On AM tonight, the new Nation's leader Warren Truss explained that his party would not toe the coalition line on all matters, and Barnaby Joyce confirmed that he wouldn't automatically oppose the dismantling of Work Choices.

It was music to my ears.

Tony Abbott giving reasons why he'd be a good candidate for the Liberal Party leadership.

Winners are grinners! Maxine looks like being only the second person in Australian political history to defeat a sitting Prime Minister.

The tragic figure of the night. Should he have challenged for the leadership when he had the chance? Would things have been different if he had?

Gave a wonderful speech in defeat, but I couldn't help feeling contempt for the position he found himself in. If he'd resigned 18 months ago, it could've been so different. He would have left at the top of his game, and been revered as a legend in global conservative circles. Now he's just pathetic. A new Liberal leader could have distanced himself from the baggage of the past decade. The truest statement of the evening was Howard taking responsibility for the government's defeat.

Kevin's victory speech was true to image, safe and bland. We can only hope that he will, in fact, change a lot (if not all) now that they've made government. Labor governments don't last that long (federally at least) but they do produce lasting reforms. Let's hope Kev maintains the tradition.

Later: A late night and a few drinks play havoc with writing skills. Going over the last two sentences ... Let's hope Kev maintains the Labor reformist tradition.

I rarely vote for the conservatives, so it wouldn't take many of these (perhaps none!) to influence my vote. However, I imagine many less committed voters are indicating their voting intentions (according to the polls) as a result of the cumulative dissatisfaction caused by some or all of the following.

In no particular order ...

1. The concept of the 'non core' promise.
2. The lack of support for the Republic Referendum.
3. Mindlessly following the lead of the US regarding foreign policy.
4. The deception used to justify joining the debacle in Iraq.
5. Cynically using the populations' xenophobia for political advantage. (Refugees, Tampa, the Pacific Solution, fear of terrorism, manipulating the legal system to detain suspects on minimal evidence.)
6. The abandonment of an Australian citizen to years of detainment without trial. (Until it became a political imperative to act.)
7. Ignoring climate change. Debunking the mounting evidence that human action is causing global warming. Not ratifying Kyoto, particularly galling after major concessions were granted to encourage us participate. The sabotaging of promising green technologies in favour of the coal industry. (Until it became politically impossible to ignore.)
8. Neglecting eduction. Increasing the funding to rich private schools by using a dodgy funding formula. Leaving public schools were left to fend for themselves. The financial squeezing of universities, and the neglect of skills training. (Until now, of course.)
9. The myth of being great financial managers, when all they've really had to do is redistribute mountains of incoming cash courtesy of the mining boom. The manipulation of the budget surplus to provide tax cuts at politically opportune moments. Not using those funds for desperately needed improvements in infrastructure, education and health.
10. Work Choices, or how to screw the weakest in society. (Until the next recession, when we all get screwed.)
11. The lack of an apology to the 'Stolen Generation.'
12. Promising to keep interest rates low while political expediency causes them to rise.

That'll do for now. It only took only a few minutes to compile. There'd be many others given more time.

I'm open to suggestions.

There's a lot of dissatisfaction baggage between Howard and an election victory.

Bring on the 24 November.

There'll be many parents in the outer suburb marginals who'll be sorely tempted by this bribe. They won't think about where the money's coming from, its effect on inflation and their mortgages, the leeway it gives for private schools to keep raising their fees, and the inequality of providing the rebate to the wealthy while those in real need with kids in public schools get little benefit.

It's a typical Howard move. Welfare supposedly aimed at the needy but in fact benefits the wealthier demographic. Just like the Health Insurance Rebate.

I'd like to think that the Labor party will not be tempted to match it in some way. Oink Oink, Flap Flap!

Update: The pigs are on the wing!

First seen on AustralianPolitics.com

Writing about the prospect of the Federal and all State governments being Labor controlled, he states ...

Australia is thus approaching a fascinating historical juncture. Amid such benign economic conditions, we may be on the brink of an unprecedented experiment in power politics - giving control of every government in the nation to a political machine with a proven record of insularity and self-serving public patronage on a large scale.

