At least Labor's political launch bribes amounted to about half that of the coalition. Still irresponsible in my view, given the uncertain economic outlook.

The Gold Medicare initiative looks like an extension of the DVA Gold Health Card provided to ex-servicemen. As someone who has an elderly parent it's certainly attractive. If it's enough incentive to make my 88 year old mother vote Labor is another thing entirely.

I'm looking forward to the next opinion polls. My prediction is that nothing much will change. Howard promised too much to be taken seriously, and Labor hasn't convinced the debt ridden voters in the marginals that they are safe with the economy.

If Labor can't consistently poll better than 52% two party preferred, then they can't win.

An interview with the Prime Minister heard on ABC Radio’s AM program while driving to work this morning:

CATHERINE MCGRATH: If you're so concerned about interest rates, why are you spending so much?

JOHN HOWARD: Well, Catherine, to start with on the spending. This spending, half of it… well a lot of it is not spending, it's tax reduction. I mean, you can't call the entrepreneur's tax break, you can't call the childcare rebate, you can't call that spending. They're tax reductions, they're tax benefits.

But on top of that the figures quoted are over a four year period. And when all of our election commitments are fully costed, added up and everything the surpluses we will project will be larger than the surpluses that were announced at the time of the May budget. [My emphasis]

So, a tax reduction is different in effect from government spending? You don't have to be an economist to work out that either way, there's extra money sloshing around in the economy. Extra money for the population to spend can be inflationary.

I suppose if the money's spent without the government going into deficit then there's less risk of pressure on interest rates, however, Howard is promising to spend revenue based on the current growth of the economy, projected four years into the future. The big risk is that the economy won't grow at this rate, and a slowdown will impact on the amount of money available for the government's promises. (And Labor's too, for that matter.) If this happens, the government will have to break the promises, or go into deficit.

There are warnings of a possible slowing down of the US and Chinese economies. Couple this to the oil price at near record levels, a tottering housing market and record levels of private debt, the promises of both parties may well be unattainable.

I will be interested to see how the opinion polls are effected by Howard's new election bribes. I recall that the budget handouts didn't bring on the expected poll bounce; maybe the same thing will happen this time. Perhaps the voting population is becoming immune to these over the top financial inducements? The political process would be all the better if this was the case.

Unbiased commentator. Must be true!

As usual, the AFL finale didn't quite reach the standards of the two qualifying matches last week, but was an entertaining game none the less. Good luck to Port in stopping the Lions from equaling the most consecutive flags record. I doubt if a team will get another opportunity in my life time.

The grand final was a welcome distraction from the unpleasant reality of opinion polls published yesterday showing the government leading by a wide margin. The jump in support for the government seemed large when compared to polls taken only a week ago. Maybe it's a glitch. I'd like to think so, but I'm not delusional to the extent of thinking that they are going to lose the election.

We can be thankful that the election kept the Prime Minister in the MCG stands where he belongs. Unfortunately, we won't be so lucky next year, where it's assured he'll be back on the pitch handing out the gongs.

With all the blather from the government regarding preemptive strikes on terrorists situated in other sovereign nations, we should remember what happened in 1999 when Timor went up in flames after the independence vote. If ever there was a time to take unilateral action, that was it. It didn't happen. Basically, Australia sat on its hands until it got clearance to move from the UN Security Council.

At the time, I can remember Downer on the radio, obviously under pressure to do something about the situation, saying in effect that to move into Timor would be the equivalent of an invasion of Indonesia.

People will argue (rightly) that the troubles in Timor weren't a direct danger to Australia, but the issue is the same; unilateral action in a foreign nation is tantamount to a declaration of war.

I suspect Howard got carried away by his mate George's rhetoric on this issue, and the subsequent US invasion of Iraq, when he first stated the government's position on the subject. He didn't twig that the US, who has a tad more military might than us, can get away with this sort of thing.

At least Downer is talking some sense on this issue:

"Of course we haven't any intention of sending troops into Indonesia without the approval of Indonesia.

"Now in the case of Indonesia, or Malaysia or Singapore or the Philippines, these are countries which are our partners in the war against terrorism.

"You would obviously work with the country involved. First of all you would do it with the co-operation of the country involved."

Apparently, the preemptive strike initiative ...

[is] aimed at countries unable or unwilling to act against an imminent terrorist threat against Australia.

So that's what the Abrams tanks are for! All we need now is a lawless Pacific atoll to invade, and a way to get them there.

What at hoot! (If it's true.)

It's half way through the election campaign today, and my feelings at the moment are 'who cares?' Very unlike me to be so detached from the political process. It's all I can do to write about it.

As I've stated before, I feel that we are in for another three years of conservative government. I'm heartened by the opinion polls that show Labor still in the running, even after the bombing in Jakarta, but the economy's going well and government's not incompetent. Nasty, narrow minded, sycophantic, dishonest and divisive maybe, but not incompetent. Not enough for the punters to turn against them.

Mark Latham's chances of picking up Adelaide seats in anywhere but the Port Adelaide area evaporated after he was pictured in various papers wearing a Port Adelaide supporter's scarf while kicking a football.

Wearing the scarf was obviously suggested by a Liberal spy. Latham, being from Sydney, would not have known that 90% of Adelaidians support the the Crows, not Port. Just because Port are in the finals doesn't alter this fact; expect Latham to photographed in a Crows jumper during his next outing.

Not much point in asking me what I thought of the 'Great Debate.' I didn't watch it past the first 10 minutes, and that was on the ABC at 10.00pm following the Bradman documentary and Stephen Hawkins telemovie.

10 minutes was enough! Talk about mogadon TV. Boring as. Of course, that was the point. Howard made sure that it was early enough in the campaign to be forgotten by polling day, and both sides made sure that only the dedicated political observer would sit through it. A totally meaningless exercise, despite the 'worm' and its endorsement of Latham.

Put them in front of a live audience with a free rein to ask questions. Now that would be entertaining!

In the Sydney Morning Herald, an excellent article about the consequences of pouring money into the health system without any means of keeping the costs controlled.

While both sides of government compete in terms of their reputations as financial managers, little attention has been paid to the way the Coalition Government has tied the fortunes of taxpayers to rising health costs over which it has no effective control.

The government, in particular, has lost the view that to keep the health providers in line requires the consumer to fork out cash over and above the government subsidy. The more the provider charges, the more the consumer needs to pay to create pressure on the provider not to raise prices too far.

Then there is Medicare Plus, where the taxpayer meets 80 per cent of all health costs exceeding $300 for some families and $700 for others. This taxpayer contribution is 80 per cent of whatever the doctor or other health provider sees fit to charge. Somewhat unsurprisingly, there was a $1.4million blow-out of the scheme in Victoria in the month of June alone, according to one report.

The government doesn't see the problem ...

Remarkably, the Government suggests it has no responsibility for controlling increasing health costs. The federal Health Minister recently declared that "the Government doesn't believe in price control. We don't control the price of bread. We don't control the price of milk. We don't control the price of medical services."

They control the amount of money going to the medical industry. Simple, really.