A champagne socialist reflects on Western culture and the Universe... and whilst gazing at his navel, he comes up with a lot of useless lint. It is the fruits of this navel-gazing that form the substance of this blog.
Part 1
Published on October 4, 2004 By Champas Socialist In Politics
Today starts Part 1 of a series I’ll be running this week. A friend recently asked me to name one BAD thing John Howard’s Liberal Party had done. I told her I didn’t know where to start and didn’t have time to get into it then. I’ve racked my brains and come up with one thing. Maybe two. Please feel free to add to it. I haven’t kept a running list over the past decade and some things have undoubtedly slipped my mind. Today we begin with Health and the Environment.

Health
1. Reduced the rebate on medical services provided by doctors and thus has overseen an 11% decrease in bulk billing. From an all-time high of 80.6% under Labor, Howard and Abbott have brought bulk billing down to 67.7%.

2. Destroyed Medicare’s dental health plan

3. Decreased hospital funding

4. Forced older Australians to sell their homes through a user pays policy for nursing homes

5. Raised the safety net to an unreachable level

6. Done nothing to help the millions of Australians who suffer from mental illnesses, in a country with one of highest levels of suicide in the world.

7. Introduced a user pays scheme for the drugs watchdog TGA, thus giving the drugs industry more power over its own watchdog.

8. Introduced a Bill to get the contraceptive pill banned for young Australians. This would have caused many pregnancies in 14 year old girls. In turn this demand on our teenagers would have caused greater social problems as they dropped out of school or found it impossible to keep up, forcing them and their babies onto our welfare system, unfairly causing them heartache and causing a greater strain on our welfare system.

9. Changed the make up of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, thus giving industry a stronger role in deciding what drugs are allowed on the market.

10. Brownwyn Bishop’s kero baths scandal

11. Refused to back prevention of the root causes of asthma and melanomas when he refused to sign the Kyoto protocol.

12. inadequate recompense for carers (about 85 cents a day)

13. Did not try to make sure medicines for ordinary Australians would stay cheap after an FTA with the USA. Our PBS is the envy of the rest of the world and Howard would rip it apart if Latham hadn’t stopped him.

14. Tried to force pensioners and everyone onto the private health system.

15. Private health premiums have gone up under Howard.

Environment
16. Instead of backing proven, clean and efficient energy resources such as solar and wind energy, Howard put millions of dollars into researching whether it might be possible to pump dangerous fossil fuels and carbon emissions back into the ground. The effects of such an idea are unlikely to be good or safe. Solar energy is safe and it’s making millions of dollars for countries like Japan who have backed their renewable energy industries.

17. General inaction and disinterest

18. Despite commitments by almost everyone else in the world, JH refused to sign the Kyoto protocol to lower greenhouse emissions, to the peril of Australia’s future generations who will suffer more asthma and melanomas than any previous generation.

That's Part 1, more to come soon.

But on another topic....
I am outraged by Family First’s scare campaign against the Greens. Since when was it the Christian thing to do to lie and distort? They want to talk about extreme? What about a Party that believes in reserving health and education for households where the parents are married with 2.3 kids who are still living at home, while the rest of us wait for the leftovers?! That’s not Family First, that’s make Australia worse! Neither major party should control the Senate, but why is the Liberal Party making deals with this vocal minority?

Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Oct 04, 2004
Here's another reason..

He is a lying cheating turd of a man who will do absolutely anything to to get re elected.

Great post mate.
on Oct 04, 2004
You're being very optimistic Champas, are you sure that modern computer technology has the storage capacity to catalogue his misdeeds?
on Oct 05, 2004
Thanks Phoenix.
Well Toblerone, you know what FishHead says about us left wingers: nothing but pessimistic optimists.
on Oct 05, 2004
Every day I find out more about the Family Worst (Family First) team calling themselves Christians. Is this Christianity:?

1 Family First is running misleading TV ads accusing Bob Brown of wanting to give cannabis to children.

2 A Family First campaign worker in Dickson stated that lesbians should be burned at the stake.

3 Family First’s Victorian Senate candidate called upon supporters to pull down temples, mosques and bottle shops.

Must have missed that bit of the Bible.

on Oct 05, 2004
Yeah as a Christian I find all that offensive.

Sunrise this morming - they had a Family First rep (I don't know who it was) and they asked him about those candidates and he said that the one who talked about Lesbians has been stepped down (or whatever the tern is - He's not being endorsed by the Family First party)
and he kinda skirted the issue around the other one. Personally I'm voting Labour with Hetty Johnson (independent) for the senate.

