Rick Samimi's Political & Business Commentary

Watch out Tony! Gillard Government is throwing out old problems & cleaning its act!

2012-01-22T21:41:00.010+11:00

The upturn in fortunes that the foreign policy exposure Julia Gillard enjoyed in meeting the Queen & the US President Obama towards the end of last year has not abated yet.

Julia Gillard has finally started to demonstrate her political skills by getting rid of or finalising most of the unworkable policy promises that she made in order to save her political career after the last election.

The carbon tax legislation has been sorted out, Mineral resources tax is almost forgotten & the boat arrivals are off the front pages even though her policies in this area have utterly failed & Abbott & Morrison are trying their best to revisit the issue traction again. But most importantly, Gillard & her advisers have continued with their spring clean of poor policy initiatives & have got rid of her promise on the unworkable poker machines pre commitment nonsense to Andrew Wilkie by convincing Peter Slipper to become the Speaker!

The above matters should all start the alarm bells for Tony Abbott & his up to now effective negative strategy towards the Government. Gillard is making negative or troublesome policies scarcer for Abbott to attack. At the same time Abbott can not take much credit for many of the backflips by Gillard as his opponents are usually quick to point out that he at no time offers a workable alternative! eg in case of the poker machines Senator Xenaphon has pointed out exactly that!

Therefore, as I mentioned in my last post, 2012 may turn out to be a lot more troublesome for Tony Abbott than he could have anticipated.

In order to preserve the coalition's lead over the Government, Abbott must prove his leadership credentials to the voters, by demonstrating his policy vision in various troubled sectors of the economy, & by effectively countering the likes of the ambitious & out of control Bill Shorten, the PM in waiting! He must openly & directly tackle Bill shorten on the Fair Work Australia & commit to struggling businesses to change the more inflexible & stifling aspects of the legislation.

In short, whilst the voters may be waiting with their baseball bats to punish Gillard & Labor at the next election in 2013, they are yet to roll out their welcome mats for Tony Abbott! And he needs to give them enough reasons to do so! Being negative & short of alternative policies will not accomplish that!

2012: The year Tony Abbott must prove himself as a credible "alternative PM"

2011-11-26T23:46:00.008+11:00

By all accounts Tony Abbott has been a very effective opposition leader since the election day in 2010. Despite all his detractors' protestation, his job as opposition leader is & will be to attempt to block any government policy his side of politics does not agree with, and to win votes in the process.

However, 2012 will be a year Abbott must firstly demonstrate his policy credentials, and then prove his leadership abilities as a credible alternative PM.

Julia Gillard has by any definition enjoyed a great run in the past few weeks. She passed her poisoned "Carbon Tax" as well as the "Mining Resources Supertax" through the Lower House. She's been seen as a decisive leader in the world stage & has improved her fragile numbers in the Lower House by one!

She has truly put an end to her rocky 2011 with a bang! Despite her earlier comments about lack of interest in foreign policy, she is finishing the year in full appreciation of what wonders "Foreign Affairs" can do to make any leader look decisive & worldly! From hosting the Queen to enjoying the "Obamarama" in standing shoulder to shoulder with the US President, to lecturing European leaders about economic management whilst hosting Asian Leaders.....

And to top it all, for the first time during her reign as the PM, she managed a superb coup without a single leak by her eternal enemies in Labor Party & surprised the opposition this week by increasing her slim & fragile majority by one vote in the Lower House. This will potentially neutralise the "Poker Machine" issue from the already shrinking war cupboard of Tony Abbott.

All of the above leave Tony Abbott in a very sticky situation for 2012. He has only the "Boat People" issue as an unresolved matter to hang on to. Whilst he can & will continue to attack the carbon & mining tax, the truth is he is now fully exposed & can no longer hide behind "problematic issues of the minority Government".

Whilst it is still probably true that no matter what Gillard & Labor do, voters will be waiting with what a prominent journalist in the media recently termed "their baseball bats at the polls in 2013", the fact is 2012 will be a make or break year for Tony Abbott too. No matter what happens to Gillard & her fragile minority alliance with the Greens & independents, and no matter how the likes of Bill Shorten & Mark Arbib & the rest of faceless poll driven & self promoting men of Labor play their cards with Julia Gillard's leadership, Tony Abbot must prove himself as a credible alternative prime minister with at leasts some credible & fully costed policy platforms in 2012 or face the potential consequences.

If on the other hand Abbott decides to continue to ignore major policy fronts such as IR & simply continues with his current war of attrition & solely relies on the apparent comfortable lead the opposition enjoys in the polls on the two party preferred basis, he may find 2012 a lot less enjoyable as the opposition leader than 2011!

Australia, a multi speed economy with a minority government paralised by instability

2011-11-05T20:44:00.004+11:00

Australia weathered the global financial crisis better than her European & north American counterparts, thanks to the resources hungry economies of South East Asia & India.

Regrettably however, we have inherited a multi-speed economy with many sectors in varying degrees of recessionary difficulties, a minority government that is hostage to its independent MPs & the Greens, a PM tarnished by her inability to demonstrate any political conviction, and her failure to implement any of her main stated policies, and worst of all a Reserve Bank that is simply in denial about the recessionary state of many sectors & is has remained obsessed with controlling inflation, which by the way does not even exists in many sectors, most notably in retail which is being crushed by deflationary pressures.

As a result, the political game in Canberra has simply become a war of attrition between a much weakened PM who has to constantly watch her back, and an opposition that has mastered, albeit unproductively for the nation, the art of negativity.

Meanwhile, the government has failed to address any of the fundamental issues facing retail, construction, tourism & manufacturing sectors (to name a few) all of which comprise of many small struggling privately owned businesses.

At the same time, the Qantas confrontation has highlighted the inflexibility of Julia Gillard's "Fairwork" legislation & how it has reversed most of the IR reforms of the past two decades.

And to make matters worse, the self serving powerbroker elements in Labor party such as Bill Shorten, continue their rather superficial & patronising public support for the PM whilst they adoringly look at themselves in the mirror every morning & see the future PM smiling back at them!

It has taken more than 25 years of continuous reform to take Australia to its current dizzy heights. The current PM & her incompetent team around her are unravelling everything in the space of 2.5 years!

Let's spare a thought for the political obscurity of Wayne Swan!

2011-09-03T22:57:00.006+10:00

By any account, these are desperate times for Julia Gillard & her Government. All the main policy agendas that Gillard specifically targeted as her priorities after toppling Kevin Rudd are in absolute tatters, and with them goes the last shred of the PM's credibility.

As a result, the usual murmurs of a potential change in the leadership have become the hot topic of the day & all sides of media are speculating about potential challengers or suitable replacements if Gillard's political fortune continues its downward spiral. Just about every man & his dog has been mentioned as speculation continues about Gillard's future, from the obvious candidates such as Bill Shorten, to Stephen Smith, Chris Bowen, Simon Crean, Greg Combet, Peter Beatie & Kevin Rudd etc etc.

But in the middle of all the confusion & mayhem, let's stop & reflect, and spare a thought for poor Wayne Swan! No one is even mentioning poor Wayne Swan's name in any of this. After all, as the Deputy PM & Treasurer he is the second highest ranking Government member after the PM & under normal circumstances an obvious choice to replace her!

But not in case of Wayne Swan! No one cares & no one, even in Labor Party seems to take him & his chances seriously.

It's frustrating enough for Swan that he believes he has never received an ounce of due credit for what any other treasurer would have undoubtedly got massive accolades for, ie stirring Australia through the GFC without a recession, because most observers attribute the result to luck, China & the mining boom than Swan's skills.

And now, once again at a time of leadership crisis, he's been dealt with like an obscure junior backbencher no one has ever heard of!

Wayne Swan must be puzzled, confused & spitting chips! No matter what he does he can't get any traction! The media & most voters do not seem to be interested in him & his political fortune, or even lack of it!

Bill Shorten will do & say anything he can in his self promoting march towards the Lodge as a future PM!

2011-08-04T19:45:00.005+10:00

Bill Shorten, the former Victorian State President of the Australian Labor Party and Secretary of the Australian Workers' Union (AWU) has to be THE worst ever heavy handed union powerbroker we have ever got stuck with in a position of power in Australia, and he sees himself as a future PM too!

His most notable achievement since getting elected to the parliament on the back of Kevin Rudd's popularity in 2007 is, ........, being one of the main architect's of the execution plot that toppled Rudd in 2010. And Bill Shorten did it for,...... the sake of Bill Shorten's advancement towards the PM's seat!

And there he goes again today. His sadly misinformed, ignorant, poorly timed & biased comments about the plight of retailing were an embarrassment to this incompetent Government. At a time when most retailers are reeling, who is Shorten to question their business models when as a union official all he did was making running business harder for small business?

And as for the Federal Government's contribution to the severe recession retailers are experiencing? They have not done anything to curtail unreasonable landlords & their fair Work legislation has made it totally inflexible & expensive for employers in retail sectors.

So, thank you Mr Shorten! Thank you for doing & saying all that is necessary to further your own career! Let's hope you never make it to the Lodge!

The gloomy retail outlook has more to do with consumers' newly found power & expectations than the obvious structural problems!

2011-07-28T12:18:00.026+10:00

The main reasons for the much debated & document malaise in Australia's retail sector can be summarised below:

Well documented fragile consumer confidence & cautious consumers

Structural & costing issues relating to high labour & occupation costs in Australia

A PM who in leading a minority Government, is hostage to narrow political interests of her political supporters & in trying to save her political career has bet everything on a hard to explain Carbon Tax

A suspicious electorate who is finding it hard to believe that everyone will be better off as a result of the carbon tax

An opposition that is cleverly taking advantage of a weak PM to instill fear in consumers' psyche about her policies, including portraying them as half baked & made on the run!

A Reserve bank that keeps everyone guessing about the interest rates & the true health of Australia's economic well being & in the process further hammers consumer confidence

A well documented rise in utility, food & petrol prices & other household expenses

The media feeding on shock headlines such as "Interest rates on the rise", "Utility charges to double" or "House values declining" & in the process make consumers even more cautious

A desperate media that is feeding on above shock headlines further undermining confidence

The strong Australian dollar making it both fun & affordable to shop on line for consumers

An almost universal lack of online presence in a substantial way by most Australian retailers to combat the above, further allowing the consumer dollars to be spent on overseas websites instead.

The blurring of channels giving consumers a much stronger bargaining power due to ability to source products from many competing suppliers

Having listed the above factors, most importantly & noticeably, it is the consumers' attitude towards retailers, the exertion of their newly found powers & the unreasonable expectations they are placing on retailers that is making the sector structurally unsustainable.

Consumers are finding the indescribable joy of exerting their newly found psychological & financial power over hapless & desperate retailers a new shopping experience unknown in Australia until this year. that is driving consumers to shop on what they choose to have, but at the lowest price! They are enjoying the brutality of what they are putting retailers through!
Most consumers' (young & old) attitude & psyche towards most retail stores they walk into can be summarised as:

I can probably buy what I am looking for cheaper elsewhere!

Therefore I must drive a hard bargain!

I must watch out they don't rip me off!

I'd prefer service AND lowest prices at the same time!

I can't be bothered to go to the cheapest retailer around! instead, I will use my smart Phone apps to make them price match with other retailers'.

They must meet my demands because I am spending my money with them & not someone else

If I don't enjoy my "shopping experience" I won't go back there again, unless I can get them to sell things to me cheaper than elsewhere!

I don't mind being rude to the staff because I AM spending my money with them instead of somewhere else!

If I don't get what I demand from them I will spend MY MONEY somewhere else!

Here's a true story, of a customer interaction I had in one of my stores this week:
Me (M): May I help you Sir? Customer (C): Yes I am after a brand of xxxxxx (name withheld) starting with K you have on Special!
M: Is it this one Sir? C: No! You had it on Special for $6.50
M: OK! I think it's this one Sir! It was on Special in our Catalogue THREE months ago. It's now $7.25 (i.e a mere 10% more)
C: (looking very annoyed) BUT I have come all the way here because you had it at $6.50!! You don't want to lose my business do you?
M: (thinking, OK Customers are always wrong!! But, what the heck!) OK Sir, I will sell it to you for $6.50!
C: (at the registers) takes out his credit card to pay after having secured a catalogue price!
M: (firmly & politely): I am sorry Sir! But due to recent hike on EFTPOS?Credit charges our minimum purchase on credit cards is now $10. Would you like to buy something else or pay cash?
C: (huffing & puffing): You guys should get on with the times! I am giving you MY business! You should jump at it! Then he took out a $10 note from approximately $250 of cash in his wallet AND threw it at me in disgust!
M: Thank you Sir, here's your change!
C: (Avoiding eye contact & making his disgust with me and my service plainly obvious) grabbed his bag & stormed out without a response!

