A late arvo offering of reptile swine before pearls ...

 

What is it with the lizard Oz and the hive mind? 

Have they turned slacker? Dame Groan often appears on a Tuesday, and is often saved by the pond for a next day treat.

But what are the cratering Caterist and Lord Downer doing appearing in the shallow waters of a Tuesday? They're usually front and centre explaining those song lyrics about not liking Mondays ...

What with it being a late arvo post, this casting of swine before pearls will likely see many pearls miss out on the swine. 

But the pond must keep its mission uppermost in mind, a true and diligent account of the workings of the hive mind, and must clear the decks for a possible swarm of reptiles on the morrow. 

To cope and to keep herpetology specialists informed, the pond simply had to organise a late arvo splash.

On the other hand, there's nothing much to learn.

Do the maths. Dame Groan long ago established that she was the spirit of Enoch Powell born again in the antipodes.

It doesn't take a four minute read to be reminded that Dame Groan hates pesky, difficult, intruding, invasive, invading, uppity furriners from the core of her being.

So it goes ...

Do the maths; high migration isn’t an economic positive, Sadly, both sides of politics have been captured by pro-immigration lobby groups; property developers, universities, big business, the bureaucracy, some ethnic groups and show little inclination to significantly reduce migrant intakes.

The pond hopes that anyone featured in the opening snap considers taking defamation action, considering the tag ...The migrant experience today is different to that of more than twenty years ago, when their commitment to Australia was generally very strong. Picture: AAP

Those with a better memory of long lost days than the pond might recall that way back when furriners of twenty years ago were a shifty, wretched mob, lacking commitment to Australia.

And back before then, there were shifty, tricky boat people, definitely weak-kneed and weak-willed in their commitment to Australia. Pauline made a career out of it, and the lying rodent made a career of her careening about in full dress bigotry.

It turns out that this is a perennial, never-ending problem ...or so Dame Slap, channeling Pauline, suggests.

Over the years Dame Groan's barely disguised bigotry and hostility has been paraded to the lizard Oz hive mind, so it was a tad optimistic of the pond to expect anything different this day.

Over the years, I have written a great deal about the economics of immigration. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve never thought economic considerations should be the primary driver of a country’s immigration policy.
This should be dictated by the kind of society we want to be and the requirement for social cohesion. A country’s immigration policy should reflect the preferences of its citizens; it shouldn’t be driven by the self-serving entreaties of vested interest groups.
The reason the economics of immigration matter so much is the argument that the economic benefits of immigration are so substantial that the downsides of accepting large migrant intakes just need to be managed.
The purported gains include increases in real incomes, meeting skill shortages, the attenuation of ageing and greater tax revenue. In practice the economics of immigration, along with many dubious empirical studies, have been used to justify governments accepting large numbers of migrants without public approval. The evidence is overwhelming in Australia: the public wants lower migrant intakes and has done so for some time.

As usual, there's a villain standing in the way of full Trumpism, Anthony Albanese delivers a press conference at Donnybrook in Melbourne. Picture: Luis Enrique Ascui

That kept Dame Slap in full Enoch Powell rage. There were rivers of blood emanating from her keyboard ...

Survey after survey underscores this point but governments of every persuasion have refused to be swayed.
Higher migrant intakes enlarge the size of the economy but do not necessarily increase per capita output, at least in the short term. Higher intakes lead to an immediate capital shallowing and lower productivity, at least until capital formation can catch up. This can take as long as 20 years. The more skilled and younger are migrants, the greater the economic gains. But these gains largely accrue to migrants themselves rather than to the population at large. Most migrants, particularly those entering under temporary visas, are not skilled.
The fiscal impact of migration depends on the composition of the migrants. Humanitarian migrants impose a large fiscal drain while only some skilled migrants generate more tax revenue than they receive in direct and in-kind benefits. Because migrants age, the impact of immigration on the age profile is inconsequential.
Do these economic considerations provide a real basis for a government overriding the legitimate preferences of citizens when it comes to determining the size and nature of a migration program?
A similar question was raised by Douglas Murray in his book, The Strange Death of Europe: Immigration, Identity, Islam, published in 2017. According to Murray, “it has been claimed that immigration is an economic benefit for our countries; that in an ‘ageing society’ increased immigration is necessary … and that globalisation makes mass immigration unstoppable”. He carefully examines some of the key economic reports used in Britain and other European countries to support the case for large migrant intakes. In particular, he notes the use of “exceptional cases” – the migrants who succeed in magnificent ways by earning large sums and establishing businesses. But these exceptional cases deliberately camouflage the large number of migrants who don’t succeed and remain dependent on government welfare benefits year after year.