This is uncharted territory. Nine Labor governments out of nine. Nine governments able to cross-fertilise each other's power base, exercising complete control over appointments to the judiciary and the senior bureaucracy. Nine Labor governments with big debts to the unions that underpin their finances. It could change Australia's political culture for a generation.

Actually, it's not that 'unchartered.' In 1969, all governments were controlled by one party, when the conservatives held all the speakers' chairs. I don't remember the country's political history being effected by that calamitous event. There have been several other periods when both sides held the Federal and all but one of state governments. It didn't hurt our democratic framework then, and it won't this time.

State governments have a lot of more pressing things to be worried about. They can't raise the funds to finance their activities. They've been marginalised to the point of irrelevancy by successive Federal governments using the Foreign Affairs and Corporations provisions to override state powers. It's hard to see how they can have any real influence in the modern era.

The fact that dodgy state governments have survived as well as they have is an indication of just how uneasy the population is about the current Federal government.

Besides, the clean sweep won't last too long. I'll make a brave (not) prediction that some of those state governments won't win another term. For the NSW government to survive another election would be a miracle.

Sheehan concludes with this ...

That is what the election on November 24 is really about. Under a Labor government, the deputy prime minister and minister for industrial relations would be a hard-left union ideologue and labour lawyer, Julia Gillard. The attorney-general would be Senator Joe Ludwig, who, in the great tradition of the Labor patronage machine, is the son of a Queensland Labor powerbroker, Bill Ludwig, the national president of the Australian Workers Union. Leaders of the machine would dominate the ministry.

So what's new? Labor governments throughout the century have been populated by ex-trade unionists. I don't need to point out the renowned Labor Prime Ministers who sport that background.

It's a pity commentators don't mention the business connections that fund and man the conservative parties.

A sure fire winner. Promise that, once elected, election campaigns won't be allowed to run longer than three weeks.

Take it from me. You'll romp it in.

As before, they were concentrating on my electorate, the seat of Bennelong. Can't think of the why they're so interested in that one ...

For the record, I reiterated my intention of voting against the sitting member.

Roll on 24 November.

Mr McMullan said that figures released on the weekend illustrate the worst features of the Howard Government’s failed strategy in this area of federal/state relations.

Only 21 of the 28 mooted colleges have opened so far, and those that are open are struggling for enrolments. Only 2 of the 21 that are open have met their 2007 target enrolment figures. The budget to run the whole 28 has recently been raised to $552 million and, given the low numbers of enrolments, this equates to nearly $175,000 per student.

Mr McMullan told the meeting, “The Australian Technical Colleges are expensive, inefficient and ineffective. Labor has always been concerned that they merely attempt to duplicate the services already offered by TAFE, but without the networks and the access to apprenticeships that TAFEs have.

I always thought the original proposition was stupid considering the states already run technical colleges. Surely it would have been more sensible just to increase the funding for the existing system?

Of course, the conservatives had another agenda, and that was to negate the Teachers' Union by forcing staff in the new colleges to go on AWAs. True to form, those AWAs have some nasty conditions ....

TEACHERS will be required to submit to blood tests for drugs or alcohol under harsh new industrial contracts that strip away a plethora of conditions.

The tests may be ordered under confidential Australian Workplace Agreements covering staff in the Howard Government's Australian Technical Colleges.

One AWA - seen by The Daily Telegraph - gives a technical college the right to take samples of an employee's blood at any time. It reads: "The Australian Technical College . . . reserves the right to apply any reasonable testing procedures to the employee without notice to detect the presence of alcohol or drugs in the employee's blood."

In the unionised NSW public school system teachers have never been tested for drugs or alcohol.

President of the NSW Teachers' Federation Maree O'Halloran said a proposal for tests would be a "gross infringement of civil liberties".

So the original reason for the implementation of these colleges was a classic Liberal government union bashing exercise, and nothing to do with increasing employment as they've piously claimed this time round.

One of the assumptions made by both parties in the current election campaign is that the economy will keep growing at the present rate for the foreseeable future. Howard's and Rudd's recently announced $30 odd billion tax giveaways are only deliverable if that assumption holds true.

There are a couple of economic 'elephants in the room' that both side of politics don't want to mention. One is the sub-prime lending crisis in the US, the other is Peak Oil. The former may knock a few years growth off the economy. The later issue, Peak Oil and its effect on the oil price and world economy, is much more serious.