Now, Don't be alarmed!
The so called "customer is always right" marketing gurus are wrong if they think I lost a customer there by not accepting his preferred method of payment after he had extracted the life out of a miserable $6.50 product out of me! In all probability this customer has now tasted blood in my store & will be back to hunt for more bargains sooner rather than later!

The only thng in these uncertain retailing times that is quite clear is that the eventual sustainable response to the above can not arise from price differentiation & discounting alone as it will only make consumers more suspicious & bargain savvy. The solution will have to arise from innovative "shopping experience" ideas which the likes of Zara & Nespresso are successfully managing in the new Westfield in the sydney CBD.

The Greens will ultimately be a threat to Labor Party and moderate politics in Australia.

2011-07-28T11:45:00.012+10:00

The Greens supported minority Government of Julia Gillard is being take to far left by the Greens' dominated policy agenda and in doing so is irreversibly damaging the more moderate leaning aspects of Australia's political landscape.

Make no mistake as many voters do! Many of us remain confused about the true policy stance of the Greens! The Greens are not the same as the pragmatic centrist Democrats who in their heyday were "keeping the bastards honest" by keeping the political debate in the centre.

The Greens are a far left party which will damage Australia in two substantial ways in the coming years by moving Labor to far left in order to appease the Greens, & coalition to far right in order to appease conservative anti green voters:

a) The Greens will attract the left leaning disenchanted Labor voters & hence will make it harder for Labor to initiate moderate centrist leaning policy initiatives, and

b) Their policies will drive the right leaning conservatives more to the the right & in doing so substantially diminish the much needed influence of moderate centrist conservative politicians in the coalition.

Thankfully, in our democratic system, Bob Brown & his team will eventually be held accountable for their policy decisions in the next Federal election at the latest. And if the recent state elections in NSW & Victoria are anything to go by, unless the Greens define a more palatable pragmatic political position, they will be punished at the polls!

"Policy on the Run" is becoming the trademark of the Gillard Government

2011-06-08T19:07:00.012+10:00

Making up policy on the run is becoming the trademark of this Prime Minister & her Government!

Please keep in mind that the policy concepts are not necessarily being questioned. Rather it is the obvious lack of strategic planning, detailed analysis, consultation with stakeholders or analysis of the potential economic impact of the major policies on business & employment that are baffling! It is becoming more & more apparent that most are made up on the run as knee jerk reactions to public opinion, which are usually influenced by the extreme right or extreme left!

It all started from the early days of Gillard's reign when she announced the poorly studies or planned & now botched East Timor solution for asylum seekers.

Then the Government decided that after all the original advice to the then PM Rudd to drop his ETS policy was not sound & decided to announce another policy on the run, namely the carbon tax!

Last week we had the poorly planned Malaysian solution which prompted even some prominent labour leaning lawyers to protest the apparent lack of detail in the policy!

And the Government announced today it is banning live animal exports to Indonesia for six months! Based on the evidence on the Four Corners program last week, there are serious animal cruelty issues in the treatment of live stock exports to Indonesia which need to be dealt with. However, this must be done in a considered way, not on the run as the government did with refugees & carbon tax!

Now up to 15,000 cattle are stuck in ports in NT & WA as they were due to leave because the Government yet again made an announcement on the run! The ban was announced today by the Agriculture Minister without any consultation with the cattle growers or any consideration for the immediate economic hardship placed on them as a result of this "on the run" policy announcement.

The PM needs to start to demonstrate policy commitments that suggest good policy planning & some conviction by her & her government, or risk being punished at the next elections.

Without the mining boom, Australia would be in a deep recession & stuck with leaders who lack inspiration, vision and conviction!

2011-06-04T22:51:00.013+10:00

And to make matters worse, both Gillard & Abbott seem to neither have the policies to deal with Australia's major economic issues nor the capability to be the inspiring leaders that Australia desperately needs.

Talk to any retailer, big or small, tourism operator, manufacturer, farmer, car dealer & generally any small business operator & it is crystal clear that things are going so bad that even the concept of "two speed economy" does not accurately describe the malaise in the Australian economy. Unless of course the term refers to the economy of Western Australia vs the economy of the rest of Australia! (same point also stated by the CEO of Linfox in today's AFR)

And at a crucial time in Australia's history, we have hit a massive drought of talent in the Federal politics in this country. Both Julia Gillard & Tony Abbott lack political conviction, are light on visionary policies & worse of all lack the ability to state & sell their policies to the electorate in an effective manner.

Gillard (and Rudd before her) & her Government have proven that they simply are incapable of designing & implementing good policies (as opposed to policy on the run in order to catch up in the polls). In the odd occasion that they do, they either

a) demonstrate a total lack of conviction in their own policy eg dropping the ETS or the asylum seekers issue that Gillard is wrestling with, or
b) are totally incapable of selling the idea to the voters (eg carbon tax), or
c) are incapable of managing & controlling the implementation costs associated with policies (eg BER, Insulation & the current budget blow outs in the broadband roll out)

On the other hand Abbott, whilst effective as an opposition leader in opposing everything, is perceived to be light on policy, and worse, totally hostage to the ill informed and/or biased views & opinions of radio shock jocks & marginal seat voters, ie those who will supposedly win him the next election! By choosing this risky strategy, Abbott is being perceived as very light on any substantive policy & therefore incapable of leading Australia!

As the reputable "Economist" magazine pointed out this week (in a Special feature on Australia), the current lack of substantive leadership & vision on both sides of politics in Australia threatens to harm the great reforms implemented during the Hawke/Keating/Howard years & destroy Australia's bright future!

In conclusion, whilst the Gillard Government may lose the next election due to total failure in effectivepolicy implementation, an Abbott led coalition must demonstrate viable visionary policies to deserve to win Government!

Pauline Hanson, the self appointed "Voice of People" is once again rejected by the majority of the voices she claims to represent!

2011-04-12T13:32:00.023+10:00

At last it's official! Pauline Hanson has once again failed in her bid to re enter politics in Australia. She has now unsuccessfully contested multiple elections (7 on lmycount) since her one and only win in the 90s. That is a relief, both for NSW voters & for the Greens who won the last upper House seat on preferences. (Relief for the Greens simply because at some stage last week it looked as if the Labor & Greens preferences were flowing to Hanson & she was going to snatch an improbable victory!)

But thankfully on preferences the last seat went to the Greens! Yet the rather arrogantly self appointed "voice of People" has once again refused to acknowledge the rejection by the majority of the voices she claims to represent & no doubt will continue to blame the usual paranoid conspiracy theories against her as the main reason for her failure!

In an interview today Hanson blamed the voting system in NSW for her loss & demanded more education for voters to minimise informal votes! (one could counter claim in rejecting her, voters have proven themselves to be rather well educated!). Nevermind that she also failed in her bid in 2003 in NSW & her Senate bids in QLD previously & blamed other reasons for her failure at the time!

Hanson also claimed the NSW elections proved voters were tired of major parties. This is widely acknowledged on a national & indeed international level & is not a reflection of Hanson's popularity by any means!, She did however conveniently fail to mention the 17% swing to the coalition & overall loss of seats by independents, and her own failure in the NSW election! A point that contradicts her statement!

Nevertheless, what is even more astonishing is Hanson's refusal to admit her support base is at best marginal & far from broad based these days & as such she is not entitled to continue to refer to herself as the "Voice of People".

In doing so & staying in a state of denial, she is simply demonstrating she is as narcissistic as any fading politician around & as Malcolm Farr aptly put it in his column today ..."Voters do not believe she stands for anything…apart from Pauline"!

The sad sorry messy damaged state of NSW Labor

2011-03-29T22:35:00.040+11:00

Congratulations to Barry O'Farrell & his team for their historic win in NSW Elections. Mr O'Farrell fended off all criticism of being too cautious in a winnable situation & kept his team untied & well disciplined & led them to one of the biggest swings in election history in Australia. Many seats in the labor heartland were won by the Liberals or coalition & many others had double digit swings away from labor.

In the past few days however, the sad news is that the same usual suspects who have brought Labor to its knees & in the process have almost destroyed NSW, are playing the same old blame games relieving themselves of all accountability. A the same time, they have chosen another hand picked leader, a more influential & powerful puppet this time, i.e. John Robertson as the designated opposition leader.

Frank Sartor, Morris Iemma & others have raised very valid points about this same "job for the boys" powerbrokers, with Sartor writing an open letter to Obeid in SMH.
Most sansationally , Paul Keating in his usual frank manner, in an interview with Leigh Sales on ABC's 7.30 report on Tuesday night summed up the situation (& relieved me from trying to "yet again" highlight the plight of NSW Labor & the damage the likes of Arbib, Bitar, Robertson, Riordan, Obeid, Bitar, Roozendaal & co have done to both Labor party & NSW. Here's a wrap up of Paul Keating's interview on 7.30 report tonight:

NSW Labor leadership front runner John Robertson has been rejected as a political "fly-by nighter" by former prime minister Paul Keating. In an upfront interview with ABC Television, Mr Keating launched a heated attack on the former NSW transport minister, saying if he got the top job, NSW Labor would have "no future". Mr Keating said he stood by a letter he wrote to Mr Robertson in 2008 that stated: "If the Labor Party's stocks ever get so low as to require your services in its parliamentary leadership, it will itself have no future." "Correct,"

Mr Keating reaffirmed on Tuesday. "Jumping on and off buses and trains as transport minister doesn't give you any authority to be leader." He said the "dead men and women" of the state Labor Party - those who lost their seats in the weekend's election - hung round Mr Robertson's neck. But Mr Keating denied he'll quit the party should Mr Robertson accede to the leadership. "No, I'm a life member. "I'll see fly-by nighters out well and truly."

Questioned on the state election that saw Labor booted from government in a landslide after 16 years in government, the former Labor PM said party machinations had torn the party from the inside out. "The Labor government of NSW had its moral authority torn away from it. "The rot set in when (Eric) Roozendaal became (ALP national) secretary, followed by (Mark) Arbib and then (Karl) Bitar," Mr Keating said, adding the group was characterised by their belief "in nothing". "They're not about policy, they're just about winning the next election."

At last some good news out of Labor Party! But is it only good news for the time being?

2011-03-16T19:52:00.020+11:00

Good news!...No, I mean Great News:

Karl Bitar the ALP National Secretary & one of the main architects of the disastrous Labor Election Campaign during last year's Federal Elections has announced his resignation from the position. That is great news, for both the Labor Party & Australia!

Karl Bitar (alongside Mark Arbib & the rest of the NSW Right powerbrokers) left NSW in the sorry state that it currently is for greener pastures of the Federal politics a few years ago as the Labor National Secretary (Mark Arbib got himself on top of the Senate ticket from NSW & became a Senator in 2007).

Bitar, Arbib, Shorten & the rest of the so called faceless powerbrokers then advised PM Kevin Rudd in early 2009 to drop his "Greatest moral challenge of our generation", ie his ETS policy & subsequently lost him all credibility, and then proceeded to execute him as we all know.

Amazingly however, Bitar & Arbib arrogantly refused to take any responsibility for Labor's poor showing in the last Federal election & to this day remain unaccountable for their poor track record in NSW & Federal politics.

Therefore it is great news that Bitar is quitting his post! But don't be fooled by his "family reasons" rhetoric. Of course politicians' families do sacrifice a lot & I am not disputing that for a moment, and Karl Bitar's young family are no exeption.

What is worrying about Bitar's resignation is if his real motive is to position himself for a cushy Senate seat or a safe Labor seat in the Lower House in the next Federal election, as Arbib, Bill Shorten, Greg Combet, Doug Cameron & countless other high ranking union officials have done in the past.

So watch this space! If Karl Bitar is simply resigning in order to get into the next Parliament, the news is not as good as it seems on the surface!

Where is the good old Aussie compassion?

2011-02-16T20:48:00.007+11:00

Scott Morrison & Tony Abbott have really hit a low point in the last 24 hours by attacking the Federal Government for footing the bill for flying the asylum seekers to Sydney to attend the funeral of their loved ones who perished in the boat disaster at Christmas Island!

What do they think they are doing? Appeasing & winning the ignorant uneducated marginal seat votes, which by the way they failed to win enough of in the last Federal Election anyway?

