Eric Abetz and labour relations

The dog that didn’t bark in the night over the past two years has been industrial relations. Labour relations has been an ongoing sore, relentlessly undermining our prospects and ruining opportunities to raise living standards at every turn. Yet these past two years, conservative government though it may have been, other than a brief wrangle at Qantas, which could have been a massive disaster but in fact wasn’t, I don’t think I can recall a single IR dispute of any consequence.

I have to tell you that I think much of the credit goes to our Minister for Employment, Senator Eric Abetz. In what is the most fractious part of our economic structure, he understood the necessity of working with the grain and not against it. His quiet approach allowed a downwards real wage adjustment to go on behind the scenes, with the most amazing, but largely unnoticed improvement in our labour market having gone on, even with the flat rate of growth in GDP.

Today we find this in The AFR: Abetz accused of restacking Fair Work.

Employment Minister Eric Abetz has made a series of conservative appointments to the Fair Work Commission, using his expected last days in federal cabinet to counter-balance union appointments to the tribunal made by the former Gillard government.

Industrial relations lawyer Tanya Cirkovic, a former legal partner of Liberal Party identity Michael Kroger, and Christopher Platt, who worked at the Australian Mines and Metals Association were appointed commissioners.

Both Mr Platt, currently employee relations manager at BHP Billiton’s Olympic Dam project, and Ms Cirkovic have addressed the conservative HR Nicholls Society.

The last bit does make me laugh since I have also addressed the HR Nicholls Society whose main aim in life has been to rid us of the IR Commission which, in spite of the all too regular criticisms from the HRN and others, has been the main obstacle to union power in this country. If Senator Abetz is removed from the Ministry, just keep the following in mind:

The appointments came as Labor and the Greens denied Senator Abetz a rare legislative victory on industrial relations by stalling the passage of proposed changes to the federal workplace laws changes.

Senator Abetz has reached agreement with six senate crossbenchers to support changes to the Fair Work Act, including new limits on union bargaining power on new projects.

But Labor and the Greens organised a long list of speakers on the bill, ensuring the vote on the changes was delayed until at least the next sitting of federal parliament in three weeks.

[Opposition workplace relations spokesman Brendan] O’Connor said he would spend the parliamentary break seeking to convince the crossbench to reverse their in-principle position and not support the changes proposed by the government.

If it is jobs you are interested in and a reduction in union power, that is the way to have done it. It will be a sorry day for us all if Eric is removed from cabinet and IR is parcelled out to someone less skilled than he is.

To some decency is merely a weakness to exploit

By Simon Benson via Andrew Bolt whose post is titled, A fine man and good Prime Minister destroyed.

(I)t is my view that, just like Kim Beazley was perhaps the best prime minister we never had, Tony Abbott was potentially the best prime minister we had but never knew it…

Above all else, the bloke I know is one of immense personal decency, integrity and goodwill. He espouses a set of values, principles and personal ethics that speak to community values that many of us could probably only aspire to. And on these values, he is uncompromising. He is loyal to a fault and conducts himself with a personal humility rare in politics.

His mistake was that he, perhaps naively, believed the principles he adopted in life would work in politics, and that the loyalty would be returned. To the shame of many on his own side — those who sat in the parliament on Tuesday like lemmings with their heads bowed after having thrown one of their own off a cliff rather than themselves — it took Labor leader Bill Shorten to recognise the character of Abbott…

The unrecognised fact is Abbott achieved more in just 24 months of government than perhaps any modern leader. He got credit from the nation for none of it, including even the most fundamental task of restoring stability to the administration of government after the near institutional destruction inflicted by Labor.

Howard himself said he did not believe that Abbott — and Scott Morrison — would be able to stop the boats. Under Abbott the country will be allowed a plebiscite on gay marriage. Who would have thought it?…

Despite the predictions he would be a national embarrassment on the world stage, it was on this stage that he became a statesman. His response to the twin tragedies of MH17 and MH370 assuaged the grief and anger of a nation. He elevated Australia’s response to global terrorism to one of leading rather than following, as recognised by the US President Barack Obama.

