Howard Made History – Happy Anniversary!

howardtracksuit

From ‘The Poll that Counts’ video series from the National Tallyroom in Canberra, to celebrate the first anniversary of the election of the Rudd government: Howard Made History

Just click the link. Enjoy!

Advertisements

62 Responses

  1. Amazing how that footage can still get me all emotional after all this time, watching those Bennelong numbers, Wong’s expression change, and hearing the crowds. I’d sooner watch that than The Howard Years, that’s for sure.

    Kevin, you should include a link to the YouTube version. It downloads faster and you don’t have to wait for the whole thing to load.

  2. I think we deserved a Happy Feet moment. hehe

  3. Yeeeeehaaaaaaw!!!

  4. Thanks for this video Kevin. Absolutely love it. Great moment in Australian politics and it made a lot of people, including myself, very happy.

  5. So where is the dragon slayer lady…put back in the Barbie box to materialise before the next election???

  6. Yes just where is Maxine now, never seem to hear a word

  7. scaper,

    I think she is like a lot of MP’s. Just getting on with their job as a MP for their constituency.

    Either that or she is in Mordor looking for a ring.

  8. The youtube version is on my blog: Labor View from Bayside I don’t think the quality is as good – probably why it loads faster.

  9. Oh my that did me good to watch that clip! It brought back the euphoria of the evening celebrating with the other YRAW volunteers. Crying tears of joy as Makin, Kingston and Wakefield changed hands and the icing on the cake was the rodent losing Bennelong.

    joni: and this is our 7000th comment! cyber-streamers fall from the ceiling.

  10. I like the guy sitting down near the fireplace, looks like he is driving a truck

  11. Kevin – that is just great!

    And can I remind everyone of something?

    Howard – the master politician, the supposedly best politician of his generation (tm – liberal party supporters), the lying rodent, “honest John”, etc etc.

    LOST HIS OWN SEAT AT THE ELECTION!

    That’s right. He did not have a chance to force a by-election, he did not have the chance to say “Mr Speaker” one last time. Voted out by the “mob”. Woohoo.

    And before anyone says “get over it”. I just ask: why?

  12. And before anyone says “get over it”. I just ask: why?
    11. joni | November 25, 2008 at 12:05 am

    Thats easy. Australians turned to the dark side at the last election Whats more, they were proud of it.

    If labor had been handed unemployment at 8% and took it to 4%, people would have said what a great job.

    The libs take unemployment from 8% to 4% and they are told get lost. Furthermore do not come back until you have learnt your lesson.

    Not only that but the most dishonest and corrupt govt in Australian state history was reelected in NSW.

    The only dishonest people are the ones who voted for the ALP

  13. Neil – if the liberals presented a decent party to vote for at the last NSW election they would have romped in. But no, you blame the ALP.

    Also, it seems from the polls that the electorate is quite happy with the decision it made.

  14. Also, it seems from the polls that the electorate is quite happy with the decision it made.
    13. joni | November 25, 2008 at 12:25 am

    Thats true. But for me i am completely dumbfounded.

    Dudd signs the Coyote protocol but what has he done about CO2 ommissions??

    Is it possible he said he would do something just to get stupid people to vote for him???

    I think most of the people who post here are greens/socialist type people. The ALP needs you people to get into power. So it says it will do something about the environment etc but i do not think it is that much different from the Libs.

    The ALP just says things to get your votes. Perhaps the ALP is a little bit greener than the Libs but not a lot.

    The ALP is much better at getting people to vote for them than the Libs.

    like I said, if Labor had been handed 8% unemployment and took it to 4% they would have been reelected.

  15. “…most of the people who post here are greens/socialist type people. The ALP needs you people to get into power…”

    Well, I fit into that category, Neil.

    I don’t like right-wing govts be they Liberal or the current ALP (although I will take the latter as the devil’s alternative).

    At the recent local govt elections in NSW, I voted 1 Greens and then exhausted my vote – I’m happy to say four Greens councillors got elected.

    If it’s possible, I will do the same thing at state and federal levels. With the poor quality of the both the NSW Libs and Labs, I think we will see a rise in the number of Greens and independents in govt.

  16. Neil I have asked you this so many times I have lost count, most times I put this to you in Blogocracy, but you have never answered it.

    Just how did the Howard government get unemployment down to 4%? Exactly what were the policies he put in place that did this and how come unemployment is measured by state and it happened that the states which dragged down the national unemployment rate were the resource rich states?