And at what cost to human dignity? At the expense of their own reputation being tarnished (especially in case of Scott Morrison, who is basically a decent person but somehow seems to transform to a different person in his capacity as the shadow Immigration Minister)

And at the great expense of taking away the very last few shreds of human dignity from the grieving asylum seekers who have lost their loved ones in a tragedy?

Isn't it enough that the rest of the world is starting to view Australia as a redneck xenophobic & racist country? Do we need to strip these desperate grieving people of their last shred of dignity by denying them reunion with their loved ones?

Last but not least, Joe Hockey should be commanded for his integrity & dignity & for not selling out his principals.

As a Liberal voter I am ashamed of what the right wing religious factions in the party stand for & hope Tony Abbott gets his act together & stop being held hostage to their views.

All in all, three important questions in the immigration debate in Australia need to be addressed:

1) Are economic refugees a bad thing for a sparsely populated country like Australia after all? And does the main problem lie in successive governments' lack of sufficient investment in infrastructure which means our cities can not cope with larger populations? After all many major Western Cities have higher populations than Sydney & Melbourne.

2) If the situation in places like Iraq & Afghanistan is stable enough for us to turn refugees from such places away, isn't it time then that we bring our troops back home?

3) Are we really a compassionate tolerant multicultural nation or are we simply kidding ourselves?

Is Julian Assange subversive or is he merely using the internet to highlight the incompetence of our politicians in international diplomacy?

2010-12-12T22:42:00.030+11:00

The media frenzy & the hysterical political reaction to Julian Assange & Wikileaks have made is very difficult to objectively assess Wikileak's true intentions & whether the leaking of cables amounts to subversion & treason, or is simply a 21st century internet version of freedom of speech & information.

In all probability the truth lies somewhere in between!

Is Julian Assange an eccentric opportunistic narcissist? Will the leaks put covert operators' lives in danger? The answer to both questions are probably yes!

But, at the same time, has Assange exposed the incompetence and/or eccentricity & bad judgement of many political leaders & the many innocent lives lost as a result? The answer to this question is on the other hand definitely yes!

Whether what Wikileaks & Julian Assange are doing will benefit the cause of freedom of information around the world in the long run is hard to predict. But so is its probable exaggerated negative impact on the world of diplomacy!

At any case however, the current Wikileaks story highlights many interesting points:

It certainly highlights the fact that the Internet can not be fully censored, and that by itself has to be a good outcome! Are the governments going to shut down various left leaning but very reputable in the west such as the New York Times, The Guardian, Der Spiegel (and Sydney Morning Herlad in Australia)?
It also brings to question whether the western governments are only interested in freedom of speech & information as long as they control the content & scale & scope of it & their dirty laundry remains secret?
In my view the Wikileaks story also once again highlights the incompetence of the US Government in handling its affairs! Isn't it interesting how the British Government documents have not been leaked to a great extent? Or the Russian, Chinese, North Korean or Iranian Governments' for that matter?

And was the over reaction & state of panic the best way governments & politicians in the west could have dealt with the situation? All that has done is that it has made Julian Assange a martyr in the eyes of most young left wing Internet savvy people in the West!

Was it necessary to make Assange a martyr of freedom of speech? On the other hand, conspiracy theories would be asking whether CIA is behind the leaks & is using Julian Assange as a scapegoat to divert the public's attention from messier issues elsewhere? Or were the leaks fed to Wikileaks from Chinese intelligence for political point scoring purposes & in order to embarrass & corner various governments in the west?

In all probability the Wikileak story will fade away in the coming weeks & the international world of diplomacy may go back to its dirty secretive covert ways.

But the world as we know it has changed & will not be the same! And Julian Assange & Wikileaks can take the credit for that!

Political rhetoric once again fails to address the critical issue: Major banks' mistreatment of small to medium size businesses

2010-12-03T22:48:00.029+11:00

The four major banks in Australia are laughing at their customers, the Federal Treasurer & his shadow opposition spokesperson at a time when they are generating record profits whilst still enjoying government guarantees. The banks' claim of increasing funding costs seem to be disputed one minute & endorsed the next the next!

The main criticism of the banks is not the fact that they are generating record profits or whether their borrowing costs are increasing or have been stabilised as debated every second day. No one really cares if banks are making record profits! After all we are told the main reason for the GFC was the unhealthy state of most major banks!

The crucial points is this: Unfortunately whilst all the media hype & political point scoring are distracting the public by attacking the banks, the banks are continuing to squeeze the life out of most small to medium size businesses (in most sectors) by starving them of funding and/or charging them 2-3% above mortgage rates or withdrawing funding altogether!

The political point scoring & bank bashing have clouded this extremely important point. In fact it seems to be almost conveniently ignored by both the Government & the opposition whilst both sides continue to trip over each other with populist bank bashing rhetoric to appease mortgae holders.

At a time when all senior people in charge of the levers of the economy are starting to admit a two speed economy is now entrenched in Australia, the behaviour of the major banks towards non mining sectors which are still struggling to deal with the post GFC slowing down of consumer spending, floods, draught etc is unconscionable!

This is having a dual negative effect on the viability of businesses:

Firstly as mentioned businesses are being straved of extra funding or being wound up. Secondly, the the tightening of borrowing criteria is adversely affecting asset prices as propspective buyers are unable to secure funding from the major banks to buy businesses.

Ralph Norris the CEO of Commonwealth Bank of Australia

The banks CEOs meanwhile tend to ignore this important point in their derision of "whining customers & regressive socialist politicians" as they laugh all the way to the...mmmm....bank with their multimillion dollar salaries!

It is a timely reminder to all concerned that one of the reasons Australian banks did not get involved in the sub prime disaster & the CDOs (and other acronyms!) was because they were fat cats & had a monopolistic profitable control of Australia, not because they were prudent & managed well!

The latest "Target for Faraway Laughter" Awards!

2010-10-18T21:27:00.033+11:00

OK! I confess to the hard core Pink Floyd fans that the title of what I am hoping will be a frequent post, "Target for Faraway Laughter" has been inspired from a line in Shine on you Crazy Diamond, a song about Pink Floyd's founding member Syd Barrett!

Having said that, there have been plenty of "Targets for f\Faraway Laughter" in the past few weeks, and that is what this regular post will start to simply list!

Let's start with my two favourite people in Australia! Yes the PM Julia Gillard & her opposition Tony Abbott, and their first respective foray into international diplomatic travelling.

Have we chosen our leader wisely when the PM says "Foreign policy is not my thing!" Or does she mean to say "the deal with Kevin Rudd is I leave foreign policy to him, and that's fine by me because I don't like it anyway!"

And how about Tony Abbott's sharp mind? Is "avoiding Jet lag" is the best Mr Abbott can do at the top of his head in order to answer a tricky question a sad reflection of the quality of our leaders? Can you even imagine John Howard making such a huge gaffe?

Congratulations to both Julia Gillard & Tony Abbott for winning the inaugural "Target for Faraway Laughter" Award!

The great thing about my award system is that I can have as many or as few winners as I wish in every post. Here are the rest:

Kristy Fraser Kirk & her PR managers & Lawyers are a target for faraway laughter! There is no doubt that Mark McInnes had committed an act which warranted compensation or he would not have voluntarily resigned. However, Ms Fraser Kirk is now the subject of reticule due to the pompous $37m claim & the subsequent refusal to give any of the $850,000 to charity as she originally declared because there was no "punitive payout"!

Congratulations Kristy! In you acceptance speech of your "Target for faraway Laughter" you should thank your PR & legal minders for making a fool of you & themselves!

Greg Norman for announcing he's engaged again! He's looking more like an old white trash than the Great White Shark he once claimed he was!

Kristina Keneally & the NSW Labour Government: Keneally & her Government are ever present as targets for faraway laughter. My award simply acknowledges this fact! The latest stage managed spat with PM Gillard is yet another pathetic attempt to portray Keneally as a tough independently minded leader. This in my view only further qualifies her for a "target for Faraway laughter Award"!
The last award for this edition goes to the Pope & the Catholic Church! They certainly know a thing or two about miracles! How else an organisation so badly tainted by its members' inexcusable misuse of public trust could still be able to claim the moral high ground & allowed to operate? Surely only a miracle could make that happen!

So Congratulations to the Pope & Catholic Church! They have been awarded a "Target for Faraway Laughter" award!

Paraphrasing the great Dave Allen "May their God be with Them!

Is Woolworths (Australia) finally about to lose its Mojo?

2010-09-28T20:43:00.013+10:00

A definite answer to the above question will not be fully clear for at least another 18-24 months until the majority of Coles stores are refurbished & Woolworths has rolled out its "Danks" hardware stores in competition to Wesfarmers' Bunnings.

Nevertheless, Ian McLeod (above) the boss of Coles has rattled Michael Luscombe & Woolworths in the two years since he took over the ailing giant & may very well go all the way & regain the retailing Mojo back in the next few years!

The roll out of Coles' new stores have certainly been a revelation in supermarketing retailing in Australia. I have previously written in my blog about the Coles store at Stockland Balgowlah in Sydney & the innovative "Fresh Markets" retailing concepts that are being trialed in that store.

It suffices to say that Woolworths have been alarmed to the point that they have recreated the concept in a new store format in Caringbah in Sydney, even though their CEO Michael Luscombe initially dismissed the format as too expensive!.

Not that the art of copying is anything new in the Woolworths corporate culture! In fact I would consider Woolworths as master copiers! They are great at rolling out other retailers' ideas & skillful at implementing concepts better than businesses who originally created them! Just about every single new idea in various Woolworths units in the past 20 odd years has been copied from US & European retail giants. and the same applies to Coles & Ian McLeod's admiration for the likes of Walmart for whom he worked for previously. Both companies would of course rightly point out that watching competitors' ideas is a must & that is what they are doing.

The major factor favouring Wesfarmers & McLeod was however reported in the Weekend AFR on Saturday 25th September:

Coles will be contributing to approximately 25% of Wesfarmers EBIT whilst Supermarket operations are expected to generate 80% of Woolworths' EBIT in the next few years. This will giver Woolworths less scope to grow sales by reducing prices as this will affect earnings to a much greater extent than Wesfarmers' would if Coles embarked on the same strategy.

Nevertheless, whilst Michael Luscombe will be watching Ian McLeod's progress at Coles very closely, the main strategy for Woolworths will still focus on attacking Bunnings rather than Coles.
The role out of hardware stores in the joint venture with the US giant Lowes under the banner of "Danks" will commence from next year. Woolworths hope to swiftly take a big chunck of this lucrative market away from Wesfarmers.

And undoubtedly many business commentators will cheer the introduction of what they will term "more competition" in the hardware sector! he toothless ACCC & its much loathed Chairman Graeme Samuel will turn a blind eye to the ever increasing duopoly power of the two retailing giants whilst small hardware store owners go out of business!

Election 2010 Performance Cards: Who got a distinction, who got a credit & who got a pass conceded?

2010-07-20T14:37:00.018+10:00

The Federal Election is at last over & 17 days after the election Julia Gillard finally convinced the 3 independents & the first ever Greens MP to support her to form a minority Government with 76 seats (down from the notional 88 seats prior to the election) in the 150 seat Lower House.

This historic election also attracted the most intense media coverage & scrutiny of any election at any level in Australia's history. Traditional forms of media, ie print, TV & radio were fully joined by the new social media forms eg facebook & twitter resulting in all kinds of commentary which even manifested itself in the rather ridiculous situations where journalists were interviewing other journalists!

Therefore, my post is not about post election analysis! It suffices to say that the campaign was void of any major substantive policies & both leaders resorted to negative campaigns & were hardly convincing, and hence the hung Parliament we were delivered! In simple terms I would score the election as follows:

The Greens: Distinction: They took full advantage of the protest vote & the fact that voters do not hold them accountable (at least up to now) & won the balance of power in the Senate from next July & their first ever lower house seat.

Tony Abbott & the Coalition: Credit: Labour badly underestimated Tony Abbott's political skills. Not only he nearly toppled a first term Government, he will also be sitting comfortably as the Opposition Leader whilst PM Gillard wrestles with her unstable minority alliance.

Julia Gillard & Labour: Fail, then pass conceded on resit: From a notional 88 seat down to 72, Arbib, Bitar, Shorten, Farrell, Feeney & the rest of the so called faceless men who convinced Rudd to drop the ETS, then executed him & installed Gillard nearly lost Labour the election with their strategy. However, they all got rewarded with various cabinet posts despite their near failure.