Douggie's one of the UK Speccie mob, and is beloved of John Anderson and the like, so naturally his bigotry deserved a snap, British journalist and political commentator Douglas Murray. Picture: (sic)

How soon before the bald-pated one, determined to make the most of Trumpism, appeared in a snap?

You have to wait for your visual pleasures and earn them with a slog through the groaning thickets of hate, fear and loathing, dressed up as data ...

In Germany, for instance, more than half of the income support benefits provided by the state are taken up by migrants although migrants make up less than one-fifth of the population.
When it comes to Australian studies, the same bias is clearly detectable. There is even a section of the Treasury, the Centre for Population, that regularly churns out reports favouring high rates of immigration. But it is entirely possible to reach different conclusions.
Consider the Treasury’s estimates of the lifetime fiscal impact of different types of migrants. When it comes to primary skilled migrants, particularly those sponsored by employers, there appear to be substantial net fiscal gains.
But very quickly the fiscal impact becomes negative when secondary skilled, family and humanitarian visa holders are considered. The net fiscal drain of each humanitarian visa holder is close to $400,000. Note that these estimates don’t include the costs borne by the states and territories.
A similar study conducted recently by the UK Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that low-paid migrant workers in Britain cost the taxpayer more than $300,000 by the time they retire.
Pro-immigration economists will highlight the economic benefits of young, skilled migrants while failing to add that these migrants make up a small proportion of the total intake. Net overseas migration until recently hovered at 500,000 a year but the permanent skilled migrant intake makes up a little more than 130,000 of this total and this latter number includes secondary applicants, mainly accompanying spouses. Do the math – most migrants entering the country don’t make a positive fiscal contribution.
It is also clear that many temporary migrants, including international students, are happy to game the system to stay in the country. This has led to a huge build-up in the number of appeals against rejected visa applications.
At the end of 2024 there were more than 80,000 pending appeals before the Administrative Review Tribunal compared with 14,000 a decade ago. The cost of this process is borne by taxpayers and the migrants get to stay in the country in the meantime.
The e61 Institute has looked at the rising rate of visa-hopping in Australia. In 2009, only 2.5 per cent of those receiving graduate visas sought another visa compared with 25 per cent in 2018. Visa-hoppers are typically employed in low-skilled jobs and earn less than other graduate visa holders. They generally come from low-income countries such as Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

At last, cue the mutton Dutton ...Peter Dutton delivers an address to the Lowy Institute in Sydney. Picture: John Feder

Strangely, Dame Groan determined he'd been captured by the mob of quiche lovers ruining the country ...

There is also the point that any study of the economic impact of immigration undertaken more than 20 years ago is basically irrelevant. In those earlier years, there was essentially only a permanent migration program. The migrants made Australia their home and many didn’t have much contact with the countries they had left. Their commitment to Australia was generally very strong.
The migrant experience today is different. Most migrants enter temporarily, although many intend to seek permanent residence. Through What’sApp and the like, they have constant contact with those in the countries they left. Cheap travel means they can visit regularly. Indeed, even those who have qualified for humanitarian visas will sometimes visit the countries they have fled.
Sadly, both sides of politics have been captured by pro-immigration lobby groups – property developers, universities, big business, the bureaucracy, some ethnic groups – and show little inclination to significantly reduce migrant intakes.
There are some announcements from time to time – Labor’s plan to cap international student numbers, the Coalition’s vague intention to cut the permanent migrant intake – but nothing comes of them. Indeed, the number of international students in the country is the highest on record. Roping in tame economists is just part of the strategy.

