RIP Gough Whitlam

tobe said:
Im pretty sure Bob wasnt treasurer either. He had a couple, Bill Hayden being the last before he was dismissed. Im pretty sure Bob was leader of the ACTU till being parachuted into parliament and then parachuted into the leadership deposing Bill Hayden just before the 83 election.
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying Bob Hawke was Whitlam's Treasurer, but that AB was getting confused which PM had Keating as a Treasurer (it wasn't Gough, it was Bob).

And Bob Hawke did serve (if that is the word) as Treasurer.

After Keating's failed coup in June 1991 for about 48 hrs.
 
Bill Hayden

he was a good man, my family only stayed together because of him. He was the local member and when dad took off and mum had 6 kids under 7 (pre single parent pension days) he broke the rules and made the kids wards of the state and mum the guardian. Dad came back years later and because of the kids mum took him back, I came along a few years after that. Without Bill I probably would not exist.
 
well its bloody difficult to place labor treasurers,

all f-ups look alike

should have wrote simon and jim were Gough's f-ed up treasurer


Australia's government

Labor, makes marvelous promises, gets in, goes bust, gets kicked
LNP, gets in, pays for previous promises, gets electorate upset about paying for previous promises, gets kicked
repeat

Labor is fiscally incompetent, but if they weren't ocassionally elected,
there wouldn't be anything for the LNP to do
If somebody could teach a labor treasurer to count, what amazables they could accomplish
 
Last edited:
Yes - but he did an awful lot that didn't cost much ... equal pay for women, anti discrimination, opening land rights talk

And a lot of what he did was essential and long overdue - sewer systems for western Sydney

If only our current pollies wouldn't spend all their money on "assessments" and just do.

AlmostBob said:
well its bloody difficult to place labor treasurers,

all f-ups look alike

should have wrote simon and jim were Gough's f-ed up treasurer


Australia's government

Labor, makes marvelous promises, gets in, goes bust, gets kicked
LNP, gets in, pays for previous promises, gets electorate upset about paying for previous promises, gets kicked
repeat

Labor is fiscally incompetent, but if they weren't ocassionally elected,
there wouldn't be anything for the LNP to do
If somebody could teach a labor treasurer to count, what amazables they could accomplish
Click to expand...
 
AlmostBob said:
well its bloody difficult to place labor treasurers, all f-ups look alike
Click to expand...

I can understand why people think like that, and why people in particular dislike Keating, particularly given the following quote -

"The first thing to say is, the accounts do show that Australia is in a recession. The most important thing about that is that this is a recession that Australia had to have".​

Which is a shame because they (Hawke and Keating) achieved a lot in their (combined) 13 years, including -

- The floating of the dollar,
- Deregulation of the financial sector,
- The Prices and Incomes Accord (later evolved into enterprise bargaining),
- Quite ambitious reductions in tariffs, quotas and subsidies
- Reforms to how the RBA uses Monetary Policy (inflation targeting)

All these things have played very important roles in the performance of the Australian economy of the last 30 yrs or so.

Critics of Keating point to the $96bn in debt that was left behind in 1996. That is true, but these same people typically they overlook that almost $40bn of that debt was Lib/Nat legacy debt from the Fraser Government (John Howard was Treasurer from 1977 to 1983).

Costello and Howard came in and did clear the slate on the back of the strong economy they inherited (thanks ALP) and over $70bn of asset sales (so it wasn't all good budgeting) - and they did even more reforms (Wallis / the GST, etc)

I do think Costello > Keating as a Treasurer (despite this cartoon from 1996).

prosperity1.gif

​
But Keating would rank pretty high on my list.
 
Last edited:
I agree. I think Keating was the most forward-thinking treasurer Australia's had. He understood that we were part of a global economy. People tend to denigrate Labor treasurers saying that they're not fiscally responsible, but the fact is that no Liberal treasurer has had the vision that Keating had.
 
It isn't vision if it can't be paid for
's what I wrote, think of the amazables Labor may accomplish, if they could count
if they put in place what they promise, in a manner fundable,
till they do learn what a dollar costs, it will be more " 'its time' and hope we don't have to explain what its time for "
 
Lord Shanghai said:
History will judge Gough kindly.

His electoral loss in 75 was akin to Churchill's post-war electoral defeat. Both must have felt very betrayed.