Tony Windsor & Rob Oakeshott: Exam results bought! Showered with money in return for their support, if the Gillard Government performs poorly or fails to deliver on the promises, both will be severely punished by their majority conservative electorates.

And finally credit to the lone man in detention: Bob Katter: Love him or hate him, think of him as impulsive or cranky, he showed a lot of integrity by not accepting the lofty position that Windsor & Oakeshott decided to accept & stuck to his guns.

The coming months will undoubtedly be politically unstable as well as exciting & whether the Government can last a full term is anyone's guess.

The election however has left many questions unanswered, mostly for the Labour Party. The main question was starkly obvious in pictures on election night: One TV Channel had the experienced, worldly, pondering & pragmatic Graham Richardson whilst another had the cocky arrogant, blameless & self assured Mark Arbib.

The once unrivaled labour political machine that delivered labour's longest reign in the 80s & 90s with many substantial reforms has been reduced to a poll driven structure void of any vision by a bunch of political excursionists whose political CVs consists of utter failure in NSW, incompetence in Federal politics & a near loss election strategy for a once popular first term Labour Government!

Like many others, I believe Julia Gillard does not have the influence or the will to reform the Labour Party structurally simply because she is a product of the new labour herself & owes her primeministership to the powerbrokers.

It is the remaining & substantial influence of these incompetent yet ruthless & cocky powerbrokers that will result in lack of vision, policy vacuum & be the major concern in the next three years, not the minority Government!

Rudd's downfall: A win for factional powerbrokers & a loss for democracy in Australia"

2010-06-25T21:20:00.065+10:00

The factional powerbrokers of Labour Party had no choice! Poll driven politics is about doing all you can to stay in power & is not that much different to the way things are done in the world of business!

As the equivalent of the board of directors of the savage & result & poll driven modern day politics, they had no choice but to sack their equivalent of MD/CEO whose faltering performance was negatively affecting their stock price (popularity) with their shareholders (the voting public).

Labour's right & in particular NSW right have become adapt at executing their faltering leaders! They, the powerbrokers are the real winners and the main loser is democracy in Australia! As Mark Latham aptly put it on the weekend ".....the modern day Labour Party contracts its leadership to the best salesperson"

The critical point to consider now is the fact that factional powerbrokers in the Labour Party continue to maintain their stronghold on power even though their advice was in part responsible for the poor performance of the government & the policy decisions that made Kevin Rudd's popularity nosedive in the polls & for them to decide to remove him from power. NSW is another classic example of this fact!

Take NSW right as an example of why factional powerbrokers are bad for democracy:

Senator Mark Arbib & other NSW Right powerbrokers were instrumental in the election & downfall of NSW Premiers Morris Iemma & Nathan Rees, as well as the election & downfall of Kevin Rudd

NSW Right has installed 3 Premiers & pulled the plug on two in the past few years based on its own policy agenda & in order to change the party's sinking electoral fortunes. Its powerbrokers have left a trail of destruction behind for greener pastures of federal politics. They helped Kevin Rudd win the election in 2007 & were reportedly instrumental in convincing him to drop his emission trading policy. This decision was the final nail in Rudd's downward spiral in opinion polls. Then as a matter of necessity, they hatched a plot to replace him with Julia Gillard in order to win the next election! And that is what I mean by saying that the real winners are the faceless powerbrokers & the real loser is democracy.

Bill Shorten is one of the Union backe poerbrokers reportedly instrumental in Rudd's downfall

Notwithstanding my contention above, it is difficult to feel any sympathy for Kevin Rudd as a politician, although I am certain he & his family will go through a difficult time. It is universally acknowledged that Kevin Rudd's downfall had much to do with multiple factors such as his arrogance, overbearing attention to detail without actually implementing any major policy, lack of consultation, lack of delegation to his ministers, dismissive & rude behaviour & as Professor Robert Manne states in his article in the July issue of the Monthly, ..." a deep confusion & unresolved tension between words & action".

Nevertheless, ultimately it was Kevin Rudd's lack of understanding & appreciation of the powerful influence of factional powerbrokers in the Labour Party that brought about his eventual downfall and what Tony Abbott cheekily termed "Sussex St assassination". Powerbrokers (on both sides of politics, not just labour) are here to stay at the expense of democracy.

Will the bi-election in Penrith be the beginning of the end of Tripodi, Obeid, Robertson & their cronies? Let's hope so or we are doomed!

2010-06-19T00:09:00.011+10:00

The Penrith bi-election will potentially go into the record books. It is predicted to result in the largest single swing against any Government in the history of NSW & possible Australia.

Let's hope so! not for the sake of creating a record! No!

Let's hope the swing will finally send Joe Tripodi, Eddie Obeid, John Robertson, Eric Roozendaal, Premier Keneally et al the message:

The people of NSW are sick & tired of NSW Government's incompetence, scandals, financial mismanagement, cronyism, backroom deals & in fact who you are as human beings!

It is time for change in NSW, and it will hopefully start with the people of Penrith kicking the Labour Party in the guts with a strong message!

In Barry O'Farrell & his coalition team we have a group of energetic, caring & decent politicians ready to take on the mammoth task of bringing NSW back from the bottom of the rotten swamp Tripoddi, Obeid, Robertson & co have taken us down to.

Polls are starting to suggest Kevin Rudd's populist rhetoric is becoming as believable as Woolworths slogan "The Fresh Food People"!

2010-05-03T20:29:00.027+10:00

Late Friday night, since all others shops were closed, I decided to give Woolworths "The Fresh Food People" yet another chance to prove my contention that their slogan was the greatest ever successful marketing con job in Australia's advertising history!

As I tried to grab the very first mandarin my finger went through the rotten soggy back of it. Now I am embarrassed to confess I have a weak stomach! So in a reflex action I pulled my hand back & the mandarin flew in the air & splashed on the floor! (yes splashed!)

As proud as I was to yet again proving the might of Woolworths wrong & cursing their promise of "Fresh Food" as "Almost Rotten", I thought of our PM Kevin Rudd & how his continuous populist rhetoric totally contradict his now familiar major policy back downs or broken promises, and how similar that is to "The Fresh Food People" slogan of Woolworths!

Now please don't worry about me! No! The the political frustration of having had to put up with all the crap with Trapodi, Obeid & their cronies in the NSW Government & Kevin Rudd's self preservation obsession have not made me lose my mind! Not yet anyway!

This is my way of politely telling our PM, that as of today, even his most loyal left wing journalists such as Peter Hartcher & Ross Gittins of Sydney Morning Herald (Monday 3rd may 2010) are indirectly suggesting that Rudd is a self preserving political coward willing to pull back from any policy initiative in order to get himself re elected.

Ross Gittins even went as far as suggesting today that if john Howard, the climate change sceptic, had won the 2007 election, because of his political conviction & strong leadership, he would have most probably by now started the Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) which would have been as diluted as the one Kevin Rudd postponed last week!

Overall, Kevin Rudd has led a Government which has given us many broken promises for self preservation purposes, policy failures & unpractical rhetoric to buy votes. On top of everything else, Rudd Government seems to be totally void of political skills in the Senate to negotiate the passage of any of its bills with the Greens & independents. And worst of all, it is too gutless to call a double dissolution election even on policy initiatives such as Climate Change which Kevin Rudd called "The greatest moral issue of our generation"!

Although many other blogs have already listed Rudd's back flips & broken promises, let me refresh your mind with some of the major examples of grandiose rhetoric & unworkable promises, policies back flips & lies Kevin Rudd is cowardly guilty of, all as it turns out introduced or dropped in order to get him re elected:

Petrol price watch: Worked as a cunning election promise, but failed as a ridiculous policy & subsequently dropped as unworkable
Grocery price watch: Yet again another cunning but shallow election promise which failed & Website closed down as unworkable
National Broadband scheme: A $43 billion dollar scheme which so far has been a total mess & another unmet election promise. Besides a $25 million dollar "Implementation Study" and many angry ISPs, nothing substantial has taken shape as yet & not a single metre of fibre optic cable for the program installed.
Home insulation Scheme: A $2.5 billion dollar fiasco of historical proportions & lost innocent lives. It must be notes that Kevin Rudd blamed everyone else in order to "insulate" himself from any political damage. He ended up dumping the program altogether after having promised honest insulation businesses assistance by June 2010.
Boarder Protection: An absolute moral & political failure:

This is a major example of Rudd's cowardness. It also demonstrates what it meant to have leaders such as John Howard & Paul Keating who demonstrated political conviction as opposed to cowards like Kevin Rudd! Paul Keating presided over Aboriginal land rights whilst John Howard openly stopped people smuggler boats by diverting through the inhumane but effective "Pacific Solution" scheme. (I for one totally disagreed with that policy & was disgusted by the "Children Overboard" situation). But at least you knew where you stood with John Howard, and Paul Keating for that matter!

What is Kevin Rudd's level of conviction? Where is his promised "Humane" approach to asylum seekers? After a major failure to stop people smugglers sending more than 100 boats to our shores, Rudd stated "The situation in Afghanistan has stabilised, therefore we will not process refugee applications for the time being!"

OK Mr Rudd! If that is the case & all is stable in Afghanistan, please bring our troops back home ASAP!

Health Reform: failure or success not determined yet. However, so far the obvious Labour Party "stage managed" disagreement between the Labour Premier of Victoria & Kevin Rudd made a mockery a policy which may turn out to be the single best achievement of Rudd's first term. Whilst the jury is still out on this policy initiative, many experts in the field are already claiming it will be yet another bureaucratic nightmare & not much else. nevertheless, we will have to wait & see
Childcare Reform: The Government dropped its election promise of 250 additional new Childcare Centres recently claiming that the industry now had sufficient places available & there was no need for the program to expand the number of Centres!
The "Fair Work Award Modernisation Legalisation"

As I wrote in one of my earlier posts at the time, ......"The legislation is overall a failure in that it missed a great opportunity to implement "real reform". Unions' bitterness towards "Work Choices" made Gillard & Rudd miss the chance to reform industrial relations & therefore leave a major legacy!"

I still stand by my comment that "if it was claimed "Work Choices" made it too easy to sack workers, then "Fare Work Award Modernisation" will make it too difficult to employ workers!"

Which brings us to today & the Tax Reform: As I mentioned previously, even the staunchest media supporters of PM Rudd such as Peter Hartcher & Ross Gittins admit that the so called Tax Reform announced by the Government is a soft reform carefully designed to win votes by avoiding difficult decisions. Only 4 of the 138 recommendations have been taken up by Rudd & Swan! This makes Wayne Swan's grandiose announcement that ...."it's one of the biggest reforms in Australia's history" a joke!

Now you see why Kevin Rudd's policy back flips & monotonous populist rhetoric & repetative contrived phrases such as "working families" are beginning to be as annoying as Woolworths claim to the mantle of Australia's "Fresh Food People"?

Because they both use media spin doctors in order to fool us into believing they are true to their word!

Australian political landscape is void of legendary political statesmen & women

2010-04-13T21:32:00.014+10:00

Menzies, Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke, Keating, Howard & Costello! Love them or hate them, they were history making political figures of substantial political skills & calibre.

As polarising, single minded, self absorbed, arrogant & error prone as some of these people were at times or even throughout their political careers, they were a necessity for the health of our political system! Every nation needs legendary political statesmen & so does the international community, Statesmen such as the likes of Churchill, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, De Gaulle, Kennedy, Nixon, Kissinger, Kohl, Thatcher, Reagan, Brezhnev, Gorbachev and Putin!

In Australia & indeed around the world, we have been fortunate to have real political junkies of great calibre in the past 50 years. Most of these leaders by definition are polarising, dedicated & focused. They arise passion in their supporters & foes alike.

Unfortunately however, Australia in particular is now going through a dry patch void of any true figures worthy of consideration as true political statesmen or women!

Rudd, the consummate rhetoric spinning committee forming bureaucrat vs Abbott the right wing opportunistic populist? Both are full of populist rhetorics & meaningless spin without the statesman like political capability to implement any real policy!

Rudd Government's utter failure to negotiate any meaningful legislation through the Senate is a significant reflection of the rot that is setting in!

Don't get me wrong! I am not saying Rudd & Abbott are not intelligent or consummate politicians because they both are! But they are incapable of inspiring their followers & raising themselves to the levels some of the predecessors were able to.

We shall & will therefore miss the days of Keating vs Howard battles...and even Peter Costello's annoying grin! The departure of Malcolm Turnbull put an end to any politician in either houses of the parliament showing any real statesman like qualities.