If the more dire predictions regarding Peak Oil eventuate, the predictions of tax giveaways will be laughable in the face of declining government receipts.

Peak oil and climate change are related, but the effects of peaking oil supplies will be felt much earlier and have a sharper negative effect on the economy. Predictions of just when the peak will occur vary. Some say it's here now, others say it won't happen for a couple of decades. Even if the optimists are correct, it's not that far away.

Over the last week the oil price hit $90 barrel*. Admittedly, that spike was a reaction to the threat of Turkey taking military action in Iraq. However, the steady rise of the oil price from around $30 three years ago to $85 this month is simply due to demand outstripping supply. $100 / barrel is not out of the question in the near future.

Since the 1960s, two barrels of oil have been consumed for every barrel found. China and India are competing for oil on the world market for supplies, and they have some way to go before they approach anything like the per capita energy we consume.

(Click to enlarge)

Australia has been insulated from the current rising energy prices due to the rising value of the Oz dollar. Not every country is so lucky, and eventually increasing energy prices will start to negatively effect the world economy.

Perhaps the imminent $100 per barrel oil price will put the issue on the public agenda. Until then, Rudd, Howard and Co will happily perpetrate the myth that resources and rising living standards last forever.

*$92 as of today.

Howard was woeful, in my opinion.

Rudd exploited the governments perceived weaknesses in the areas of health, climate change and education. Howard looked weak on those subjects because the government has generally ignored them throughout his incumbency.

If Howard had done the sensible thing and resigned a year ago, Costello, as a new leader, wouldn't have carried that baggage to the same extent. He could have subtly sheeted home the blame for previous inaction to the departed leader. The government's new interest in these areas wouldn't have looked so cynical.

Howard's stubbornness in not resigning with dignity when he had the chance, and Costello's inability to force the issue, has probably cost Costello his turn as PM.

And yes, I know I'm ignoring that Howard has lost every previous election TV debate as Prime Minister. Never write of the chance of a miracle Tampa.

The above shows some of the election material received this week at our house in the Benelong electorate. That's not all of it, some was thrown away, but the ratio of John Howard's vs Maxine McKew is about right.

JH really must be fighting for his political life as no one is safe from him popping up when least expected. My kids have seen him twice in the past few weeks. I've been spared, but I have shaken hands with Maxine a couple of weeks ago in a local shopping area.

Bring on election day.

Only time will tell if the proposed tax cuts have the desired effect, but hopefully the population is smart enough to see this for what it is ... a crude election bribe.

It's hard to see how tax cuts of this magnitude wouldn't put further pressure on interest rates as the economy nears its growth limits. It would be far more sensible to put those funds towards increasing spending on education, health and infrastructure, all areas that have been neglected by the present government.

There's something wrong when funding essential services is ignored in favour of providing extra cash to end up being spent on consumables. Of course, this is the Conservative way. Give the cash to the population whom, in their eyes, should be spending it on the services the government doesn't really want to provide, like, education, health and infrastructure.

Rudd is being sensible to date and not rushing to match the deal. With a large proportion of population indicating they'd like more spending directed at the neglected areas, Labor would be sensible to temper any tax giveaways in favour of targeted spending.

Taxes, and ...

"The Chaser" is going to try something on during APEC.

I don't know what was funnier. Bin Laden emerging from the 'Canadian' motorcade, or the stern reactions of the security head honchos after the event. Surely they should have known.

And it's not as if the Chaser boys didn't go out of their way to leave some hints for the security enforcers ...

IF ONLY the police had stopped to read the fine print on the "APEC 2007 Official Vehicle" sticker.

"This vehicle belongs to a member of The Chaser's War on Everything.

"This dude likes trees and poetry and certain types of carnivorous plants excite him."

To his credit, and he doesn't get much at the "Pigs," only Dolly Downer saw the incident as it was intended.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer, appeared amused. "Whatever you think of the humour of The Chaser … they were clearly not going to harm anybody in a physical way," he said. "They presumably were, as is the nature of their show, aiming to humiliate a lot of well-known people."

Expect to see the Chaser team get a nasty slap on the wrist when they front court in October.