    How come unemployment in just about every other area not related to or spun off from the resources and services sectors thereof went up under Howard? How come productivity went down under Howard during a time of unprecedented world wide economic prosperity (turns out built on massive debt of six times greater than world GDP), how come the current account sky rocketed to record levels under Howard? You keep going on about government debt but leave out that side of debt, and that was entirely of Howard’s making.

    Was unemployment going down or up when Howard took power in 1996?

    Also notice how you have to bring in a state in every post on a topic about the federal government.

    Please Neil don’t make post my dead horse graphic again.

  17. Just how did the Howard government get unemployment down to 4%?
    16. Adrian of Nowra | November 25, 2008 at 7:38 am

    I do not know. But 4% unemployment is an unusually low number. I do not believe it was just dumb luck. Labor was in power for 13 years from 83-96 and unemployment was over 6% for most of this time and around 10% for 4 years.

    Why don’t you tell me because i do not know. As for worldwide prosperity, the US was running massive budget deficits when we were running surpluses. Unemployment in Germany in France is around 8-9% and we have 4.

    I actually would suggest no-one really knows. The simplest answer was that it was due to Howard/Costello.

  18. One area was work for the dole. Record numbers of people were put into this program (good for the real bluggers who dont look for work)
    Work for the dole persons were not counted on the unemployment figures. Also people working 2 or more hours a fortnight were not counted on the figures either.

    Not sure what has become of all of that recently.

    State goverments are just as bad at reporting on crime rates, hospital numbers and overall spending.

  19. Also people working 2 or more hours a fornight.

    I could be wrong with that statement it could be more like 8 hours.

  20. What a laugh Neil it was due to Howard-Costello and nobody knows why.

    Of course they know, and the government knows as in ABS, Finance, Treasury, Employment and IR etc. They were pumping out all the figures as were organisations like Access Economics and many other think tanks.

    The real reason is that Howard and Costello by sheer luck fell into the greatest resources boom the world has ever seen due to the rise of China and India, and those “Labor” states with lots of resources dragged down the national average. If Keating had remained in power unemployment would have been just as low, but I bet you would not have been attributing the low figures to his government but saying it was due to other factors like the resources boom. And if the resource rich states had been Liberal you would have been saying what a great job they are doing in helping Keating look good.

    ————————
    No aquanut it is a bit of a misconception on how unemployment is calculated, but Howard did nothing tricky with the figures. They were calculated using the then current accepted international way of measuring unemployment, just as the previous Labor government used the accepted way at the time of doing it. Yes they are misleading and actual unemployment is much higher than the officially released figures, but it would have been the same under a Labor government.

    A more telling figure is under-utilisation and more importantly under-employment, both of which ABS measures. Figures for these remained high under the Howard government.

  21. aquanut

    You are completely correct. The figures were adjusted by the Government. I found this out by asking Matt Price ( RIP). People who worked more than 10 hours per fortnight were not on the list, however that was changed to anyone working more than 2 hours per week.

    Figures are always concocted by governments. I also had a go at Tony Abbot after claiming that pensioners were better off uner their government when in fact they were worse off because the products which lowered the CPI were products not applicable to pensioners, whereas the products which sky rocketed like, food, fuel and utilities were. So actually pensioners were worse off. He all but admitted it.

  22. “The simplest answer was that it was due to Howard/Costello.”

    Is this what passes for argument? In this case the ‘simplest answer’ is totally simplistic, pejoratively speaking (so there can be no misunderstanding).

    Personally I think the low unemployment numbers were due to the global warming/cooling or was that caused by Howard as well. Lol.

    But credit: where credit is due Neil did say: “I don’t know”.

    And that Neil is where you should have stopped.

  23. Well – this has certainly woken me up. BBC is running a story on Rudd’s first year and who do they interview? Gerard Henderson.

    Such an objective choice – no bias in what he says.

  24. Sorry Shane that is not correct, it was not changed by the Howard government, and heaven forbid I stick up for Howard, but it was changed by the international way unemployment is measured, Howard adopted that measure just as Keating and Hawke before him adopted the measurement from the same authority.

    I notice that Rudd is using this way of measuring unemployment?

  25. Sydney Morning Herald, 15 March 2005:

    Australia’s rate of workforce casualisation is … the highest of any advanced economy.

    http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Casuals-the-key-to-boosting-workforce-says-report/2005/03/14/1110649129740.html

    All casuals are counted as “employed” (providing they work more than an hour per week).