She really is a most excellent hater ... could a bombing help?

And so to the careening Caterist, in full election mode, and taking four minutes out of precious life with  Liberals must pitch to Camden, not Canberra, in budget reply, We can confidently predict the Opposition Leader’s budget-in-reply speech will be met with the instant scorn the mainstream media reserves for conservatives.

Once again the mutton Dutton led the way, and once again the pond wondered if it was possible to take a decent snap of the lad, Thursday’s speech by Opposition Leader Peter Dutton will be the most important he has made in his 23 years in federal parliament. Picture: Nikki Short

As an aside, of late the reptiles have been running heavy on a warning, This article contains features which are only available in the web version, Take me there

No, not there, but it tickles the pond's fancy each time it turns up, which is more than can be said for the Caterist, going full Milton ...

The competition watchdog’s report on supermarket price gouging was not the blockbuster Anthony Albanese might have hoped for on the eve of an election.
Coles and Woolies may be making fat profits, but the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission found no evidence that anti-competitive behaviour had pushed up the price of cooking oil, lamb or hot cross buns.
Milton Friedman was right all along. Inflation isn’t made at the checkout; it is made in Washington or, in our case, Canberra.
“Consumers don’t produce it. Producers don’t produce it. Trade unions don’t produce it,” Friedman said in a 1978 lecture. “What produces it is too much government spending and too much government creation of money, and nothing else.”
That salient fact is unlikely to be acknowledged in the rhetoric or substance of the federal budget on Tuesday.
Indeed, it is almost certain to be the most fiscally irresponsible budget since 2013, when Wayne Swan abandoned his promised surplus and went for broke. We’ve been paying for it ever since. Swan committed $14.3bn for a fledging disability care scheme that became the cash-guzzling National Disability Insurance Scheme. He locked in $9.8bn across six years to implement the optimistically named Better Schools plan.

The old hits are the best if you happen to be an expert whisperer of flood waters in quarries, and then came a snap of a couple who didn't get it ...Finance Minister Katy Gallagher and Treasurer Jim Chalmers at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: Martin Ollman

The pond guesses a few might have words to say about the Caterist dusting off shopworn Milton and trying to flog it as new, but it's all much of a Caterist muchness, an electioneering tale of woe ...

The commonwealth’s direct contribution to government schools increased by 71 per cent in real terms across the next eight years, from $14.7bn to $25.1bn. The schools, sadly, got worse.
Good governments rise above the daily cut and thrust to imagine the country they would like it to be 10 or 20 years hence.
Poor governments begin with a fixed three-year horizon that grows ever shorter. For Jim Chalmers on Tuesday it will be about seven weeks.
The drop to the Sunday newspapers of further subsidies for energy bills is the kind of low-grade stunt the government has been reduced to as it tries to buy its way out of trouble. It follows other big-spending announcements, such as the $8.5bn expansion of Medicare bulk-billing the Prime Minister announced in February. Only $1.2bn of that is likely to be committed in Tuesday’s budget. The rest will be spread across the three years from 2026 to 2029, a detail Albanese’s advisers decided not to include in the announcement press release.
It also will add to the growing burden of recurrent spending that has been cemented in place by Labor. A decade ago, federal spending as a proportion of GDP was steady at between 24.5 and 25 per cent. The new normal under Labor is at least two points higher than that and getting closer to three.

Swannie was the next villain on parade, Wayne Swan

The Caterist did his very best to like Jimbo ...

The Treasurer sees no reason to apologise for government enlargement. If anything, he seems proud of it as someone who believes in big government.
Those with a more orthodox perspective might be tempted to see Chalmers’ speech to the Business Council of Australia in February as a sign that his thinking was maturing. He admitted that public spending had helped keep Australia out of recession across the past two years.
“But we know that the best kind of strong and sustainable economic growth means growth led by the private sector,” he said.
It is encouraging to hear Chalmers use the adjectives “strong and sustainable” to describe economic growth rather than the “inclusive economic growth” he once espoused.
Yet before we hail this Damascene conversion, we should invite Chalmers to elaborate on his choice of the word best. Does he know of any forms of strong and sustainable growth that aren’t driven by the private sector? When he says the economy “is at its best when it’s private companies powering growth and propelling us forward”, is he aware of any other forms of propulsion?
Budgets have become more predictable and formulaic over the years and we can confidently predict that Tuesday’s will be more unsurprising than most. The overall size of government spending will hit a new record, even allowing for inflation.

