base with some
signature campaigns and successes. It gave up the free speech fight,
gave up on workplace reform and dares not challenge the global warming
hysteria (indeed, its lacks the people, conviction and strategy to even
attempt it). Where are the inspiring reforms – ones that its supporters
will gladly man the election booths to defend?
1. Why is it that the Murdoch Press is the main agitator
for more free speech? They are the pedlars of verbal violence and
dishonesty .The most vigorous defenders of free speech because it gives
their vitriolic nonsense legitimacy. With the use of free speech, the
bigots and hate-mongerers like Bolt seek to influence those in the
community who are susceptible or like-minded. 2. workplace reform is
happening. Wages are in reverse. 3. You can believe the likes of Abbott
and Bolt on Climate Change but I will stick with the evidence. 4. If
Andrew can name a conservative reform in the name of the common good
then do so.
– the Government too often radiates a lack of conviction. It often
dares not dare name the cause in which it fights: it cuts (barely) the
ABC without explaining that it’s too big and biased; it slashes at
global warming programs without explaining why they are a useless fix to
a non-problem, it resists Obama’s global warming evangelism without
explaining he’s a fraud.
Perhaps the facts get in the road and are difficult to move.
– the Government has picked too many fights it cannot win, not just
with the Senate but more especially with the public. It must ditch the
undoable, argue only for what it can win and avoid the Senate bloc
wherever possible. Bye-bye Medicare co-payment and parental leave
scheme.
It was only Tuesday that Abbott told the Indian PM that
he, Abbott, was a ‘’can do’’ person. And yes he should consign the
co-payment and PPL to the rubbish bin. But there will be a residual
price to pay for his ineptness.
– the Government seems out of synch with the times. Younger and
fresher faces – women particularly – are needed in the lineup. Some of
the Coalition’s most appealing talent is not in the Ministry.
Ah women. That’s always been the problem. Hasn’t it. The polls show that women and young people loath the man.
– the Liberals have never prospered without senior ministers in
Victoria arguing the case, leading the charge, imposing themselves on
the debate. Where are they?
That’s true. Victorians seem to have always been the more level-headed and of the ‘’small L’’ variety.
– a small point now, but why do Ministers go onto big set-piece
interviews, especially with the ABC, without something new to reveal or
announce? Why sit there passively while the interviewer asks the gotcha
questions they’ve been working on for hours, hoping to have found the
weakness?
What a silly question. The answer is obvious. There aren’t any.
Enough.
True, I have listed here the Government’s shortcomings but not its
strengths and virtues. And if I were to list Labor’s failings, the list
would be much longer.
But the Government cannot just motor on as Julia Gillard fatally
tried, arguing that voters will eventually come around and see the gain
for the pain, or see through the Opposition’s alleged failings. The
polls today have a reality. Something is not working and must be fixed.
Labor lost the last election principally because of its
leadership problems but the Gillard minority government never defeated
on the floor of the house while at the same time passing some major
reforms. Gillard could negotiate, Abbott cannot.
That fixing must start over the Christmas break. The planned minor
reshuffle must be expanded. A new start must be signaled with new faces
and an act of repentance. An aggressive, positive and confident media
strategy must be adopted.
Get sharp. Get tough. Get assertive. Get confident. Offer inspiration. And fight.
One could argue that the damage has already been done. The electorate has labelled the Prime Minister a liar.
As I said at the start. Andrew Bolt raised a number of
issues that are relevant to the LNP’s current predicament. He does not
seem to apportion blame for anything to the party leader.
Your news of the weekend, reduced to a snarky rant
"Sure, global warming, whatever. But let's talk about how people just don't clean up after their dogs properly…" Photo: Ian Waldie
It's been a storied few days for lovers of quality statesmanship
You know, it's just barely possible that this weekend was the
moment when the world, as one, looked at Tony Abbott and went "…um,
why's this guy talking?"
It started on a high note
when your PM and Minister for Aboriginal Affairs announced to British
PM David Cameron (twice!) that "It's hard to think that back in 1788 it
was nothing but bush and that the marines and the convicts and the
sailors that straggled off those 12 ships … must have thought they had
come to the moon."
It's an interesting statement for a bunch of reasons,
starting with their apparent familiarity with the rich eucalypt forest
and scrubland of the type that covers the lunar surface.