Which brings me to one last current point which relates directly to one of my earlier blogs regarding the failure of "Party Based" governments of the Westminster system:

The unusual political situation that has come about as a result of the recent Tasmanian State election may be an opportunity for reform in our system of Government!

The incumbent Labour Government holding a mere 10 seats, has been given the task to form a Government in the 25 seat lower house. The Greens with their 5 seats have guaranteed not to block supply. Premier Bartlett is now considering offering the Greens ministerial positions without octal forming a coalition government!

The situation with the Tasmanian State Government will be an interesting test case to investigate whether it is possible for a governments in Australia to offer ministerial positions to independent Senators or MPs or minor parties without actually forming a coalition & still have a workable situation.

The best case scenario would be to support Noel Pearson to get elected as an independent Senator or MP, and the offer him to become the Federal Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, without interference from either major Party! Surely this is worth a try if the situation in Tasmania shows the slightest sign of workability in the coming months!

Myer's sagging share price suggests Bernie Brookes & his team have disappointed the Markets & failed Myer Shareholders & Customers

2010-02-05T20:40:00.016+11:00

I wrote a blog on 1 October 2009 questioning Myer's myopic retailing & customer service strategy in order to magnify the improvement in Myer's bottomline at the time of Myer IPO. I suggested that their flagship CBD stores aside, Bernie Brookes and his team were simply flogging off a bunch of tired old suburban stores with tired merchandising, poor appearance & skeletal staff offering absolutely minimal service. (You may wish to scroll down & read the my post)

Unfortunately for Mr Brookes & Myer, it seems that so far the markets and Myer customers tend to agree with my (and I am sure many others) sentiments. Myer shares have been trading for a mere 4 months. The share price is frequently setting all time low records & is trading at a significant discount (nearly 25%) to the issue price.

However, Myer's announcement to the ASX this week blaming tough discounting for less than impressive Christmas results is what makes me even more sceptical than I was in October last year!

Firstly, Myer were the main culprits responsible for starting the Christmas discounting war in mid October 2009. They slashed their prices so deeply that it left all other major competitors no choice but to do the same. Therefore, for Myer to blame the deep discounting for their poor results is laughable.

Secondly, perhaps Mr Brookes & his Board should employee Operation Managers who have the insight to remind the Board that in order to volume sell products in certain deeply discounted departments, face to face customer service is a necessity! And this involves adequate & preferably trained, and if it is not too much to ask, motivated staff! Most of the staff in Myer are demoralised, under trained & over worked!

For example, there is no wonder why the latest Myer announcement to the ASX admits disappointing "Electrical sales" but blames the poor results on the most obvious factors: lack of Government stimulus money & deep discounting!

Customers in a typical Myer electronics section in most suburban stores during December & post Christmas sales had to choose from 100s of discounted TV screens, DVD players, Cameras etc, plus the locked up & inaccessible iPods without having the luxury of asking a staff member for advice or assistance! Therefore, in all probability many of them simply didn't stick around! They walked out & got a similar or better offer & possibly some service elsewhere!

This makes me wonder how the Shoes Department fared in Myer's results.! My own personal experience at Myer in the post Christmas shoe sale was one of frustration! Alongside with at least 20 other customers, I got tired of waiting for the one stressed staff member on duty in the entire shoe department to attend to my request for the shoe for my other foot!

And I wonder the same about bedding, furniture, white goods.........

Nevertheless, in the announcement Bernie Brookes, Chief Executive of Myer, said:

“Against a backdrop of unprecedented early and deep discounting in the retail sector in the run up to Christmas, we now expect to achieve growth in EBIT in excess of 10% for the first half, and a continuing improvement in EBIT to sales margin. This reflects a continued disciplined approach to running the business – an ongoing focus on cost control, and rigorous inventory management."

He also stated: “While sales in the December month were disappointing, the business performed very strongly in January and the Stocktake sale was a great success."

It will be very interesting to see if Mr Brookes is accurate about Myer's performance in January!

At the end of the day, markets only care about financial results. But in case of Myer, this hell bent attempt at cost cutting seems to be a transparent attempt to artificially inflate EBIT!

And so far, neither the markets nor Myer customers seem to be taking much notice of Mr Brookes improved EBIT!

A Football Analogy to demonstrate the riskiness of the NSW Opposition's defensive strategy in the run up to the State Election

2010-01-17T20:54:00.020+11:00

The latest polls in NSW on the weekend of January 16-17th 2010 indicate that whilst the opposition holds a commanding 56 to 44 percentage lead over the Government, the voters have warmed up to the newly installed Premier Keneally, whilst they are still lukewarm towards opposition leader Barry O'Farrell.

I am going to use a football (soccer) analogy to demonstrate the risks involved in the timid & defensive strategy the opposition has used since it became obvious that Morris Iemma's position was becoming untenable.

As an avid & lifelong football (soccer) fan, for years I have had to defend the game regarding justifiable criticism about defensive football teams which play for a 1-0 win. The main strategy employed by defensive teams is to cautiously defend at all costs, and wait and take advantage of the opposite team's mistakes in order to win the game.

The are however several risks involved in defensive tactics. The main risk factors are:

1. If the opposing team throws in a creative player who scores, a defensive team selection may not have the capability to attack to score back, or it may be too late to rearrange the team to an attacking formation.

Football analogy: The Government seems to have used its last substitution opportunity before the next election well, by throwing in a new Premier who does not remind the voters of the labour powerbrokers they so intensely dislike, even if she is tagged their puppet.

2. Defensive teams are universally loathed by all but their own hardcore supporters. They lack creativity & vision and are usually uninspiring.

Football analogy: The boring quiet NSW opposition is starting to annoy the voters as much as the incompetent Government is! Bored voters, like bored spectators can & will switch off & stop following uninspiring leaders.

3. Defensive teams' players are not as popular as attacking teams' players amongst fans and are usually unknown because of this.

Football analogy: I have even written to Mr O'Farrell & asked him at what stage prior to the next election he proposes to increase the public profiles of the members of his shadow cabinet? No matter what the issue of the day is, health, transport, education, community services etc etc, not many voters know who the shadow ministers are! Given the opportunity by the media, Mr O'Farrell seems to be the spokes person for all issues

In other words, in a football analogy, the opposition in NSW is taking all of the above risks & more by sitting back and hoping that the Government continues to stumble towards the March 2011 election.

Barry O'Farrell is trying to score on the election night & get elected! Whilst this may be the most reasonable strategy considering the "Foot in the mouth" previous two election campaigns by the opposition, it exposes the classic negative aspects of a defensive team strategy to the voters.

It is universally acknowledged that most NSW voters are fed up with the Government's lack of policy and vision, incompetence, cronyism & poor management of the state. But are the voters ready to cheer & get excited for the 1-0 kind of win the opposition is gearing itself for? Or will they find the team uninspiring & boring?

The answers to the above questions will be the main determining factors of the result of the next NSW state election.

The opposition risks getting overwhelmed by its lack of attacking ploy & its seemingly "sit back & wait" strategy more than ever before. The Government has used its last available substitution wisely by installing a Premier (puppet or no puppet) who does not

a) look like, or

b) talk like or

c) behave like the stereotype self serving tainted labour politicians everyone dislikes.

So, the opposition could clearly see the weakness in the Government as a result of the overwhelming influence of the likes of Obeid & Tripodi, but instead of attacking to score, they may have allowed the Government to fill the gap by installing a new Premier who at least so far has remained a popular fresh face in the eyes of the voters.

Mr O'Farrell & his coalition partners must start to employ a more exciting, open & attacking style of play, or risk being labeled boring, defensive & unadventurous by the Government, and most importantly by the voters. In football analogy, the fans simply switch off & stop following defensive teams when they find an exciting player elsewhere!

And last but not least, as for those optimists who might think there is a long time left between now & the next election, my answer in terms of football analogy is this:

a) The referee has already looked at its watch because the final whistle is getting closer,

b) Some fans have already started to leave the stadium in total frustration & disgust by the inept display by both sides

c) Those frustrated yawning fans who are staying are feeling totally ripped off by the price they have paid to be witnessing a boring 0-0 so far.

d) However, most crucially, whilst still damning both teams, the spectators seem to be getting excited by the new American import substitute who has just entered the field in the pivotal position of Premier & seems to be breathing some life to the game!

There is a risk the excitement of watching a new player with a fresh approach to the game will encourage fans to abandon their support for the defensive uninspiring team they had initially hoped was going to win the match!

Abbott's election raises more unanswered questions about the opposition than actually answering any existing ones! Just ask the fly on the wall!

2009-12-01T21:11:00.037+11:00

Tony Abbott, the polarising ultra conservative worrier, the abrasive politician with a likable personality according to those who know him on a personal level, the Minister with a short span of attention for details according to those who dealt with him during his time in Government, and the ideological son of Bronwyn Bishop & John Howard according to himself is now our new opposition leader.

If Tony Abbott thinks he can justify or legitimise his 41 to 42 election by quoting an old LABOUR politician saying "One vote is a landslide", then he has already displayed his naivety as he embarks on the rough road ahead.

And a rough road ahead it will be! Simply because Abbott's election today, not only does not put an end to division in the party, it in fact polarises the Liberal Party more than ever before, with the worse possible scenario similar to what has happened to the Republican Party since the election of George Bush in 2000.

The main reason for this claim is due to the fact that Abbott's election in fact raises more unanswered questions about the opposition than actually answering any existing ones! Having said that, let's leave the political analysis to the so called media experts & political reporters, the same experts who had told us Hockey was going to win the spill comfortably!

Instead, let's imagine being a fly on the wall this morning & listening to the reaction to the news! I am sure some of the following comments were floating around today, some of which raise valid questions about the opposition & Mr Abbott & some which, in the great Australian tradition, would take the mickey out of them!

"Abbott claims he would be the ideological love child of Bronwyn Bishop & John Howard! How relevant are those to the young people in the 21st century in Australia?...and who is Bronwyn Bishop?!"

" Let's assume the opposition sends the ETS to a Senate Committee (Sir Humphrey Appleby of Yes Minister fame would have been proud because he would have done exactly the same about a policy which needed to be delayed!), the question remains: What is their policy going to be in February 2010? Are they really suggesting they will have a cohesive, credible policy by Feb 2010 i.e. in less than 2 months?"

" If Abbott claims "One vote is a landslide!", what makes him think he won't be challenged soon? Another spill, and only one vote would need to be reversed & he will be toppled!"

"Will this mean that after years of being ignored by all leaders, Bronwyn Bishop will get herself a decent hairdo before coming back to the front bench?"

"Since Abbott won the leadership by 41 to 42 votes, how strong will his leadership be & how much authority will he have? Would he have to accommodate every one of the 42 who voted for him?"

" How do the "Powers That be" in the Party propose to sell a polarising personality to the electorate when they have been claiming Malcolm Turnbull was polarising?"

"Are the "Climate Sceptics" conservative mob any better than the "former Union Officials" infested Rudd Government? probably not! Just as pig headed & self centred"

"All Abbott & Minchin have achieved today is letting Rudd look decisive & credible on climate change without having to explain his policy to the public!"

"What's the difference between the ruthless union aligned powerbrokers in the Labour Party & how they disregard & sacrifice the Party's best interest to protect their own power base, and the likes of Nick Minchin in the Liberal party!...NOTHING!"

"Doesn't Tony Abbott realise that Rudd & Labour Party will easily make him & his backers an election subject? ...as evident by the TV ads which were obviously produced earlier and went to air this afternoon?""Would Peter Costello be sad, or smirking today?"

"Will Minchin, Abbott & the rest of the conservative powerbrokers now attempt to finish off the bloodletting by getting rid of the talented moderate frontbenchers who backed Malcolm Turbull & instill more right wing climate sceptics in the shadow cabinet?"

"They would have been a lot more credible in the eyes of the public if they had a viable easier alternative like a carbon Tax and then attempted to block the ETS!"

"Will his spin doctors teach him to drop that constant annoying "Urrrr .......Ummmm.." after every 3rd word he utters?"

But the winning remark has to go an actual interview with Bob Hawke! When asked today what kind of leader will Tony Abbott make, he said..... "Temporary!"

More questions for Mr Abbott & his team later!

Spin at its lowest form: Liberal rebels opposing the ETS as a matter of "Policy"!

2009-11-26T23:54:00.019+11:00

Where were these so called loyal Liberal Party soldiers of integrity, who are prepared to resign their "shadow" positions as a matter of "Principal stance on a policy issue", when they were actually needed in early 2007 to tell PM Howard about Work Choices?