And he signed three free trade agreements that Labor seemed incapable of progressing…

In toppling Tony Abbott, Turnbull and his cohorts have not only legitimised the scandalous behaviour of the previous Labor government, they have endorsed it, using similar justifications for their actions.

Ultimately, it was when The Australian went over to the Dark Side that made the final difference. Other than Greg Sheridan, Henry Ergas and Nick Cater, reading The Oz became like reading The Age.

It’s not leadership, it’s followership

The most singular part about Malcolm Turnbull leadership is that he has no desire to lead anywhere except where others also on the left already want to go. On not a single issue that I can think of does he have a view in any way different from the ones held by Mark Scott, say, or the usual leftist loons at the “national broadcaster”. He is as personally empty of any deeper thoughts than the usual socialist maunderings of the mental midgets who populate our ABC. If he really does make Martin Parkinson his Chief of Staff, it will only be because he wants to rub salt in our wounds.

The first poll since the change in leader has the Coalition up at 51-49, an inconsequential improvement on the 48-52 when last taken under Abbott. This is with all of the one-sided pro-Turnbull coverage by The Australian-ABC media axis. If that part of the Parliamentary donkey vote for Turnbull were reading the comments on this blog, rather than those unrepresentative columnists in The Oz, never mind listening to the dyed-in-the-wool left media on the ABC, they might have had a better understanding of what the actual views of their own constituency are. To find that half the Parliamentary Liberal Party are Labor voters at heart is a dismal revelation that won’t be soon forgotten. If their stomachs did not turn at the very idea of voting for Turnbull, they are sitting on the wrong side of the House.

MT for PM

Every political leader comes with added features that are not to my liking, even the ones I like the best. With Tony Abbott, his lack of genuine mongrel, an unwillingness to deal with enemies within the party in as hard a way as possible, was unfortunate. His willingness to let others take care of, and maintain responsibility for, their own portfolios without intervention was perhaps a fault, but it was only a fault because of the incompetence and ill-will which surrounded him. Brandis’s “even bigots have rights” sunk the ability to defeat 18C, but I knew Brandis was an incompetent and perhaps Tony did not. Malcolm at the ABC was another, and Joe in Treasury is yet one more. Yet these are genuine power brokers within the party. Tony did what he could with the material he had, but they let him down, along with the rest of us.

On the issues that got him into hot water on our side, it was Paid Parental Leave that was possibly the worst so far as public relations went, but was not a bad idea in more normal times. As I read it, he was trying to strengthen the family and open the opportunity for women to have children, an aim I fully support. Constitutional recognition of Aboriginals I still think is a judicial nightmare we do not need and would long regret. But this, too, came with a charitable heart, and I naturally support his wish to improve the lives of aboriginal people.

I knew, however, just how up hill the battle would be when I came back in July to find Bronwyn Bishop’s helicopter ride a daily front-page story across the Murdoch press. This is a one-day non-issue unless there is another agenda running besides selling papers. The speed with which Tony Burke’s genuine example of rorting disappeared within days, and never had traction, is what any political leader would have expected. What he was dealing with, however, was an Australian-ABC axis that in the end was too powerful to resist. This piece of disgusting hypocrisy from The Australian yesterday was typical:

Turnbull’s critics should pull their heads in and focus on the real battle: it’s against Shorten and the Labor Party, not between opposing factions in the Liberal Party.

Really? Is this so? Where was this advice a week ago when Abbott was leader and Turnbull was doing everything he could to unsettle the Government. Disgusting sanctimonious cant, disguised as independent, above-the-fray objective advice. But it was what I had become used to.

Even with it all, Tony ended up with 44 against 54. I am, of course, in the 44. Tony has the safest pair of hands of anyone on all of the issues that matter to me. This is from Jo Nova who says about climate change what I feel about much else:

Despite the resounding win a mere two years ago, and achieving his main promises, Abbott has been ousted in his first term. Politics is dirtier than ever.