... but it was too hard even for someone as strong-willed as the Caterist, so the reptiles had to rush in an AV distraction featuring petulant Peta ... advising Armageddon was upon us,  Sky News host Peta Credlin says almost everything the Albanese government has done has made a “bad situation worse”. The government has announced tens of billions worth of policies which have been matched by the opposition in the lead up to the hotly contested election. “Every day now from Labor, there's yet another spending announcement in the hope they will bribe you with your own money,” Ms Credlin said. “Tomorrow night, the Treasurer will deliver a spendathon, vote-buying budget and the Opposition leader will respond on Thursday with a ferocious critique of three years of bad government.”

With her glowering presence in place - the pond was sorely tempted to drag out its Addams Family joke again - the Caterist turned to his usual climate science denialism, and then spent much energy quoting from an MRC report, as incestuous cultists are wont to do ...

There will be more pie-in-the-sky policy nonsense about a Future Made in Australia without committing to the fiscal measures that might attract inward investment, such as a reduction in corporate and income tax.
There will be no change of direction on energy policy or any relaxing of the government’s commitment to its impossible 2030 climate goals.
Peter Dutton’s speech on Thursday evening will be the most important he has made in his 23 years in federal parliament.
It is his opportunity to spell out how he will stop the growth in government and begin to wind it back. He has promised to cut the 36,000 public service jobs created by the Albanese government in Canberra. He has promised a much-overdue line-by-line review of government grants, starting with the most ridiculous ones.
A recently published Menzies Research Centre report reveals the Albanese government approved 77,000 grants between June 2022 and December 2022. Approved programs included $1.1m to decolonise lactation care among First Nations women and $318,000 towards “a process of subverting and renegotiating souvenir tea towels”.
The money saved by cutting out this kind of nonsense is relatively small but it would pave the way for bigger savings, such as the $16bn it will cost taxpayers to forgive student loans, equivalent to about $1500 a household.

It goes without saying that it's all the fault of the ABC, and in particular ...Sarah Ferguson

The relentless harridan did down a hapless Pete, completely unable to get a word in ...

We can confidently predict the Opposition Leader’s budget-in-reply speech will be met with the instant scorn the mainstream media reserves for conservatives. As usual Dutton will struggle to get a word in edgeways in his Thursday evening interview with the ABC’s Sarah Ferguson. Perhaps he should tell her he has something more important in his diary, like shampooing the cat.
His speech must be targeted for Camden rather than Canberra. He must speak to the outer suburban and regional seats where the cumulative pain from mortgage payments, energy bills and supermarket shops is hurting. His audience is the people who can tell you the price of every item in their grocery bag without referring to the receipt.
As a footnote, let’s give credit where it is due to Australia’s most popular supermarket chain.
In 2024, this column took Woolworths to task for avoiding the word Easter in marketing hot cross buns. Woolies has learned its lesson. A pack of six Easter traditional hot cross buns is on sale for $4.40. We may not be witnessing the busting of inflation but at least we’re witnessing the busting of woke.
Nick Cater is a senior fellow at the Menzies Research Centre.

Not a major exercise from the Caterist. Nothing so bold as his quarry predictions, but still even a minor work from a master of bullshit should be savoured ...

Why this day he was almost down there with Uncle Leon when it comes to spin ...

You didn't have to hide it on page 2. The body was on page 1 ...

...and the story was a hoot ...The Trump Administration Accidentally Texted Me Its War Plans, U.S. national-security leaders included me in a group chat about upcoming military strikes in Yemen. I didn’t think it could be real. Then the bombs started falling. (archive link)

How the pond would prefer to be elsewhere ...

Circling back, that was all an elaborate set up for the arrival of Lord Downer, third member of the reptile triptych, offering Political limbo is no answer to our decline, It is possible that the Labor Party or the Coalition will win an absolute majority. Still, what could we expect from a hung parliament?