Mr Abbott? Senator Minchin? Mr Andrews? Mr Robb? All those backbenchers who got their 15 minutes of fame in the media in the past 24 hours but still nobody knows their names or cares who they are? Why didn't any of you have the courage to stand as a matter of principal & difference in policy issues & tell the PM his Work Choices was unpopular when you were in Government?

Mr Howard was a great PM, a strong leader & resided over the most prosperous period of our nation's history. Despite his failing to sense the deep seated resentment towards Work Choices, he at least sensed the importance of Climate Change in the eyes of the public and announced the first steps towards an ETS in 2007.

But Mr Howard's legacy is in danger of being seriously tarnished simply because he failed to address the succession planning in the Party. Mr Costello & Mr Turnbull aside, there is not a single opposition personality who has either the credibility or the broad appeal to lead the Party! And even if the likes of Mr Abbott think they do have credibility, they are forgetting that they have lost most of that credibility in the last 24 hours!

Perhaps Mr Howard failed in his succession planning because in his final term he started to believe that the people of Australia wanted him to be their PM indefinitely! Or perhaps his failure arose from his fear of the moderate forces of Costello or Turnbull making the Liberal Party relevant to the 21st century issues? Or as some commentators are suggesting, should Mr Costello shoulder some blame for the current mess? Afterall, he would have been able to lead the Party with authority & kept its policy front moderate?

Therefore, whilst Mr Howard is correct in demanding rightful credit for his part (and his team''s) in leaving Mr Rudd a healthy economy as the global financial crisis started, he must also shoulder some responsibility for the mess the Liberal Party finds itself in at the moment.

Now, the myopic right wing behaviour of the conservative rebels and aapparent personal ambitions are creating a perception of an irrelevant and out of touch party which is playing lip service to the energy sector & other big business!

I am not saying this is the case! But generally voters' perception will be the reality in their minds on election day!

Like many moderate Liberal Party supporters, I do not subscribe to Kevin Rudd's policy on ETS & find both the global initiatives as well as our Government's strategy too complex & expensive.

But like many other humble voters I appreciate two clear issues:

1. Mr Turnbull's endeavour to position the Liberal Party as an active participant in the ETS debate is imperative in the sense that

a) If the Party does not actively participate in design & implementation of solutions to the apparent global warming problem, the Government & the Greens will be given a free hand in shaping the perception of the voters, in particular young voters who booted the Party out of office in 2007. And who can blame them for taking advantage of the opportunity when they find their opposition with their heads in the sand?

b) Unlike what the right wing spin wants everyone to believe, the majority of scientists who support the evidence suggesting global warming are neither right or left wing, or politically motivated for that matter. The propaganda suggesting climate change is the "new left wing religion" is at best similar to the days of Herbert Hoover & Joseph McCarthy in the USA when all left wing voices were deemed to be communists!

2. The Government is taking full political advantage of the infighting in order to hide the clear deficiencies & flaws in its ETS policy. But at least in the eyes of the public, the Government's intentions are clearly positive & proactive.

Therefore, the so called gate keepers of the Liberal Party's principals: History will judge you harshly for taking the Party to the extreme right!

Voters, on the other hand, labour,green & moderate liberal, will neither forget your treachery today towards your leader nor your unwillingless to act on a matter of great importance to them.

Rebel Nationals & Liberals risk pushing conservative politics in Australia too far to the right

2009-11-09T22:04:00.001+11:00

Watch out the rebel Nationals & Liberals, the so called climate sceptics!

Give the moderates led by Malcolm Turnbull a chance to negotiate amendments on ETS or you will be heading to oblivion by being portrayed as a bunch of ignorant rednecks who are simply "Big Business" stooges.

It's ok to argue for your electorate & oppose the Government's policy on how to tackle it! It's ok to raise your concerns in the party room!

But don't deny the fact that Climate Change is an urgent issue which needs to be dealt with!

Even worse, don't simply deny it without presenting a viable, credible & workable alternative solution!

By simply denying climate change, you sound like a bunch of out of touch redneck peasants who have never left their small towns in the bush before! No different to the gun carrying small town rednecks in the USA!

Keep acting with your heads in the sand & you will risk everything:

Alienate the younger more environmentally conscience voters.

Make yourselves look like a bunch of out of touch redneck fools
But most importantly, you will hand deliver the Liberal Party to the arms of the religious right factions waiting to take the Party to the same dungeon that the Republican Party in the USA has been taken to. The party will be hijacked by redneck ill informed ignorant right wing!

The current refugee boats debate in Australia:Is Kevin Rudd more concerned about the welfare of the refugees or his own popularity?

2009-10-29T22:24:00.003+11:00

I will keep my post on this complex & gut wrenching subject short and simple:

I was never a supporter of Howard Government's harsh stance on refugees & the disasterous detention centres policy. Like many others, I was appalled by Howard's political exploitation of public mood at the time at the expense of desperate refugees. However, Howard was at least upfront with the public about his tough policy on boat refugees.

I am now even more appalled by PM Rudd disingenuous attempt in trying to make the problem disappear, & more importantly it seems, to protect his "teflon popularity" by shifting the refugees to Indonesia & their much harsher camps.

In my opinion, both PMs have brought shame to Australia & its proud history of compassion & fair go. However, Howard was at least upfront about his shameful policy whilst Rudd is trying to hide his in order to portray himself as a humanitarian!

Should Thomas Dux Grocer customers be told that all Thomas Dux stores are fully owned & operated by Woolworths?

2009-10-11T00:57:00.013+11:00

In May this year, Woolworths bought Macro Wholefoods, an organic food supermarket chain of 9 stores for a repoted $30m from Brett Blundy's Retail Group, which had previously sunk millions of dollars into the stores and was happy to sell its loss making venture to Woolworths (although this was denied by co owner Pierce Cody)

As reported at the time in the financial media, Woolworths were interested in Macro stores for two primary reasons:

Macro had more than 100 organic private label products.

The acquisition of the 9 Macro stores would fast track Woolworths' entry to the high margin upmarket gourmet food market as the stores would be rebranded under the newly established "Thomas Dux Grocer" division of Woolworths. Thomas Dux was already operating and would have 11 stores in Sydney & Melbourne after the rebranding of the 9 Macro stores.

Macro wholefoods was the first large scale attempt by any food retailer in Australia to duplicate the likes of the impressive"Whole Foods Market" chain in the USA. These business models attempt to sell high quality organic and/or naturally grown fresh & packaged food products at higher margins.

Macro's business model did not manage to achieve the widespread reputation or get close to the high benchmark standrads of the "Whole Foods Market" and as mentioned earlier was rumoured to have always been a loss making venture for the astude Brett Blundy (in partnership with the founder Pierce Cody).

Woolworths have always been wary of the commercial fragility of a purely organic products based food retailing business model in Australia. Generally speaking, there is an immediate & direct negative effect on retail sales of organic food products when there is pressure on discretionary income.

Therefore the "Thomas Dux Grocer" employs a different business strategy altogether. On the official website, thomasdux.com the stores are promoted as being all about rediscovering all that is good & exciting about food, with fresh fruits, vegetables & deli products as well as speciality foods from around the globe.

The Thomas Dux format has the potential to introduce an innovative, exciting & much needed retailing format to the deprived consumers in Australia (compared to the USA), and it will most probably thrive considering that the business model has been designed & implemented by Woolworths, the most capable food retailer in Australia.

Nevertheless, there are certain aspects of the way the brand is being promoted which are rather disturbing.

Thomas Dux Grocer is being promoted to consumers as (quoted from the official website & full page ads in local papers):

"We're the local store: it's the place for people who love good food to shop every day. It's a meeting place that reflects the communities we serve. .....................Thomas Dux is about being 'just around the corner'."

The wording of the description of the business on the website, and design & wording of the advertisement in the local papers the emphasis on the "Local" aspect of the business are cunningly structured to promote the business and give the impression that Thomas Dux Grocer is like a "Small local family owned start up that is now expanding!". Not surprisingly, there is no mention of "Woolworths" in any of the promotions, on the website or (I suspect, although I am yet to inspect the stores closely) at any of the stores.

I acknowledge that not promoting or revealing the parent company is not an unusal business practice, is not necessarily a deceptive or misleading practice and in fact occurs in many industries to various degrees.

In case of the Thomas Dux stores, it is the "local, small, family feel" aspect of the promotional strategy that I take exception to.

Whilst I am sure Graham "Woolworths(!) Practices Act" & ACCC would not see any contravention of the relevant sections of the Trade Practices Act with the issue in my point, I am still of the opinion that the public must be informed when a local "Small Business" they shop at and perceive as an independent operator is in fact owned by a giant corporation with a massive market share and influence. I have also made this point about the many bottle shops and pubs that are owned by Woolworths & Coles (Westfarmers) in the past.

But none of the cases have seemed to be as belatently veiled as the Thomas Dux.

In many instances, consumers continue to support small local (& family owned) businesses even though they (at times incorrectly) perceive theses businesses as being more expensive to shop at compared to larger operators.

The Thomas Dux model & image fits both of the above. It looks like a local small business start up that is expanding, and it is more expensive than many other outlets with a similar or competing offer.

Should consumers be explicity told that in case of Thomas Dux Stores, they are dealing with Woolworths as the parent company and the full owner of the business? Your comments are welcome & encouraged.

Myer Share Offer: What is the big fuss about a bunch of tired looking stores with no staff and dismal range of stock?

2009-10-01T20:41:00.001+10:00

(An edited version of this post was published as the "Letter of the Week" in BRW Wed 8th Oct 2009)

Can Department Stores survive without customer service? Can they be attractive to investors even though all over the world Department Stores have been consistently losing retail market share to Speciality Stores over the past 20 or odd years? And more to the point, can Myer sell its story successfully to investors by improving financial performance & bottom line by reducing staff levels in most stores? Also, how about Customer Service? Does it count for anything at all in Myer's retail strategy into the future? I guess speciality retailers must be rejoicing the opportunity that Myer is creating by not offering any service or advice in most of the departments in Myer stores.

Don't get me wrong! Myer share offer has been a great marketing exercise! Jennifer Hawkins can make any campaign interesting, whether it is about Myer or Rent A Loo! Investors will take notice and listen. Bernie Brookes and his team are doing a great job to get the attention of the investors they are after!

On a closer look (at Myer's share offer, not Jennifer Hawkins!), will Myer be a good investment in a retailing era that has seen department store business models progressively lose a substantial portion of their market share to speciality stores in most developed countries over the past 20 or odd years? And is eliminating customer service a clever medium to long term strategy for a department store business model?

Myer's CEO, Bernie Brookes and his team have been working very hard to get to the current stage of the process and get the business to at last after many years start to show some healthy profit.

But what has been the cost of achieving this? Most experienced and loyal Myer employees have either been made redundant or sacked (admittedly some were not the most productive). This of course is the classic razor gang corporate cost cutting strategy and once concluded will make the bottom line look healthier by simple accounting default, and a great way of making it look as though the business is performing much better financially due to productivity gains! Great and simple idea if the intention is to sell the business!
Go to any Myer department store and the level of service is non existent or at best as good as discount variety stores' such as Big W & K Mart' level of service.

in my unsuccessful attempt to purchase a new model iPod touch from a Myer store the other day, after having taken an eternity walking around the store to find someone to help me with my enquiry, the staff admitted to me that:
1. The entire Electronics Department (TVs, DVDs, iPods, Cameras & Computers) no longer had a single specifically allocated specialist staff member
2. Myer had not offered to train one of the other staff to at least enable them to provide basic advice on e.g. the differences between different models!
3. And then they informed me that the store did not have the new iPod and the next order would take up to 4 weeks to arrive!
4. On top of this, it was suggested to me that minimum staffing levels are making Myer stores prime shoplifting targets. I am sure shrinkage catches up with accounting results sooner than later!

I look at my most recent shopping experience in Myer and don't like what I see. Poor range of products & tired looking stores in most suburban locations, next to zero customer service and in many cases demoralised staff! I am not sure these non tangible factors are indicative of a Rosy retailing future for Myer!

But as worrying as the above is, the greedy way the financial media is hyping up the Myer share offer is even more astonishing & sickening. The media are acting as irresponsibly as they did in the few years prior to the beginning of the current financial mess. Not many commentators have made much reference to the above intangible factors I and I am sure many others, are trying to raise.
Is this the same media that cheered the listing of business models such as ABC Childcare & Babcock & Brown to no end?

RBA must not hike the official interest rates in Australia before Christmas!