"For a long time most Australians who went to see a doctor
have been seen at no charge and we would like to see a $7 co-payment for
people who are going to see the doctor," he said, to a room full of
people to whom this information was neither relevant nor especially
appropriate. "It is proving to be massively difficult to get this
particular reform through the Parliament."
Awwww, diddums! People don't want to pay a tax
designed to make them see their doctors less! Don't talk about climate
change or human rights, Tone, have a little whinge about how you're not
able to pass bad policy.
But Tony did boast about how his government eliminated the carbon tax. So, y'know, that's good.
Speaking of the thing we mustn't speak about …
it was very good of the Brisbane weather to decide that if
the government weren't going to talk about climate change then it was
going to take matters into its own hands by giving the delegates a
weekend almost 10 degrees above average for this time of year, while
ensuring that the PM was given updates about the unseasonally early
bushfires that were roaring out of control through the Blue Mountains.
It's also great timing: not only was the ink barely dry on the US-China emissions trading deal, but even Tones' BFF David Cameron
said: "Countries that have so far done the least have to think about
what more they can do. I've had good and friendly discussions with Prime
Minister Abbott about that."
And hopefully Tone had a chance to catch up with Indian PM
Narendra Modi, who might mention to him that India's Power and Coal
Minister Piyush Goyal has just outlined India's plan to stop importing coal in the next "two to three years".
So yep: the government's really captured the international
mood on the subject of energy policy and climate change response. We
really look pretty cool and grown up right now.
Literally, no
Poor Redfoo. All he wanted to do was sing a fun little song
about telling women to shut up, and now everyone's accusing him of
sexism and calling for him to sacked as a mentor on The X Factor.
"It was a symbol of a negative person that came to crash the
party," he whined on Kiiss FM on Friday. "It could've been woman or male
or anything, any sexual orientation."
Really? Male or woman, huh? Even the bit telling them to do some girl-on-girl?
On his Facebook, he did that most charming of retorts: the
non-pology, aka the "If I offended you, I'm sorry that you feel that way
for whatever weird reason you have".
"I get excited to create things that will unite all of us
through laughter, dance & celebration," he or perhaps a work
experience intern wrote in the post on Thursday. "If during that process
I offend anyone, I apologize from the bottom of my heart."
Stefan "Redfoo" Gordy, by the way, is a 39-year-old adult.
Incidentally, it's entirely possible to write a party song
without feeling you have to tell women to shut up. Here's Sydney's the
Stiffys with their version of the song, minus the disrespect and
including awesome jumpsuits.
The Palmer United Party have been asked to back the
Democratic Labor Party's High Court challenge against former senator
John Madigan, who resigned from the party and now sits as an
independent.
What the DLP would like would be Madigan to hand the seat
back to the party in order for them to replace him, the argument being
that people voted for the party rather than the man. Madigan, naturally,
feels that it was the man who got voted in, not the party, and has no
intention of resigning.
And since the reality is that no one voted for either, and
Madigan's presence in the Senate is the result of randomness within the
chaotic maelstrom of microparty preference deals, they're going to let the High Court decide who actually owns a Senate seat.
The outcome has obvious interest to PUP in the wake of the
increasingly likely departure of Jacqui Lambie from the party, who has
refused to sack her chief of staff Rob Messenger.
Messenger has been expelled from the party, and Lambie has responded with the bizarre announcement that
"I've requested that all my staff not be members of any political
party. I want a non-political office and Mr Palmer's confirmation that
Mr Messenger is no longer a member of the Palmer United Party saves him
the trouble of resigning." Because why would you want political
affiliations in a political office in politics? That sounds crazy!
ABC directors also claimed, at $120 per household per year, the ABC provided value for money. Photograph: Andrew Henshaw/AAP Image
The ABC board has used its annual report to make a pointed statement
about the Coalition’s broken pre-election promise not to cut the budget
of the public broadcaster.
ABC directors also claimed at $120 per household per year the ABC
provided value for money and was 2.5 times cheaper than a basic pay TV
subscription ($300).
“The full suite of service – radio, television and digital, both
domestic and international – costs roughly $120 per household per year,”
they said.
The board has also accused the government of cutting an additional
“several million dollars” by stealth – on top of the 1% cut and the
termination of the Australian Network contract.
