Julia's Reign

[chasmac]

Are Roxon and Evans staying until the next election?

 

[Rob42]

Are Roxon and Evans staying until the next election?

Yes, both on the backbench, so no messy by-elections, etc.

 

[Rob42]

http://www.news.com.au/national/pm-...-to-destroy-govt/story-fncynjr2-1226570172009

Messier and messier. One small error by the PM in this piece - it won't only be marginal seat MPs who are damaged by this white-anting: it may well be Labor MPs in previously safe seats, which will become marginal seats at this rate.

 

[ACT Crusader]

I can understand the Evans resignation and all that but the Roxon one is interesting give what has been said about the PM knowing well in advance. So Roxon was promoted knowing she wanted out? There must have a pretty toxic relationship between the PM'a office and McClelland's.....

The timing of the resignations and announcing of election date is understandable though. We're in campaign mode no matter what some are saying and it's pretty relentless stuff even for a sitting MP (Moana Pasifika) let alone a Cabinet Minister. If Evans and Roxon aren't engaged in the job then it would begin to show very very quickly in campaign mode.

 

[ACT Crusader]

http://www.news.com.au/national/pm-...-to-destroy-govt/story-fncynjr2-1226570172009

Messier and messier. One small error by the PM in this piece - it won't only be marginal seat MPs who are damaged by this white-anting: it may well be Labor MPs in previously safe seats, which will become marginal seats at this rate.

If certain sections of the media (and poll watchers) are to be believed an ALP seat with a 5% majority is a marginal

 

[BPC]

I can understand the Evans resignation and all that but the Roxon one is interesting give what has been said about the PM knowing well in advance. So Roxon was promoted knowing she wanted out? There must have a pretty toxic relationship between the PM'a office and McClelland's...

Given the poor polling data facing the ALP, it may be just like the last NSW election - those who don't have the stomach for 6 to 8 years on the backbench are leaving early to avoid the rush. I suspect that there will be a few unemployed (and unemployable) ALP members on the job market on 15 September.

 

[Scotty]

I can understand the Evans resignation and all that but the Roxon one is interesting give what has been said about the PM knowing well in advance. So Roxon was promoted knowing she wanted out? There must have a pretty toxic relationship between the PM'a office and McClelland's...

The timing of the resignations and announcing of election date is understandable though. We're in campaign mode no matter what some are saying and it's pretty relentless stuff even for a sitting MP (Moana Pasifika) let alone a Cabinet Minister. If Evans and Roxon aren't engaged in the job then it would begin to show very very quickly in campaign mode.

Yes, but was it the chicken or the egg?

Did she decide on the timing of announcing the resignations, then decide to announce the election, or the other way around? I suspect the announcement of the resignations of two Gillard supporters brought forward the announcement of the election date. She wanted to try and balance out not having her supporters in their position for too long with leaving enough time before an election to announce re-shuffles.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Yes, but was it the chicken or the egg?

Did she decide on the timing of announcing the resignations, then decide to announce the election, or the other way around? I suspect the announcement of the resignations of two Gillard supporters brought forward the announcement of the election date. She wanted to try and balance out not having her supporters in their position for too long with leaving enough time before an election to announce re-shuffles.

she didnt want to go to caucus without the threat of an election that had already been announced because they mght have got to thinking about things other than who to replace Roxon and Evans with?
i cant remember does she pick or do they vote and she allocates or what?

 

[ACT Crusader]

she didnt want to go to caucus without the threat of an election that had already been announced because they mght have got to thinking about things other than who to replace Roxon and Evans with?
i cant remember does she pick or do they vote and she allocates or what?

PM picks Cabinet. It's been one of those things that have been discussed to reform but a PM will never support a change so never gets any real momentum.

 

[ChargerWA]

It's ironic that the Government's much hyped mining tax has failed to raise any revenue and due to negative publicity surrounding it has most likely hurt confidence in the mining industry actually leading to less revenue from the mining sector.

Not really a glowing recommendation of this governments economic credentials.

Ideologically I support the notion that in the boom times Australia should make efforts to ensure Australia gets its fair share of profits from the mining industry, but the timing and implementation of the mining tax has been a monumental cock up.

 

[MrTimms]

Ideologically I support the notion that <Insert Notion>, but the timing and implementation of the <Insert Plan> has been a monumental cock up.

Fixed.

Pretty much sums it up.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

It's ironic that the Government's much hyped mining tax has failed to raise any revenue and due to negative publicity surrounding it has most likely hurt confidence in the mining industry actually leading to less revenue from the mining sector.

Wouldn't it be ironic that people criticizing the mining tax for gaining no revenue would also criticize them for hurting "confidence" in the industry? Given that if the mining tax gained revenue this year while commodity prices were down (the real driver of mining profits/confidence) it would be hurting the industry?