    That is how Australia had such distinctive numbers; the developed world’s highest rate of casualisation.

    It equates to the developed world’s highest rate of job and income insecurity.

    Not such a satisfactory result viewed from that angle. The Liberals must take “credit” for that unsatisfactory result.

  26. Now that is a fact Caney.

    We also had the highest unpaid overtime in the Western world and were the hardest working taking the fewest holidays, all of which helped Howard achieve his great economy and (false) bragging rights to being a great economic manager.

    How did he reward his battlers that worked so hard to take us from a nation of bludgers to a nation of hard workers? He gave them WorkChoices.

    Just how out of touch can any leader be? Howard certainly takes the cake on that one.

  27. I actually would suggest no-one really knows. The simplest answer was that it was due to Howard/Costello.

    …some of us have a bit of an idea…

    …what about this … the rest of Australia was working its arse off – despite John Howard and The Private School Bullies sitting on their hands scheming, creaming and counting the tax that they received from the mining and ancilliary businesses selling coal and iron to China and Japan. The wine industry – wine to the rest of the world. The vocational and education industry selling knowledge and skills to Asia and the world. The IT industry developing innovative software and games…the list goes on

    In the meantime the Howard Government changed the way in which employment (unemployment) was recorded and created a legal system that allowed employers to pay peanuts on casual, part time and contract rates…while locking the unions (boo!) to assist those with little or no knowledge in IR and negotiation of pay and conditions – slowly eroded during The Howard Years ( 😆 )

    BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY made this country fire during The Howard Years (!) just as the lack of business will increase unemployment under the ALP government for the next three to five years…

    What Howard’s lot couldn’t do, is listen, when people said we don’t want a tax cut we prefer better water storage, roads, rail, ports, hospitals and health care, education and training – that’s INFRASTRUCTURE – so that when the good times turn up again we can operate the business (country) better.

    All Howard did was shift government debt to ordinary folk, tax people with low or fixed incomes (GST), take us to war in three countries (Timor, Iraq and Afghanistan) and huff and puff over alternative energy (I am not a believer in AGW but a firm believer in alternative energy soucrces)

    John Howard & The Private School Bullies were out for themselves and themselves alone…

    As for the present government I’m a bit like Sans Blog – Rudd and Co are just a more polished version of the last lot – colder more calculating but still out for them selves rather than the people they represent (eg carers, pensioners)…

    In conclusion, BUSINESS creates jobs and fills governments coffers not governments – as a small business owner the biggest problem I had was government intervention in running my business…but Howard and Costello have made our future far more difficult by just sitting around and counting the money for 12 years, rather than getting on with building a nation…

    12 steps back, one step forward…

  28. Figures are always concocted by governments.
    21. Shane | November 25, 2008 at 8:56 am

    Shane I thought this urban myth had been put to death. We went over this one Sunday afternoon last year.

    The way unemployment is measured has not changed for fourty years apart from some minor changes.

    One thing that we found surprising was that the unemployment rate is measured by a poll conducted by the ABS not by the number of people receiving benefits from Centrelink.

    There is no way the govt could influence the figures.

    But people will believe what they want to believe

    26. Adrian of Nowra | November 25, 2008 at 9:20 am

    But Adrian you said that by sheer luck Howard fell into the resources boom. Now you are saying it was due to hard work. Please make up your mind. As for Workchoices it gave people where I work $1,500/year more income.

  29. I think the following 2004 Age article by Tony Nicholson brings the real jobless figure into the light (and there are plenty of similar articles on the ‘Net):

    Rubbery figures hide the real jobless tragedy

  30. The wine industry – wine to the rest of the world. The vocational and education industry selling knowledge and skills to Asia and the world. The IT industry developing innovative software and games…the list goes on

    The innovativeness of Australians, despite the Howard government …

    Allen Consulting Group, via The Age, 15 August 2005:

    The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s average for expenditure on R&D as a percentage of GDP is2.5 per cent. Australia spends only 1.2 per cent of GDP on R&D – the second lowest in the OECD.

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/rampd-lag-a-concern-says-report/2005/08/14/1123957950502.html

    Under the Liberals our economic competitiveness suffered like few other countries.

  31. JOBS AND THE FALSE ECONOMY OF HOWARD

    7:30 Report, 30 January 2007

    CHARLES BRASS: Now, according to the statisticians, a job is working for pay two hours a fortnight.