The opening collage was one of those hideous reptile compiles, wisely uncredited, which the pond now thinks is a sign that AI has taken over the hive mind, Political parties that won elections should be held to account for their policies, for which the public had voted, by the Australian people at the subsequent election.

It was tedious and banal all in one, and was followed by another of those peculiar warnings, This article contains features which are only available in the web version, Take me there

No, not there, here, as Lord Downer was quickly into his stride ...

In the British parliament there is something called the Salisbury convention. Named after the Marquess of Salisbury and introduced in 1945, the convention guarantees that the House of Lords – where the government seldom has a majority – will pass legislation that was included in the winning party’s election manifesto.
It makes sense and helps to facilitate the democratic governance of the country.
We have nothing like that. Opposition and minor parties continually amend or defeat government legislation in the Senate regardless of whether the government promised at the previous election to make the changes the Senate blocks.
So, as we head for the next election, the major political parties should adopt an Australian version of the Salisbury convention – named after an Australian instead of the Marquess of Salisbury, of course.

What a wise old owl he, and to back him up, the reptiles dragged in a rat in the ranks for a Sky Noise outing,  Former Labor minister Joel Fitzgibbon warns a hung parliament could have a “chilling effect” on the Australian economy. Mr Fitzgibbon wants Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton to agree on a pact ahead of the election to get behind whoever wins government to guarantee supply, therefore sidelining the minor parties. “This is an idea to save the Australian economy from what could be a disastrous hung parliament,” Mr Fitzgibbon told Sky News Australia. “I was chief government whip in the last hung parliament – I saw it very close up, and it’s very, very ugly and it has the potential to put a chilling effect on the Australian economy.”

Bugger off Joel, this is Lord Downer's turf, he doesn't need help from a rat to set the teal bells pealing an alarum ...

That would mean if Labor or the Coalition won a majority in the House of Representatives, the winning side would be able to fulfil its election promises.
That would help assuage the cynicism of a public that had heard promises from politicians that were not delivered.
Sometimes election promises are not delivered because the government can’t get the legislation through the Senate.
I know what the counterarguments are going to be. The Senate, unlike the House of Lords, is elected. Yes, it is, but in a disproportionate way that does not reflect the opinions of the Australian public in general. It is gerrymandered in favour of the smaller states.

Say what? Did Lord Downer just talk of an unrepresentative swill? Has he taken to channeling the French clock man on his way to Paris?

Or does he just love doing impressions?

Fair's fair, if the pond showed Addams Family restraint there had to be some sort of reward ...

Opposition parties will claim that the promises of the winning party are flawed and that they themselves have some kind of a mandate.
Well, they didn’t get a majority in the House of Representatives, and that defines who governs our country. They can scrutinise, amend and even defeat legislation that is introduced but was not part of an election commitment.
But political parties that won elections should be held to account for their policies, for which the public had voted, by the Australian people at the subsequent election.

The reptiles sensed that His Lordship was flagging, perhaps even floundering, so they sent in the dog botherer to help ... Sky News host Chris Kenny discusses how the two major parties could avoid the “prospect” of a hung parliament in the upcoming federal election. “While everybody is worried about the prospect of a hung parliament and minority government, some people are thinking about how we could possibly avoid this situation,” Mr Kenny said. “The major parties ought to deal with this, and just basically do a deal that whoever wins the most seats in the lower house can form government with the support of the other major party, it will be a neat way to freeze out the Teals and the Greens.”

Did they select that snap of the mutton Dutton to show he could really imitate the dead eyes of a shark?

It was way past time for the boogeymen to turn up, and so Lord Downer turned to the perfidious greenies and that dreadful Holmes a Court man...