I'm actually unsure why Fishhead is a Liberal supporter - Mark Lathams plan for families will give him more money each week giving him more excuse not to work.
on Oct 06, 2004
I'd like to commend Trina's stance here. She shows that Christianity is not about hatred and violence, even if Family Worst are. True Christians, like true Moslems, preach love and peace.
on Oct 06, 2004
Really briefly, Latham will cost us money, both over the year and the week.
on Oct 06, 2004
Because interest rates will go up? The sky will fall? The government will continue to collect taxes?

That's right, Latham will cost us all money. So will Howard and then Costello. Services will, however, improve under a Latham government.
on Oct 06, 2004
Okay I just spent the entire morning not doing housework but looking to see if I could back up my claims. From what I understand by looking at this table
Depending on the tax bracket you fall into - single income, dual income, sole parent 1 child 2 children 3 children

Labour will provide a minimum additional amount of $20 per week.

Some families will get $31, some $164 - it depends on your income per annum - but it's more money per week.

So you fall into the lowest bracket - and you get just $20 extra perweek - That's still going to go a long way.

For $20 you can buy a tin of Formula
You can buy a package of 44 huggies crawler nappies
You can buy a package of farex, a package of wipes (johnsons 80) a bottle of juice, and a package of 4 tins of pears

You can buy 10 bottle of pasta sauce
20 packages of pasta
12 packages of rice
4 packs of sausages
4kg of mince

10bottles of coke
15 chocolate bars

$20 will go an extremely long way!!!

$20 per week at 52 weeks per year is $1040 -- Even if they take away the $600 baby bonus - you're still $400 infront

Plus what I can gather - they're giving away 1 day free childcare - which is about $20

Liberals are giving a 30% rebate (I don't have the maths skills to work that out but I figure it's roughly the same)

Also from what I read the $800 baby bonus is being replaced with a $3000 baby bonus which will be increased by labour to $5000 by 2006.

From what I can gather - families ARE (certainly my family will be) better off with Labours new policies.
on Oct 08, 2004
Well, well it seems like you’ve checked your facts. Well sorta anyway. I’ve got two kids so 600 by 2 is 1200 which is substantially under the proposed combined weekly increase you put forward. Plus add to the fact that the coalition will raise the tax free threshold for my small business.

Also, finding hard data on my family’s outcome if Latham is impossible. It’s nowhere on the ALP site, so I’m left to go with newspaper article I read last week or so that said we’re one of the 1 in 10 that’s worse off all round. What I find preposterous is that he can claim he’s nice to families because he robs the poor and rich to give to the middle class. Nice guy.

So you’d prefer to vote for a man who would make you a little better off as a result of taking more of us? Sounds like a rather selfish vote.

Also the free day of child care won’t come into effect for us until Micah turns 4 whereas the 30% rebate (which for your maths deficient post is far better then the 1 free day in 5 which stands at 20%) kicks in immediately.
on Oct 08, 2004
>>>Sounds like a rather selfish vote.<<<

Oh and I suppose after reading a list of 107 items of things John Howard has done wrong and STILL deciding to vote for him because of your small business ISN'T selfish?!
I think voting on pure economics is selfish.
on Oct 08, 2004
>>>Sounds like a rather selfish vote.<<<

Oh and I suppose after reading a list of 107 items of things John Howard has done wrong and STILL deciding to vote for him because of your small business ISN'T selfish?!
I think voting on pure economics is selfish.
on Oct 08, 2004
>>>Sounds like a rather selfish vote.<<<

Oh and I suppose after reading a list of 107 items of things John Howard has done wrong and STILL deciding to vote for him because of your small business ISN'T selfish?!
I think voting on pure economics is selfish.
on Oct 08, 2004

Reply #13 By: Toblerone (Anonymous) - 10/8/2004 6:51:04 AM
>>>Sounds like a rather selfish vote.<<<

Oh and I suppose after reading a list of 107 items of things John Howard has done wrong and STILL deciding to vote for him because of your small business ISN'T selfish?!
I think voting on pure economics is selfish.


Just in case you missed it in school mate, "money is what makes the world go round!"
on Oct 08, 2004
Just in case you missed it in school mate, "money is what makes the world go round!"


My teachers always told me it was gravitational forces - just goes to show the wackiness of the Australian Catholic school system. To think that money was behind it all along....

I voted more on humanitarian grounds and simple respect than anything else this election. Neither major party has done or offered anything for me this election, so I just voted in the reps for my local candidate because I knew he was a good man and in the senate for the greens followed by the democrats because I didn't want to see either major party having control over the upper house.
2 Pages1 2