He was elected with a big win, but lasted just two years in office. Gillard barely made a government, needing help from two turncoats, and her legacy legislation burnt her solemn promise – yet she held office even longer than Abbott did.

The anti Abbott, Abbott, Abbott campaign in the media has been relentless and successful.

Turnbull has said he will stick with Australia’s carbon emissions cuts (26% by 2030) but this means nothing. Firstly, the target is obscenely high, and secondly, there are so many possible ways to waste more money and give up more sovereign rights in Paris. He can sell us out to the financial houses that want carbon trading, and waste additional billions on renewable energy.

All that and more. The Liberal Party is filled with others like Malcolm and it is a problem. But here is where we are. There are the 44 who are still in the party room, and there are the Coalition National Party also in the government. And Labor is a disaster in the making of such massive proportion, of the Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn variety, that not voting Coalition at the next election is unthinkable. Malcolm has now got this to add to his CV, everyone in the party room knows the extent to which he is an empty vessel, but the stakes are too high even to think about Bill Shorten, never mind Tanya as PM.

What has Tony Abbott ever done for us?

From Tony Abbott’s speech on relinquishing the Prime Ministership:

I have held true to what I believed and I am proud of what we have achieved over the past two years.

300,000 more people are in jobs.

Labor’s bad taxes are gone.

We have signed Free Trade Agreements with our largest trading partners – with Japan, with Korea, and with China.

The biggest infrastructure programme in our country’s history is under way.

A spotlight is being shone into the dark and corrupt corners of the union movement and Labor’s party/union business model.

We have responded to the threats of terror and we have deployed to the other side of the world to bring our loved ones home.

The boats have stopped – and with the boats stopped, we’ve been better able to display our compassion to refugees.

And despite hysterical and unprincipled opposition, we’ve made $50 billion of repairs to the budget.

I am proud of what the Abbott Government has achieved. We stayed focused despite the white-anting.

And just who were those white ants you were referring to?

If you’re so rich why aren’t you smart?

Malcolm is almost the perfect reflection of media opinion. He is like blotting paper, soaking up every conventional opinion without any actual apparent ability to think for himself. He is a non-entity in the Barack Obama mould, filled with vapid thoughts and a high opinion of his own abilities and intellect that is never at any stage reflected in anything he says or any action he takes.

He apparently won on the promise that he would not change any of the more contentious compromises Abbott had been able to meld, which is to say, he won promising not to do the very things that he wants to do, and which the media will look to him to do. The Great Communicator he is not. He is a shallow and pompous blowhard. If there is more to him, we will find out. If there isn’t, the 54 fools who backed him into the Lodge will perhaps regret what they have done, but in the meantime will have caused great harm to this country, while not even saving a single Parliamentary seat.

AND CONTINUING: The one opinion I was interested in was Tim Blair’s.

UPDATE III. The winner and new Prime Minister: Malcolm Turnbull, by 54 to 44 votes. Julie Bishop elected deputy. Disaster.

OK Malcolm. It’s now up to you to show us we were wrong.

Lost the plot

Malcombe

UPDATE: From Andrew Bolt, which he has just put up, and with which I agree with each word:

Malcolm Turnbull is a wrecker. He has sabotaged the Liberal campaign in Canning, which the latest two polls show would have been won comfortably by a great candidate.

Second, Turnbull claims he is a better communicator than Abbott. Nothing in his record as Opposition Leader of Communications Minister backs up that boast.

Third, he risks splitting the Liberals with his stands on gay marriage and global warming, to name just two issues. He would not have stopped the boats or scrapped the carbon tax, and I doubt he would have pushed as remorsely as Tony Abbott from the free trade deal with China that he cited as his big economic agenda.

Turnbull is stealing the job he could not have won, using policy weapons he could not have designed and boasting of a communication ability he does not have to head a party he cannot unite.