    So, if you create 20 jobs at two hours a fortnight, that’s the same thing as creating one full time job.

    But the statistics look like 20 jobs have been created whereas otherwise it’s only one.

    But I’ll give you a statistic. In 1963, 65 per cent of the Australian population worked nine to five, Monday to Friday.

    In 2007, that’s 8 per cent.

    http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2007/s1836677.htm

  32. Did anyone catch the Howard Years last night?

    Alexander Downer was hilarious!! What a pompous git!

    “John Howard was very happy with me, and I could tell he was really pleased”

    FFS!

    And Peter Reith, what a twat.

    I was tring to think of who he reminded me of, and then it struck me – “Gonzo” from “The Muppets!!”

  33. Even in small business TB the Howard government shifted the burden from government by making them the tax collectors and bookkeepers for the government.

    Under Costello’s GST model the tax law rather than simplifying grew to seven times the size of the previous system. The company I work for hired a full time accountant/administrator to look after the tax and finance side but even that wasn’t enough and they had to hire a part time administrative assistant and even then an outside accountant has to come in at least once a fortnight.

  34. Point taken Adrian.

  35. aquanut – love the avatar! LOL

  36. The company I work for hired a full time accountant/administrator to look after the tax and finance side

    The GST is an impost on business – but, hey, it “creates” more “jobs”!

  37. Yeah, just not productive jobs!

  38. #28. Neil of Sydney | November 25, 2008 at 9:34 am

    26. Adrian of Nowra | November 25, 2008 at 9:20 am

    But Adrian you said that by sheer luck Howard fell into the resources boom. Now you are saying it was due to hard work. Please make up your mind. As for Workchoices it gave people where I work $1,500/year more income.

    Please Neil how can anyone so misread what I posted.

    By sheer luck Howard fell into a resources boom, there is absolutely no doubt about that unless you can tell us what else there was that gave him all that additional revenue and jobs growth?

    I said Australians worked hard, not Howard, he just rode the wave. The stats and history backs that.

    So your workplace got $1500 extra under WorkChoices and I guess now it’s gone you are all getting $1500 less? What about other workplaces not using AWAs that got higher pay and conditions than yours and what about the great swag of Australian workers who under WorkChoices were much worse off?

  39. The Minister just loved our BAS and Tax Statements.

    Then every year we had to get our accounts verified by an registered accountant who took The Minister’s CD copied it onto a Tax Form signed it and charged us almost a thousand dollars for about ten minutes work! (we’de already done…dumb)

  40. The GST required the private sector do (and pay to do) the government’s “job” of tax-collecting. Even so, public sector jobs didn’t decline under Howard; his bureaucracy was the biggest in history!

  41. You know there is something wrong with a tax system when your company (depending on size) must set aside at least one whole day, but usually more, of two employee’s time along with a considerable chunk of management’s and that of bringing in an outside accountant just to do a legally required regular tax statement.

  42. Thanx Joni @ 38

  43. By sheer luck Howard fell into a resources boom

    The resources boom being predicated on exports mainly to Asia. This in spite of Howard’s dubious “attitude” to Asians. Sheer luck for Howard there ever was a resources boom to make the economy (and, the Liberals say, his government) look good.

    Asiaweek, The Week of October 18, 1996:

    By refusing to condemn Ms. Hanson, Mr. Howard has implicitly sent the message that it is acceptable to publicly hurl racial epithets — and perhaps worse. “One of the great changes that has come over Australia in the last six months,” the prime minister said in a … speech, “is that people do feel able to speak a little more openly about what they feel. In a sense, the pall of censorship on certain issues has been lifted.”

    http://www-cgi.cnn.com/ASIANOW/asiaweek/96/1018/ed1.html

  44. Reading all the comments about the employment figures, i also beleve the “employment” figures were higher because Howard so looted the social welfare for new mums that they were forced to join the workforce earlier and earlier instead of staying home to look after their children.

    Many mums therefore worked where ever they could get flexibilty in hours for less than average pay (I was one of those). Workchoices would have made that exploitation worse.

    In the natural fiscal landscape of a country, in boom times, resources should be allocated such that they benefit society whereas Howard’s legacy has been that despite a 10 year economic boom, under his rule, people have had to tighten their belts, abandon any notion of family life, and works their butts of – beacuse after all, WE HAVE NEVER BEEN BETTER OFF.