In the lead-up to the 2025 election it’s time we had a debate about this and seriously thought about it. After all, one thing is certain about the next election: neither the Coalition nor Labor will have a majority in the Senate.
Commentators also are speculating that the next parliament will be a hung parliament. I’m not sure. It is possible that the Labor Party or the Coalition will win an absolute majority.
Still, what could we expect from a hung parliament? That depends on the composition of the parliament. There are three possible scenarios to consider.
First, Labor wins the largest number of seats and has an overall majority with the support of the Greens. The Greens already have said they would never support a Coalition government. That’s an eccentric position to take if they wish to retain some negotiating clout.
Labor knows it will continue to govern with the support of the Greens no matter what.
The Greens may be able to sabotage particular pieces of legislation, assuming the Coalition in opposition agrees with them – and although that seems an unlikely proposition it can happen. But otherwise, their support for Labor is already given.
Second, it is possible that Labor and the Greens are not able to secure a majority and the teals backed by Climate 200, founded by Simon Holmes a Court, hold the balance of power.
The teals won’t tell you who they would support in motions of confidence and supply in that situation but my guess is that privately Holmes a Court would prefer a Labor government. But if the Coalition secures more seats than Labor they will feel under some obligation to support a Coalition government on matters of confidence and supply.

The reptiles offered a snap so he could be identified if he turned up in the neighbourhood, Simon Holmes a Court is founder of Climate 200.

It turned Lord Downer quite Shaksperian ...aye, in that sleep of tedious death or dullard prose, what dreams might come? Ay, there's the rub, the chance to snore through a Lord Downer column ...

But here’s the rub. If the Coalition has the largest number of seats, it will have won those seats on a manifesto. It has not rolled all of this out yet but we do know it wants to move towards nuclear power, cut government spending, liberalise the industrial relation system, crack down on union rorts in the construction industry and so on.
But Holmes a Court and the teals are more of the green-left persuasion and they are likely to oppose all of these reforms. If they did, then a Coalition government would not be able to do many, if any, of the things it promised and that it regarded as necessary to revitalise Australia. The Coalition government would be hamstrung from the very beginning and after three years the public would rightly question what the point of it really was. After all, the government would have changed but nothing much else would have happened.
One solution to this is to ask Holmes a Court and his teals to make a commitment to an Australian Salisbury convention. They don’t need to tell us before the election who they would support in a hung parliament but they should make a commitment to facilitate the passage of legislation that would implement promises made during the campaign by the winning political party.
If they didn’t do that, the Coalition would be better off refusing to form minority government with the support of the Holmes a Court teals. It should make it clear that Labor should continue to govern and the teals should give Labor confidence and supply even if the Coalition had more seats than Labor.

Dear sweet long absent lord, did Lord Downer just suggest they go into a huge sulk, a complete funk, and take their toys home? Did the sight of Bob Katter contribute to the funk?

Nah, Lord Downer has no principles and no care. He'd get down with the teals in a trice, or with honest Bob for that matter ...

In reality, the Coalition probably would take power if it could but it would be a very hard three years for it, and the Coalition’s future beyond that would be questionable, having failed to implement what it believed to be necessary reforms for Australia.
The third scenario is that the Coalition could form government with support of the genuine independents such as Dai Le, Rebekha Sharkie and Bob Katter.
That might be a bit easier for the Coalition, these independents being less left-wing than the teals and Greens.
Whichever way you look at it, the country would be much better off with a majority government, be it Labor or Coalition.
At the moment the public mood is one of deep disappointment with Labor so its re-election is not a given.
The immediate challenge for the Coalition is to make sure it offers an attractive package of reforms, including control of spending, an honest pathway to reduce energy prices, the curtailment of excessive union power, and a slashing of red and green tape for investors.

However you look at it, the pond suggests that this Lord Downer word salad was one of his best, a bit like an iceberg lettuce. A kind of verbal equivalent to Liz Truss's lettuce ... 

Full of water trying to pass as insights and flavour ...

Finally, a tragedy for Canucks. They've had some rough, unnerving news of late, but this story takes the cake, and so there could be no room for a cartoon.

The pond could sense the moose herders grief-stricken and howling in pain, with not even a serve of maple syrup enough to console them ... 

But their suffering and loss made a fine way to end, because if there's one thing that binds together Lord Downer, the Caterist, Dame Groan, and beefy boofhead Joe, it's delusions of grandeur ...

Off to Russia Joe, and here's hoping there's a gulag just for you ...