Most people have forgotten that there was a mini GFC in 74-75. People voted with their pocketbooks and ousted poor Gough, even though the international economic mess was not his doing.



Alan Jones is a real hypocrite and troublemaker. My friends in the GLBT community find his hateful mouthings to be especially repugnant. According to Chris Masters' book (see below link) he has an unhealthy interest in young boys' bodies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown:_The_Power_and_the_Myth_of_Alan_Jones
Click to expand...

Fascinating read... I am amazed at how much power he wields and why he is still on air.
 
I kinda like the mix

Labour make the tough decisions that cost money ... Liberals get back in power and restore the financial balance ... Labour make the tough ...
 
property_girl said:
I agree. I think Keating was the most forward-thinking treasurer Australia's had. He understood that we were part of a global economy. People tend to denigrate Labor treasurers saying that they're not fiscally responsible, but the fact is that no Liberal treasurer has had the vision that Keating had.
Click to expand...

The forward thinking policies of Keating that you mention; which are they specifically?
 
Hoffy said:
Exactly. The furphy of free Uni was disbanded by the ALP. It was a very short term failed experiment.
Click to expand...

I'm (genuinely) curious to know your thinking behind it being a failed experiment.

And in asking that I fully agree that that user-pays (or user-contributes) is by and large a fair system - so I'm not arguing for a return to fee-freedom.

But, otoh, my impression of the higher education sector in Australia at the moment is that it is at near breaking point.

So if fee free education was a failed experiment, what do we call the current situation? (fees are only part of the current problem imo, but they have fed growth in the sector beyond a point that seems sustainable to me).
 
MarkB said:
Critics of Keating point to the $96bn in debt that was left behind in 1996. That is true, but these same people typically they overlook that almost $40bn of that debt was Lib/Nat legacy debt from the Fraser Government (John Howard was Treasurer from 1977 - 1983.
Click to expand...

You don't hear that $40bn figure mentioned because it is absolute nonsense. The inventor of the number is "progressive" economist, former ALP government economics advisor and hater of all things liberal, Stephen Koukoulas.

Here is how he conjured up the number:

http://www.marketeconomics.com.au/2024-labor-or-liberal-government-debt

"When John Howard was Treasurer, net Government debt rose at a steady pace, hitting 7.5% of GDP when Fraser lost the 1983 election [wrong, it was 7.5 more than a year later when the ALP were in power] In 1996 dollar terms, 7.5% of GDP is around $40 billion which is in fact the real level of net government debt ?inherited? by the Hawke Government when it won the 1983 election."

Despite the obvious fact that the ALP had been in government for 13 years by 1996 (why didnt they pay back the debt rather than add to it), it is a grossed up number of a ridiculous forecasting rationale based on the wrong number.

Net debt when Howard ceased being treasurer was approx $9bn or 4.8% (not the 7.5% he used) of GDP. As opposed to more than 17% when the ALP left.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/bp1/download/bp1_bst10.pdf

With regard to asset sales, it is true that much of the success in repaying the debt was due to that. This should never be a criticism though (not suggesting you are), it is merely the continuation of the aggressive privatization strategy commenced and planned to be continued, by Hawke/Keating. Another strong legacy of their time in office.
 
The Hawke-Keating government was the most reformist we've had:

- industrial relations/productivity improvements
- reduction of tariffs
- shipping industry reforms (waterfront)
- floating the AUD
- was the first to recognise native title
- Redfern speech (which even Abbott acknowledges was a watershed moment)
- abolished the two-airline policy
- proposed superannuation scheme
- encouraged relations with Asia
- allowed foreign banks entry into Australia
- began the republic debate

The LIbs would be hard pressed to come up with a quarter of the policies or innovative ideas in any of their terms. The Libs' raison d'etre is to maintain the status quo, no matter how much the world is changing or the ground rules shifting; not to improve it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
18 year property cycle
Replies
10
Views
2K
redwing
redwing
J
What do you guys think of Inala, Brisbane?
Replies
6
Views
2K
egga
E
D
Release equity and buy facebook shares
2
Replies
39
Views
7K
hobo-jo
hobo-jo
MTR
How can this happen in Australia?
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
lizzie
lizzie
P
Foreign mortgages, the UK to be specific
Replies
2
Views
1K
Paterson00
P
Back
Top