“The amount appropriated was fixed without any consultation with the
ABC,” the directors said. “It was several million dollars less than the
amount required. The difference, which will be determined when the
redundancy process is complete, represents a further cut.”
The statement by the board directors, led by chairman James
Spigelman, expressed “profound disappointment” at the government’s
action and said they had been “short-sighted” in terminating the funding
for the Australia Network.
“The board was disappointed that, contrary to pre-election statements
made by the prime minister, the 2014-15 budget, handed down in May,
included a 1% reduction in the corporation’s base funding,” the note in
the annual report, tabled in parliament on Friday, said.
“The minister for communications, the Hon. Malcolm Turnbull MP,
described this cut as a ‘down-payment’ on future funding reductions. In
addition, the government announced it would terminate the contract
between the ABC and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Dfat)
for the operation of the Australia Network Service.
“Together, the announced cuts will amount to a budget reduction of
$120m over the next four years. The ABC has commenced a detailed program
of work to examine the best way of meeting these and anticipated
further funding cuts, including a fundamental re-organisation of its
international service.”
The ABC board is waiting for the government’s expenditure review
committee to tell them how much extra money they need to cut from the
$1.1bn budget, which has already lost $120m over four years.
Jackie Kelly resigned from the Liberal party two weeks ago over its failure to reform. Photograph: Alan Porritt/AAP
Former Liberal minister Jackie Kelly has referred to the Abbott
government as “lying, lying, lying toads” for betraying western Sydney
on the Badgerys Creek airport.
Kelly, the Howard government star who resigned from the Liberal party two weeks ago
over its failure to reform, has accused her former friend Tony Abbott
of treating western Sydney residents “like schmucks” just “so the north
shore can get their curfews”. Tony Abbott’s electorate of Warringah is
on Sydney’s north shore.
In his first infrastructure statement to parliament this week, Abbott
said the decision to go ahead with Badgerys Creek airport was
“irrevocable” and would be supported by a range of infrastructure,
including roads and rail.
“That’s a crock,” Kelly told Guardian Australia. “They are lying, lying, lying toads.”
“They haven’t planned for it, there is no money on the table … Badgerys Creek will be a 24-hour airport mostly for freight.
“It will put even more trucks on our roads. The north shore can get
their curfews but we schmucks in western Sydney don’t deserve caps and
curfews. We deserve better representation.”
Kelly said a Badgerys Creek airport would not attract “cheap
airfares” because it would mainly cater to freight and so western Sydney
residents would still have to trek into Mascot to fly out.
She said she has had many people asking her to run as an independent
in the next federal election but she has ruled it out at this stage.
However, Kelly committed to helping the No Badgerys Creek Airport group
run candidates and a campaign at the federal election, and she believes
the group will garner enough support to tip seats away from the
government.
Kelly resigned from the party over its failure to implement reforms
in the Howard report on party reform, in which John Howard recommended
every Liberal party member be allowed to vote for local candidates.
Kelly has not spoken to Abbott since her resignation from the party
but said he knows her views because she has been saying it “inside the
party” for many years.
“The difference is now I can say it outside the party,” Kelly said.
Abbott, who campaigned on being the “infrastructure prime minister”,
told parliament this week the government had begun consulting with the
Sydney Airport Group on Badgerys Creek and the construction would begin
in 2016. He said an upgrade of Bringelly road and the WestConnex would
support the Badgerys Creek airport to give western Sydney the “modern
infrastructure it deserves”.
“It’s the centrepiece of our long-term vision for western Sydney –
and heeding past lessons, it will be a case of roads first, airport
second: the roads will be built before the first plane has landed.”
Meet
the man who Education Minister Christopher Pyne appointed to review
what our nation's kids will be taught in English classes. Chris Graham
and Wendy Bacon report.
A
University of Sydney Professor – employed by the federal government as a
specialist consultant to review the national English curriculum – has
described the Prime Minister as an “Abo lover” while at the same time
advising the government to focus less on teaching Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander literature in our nation’s schools, and place greater
emphasis on western Judeo-Christian culture.
In email correspondence that spans more than two years, Barry Spurr,
the nation’s leading Professor of Poetry, describes Aboriginal people as
‘human rubbish tips’ and “Abos”, and rails against the prevalence of
Aboriginal culture in school curriculums, and within politics. But the
exchanges are not just limited to First Nations people.
Professor Spurr also takes aim at “bogans” “fatsoes”, “Mussies” and
“Chinky-Poos”, and laments the reality that Australia is less white than
it was in the 1950s.
He calls Nelson Mandela a “darkie” and Desmond Tutu a “witch doctor”;
describes his University of Sydney chancellor Belinda Hutchinson as “an
appalling minx”; likens Methodists to “serpents”; refers to women as
“whores”; and in response to a comment about a female victim of a
serious sexual assault being a “worthless slut”, he suggests that she
needs more than just ‘penis’ put in her mouth, before it’s “stitched
up”.
In one email, Professor Spurr tells university colleagues and friends
that 95 per cent of the students at Australian universities –
including, presumably his own – should not be studying at tertiary
institutions, and remarks that a colleague who publicly advanced that
argument will be “derided as elitist, fascist, misogynist – the usual
litany”.
“[But] he’s completely right. One day the Western world will wake up,
when the Mussies and the chinky-poos have taken over,” he adds.
Even the “modern Brit” comes in for a serve, described by Professor Spurr as “the scum of the earth”.
Between September 2012 and late 2014, the emails were sent to around a
dozen people, including very senior academics and officials within the
University of Sydney.
Professor Spurr has this morning defended his email exchanges,
telling New Matilda they were clearly intended to mock the “very extreme
language” used.
“The comments that you refer to are largely to one recipient with
whom I have had a whimsical linguistic game for many years of trying to
outdo one another in extreme statements.
“These statements are not reflections of my views or his.
“What I say about the place of the study of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander language and literature in the curriculum is my
considered professional view and not in any way influenced by these
email exchanges which are linguistic play, and the numerous students of
different races and of colour with whom I have worked for many years
will testify that I have treated them with the same equity and dignity
that I treat all my students.
“I find it astonishing that you would think that I would seriously
hold those views and not realise, as a journalist, that these are emails
of mock-shockng (sic) repartee, mocking, in fact, that very kind of
extreme language.”
A source within the University of Sydney, connected to the School of
Letters, Art and Media (SLAM) - which includes the English Department -
has confirmed that the emails were sent from Professor Spurr’s official
university email address.
Ironically, SLAM has been the subject of an ongoing attack in The
Australian newspaper this week, with Media Editor Sharri Markson
alleging the journalism department at the University of Sydney has been
“brain-washing” students with biased, left-wing course material which
attacks conservatism and rubbishes her employer, News Corporation.
Professor Spurr was chosen by the Abbott Government to serve on the
National Curriculum Review, headed by Professor Ken Wiltshire and Dr
Kevin Donnelly. The final report was handed to the Abbott Government
late last week.
The review is proposing to alter the national school curriculum introduced in 2011 by the Labor government.
Professor Spurr’s contribution to the review was in the area of
English studies. He argues that contribution of First Nations writers to
Australia’s literary tradition has been “minimal” and that the focus of
the curriculum should be on western civilisation and Judeo-Christian
heritage.
A screen capture from the University of Sydney website, announcing Professor Spurr's appointment to the review in May this year.
“The impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples on
literature in English in Australia has been minimal and is vastly
outweighed by the impact of global literature in English and especially
that from Britain, on our literary culture,” Professor Spurr writes.
His comments are given additional weight in the final report, which
notes that the “emphasis” on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
literature was “criticised for undervaluing Australian literature and
the place of Western literature, particularly poetry”.
Those views have been strongly backed by Minister for Education,
Christopher Pyne, who described the review as having an “absence of
ideology”. On ABC Lateline earlier this week he defended the
recommendations to focus the curriculum away from Aboriginal culture
towards “our Judeo-Christian heritage”.
“Before 1788, our history was Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
culture and history almost exclusively. Since that time, obviously since
colonisation, Western civilisation, our Judeo-Christian heritage has
been the basis of our development as a nation,” Pyne said.
“So therefore, learning about where we've come from is not
ideological, it's simply learning about where we've come from…. But
knowing about our Western heritage is not repudiating our Indigenous
heritage and it's not Christianity, it's just history.”
That mirrors Professor Spurr’s public statements in the review, but
it’s a world away from what Professor Spurr says privately about
Aboriginal people and culture.
While publicly, he argues the Aboriginal contribution to Australian
literature is “minimal”, privately, he says the ‘Abo’ contribution is
non-existent.
In an email written in April 19 this year, sent to two friends
outside the University of Sydney, Professor Spurr reveals that Education
Minister Christopher Pyne – the man who appointed him to the review –
wants him to compare Australian school curriculums with curriculums from
other countries.
“The Californian high school English curriculum has arrived (as Pyne
wants me to compare ours with other countries). Another 300 pages of
reading!
“And whereas the local curriculum has the phrase ‘Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander’ on virtually every one of its 300 pages, the
Californian curriculum does not ONCE mention native Americans and has
only a very slight representation of African-American literature (which,
unlike Abo literature, actually exists and has some distinguished
productions).”
In response to that specific discrepancy, Professor Spurr explained
this morning: “My considered view is that it is very small, perhaps not
zero precisely, so I used the term 'slight' to be as positive as I could
be.”
Professor Spurr’s commentary on Aboriginal people and culture – and
people of colour generally – are littered throughout the years of
correspondence.
In April 2014, he rails against a ceremony at Uluru for the visiting
royals, Prince William and Princess Catherine, at which entertainment is
provided by “well known Aboriginal singer, Wingabanga Gumberumbul”,
presumably a reference to Gurrumul Yunupingu. Professor Spurr calls the
Prime Minister “gutless and hypocritical”, and blames his chief-of-staff
Peta Credlin for the appearance of an ‘Abo’ singer.
“We have thousands of brilliant young Australians musicians,
including the wonderful Nicole Car (who would wear her bra under her
dress) currently on the brink of an international operatic career. Why
aren’t they asked to perform? Abbott’s to blame for this. This is his
day with them, his reception. He should have put his foot down and said,
‘No more Abos’. But he’s as gutless and hypocritical of the rest of
them. No doubt Peta Whatsername said ‘Do it Tony. It makes you look like
a sensitive guy’.”
In January this year, he writes that “Abo Lover Abbott and
[Australian of the Year] Adam Goodes” are Siamese Twins and will have to
be surgically separated.
A screen capture of one of the Professor Spurr emails, which describes Tony Abbott as an 'Abo lover'.
In October 2013, he sends a long email about an Aboriginal family who
lives down the road from him in inner western Sydney. He describes them
as a ‘human rubbish tip’ and mocks Vice-Chancellor of Sydney
University, Michael Spence for his support of Aboriginal people and
culture under an email headed ‘Ancient Wisdom’.
“These are the people whose ‘ancient wisdom’, our V-C says, we should
respect, and to whom we apologise on every possible occasion and whose
rich culture we bow down before, confessing our wickedness in our
mistreatment of them.
“All very well when you’re living in a multi-million dollar mansion
in Woolahra (sic), to spout these feel-good emotions from a safe
distance. I wonder how he’d like these manifestations of ancient wisdom
living next door. The immediate neighbours tell me it has been hell on
earth and, of course, their property values have plummeted. They’re
living next door to a rubbish tip: human and material.”
Several of his emails direct friends and colleagues to Youtube videos
which celebrate the British Monarchy and deride people of colour.
In one email from February 2013, headed “Look at 11.20 – no fatties,
darkies or chinky-poos”, Professor Spurr urges recipients to celebrate
an Australian school or church which appears to be made up entirely of
white children.
In another email a year later, he links to a video
which compares London in 1927 with London in 2013. Professor Spurr
writes: “A delight until things turn sour around 4:00 with the emergence
of the darkies.”
He also manages to line up Aboriginal people, Asians, Muslims, women
and anyone obese in a single email sent a few days earlier, commenting:
“No Abos, Chinky-poos, Mussies, graffiti, piercings, jeans, tattoos. BCP
(Book of Common Prayer) in all Anglican chruches (sic); Latin Mass in
all Roman ones. Not a woman to be seen in a sanctuary (church) anywhere.
And no obese fatsoes. All the kiddies slim and bright eyed. Now utterly
gone with the wind,” he writes.
In his correspondence to New Matilda, Professor Spurr alleges that New Matilda’s access to his emails was illegal.
“My lawyer informs me that accessing my email is 'a criminal offence'
and the university's security service is currently looking into the
matter,” he writes.
New Matilda rejects any suggestion it has been involved in any criminal offence.
New Matilda is awaiting comment from Education Minister Christopher Pyne.
- Additional reporting: Amy McQuire and Max Chalmers.
* New Matilda survives predominantly on subscription revenue. If you want to support the work of New Matilda, you can help fund us here.
TONY ABBOTT IS SUCH A GIVING FOUNTAIN OF STUPIDITY
Coal is 'good for humanity', says Tony Abbott at mine opening
Date
11 reading now
James Massola, Peter Ker, Lisa Cox
Prime Minister Tony Abbott: "Coal is essential for the prosperity of the world". Photo: Andrew Meares
Prime Minister Tony Abbott says Australia's coal industry has
a "big future, as well as a big past" and predicted it will be the
world's principal energy source for decades to come.
Mr Abbott also heaped praise on Japan in comments that come
just days after China slapped harsh new tariffs on coal imports and will
be noted in Beijing as negotiations on a China-Australia Free Trade
Agreement move towards conclusion.
Industry has estimated the new tariffs could cost Australia's
economy hundreds of millions of dollars annually, though it will be
some time before exact estimates can be made.
Mr Abbott said his government had affirmed its faith in the coal industry by abolishing the carbon and mining taxes. Photo: Peter Braig
"Let's have no demonisation of coal," Mr Abbott said on Monday.
"Coal is good for humanity, coal is good for prosperity, coal
is an essential part of our economic future, here in Australia, and
right around the world."
The Prime Minister's comments, which angered the
environmental movement, came at the opening of the $US3.4 billion ($3.9
billion) Caval Ridge Mine in Central Queensland, a joint venture between
BHP and Mitsubishi. The mine will produce 5.5 million tonnes annually
of metallurgical coal and employ about 500 people.
"This is a sign of hope and confidence in the future of the
coal industry, it's a great industry, we've had a great partnership with
Japan in the coal industry," Mr Abbott said.
"Coal is essential for the prosperity of the world."
"Energy is what sustains our prosperity, and coal is the
world's principal energy source and it will be for many decades to
come."
The Coalition had affirmed its faith in the coal industry by
abolishing the carbon tax and mining, Mr Abbott said, but if there was a
change of government at the next election both of those taxes could
come back.
"If you want to sustain the coal industry, if you want to
sustain the jobs, if you want to sustain the towns that depend on the
coal industry you have got to support the Coalition, because we support
coal, we think that coal has a big future as well as a big past."
Mr Abbott's comments about coal having a bright future are in
conflict with the United Nations' top climate official Christiana
Figueres, who has warned most of the world's coal must be left in the
ground to avoid catastrophic global warming.
Less than two weeks ago, a lead adviser to German Chancellor
Angela Merkel lashed the Abbott government's championing of the coal
industry as an economic "suicide strategy".
ANU economist Frank Jotzo said he was alarmed the Prime
Minister used words like "faith" to describe his feelings about coal's
future in Australia.
Dr Jotzo said Australia's reliance on coal was short-sighted
and a "potentially economically dangerous" strategy, adding that the
Prime Minister's comments could be read as a rebuke following China's
tariff move.
Locking in Australia's reliance on coal was short-sighted and
"if we were to hitch our wagon to coal we would be putting the
Australian economy on a downward trajectory".
Climate Institute chief executive John Connor said the Prime
Minister was "taking a higher and higher stakes gamble by putting all
the chips on coal".
Earlier on Monday, Opposition Leader Bill Shorten said that
Australia risked being seen as the climate sceptic capital of the world
ahead of the G20 meeting in November.
"We've got the G20 coming up. Most nations in the world at
the G20 are dealing with climate change. Yet we're the climate sceptics
capital of the world," he said.
"The rest of the world is moving towards taking real action
on climate change, yet we've got a government who's slammed the nation
into reverse gear and retreating away from action."
Over the weekend, Mr Shorten told Fairfax Media that Labor would take a carbon price - thought not a tax - as policy to the next election.
And he has previously left open the possibility of some form
of resources tax, though he has promised to first consult with business
over such an impost.
Print