2009-08-08T18:49:00.004+10:00

RBA would surely know that lower interest rates have helped many businesses to cope with the downturn. Due to lower interest costs businesses have not had to resort to mass sackings and in turn lower than expected unemployment has kept consumer confidence high.

Start to hike interest rates at anytime in the next few months or so, and everything will crash like a house of cards. In accordance with all the hype about performance based executive pay, if RBS causes massive unemployment and dip in consumer sentiment as a result of interest rate hikes, can we demand the RBA Board to be sacked or will they resign gracefully themselves?

No matter what the indicators are showing, any hike no matter how small, in official interest rates in Australia in October (or the rest of 2009) will shatter consumer confidence, crash the badly needed Christmas trade in the retail sector, and cause a massive spike in unemployment rate.

Inflation rate is simmering below the 2-3% target and whilst retail trade figures in August were above July and higher than August 2008, retail generally is fragile.

Just try my litmus test in trade and see for yourself: Major shopping centre car parks should be full around lunchtime 7 days a week with cars queuing up for the chance to steal the odd available parking space. Go to any shopping centre and you will see this is currently not the case!

A prime example of the inflexibility of the Westminster system of Government failing the people it is designed to serve.

2009-08-01T22:06:00.022+10:00

The inflexibility of the Westminster political system can be as harmful as the laxity of the US system!

Criticism of The shortcomings of the "lobbyist infested" USA political system is a favourite past time in here in Australia and also in Brittan.

It is correctly suggested that Presidents in the USA system of government are hostage to the the lobbying influence of political donors to their party and political campaign, as are most members of the Congress and Senate on both sides of the politics. In fact most members of the Congress and Senate vote based on the lobby pressure of their backers rather than their support or opposition to Presidents and their policy initiatives. Therefore it is quite common in the USA for members to cross the floor

The Westminster system of majority rule in the lower house on the surface does give Prime Ministers more flexibility than their US counterparts, saving the problems of getting through the Senate.

But, there is ONE major aspect of the US political system which encourages good policy initiatives and easier path to implementation, which the inflexibility of the Westminster system on the other hand prevents!

The President in the US system has the flexibility to choose his/her own Cabinet members from all walks of life without having to play the vicious "factions games" of the Westminster system. Of course I am not suggesting that the usual backroom political maneuvering does not take place in the process; because it definitely does! The negotiations in the selection process however take place on a much more broader base than just amongst the factional powerbrokers and the elected members belonging to the different factions as is the case in our system in Australia.

In the USA, the members of the Administration do not even have to be elected members of the Congress or Senate (and if they are at the time of being selected they will have to resign their parliamentary seats).

However, much more importantly, and in fact impressively, and that is the main point of my blog, they do not even necessarily have to be members of the President's own Party! Examples are the former Republican Senator William Cohen who was the Defence Secretary in Clinton's Administration from 1997 till January 2001 (When Bush was sworn in) and most recently President Obama's retention of Bush Administration's Defence Secretory William Gate in his position in the new Obama administration.

And here's my point: Our system of parliamentary majority and the requirement for all Cabinet Ministers to be an elected member of one of the two Houses of the Parliament, and the subsequent factional based selection of Cabinet members can easily prevent and or stifle policy initiatives and/or implementation.

The biggest example in my argument is the CASE FOR NOEL PEARSON to be given the portfolio of Aboriginal Affairs, i.e. become the FEDERAL MINISTER FOR ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS on a permanent basis regardless of the Government in power!

As we all know, this is an impossible suggestion. Noel Pearson is not a member of any of the Parties represented in either House and even if he was he would not toe the party line and probably cross the floor all the time!

But does Noel Pearson qualify for this position? Yes

Does Noel Pearson have the track record of policy implementation in some of the most disadvantaged communities in Australia? Yes

Have successive Governments allocated and subsequently wasted billions of dollars of taxpayer money and numerous policy initiatives in this area? Yes

Noel Pearson has just released his selected writings: "Up from the Mission, selected Writings", in my view a must read for all interested on practical solutions to the Aboriginal issues.

In his excellent review of the book on August 1 issue of SMH, Michael Sexton writes "Pearson identifies alcohol and drugs as the most direct causes (of the Aborigines' social plight) but singles out the underlying problem of what he calls the concept of passive welfare, the long term acceptance of government fund without expectation of the situation changing"

Pearson believes the appalling situation in education and health in Aboriginal communities can not be solved with legislation and funding alone, and requires the much harder "Behavioural Change". He stresses the importance of "Social Order" for Aboriginal communities, something that civil libertarians misunderstand in his view. His record in cape York peninsula speaks the practicality of his views, although some Aboriginal identities have accused him and his initiatives as too harsh on aboriginals.

Most significantly, Pearson believes the debate on the future of Aborigines stifled by the "tribalism of Australian politics and cultural life". No wonder he would never make it as a team player in the comp ex world of factional play in the Westminster system!

Yes Minister! A tribute to Sir Humphrey Appleby's famous quotes

2009-07-19T23:23:00.009+10:00

This is dedicated to Sir Humphrey Appleby, and to the brilliant late Nigel Hawthorn (who won 4 Baftas in that role). Those of have seen and loved the Yes Minister and Yes Minister series are indeed fortunte to have done so.(in my case 10 times over)

The more intensely I follow politics, the more amazed I am athow well anthony Jay and Jonathan Lynn understood the ins and outs of the public service and Government.
Sir Humphrey has of course become the classic definition of the hard nosed resistant senior public servants.

In this posting, I present some of his most brilliant one liner in "Yes MInister" and some from "Yes Prime MInister". Some quotes, I have paraphrased as my recollection may be different to the actual dialogue, and names in brackets indicate who Sir Humphrey is refering to when making the particular statement:

(Prime Minister) has no business being a politician if can't ignore facts!

Prime MInister! It takes time to get things done now!

Prime Minister, in government, a clarification is not to make things clear. It's to *put* oneself in the clear!

If people don't know what you're doing, they don't know what you're doing wrong.

'The matter is under consideration' means we have lost the file. 'The matter is under active consideration' means we are trying to find the file.

Politicians must be allowed to panic. They need activity. It is their substitute for achievement.

The Prime Minister doesn't want the truth, he wants something he can tell Parliament.

The Official Secrets Act is not to protect secrets, it is to protect officials.

The surprising things about academics is not that they have their price, but how low that price is.

It is only totalitarian governments that suppress facts. In this country we simply take a democratic decision not to publish them!

A good political speech is not one in which you can prove that the man is telling the truth; it is one where no one else can prove he is lying.

Politicians speeches are not written for the audience to which they are delivered. Delivering the speech is merely the formality that has to be gone through in order to get the press release into the newspapers.

Ministers do not believe they exist unless they are reading about themselves in the newspapers.

Too much Civil Service work consists of circulating information that isn't relevant about subjects that don't matter to people who aren't interested!

Government is not about morality, it is about stability; keeping things going, preventing anarchy, stopping society falling to bits. Still being here tomorrow!

Government is about principles. And the principle is, never act on principle!

The first rule of politics: never believe anything until it's been officially denied.

Tell the press a story in two halves - the problem first and the solution later. Then they get a disaster story one day and triumph story the next.

If you do not want Cabinet to spend too long discussing something, make it last on the agenda before lunch

Britain should always be on the side of law and justice, so long as we don't allow it to affect our foreign policy.

Diplomacy is about surviving to the next century. Politics is about surviving until Friday afternoon.

Government is not a team. It is a loose confederation of warring tribes.

You can't put the nation's interest at risk just because of some silly sentimentality about justice.

The Foreign Office are not spineless. It takes a great deal of strength to do nothing all the time.

The Foreign Office aren't there to do things. They're there to explain why things can't be done.

We must get the Government to do what teh Unions want, since teh Government always changes its policies and Unions never do theirs!

A Local Council Mayor referring to the poor and homeless in her Borough:" How would you like to be around smelly, sweaty, drunks all day everyday Sir Humphrey?"
Sir Humphrey: "I don't! That's why I never stood for Parliament!"

Government Policy and political ideas have nothing to do with facts!

(Political) clarification is not about making yourself clear, it's about putting yourself in the clear!
____________________________________________________________

I will be posting more quotes as I come across them

Calling the Federal opposition? Is there anybody out there?

2009-07-16T21:35:00.006+10:00

Whilst the Parliament is in recess, Malcolm Turnbull, Joe Hockey and the rest of the opposition front bench should undertake a wholesale performance appraisal and reflect on their disastrous performance in the past two months.

Whom were the clever political advisers who decided the opposition could go for a very popular Prime Minister's jugular and finish him off with a knock out punch? Brave, but naive and fool hearty!

Their poor showing and disastrous "Utegate" strategy's opportunity cost was inability to hold the Government accountable on issues which could have been genuinely embarrassing to the Government. As a result, the media, most of which is already pro government, has by now totally lost interest in the opposition and not a single point from the opposition gets any traction.

- The grocery price watch scheme, one of the major Rudd election commitments, was scrapped and the opposition got no traction in the media. This should have been a massive embarrassing back down by the Rudd government.

- The new award modernisation legislation is a clear payback to the Unions and will potentially threaten many small businesses' viability as well as jeopardise thousands of casual jobs. The opposition has not managed to highlight these points in an effective manner.

- The broadband scheme, another major election promise, is still up in the air and the opposition unable to score anything.

Calling the opposition! Is there anybody out there?

How to unlock doors to influencial contacts and make older folks take your maturity and opinion seriously after you turn 40

2009-07-03T23:43:00.013+10:00

I was recently invited to my high school mates' 40th Birthday bash.

The following was my off the cuff RSVP response in an email to my mates. Afterwards I thought it would make a good light hearted post on my blog:

Guys,

I'd be delighted to attend. That is of course assuming that the indigestion, haemorrhoids, insomnia, stiff joints and various other minor complaints and ailments one gets once one turns 40 allow me to get out of bed on that particular Sunday morning!

Being the most senior member of the class of 86 (and arguably the wisest, simply because unlike most of our school buddies who either can't read or write properly, I only subjected myself to the permanent psychological trauma and the poor education standards that was "(name withheld) College" for a very short period!), I reached the ripe age of 40 many moons ago. I remember it vividly! The next morning I woke up with severe indigestion and realised the entire content of my birthday celebration dinner was still sitting right on top of my stomach! And that's when all the fun began to unfold!

However, I can assure you that turning 40 has potentially got many advantages too! Most importantly, your opinion and advice will at last start to be noticed by your parents and others in their generation. Remember, I said "noticed", not "accepted"!

The older generation requires "proof" of your maturity after you turn 40. This is in order for them to actually accept or seek your opinion and even act on it. To prove your "maturity" you need to achieve some kind of "older folks" medal of distinction, something that some of the other Crimea boys who have already turned 40 probably have not. I am proud to say however that I seem to have recently achieved that distinction of maturity in the eyes of my proud parents and their friends!

And, ever since they have found out about my achievement, they are so impressed that they seem to be rushing to seek my advice on everything! I am told that apparently my achievement has come at a rather young age, and hence the perception of a "young(ish) genius" in their minds.

My dear friends, as my present to you on your 40th birthday, I will share my secret achievement with you, and encourage you to do this ASAP if you want to have "Boardroom Doors" to open to your careers, and contacts to knock on your door:

Colonoscopy!

Yes! the old folks are impressed with young people who have had this done and see it as a huge sign of both "Maturity" and "Wisdom"!

They will be impressed by this, guaranteed! And they will look up to you and seek your advice in no time!

Happy Birthday Guys! See you all at the Party!

Cheers

Rick Samimi

All the debate in Canberra about the state of Australia's economy and the merits of Government's strategy means very little to the people of NSW!

2009-06-07T22:46:00.016+10:00

Is Australia in recession even though it avoided technical recession with the 0.4% growth in the GDP in the March quarter?

Can the Government's stimulus package and other policy initiatives at least take some credit for this, the Prime Minister's uncontrollable smile suggested the other day?

Mr Rudd and his team, as well as our own Sydney politicians such as Malcolm Turnbull and Joe Hockey seem to have no regard for the plight of the people of NSW! Questions like the above, and many others like those simply mean very little to the long suffering people of NSW!

NSW has technically, effectively, mechanically, realistically, electronically and practically (use whatever term you want) been in recession ever since Bob Carr realised it was time to leave the sinking ship and resigned!

After Bob Carr's untimely desertion, there were very few Labour politicians left in town who were prepared to take on the job as a front and simply act as a rubber stamp for the powerful deal makers in the out of control NSW Right.

Morris Iemma eventually did agree to take on the job, and so has Nathan Rees. Both Men did so because they realised the position was well beyond their natural political ability or ambition, and therefore an offer they could not refuse.

There was however a major difference between the two Premiers. Morris Iemma, having won an election on his own, and his ambitious but explosive and unpredictable Treasurer Michael Costa, decided to take on the "Powers that be" in Sussex Street and do something to save NSW (and they were banished as a result). Nathan Rees on the other hand, having witnessed the demise of Iemma and Costa, knows his position is simply too compromised to be able to do anything without his masters' approval.

There is also a distinct intellectual gap developing. Michael Costa was in his own way and relative to most other politicians in the State a revolutionary if not a visionary. He had the intellectual capacity to recognise major problems the state faced and the capability to develop policies to address them. Morris Iemma on the other hand, was supposed to compensate for Costa's lack of pragmatic negotiation skills, and confrontational and abrasive personality in dealing his old mates in Sussex Street. At the end, Iemma's over reliance on his backers and trusting personality gave the deal makers the perfect opportunity to plot and execute his (and Costa's) eventual demise, which started when they blocked the electricity privatisation, and finished with on the surface clean party room rebellion against Iemma and Costa.

The deal makers, knowing that their bloodied hands had made them unelectable then chose various paths. Some took up plum party jobs in Canberra, some took up upper house positions with an eye on the Premier's job, and some continued their back room interference. This time however, they were a lot more calculating in their choices. They killed any chance of political or intellectual rebellion by installing the novice Nathan Rees as the rubber stamp Premier and one of their own as his Treasurer. The state of public hospitals, education, transport and policing are all as poorly managed as they have during the two previous Premiers' governments.

And here we are today! Michael Costa is still the only major public figure who is prepared to raise what he sees as the problems infesting the NSW Government and Labour Party! He still does not suffer fools gladly and shows his abrasive courage in his pungent pen these days.

And as for the others? the backroom power brokers of NSW right have the State and its Premier where it suits them: on their knees. NSW opposition is taking the easy route of riding the public tide to an election victory and is therefore staying out of the way. The politicians in Canberra are obsessed with the merits of the stimulus package, how to define recession and argue about who knows the obvious facts of Economics 1.01 best! ....And the people of NSW are meanwhile dealing with this very long recession in quiet desperation.

Now you see what I mean? Whether Australia avoided recession only in technical terms or not means very little when you live in recession happy NSW and are Governed by the NSW Government.

Does Julia Gillard enjoy going dining and/or shopping?

2009-05-30T20:19:00.024+10:00

The answer to the above question in the context of Julia Gillard's proposed changes to the industrial awards system, is most probably a big "NO"!

But let's hope and pray she does! For the sake of anyone who enjoys dining out, meeting over coffee and shopping when time permitting, let's hope her spin doctors and advisers encourage her to do so prior to introducing her highly manipulated legislation on awards and entitlements to the Lower House next week.

Because if she does enjoy shopping and strolling down the road for a quick coffee or lunch on weekends, then she would probably have some understanding of how drastically the retailing and hospitality sectors will be affected by the proposed substantial hikes in the minimum award wages, penalty rates, casual rates, shift loadings and allowances.

Introduction of this legislation will simply take Australia back to the gloomy days of not having any restaurants, cafes or other retail shops open after 5.30pm or on Saturday afternoons and Sundays. Retailers and Cafe/Restaurant owners will simply be unable to operate at a reasonable staffing and service level at the new proposed penalty rates and entitlements. In fact many may simply go out of business.

This legislation has as many debatable issues about its fairness as the Work Choices did. If Work Choices legislation was accused of "Removing Choices", then Julia Gillard's "Award Modernisation" is also ironically termed and a major backward step towards the past! Potential massive job losses amongst casual workers, and shops and cafes going out of business and/or closing after 5.30pm and on weekends and public holidays sound like anything but modernisation.

Julia Gillard's admission this weekend, as quoted in the Australian Newspaper on Saturday 30th May, that restaurants and cafes would have to be dealt with differently, has to be extended to most other retailing sectors such as retail pharmacy. The Minister was quoted in the paper as finally having intervened to help restaurants and cafes by writing to the AIRC (Australian Industrial Relations Commission) to create a new award covering the industry that would offer cheaper rates to the sector. She was also quoted in the same article as ..."specifically requesting the commission to establish a penalty rate and overtime regime that appropriately recognises the restaurant and catering industry's core trading times and the labour intensive nature of work in the industry."

There are many other retail sectors who are also subjected to the same difficult conditions such as what the Minister refers to in her statement above. These sectors must also be granted a more affordable award structure. For example, retail pharmacies are by law required to have at least one fully registered pharmacist present during all opening hours, and if located in shopping centres, which many are, to trade seven days a week. The point is that most successful small business retailers rely on their labour intensive service levels as their main competitive advantage, a point which is in fact essential in case of provision of service in community pharmacy.

Where is the fairness for small business owners? Many (eg pharmacies and hair dressing salons) will still have to rely on labour intensive business structures and will simply be forced to pay the proposed hikes in penalty rates; and stay open and operate seven days a week! Under Julia Gillard's proposals, not only their overhead costs will increase by as much as 20% in some sectors, they won't even have the option of reducing staff levels in order to try to serve their businesses as the new unfair dismissal laws since the last elections are yet to be tested in courts.

But Julia Gillard must not rely on the current unfair dismissal laws as a way of hoping that her legislation does not have the potential to cause a massive wave of unemployment. The inherent nature of the legislation has the potential to force businesses to sack their casual employees and reduce services in order to survive, and in the process disadvantage many younger voters who voted for Gillard and Rudd in the last election.

There's is of course a carefully crafted propaganda turned urban myth that is the cause of all the anxiety about the issue of awards and entitlements amongst workers and labour politicians, and here it is:

Unlike what the unions want everyone to believe, not every employee wants or needs to work Monday to Friday till 5.30pm and be at home every evening and every weekend! Not in the retailing and hospitality sectors anyway! The ACTU and various unions have cleverly and successfully made this perception the minimum benchmark standard of any IR debate! And whilst true in some cases, specially employees with families, it is simply not applicable to the majority of the younger casual workforce in the retailing and hospitality sectors.

These two sectors are the main providers of employment opportunities for many workers who due to their circumstances are considered casual employees. For example, secondary and tertiary students find their best chance of supporting themselves whilst undergoing their studies through casual employment in retail or hospitality sectors.

These employees are more than willing to work when shifts become available regardless of time or day of the week as their availability varies regularly subject to their other engagements. On top of this, the various award systems in both sectors have rigorous casual holiday and sick leave loading provisions for casual rates. Julia Gillard's proposals substantially increase the costs of employment and therefore risk many job losses amongst these casual workers.

Therefore, the opposition has every right to oppose this legislation in the Senate next week and ask Julia Gillard what she actually means by constantly stating that ".....neither employees nor employers should be disadvantaged under this legislation"......?

The good news however, and it must be acknowledged, is that both the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister have so far demonstrated a pragmatic approach to most of the Government's major policy debates. They are both skillful political negotiators and seem to be willing to listen to concerns of business groups.

And hence my hope, that Julia Gillard does get to spend some time dining or shopping! If she does, I'd welcome her at my store at Macquarie Centre so that I can explain the ramifications from a retailer's point of view.

Neither the Government nor the opposition seem to instill confidence

2009-05-29T16:10:00.009+10:00

The Rudd Government's Budget ended up as vague, soft and politically palatable as any crafty political adviser would have dreamed of. That must have irritated the Opposition immensely. Therefore, the spin doctors unnecessarily caused a headache for the Government by advising Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan not to mention the "$300b".

A quick look around most OECD countries (except Germany) provides a disturbing trend. It seems that regardless of political persuasion, most parties in Government are dealing with the finanicial crisis in pretty much the same manner as the Rudd Government is, i.e. with a combination of stimulus packages, infrastructure spending, budget deficits and in some cases tax cuts. And interestingly enough, most opposition parties are screaming and calling these strategies catastrophic and claim superior political management skills! But they are not exactly uttering any numbers when they are asked about how much they would borrow in the short term to stabilise and deal with the current crisis.

Why is this a disturbing trend in my view? Because it demonstrates that neither the sitting governments nor their oppositions are confident in their respective policies in dealing with the situation. To make the matters even more muddled, neither side seems to want or in fact know how to deal with the long term negative effects of their respective and hap hazard policies either. This applies not just to Mr Rudd and his government, but also to the opposition. Otherwise Mr Turnbull and Mr Hockey would come up with properly backed figures themselves rather than pushing the $300b agenda.

Therefore, overall, in the absence of specific and credible policies and figures by the opposition, there can be little criticism of the Government's approach at the moment.

However, the opposition does have a point which merits further debate. The Government has offered very little tax relief for small to medium businesses in the short term. Mr Turnbull at least offered a tax roll back against losses program in his response speech, which Mr Rudd would be wise to take note of. Other than that, life goes on and Kevin Rudd will retain his high popularity rating and Mr Turnbull will comfortably hang on to his leadership position for teh time being.

It seems the only thing that can hurt both sides is in fact a double dissolution election. Surely the electorate would see an early election as a self indulging escape route before the storm for Mr Rudd, and would hold the opposition to task for their stubborn determination to block a popular Prime Minister who claims to have a mandate in several issues.

Will Kevin Rudd's honeymoon finally be over after the release of the May Budget?

2009-04-25T10:55:00.006+10:00

Mr Rudd and his Treasurer should be careful! The honeymoon period of making populist gestures, rhetorical statements and giving cash handouts is over!

The May Budget will undoubtedly contain some unpleasant cuts and Mr Rudd will have to start making unpopular decisions for the first time since he came to power in Nov 2007.

Mr Rudd may have won Government at a time when the longest global economic expansion came to a sudden and shuddering halt. But, in fact it is widely noted that in many ways this has turned out to be a massive and lucky political winning ace for him! It's allowed him to get on with his social rhetoric and populist statements, give cash handouts to bribe voters, jet set around the world and enjoy the grandiosity of being a world leader (a lot more than John Howard ever did in his 11 years may I add), and at the same time to blame all the major issues he needs to deal with (and keeps postponing) on the Howard Government's policies and the global financial crisis!

So far, we have not had a Prime Minister who has proven his leadership credentials! All we've had is an astute political operator who's enjoyed a very long honeymoon and used it in the cleverest populist way possible to make his electoral position stronger. (and in the world of politics this is a commendable achievement of course).

Let's just hope Mr Rudd has not started to believe his own speeches! (as Sir Humphrey points out in Yes Minister). Because what is ahead is not as easy to deal with as making populist gestures about issues that play with the electorates' emotions but do not subsequently require substantive policy!

The May Budget will be the first and clearest gauge of the calibre of Mr Rudd's leadership and political skills in dealing with adverse situations, as well as Mr Swan's future as the Treasurer and Mr Tanner's role as the danger man lurking in his shadows waiting for the first viable opportunity to pounce!

The Government inherited a $22b surplus and due to a variety of global financial factors, as well as its own policies, is now left with a very empty pocket, just as the May Budget is due to be presented!

And this is where the key issue lies!

Mr Rudd and Mr Swan must not be allowed to get away with blaming the deficit and any unpopular decisions contained in the Budget on the global financial downturn and the severity of the recession in our major trading partners such as Japan and the USA! They must be held accountable and give a detailed explanation of what they did with the $22b surplus they inherited when they won in November 2007, and to explain how they are going to save jobs with one dimentional policies such as direct cash hand outs!

I am involved in retailing and would be the first to acknowledge that unlike what the opposition mischiefously wants us to believe, the fiscal stimulus has had a reasonable positive effect on retail sales and has managed to maintain the consumer confidence so far. As a result, retailers in Australia are so far in a much better shape than in Japan, UK or the USA. For this, Mr Rudd and his Government must be applauded and the opposition simply ignored!

However, the stimulus could have and should have covered a much wider range of potential factors such as reduction in nonsensical taxes such as Payroll tax and other redtape in order to encourage businesses to keep jobs. On top of this Julia Gillard's job destroying new award system should have been shelved or at least delayed till 2012.

I guess all we can do at this stage is to wait for the May Budget night! I wonder if the TV viewing of the reading of the Budget and subsequent commentary and interviews on the night manages to break all previous rating records on Australian TV!!!

Well, when you think about the perilous position of the immediate economic well being of Australia and the real possibility of 7-8% unemployment in the near future, you'd think it should be the highest TV rating night of all time! :)