Ideologically I support the notion that in the boom times Australia should make efforts to ensure Australia gets its fair share of profits from the mining industry, but the timing and implementation of the mining tax has been a monumental cock up.

But wouldn't this "no revenue" result show that they haven't hurt the industry while performance isn't on the rise?

Anyway, how long do people think the business cycle is? You've got to introduce it at some point. I can't see why now wouldn't be a good time, commodity prices have been on the rise and are predicted to continue rising in the medium/long term. It wouldn't make sense economically to leave them paying tiny royaltees while plenty of other industries are suffering as the result of the higher $AUD and lack of skills because workers are off to the mines all of a sudden, and while the companies effected by this tax will have profits increasing exponentially.

I'm not a supporter of the tax she put in. It almost seems like the mining companies came up with it themselves. But the concept doesn't seem screwed up in any sense. If anything they have been way too late introducing the concept. It could have come in smaller and smoother if anything.

 

[chasmac]

Are BHP and Rio and Fortescue effectively exempt from paying the mining tax?
I'm not fully aware of the detail surrounding the mining tax, but I do recall that there was definitely some horse trading to get it approved by industry at the time.
Overall, I think the concept is sound, but am suspicious that the concessions made have bastardised it.
Also, is the mining tax the same thing as the super profits tax?
If anyone has a link to some of the commentary then please post it.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

Are BHP and Rio and Fortescue effectively exempt from paying the mining tax?

Any coal or iron ore company making over $75 million in profits here pays the tax. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerals_Resource_Rent_Tax

Also, is the mining tax the same thing as the super profits tax?

Nope, the super profits tax was the original. They had just copied a similar scheme to what the petroleum industry is on. http://www.ato.gov.au/businesses/co...htm&pc=001/003/117/003/001&mnu=0&mfp=&st=&cy=

But it was unpopular and went from that to the MRRT, (wiki page above).

If anyone has a link to some of the commentary then please post it.

Well this was a good explanation (of the original super tax) I found on google. Explains the concept and once you've got that it's simple to follow the commentary. http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-resource-super-profits-tax--what-is-it-20100511-usnu.html

 

[Inside Shoulder]

Any coal or iron ore company making over $75 million in profits here pays the tax. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerals_Resource_Rent_Tax

Does this actually answer the question?
Twiggy's never made a profit has he?

 

[chasmac]

Thanks Bru.

 

[Scotty]

http://designbuildsource.com.au/gillard-government-scraps-construction-and-productivity-probe

Gillard has scrapped the planned independent construction productivity probe because the Victorian government didn't like that they were trying to appoint a guy that may well have conflicts of interests and has been tied to the Labor party in the past.

Once again a good idea has been destroyed by politics.

Other news in the construction industry, Shorten releases the new building code less than a week before it is to be enforced on Commonwealth projects.

 

[Scotty]

HIA looked into the benefits of increased productivity in the construction industry. Hard to see why a responsible government would want this:

http://designbuildsource.com.au/lift-construction-productivity-to-boost-australian-economy

• For every dollar generated by a one per cent productivity increase in residential building, there will be an additional $4.19 of GDP created in the wider economy
• A one per cent productivity increase in the residential building industry will generate an additional $863 million of GDP a year in a constrained labour market. Under less than full employment, this figure increases to $1.15 billion
• A one per cent increase in productivity of the entire construction sector is worth an estimated $2.36 billion of additional GDP a year
• A reduction in ‘inefficient’ taxes on housing, as identified in the Henry Tax Review, to lower the cost of residential building by one per cent, would raise residential building activity by around 0.6 per cent and increase GDP by an estimated $780 million.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

@chas , no problem.

Here is some more commentary on the figures released today.

http://theconversation.edu.au/mining-tax-shortfall-the-experts-respond-12105

.........
Rather than consulting with the states on reforming the taxation of mining across the board, they took the easy option by allowing the mining companies to deduct any royalties paid to the states. That created a problem for them from day one because the states simply started to raise the level of their royalties, knowing that the effect would be to reduce the amount of profit available to be taxed by the Commonwealth. We saw that in WA and in NSW.
.........
The real problem is the design of the tax. It only applies to coal and iron ore, a result of the knifing of Kevin Rudd and the abandonment of the Resource Super Profits Tax which would have applied to all resources at a rate of 40% compared to the MRRT’s effective rate of 22.5% and narrow resource base.
.........
Is there a solution? Anyone for a tax at 40% on all resources earning super profits? And not just the mining sector. Tax all super profits. The Big Four banks come to mind.

These are mining companies whose effective tax rates were in 2010 between 13% and 17% Their effective tax rates today after the MRRT are likely to be much the same. They can pay much more tax. The money is there; the Government will isn’t.

 

[Kentucky]

Gillard's future if she loses? By election in Lalor or backbencher