The front page story in The Oz today is Tony Abbott urged to stare down leadership plotters.

Apparently, the only reason they can come up with to change the leader is that Tony is down in the polls. As far as policy goes, these empty-headed conspirators, led by the most empty-headed of the lot, have nothing to offer so far as a change of policy goes, at least not so far as the kinds of policy someone like myself wishes to see followed.

If the issue to them is the risk to their own seats, these are such craven people, with no serious vision of what is necessary to keep this nation safe and prosperous. A policy of open-bordered greenery is not only idiotic, it will also more likely than not lose the next election irrespective which party decides to make the case, that is, unless both decide to. So long as Tony is there, at least one party will not. Après Tony le déluge I’m afraid, but we should try to keep it off as long as possible, and maybe others will even wake up to the actual problems we have.

UPDATE: The news does come thick and fast. The Libs must have been set to win Canning on the weekend since Turnbull has now resigned from Cabinet and Bishop is pushing for a leadership spill. These people are utterly vile. I’ve taken everything below from Andrew Bolt.

Malcolm Turnbull and Julie Bishop have asked Tony Abbott for a leadership vote tomorrow. This comes after a string of destabilising leaks with Bishop’s fingerprints on it, and others from the Turnbull camp. First they weaken Abbott, and then then complain he’s crippled. Interesting is the absence this time around of Scott Morrison in their mooted lineup. But he has not defended Abbott, either.

UPDATE

Had Abbott been given loyalty, he would have won the next election against Bill Shorten. But I’m afraid many MPs will feel they have no option but to reward people who put their own ambitions above their party’s, fearing this will go on and on. But many conservatives will never wear this and with good reason will never trust those who have shown they deserve none. For them the question will be: would a Labor victory be their only chance of getting back a Liberal party that represents them?

UPDATE

Scott Morrison will not stand against Abbott.

UPDATE

Turnbull has resigned as Minister. At his press conference, he claims the government has not “been successful in providing the economic leadership our nation needs”. “We need a different style of leadership” – one which explains the changes and “respects the people’s intelligence”, that has advocacy and “not slogans”. (But is Turnbull really a better communicator?)

Turnbull says Shorten would be catastrophic, noting his opposition to the China free trade deal. (Which Abbott actually achieved.) “We need to restore traditional cabinet government” with no “captain’s calls”. (Turnbull so far has hit on most Labor talking points.) Turnbull admits this is not ideal, giving the Canning byelection. (But this is hypocrisy: he has determined the timing.)

Where’s our Donald Trump?

I watched Bolt this morning and the interview with Scott Morrison over Peter Dutton’s off-the-record but on-the-microphone comment. So this is where we now are, Peter Dutton apologises for microphone gaffe.

First, it was not a gaffe, it was a joke. In fact, it is the kind of joke that gives people like me some kind of hope that there are some amongst the Libs who understand climate change is a political scam, not the most urgent issue of our time.

Second, what is he doing apologising? Why isn’t the response something along the lines of – you guys in the media are such airheads that it is impossible to have an adult conversation with any of you around. The actual response, on the other hand, makes me think that these guys do not have the internal fortitude to do what needs doing:

“Obviously it was a private conversation – I should have realised the mike was there,” Mr Dutton told Sky News. “I didn’t; it was directly behind me. I made a mistake and I apologise to anyone who has taken offence to it. It was a light-hearted discussion with the PM and I didn’t mean any offence to anyone.

“If anyone has taken offence they should accept my apology. I’m disappointed that it allowed for a distraction from what was a very good policy announcement.”

Now imagine Donald Trump having been picked up by some stray microphone making a joke about some policy issue, especially one where to his own side he would be showing a bit of common sense. The most important change that may yet be wrought by Trump is his taking the media on. They are far left loons, and part of an amazingly uninformed, poorly educated cohort of journalists whose views, for the most part, are not worth the newspapers they are printed on. No self-respecting government should be forced to treat them seriously.

A focus on persecuted minorities and, in particular, women, children and families

The reason for the creation of Israel was that Jews needed a haven they could turn to if the countries they were living in became too dangerous for their Jewish inhabitants. Who would have thought that the same refuge would be needed for Christians, and more strangely, that it would be so difficult to find havens for Christians being driven from their homes? Why this is even controversial I do not know, but this is the decision that has been made by the Government today.

Australia’s acceptance of an additional 12,000 refugees fleeing the conflict in Syria and Iraq is a “generous” response that reflects the nation’s “proud history as a country with a generous heart”, Tony Abbott says. . . .

The government will dispatch officials to the region “shortly” to begin working with the UNHCR to identify potential candidates for resettlement, with a focus on persecuted minorities and, in particular, women, children and families.

Unprincipled ignorance

It’s clear enough that unprincipled ignorance is the single most defining characteristic of those who consistently attack the PM. His equation of ISIS with the Nazis, with a slight twist towards noting the astonishing pride the Islamic State takes in displaying their barbarity, has called to arms the usual brigade of anti-Abbott hysterics. But there is one difference between the Nazis and ISIS that is of singular importance. The Nazis disappeared in 1945. ISIS is a threat today. To distract from any of this is merely to attack the single most focused enemy of ISIS in Australian politics, and there would be few like him anywhere in the world. Objectively, as Stalin liked to say, attacks on Abbott over this issue transform someone into a defender of ISIS.

Daryl McCann has an excellent article at Quadrant Online: Hold the Front Page! Nazism = ISIS. Here is my choice of its central point, but do read it all.

The bloodcurdling irrationality of the Islamic State expresses itself not only in the annihilation of Christians, secularists, modern women, smokers, archaeologists, Yazidis, Kurds, Druse, Shiites, Alawis, historical landmarks, ancient manuscripts, foreign photographers and aid workers, homosexuals, adulterers, suspected Sunni apostates, but also in its exterminationist anti-Semitism. Thus, the call to “liberate” Jerusalem (al-Quds) refers to the drawing near of Islamic “End Times” and has nothing to do with achieving a two-state solution for the Israeli-Arab conflict (or East Jerusalem as the nascent capital of an Islamic Republic of Palestine). Abbott’s depiction of the Islamic State as an “apocalyptic death cult”, then, appears to be right on the money. Conversely, the accusation by leftist journalists and commentators in Australia that Tony Abbott’s analysis is mere hyperbole, intended only to boost lagging popularity at home, can be dismissed as a combination of ignorance and political point-scoring on the part of the commentariat – the very things, ironically, they accuse the Prime Minister of doing.

If I quibble about this, there is something about the wording at the start that does not come to grips with the intensity or the nature of the problems we face. ISIS are mass murderers who will murder many more if they can. I do not know where their drive for power and dominance comes from but it is not “irrational”. And “bloodcurdling” is too weak a word to do the job. With ISIS we are dealing with very rational people who are seeking power, first in the Middle East but also anywhere else they can. It is a global operation spreading with fantastic success. It is also not difficult to set up a franchise operation anywhere, which is why no country in the West is immune, where there is a large scale risk of much greater insurgency over the coming decades. ISIS is unlikely to have reached anything like the dominance it will one day have. If this doesn’t worry you, you lack political imagination and have almost no historical sense worth discussing. You are, whatever else you may think, helping to open the road to further incursions of ISIS barbarities into every part of the world.

Robert Groot, the President of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, made this statement absolving the PM of missing the point.

groot-note

OK, I get it. But side by side with that, I would like to see the Executive Council’s words on Obama’s agreement freeing Iran to develop nuclear weapons. Here’s my advice, Robert. You should back this Prime Minister to the hilt because whoever may be the next one is unlikely to take ISIS as seriously as Tony Abbott, and it will not matter which side of politics forms the next government for this to be true.