    Blind fools!

  45. 44. lekhni8home | November 25, 2008 at 10:33 am

    A few links in reference to your post. Hope they display correctly.

    More
    http://mauriegee0.tripod.com/art.htm

  46. Lekhni re: number 44, hope this link works …

  47. A blast from the past re unemployment numbers: http://www.roymorgan.com/news/papers/2003/20030801/

    ps Reb, that’s my word..twat. But I’ll let you use it ;-)) Twat seems to say it all.

  48. The simplest answer was that it was due to Howard/Costello.(Neil).

    With all the money coming in from China Howard/Costello could have made a big difference. But they blew it. Why spend money on infrastructure (and creating jobs) when we can use this money to buy votes.

    Neil, if you don’t agree with the comments of Blogocrats then maybe you should try listening to today’s economists. But brace yourself: they all say the same thing.

  49. Min,

    I think John Cooper Clarke had it first!!

    http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=zWSTnTM4lQM

  50. The simplest answer was that it was due to Howard/Costello.(Neil).

    With all the money coming in from China Howard/Costello could have made a big difference. But they blew it. Why spend money on infrastructure (and creating jobs) when we can use this money to buy votes.

    Neil, if you don’t agree with the comments of Blogocrats then maybe you should try listening to today’s economists. But brace yourself: they all say the same thing.

  51. Well said Miglo.

  52. Thankyou Alastair. I would like to say a lot more but my horrendous workload inhibits my daytime adventures on Blogocrats.

  53. Taxpayers have forked out more than $400,000 to fund John Howard’s first year as a former prime minister.

    That’s still cheaper than the only other living former Liberal PM – Malcolm Fraser – but more expensive than Labor predecessor Paul Keating.

    The government says Mr Howard’s entitlements for travel, accommodation and staff amounted to $404,583.55, excluding GST, in the year since December 3.

    The amount included $63,354.76 for facilities, $61,636.68 for accommodation and $192,542.77 for staff.

    Mr Howard racked up $75,674.90 in travel costs while Janette Howard spent $11,374.44.

    All former prime ministers have a substantial entitlement for travel, staff and office costs.

    Mr Fraser cost the taxpayers $508,882 in 2007-08 while Mr Keating cost $349,887 during the same period.

    http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/5169905/expm-howard-cost-400000/

  54. Ummm over $400gs in Howard’s 1st year as former PM. So what’s he been doing? Attending which important os thingys? Surely that $400,000+ couldn’t have been all spent on new tracky-dacks?

  55. Neil

    Concocting figures is not an urban myth. Ask Tony Abbot about the spin they put on pensioners being better off under their government when in fact he eventually admitted they were worse off because of the items in the CPI that were reducing were of no benefit to pensioners.

    Governments manipulate and spin figures all the time. It is all a matter of what they include and exclude and this has certainly changed over the last 40 years.

  56. I am just watching episode 2 of the Howard Years. Damn that man just wants to keep lying and lying.

    4mins in and he says that he did not intend mentioning Kennet as a slight to Costello.

    Do these lies continue all the way through this series?

  57. Reb… he is, he is Gonzo!

  58. Joni, I know.

    I was thinking last night …..he reminds me of someone, the looks , the mannerisms, the scraggly hair…that semi-demented look.

    And then it struck me.

    Gonzo!

  59. So when the people tire of Rudd, and Labor, where are they going to turn. Certainly not back to the Libs, if they are still Howard denyers. The Greens are not an option because they are to radical, and put the country at risk.
    The other and better option is to turn to the real Labor Party, the resurgent DLP, which is signing up new members by the hundreds, mostly former ALP members, who are turned off by the radical left wing anti life policies of the ALP

  60. who are turned off by the radical left wing anti life policies of the ALP

    Had me fooled for a moment there Goanna, but you are clearing satirising 🙂

  61. 59 – Goanna

    The Greens are OK by me, in fact throughout the long, nasty and bleak Howard years, they were the only reral voice of opposition and reason to be heard.

    Oh, the Democratic Labor Party. The conservative Catholic breakaway of the Australian Labor Party?Yeah we really do need more of the religious fundamentalism don’t we?

    Like the religious nutters aren’t already over represented in our parliament, Let’s have more anti-abortion, anti women’s rights, anti-gay campaigners!

    WTF is happening to Australia?

  62. Goanna, will it mean that all new “real” ALP members will have to kiss the Pope’s ring?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: