The never-ending reptile jihad was on again today, with Rice on the boil, and Wong being piked ...
Wong dodges questions on Higgins cover-up claims
Labor frontbencher Penny Wong has refused to accept that cover-up accusations she made against Linda Reynolds and Fiona Brown over the rape of Brittany Higgins were baseless.
By Stephen Rice and Elizabeth Pike
The pond has no idea who reads this navel-gazing stuff, but perhaps if you're a member of the cult you might find it interesting...
Defence stories also burbled along...
‘Biggest reform in 50 years’: Defence stripped of procurement
Heads to roll as Richard Marles overhauls Defence Department to boost performance
Three underperforming branches will be combined, with a new agency to control about 40 per cent of defence spending.
By Ben Packham and Noah Yim
That brought out Ben, always packing it ...
What will change with all the same people at senior levels of the new defence delivery agency? While welcome and timely, this is also a pretty flimsy announcement from Marles and Conroy.
By Ben Packham
Inevitably the bromancer was also enraged, so the pond had to send Ben packing ...
Different titles for top brass but same result: no change
If this Defence reshuffle has any consequence at all, it will contribute to a new round of paralysis as boffins try to game new structures, while leaving all the real problems completely unaddressed.
It was, for the bromancer, a remarkably short - 3 minutes said the reptiles - bout of pique and indignation, with just two snaps offering a distraction:
Sorry, the pond is trying to lower the temperature of the relentless, presumably AI bot scraping that's going on at the moment - so many meaningless hits being scored - but the link is there for anyone wanting to cut and paste the bro's words into their diary ...
Others will realise this is just part of the long standing campaign by the bro to become Reichsmarschall des Grossaustralisch Reiches (after all, it if was good enough for Göring) ...
Over the decades I’ve seen countless such Defence reorganisations. These three groups were indeed all centralised together until GWEO and naval ship building were peeled off into separate groups as a sign of their importance. You can make the case that they’re better off as separate agencies or that they’re better off centralised. One of the endless grooves of recurrent karma-like cycles of birth and rebirth in Defence is that reforms in one direction are always succeeded a little while later by reforms in the reverse direction.
Each set of reforms allegedly solves all the problems of the past.
It probably is the case that when one agency became three there was a needles and profitless proliferation of higher ranks. Peter Jennings has written that in the 20 years from 2003, the number of star officers (brigadier and above) in the ADF doubled, while numbers in the Senior Executive Service in the civilian defence bureaucracy rose by 80 per cent, while our numbers of actual war fighters stayed much the same.
We certainly have too many generals and too many senior bureaucrats, and not enough soldiers who can fight a war.
But still, everything is wrong with this Marles announcement. The government claims it is a fundamental change more important than anything in five decades – so where are the supporting documents? One and a half pages of a press release in vague general terms and a meandering press conference. That’s it?
Who knew fundamental change required so little actual ministerial work.
The government rightly recognises one of the big problems with our defence acquisition is that we change the specifications for the platforms we acquire again and again. This reform is meant to address that.
But the problem is not essentially found, or solved, in departmental flow-chart changes.
Australian defence has faced two key problems over the last 15 years. One is a dire lack of ministerial leadership and discipline. The government says it wants a mature ship, for example. Defence chooses a design in development. Nobody in Defence is reprimanded or demoted. The minister accepts the Defence preference and cabinet signs off on it.
The old structure could work perfectly well if there were tough-minded ministers across the detail who led their portfolios, demanded results and got rid of ineffective leaders in uniform and in the bureaucracy.
The heads of the three agencies to be merged already have independent relationships with their relevant ministers.
If the new merged agency reports directly to the minister and controls its budget without intimate co-ordination with the ADF or the secretary of the Defence Department, it simply becomes the new Defence Department. Or you get even more red tape, mandarin infighting and bureaucratic blather.
The other problem is that neither Labor nor the coalition in government has been willing to spend anything like the money necessary to do what it claims it wants to do strategically.
Every Defence press conference includes an acknowledgment that we face the most challenging strategic circumstances since World War II, the Defence equivalent of a welcome to country ceremony, and then proceeds to do nothing about it.
Marles repeated his preposterous claim that he’s made the biggest increase in defence spending in peace time. This increase is “across the decade”, by which he means the decade ahead.
So a “commitment” to increase spending in 2034 is claimed as the government having already made a huge defence spending increase. That is utter baloney. The government is spending almost exactly the same proportion of GDP on defence as it inherited when it came to office.
And as every strategic analyst in Australia knows – you cannot pay for a credible defence force and acquire nuclear powered submarines from that quantum of money.
Utter baloney?
Well it is a variation on "nuts"!
As for how things are going in Gaza, this day the Australian Daily Zionist News was muted, but at least Wilcox wondered ...
Doesn't a pardon mean acceptance of guilt?
Apparently the news of the feds returning to the old colonial game, in the style of King Donald in Venezuela, wasn't enough to appease the bro ...
Interpol for the islands: AFP chief Krissy Barrett’s Pacific push to counter China
Australia will lead a UN police summit to establish a Pacific regional policing bloc, directly countering China’s expanding security influence across the region.
By Geoff Chambers
As for news of the devastating floods in Asia?
Sorry, natural disasters are routinely censored at the lizard Oz.
For that you'll need to head off to an actual news organisation ...Death toll tops 800 as intense storms hammer Asian countries
Meanwhile, Dame Groan was on hand to add to the sense of tepid, endless repetition...
The header: ALP energy rebate is another hand-out we can’t afford, It’s a narrow path to tread. Inflation figures are killing rate cut hopes and power bills are soaring. Energy rebates offer quick consumer relief, but they may also be making the problem worse.
The caption for the wisely uncredited wretched collage: Reserve Bank head Michele Bullock and treasurer Jim Chalmers have walked a narrow path, but surging electricity costs threaten to derail the anti-inflation fight.
These days the old biddy is a two trick pony, alternatively bashing migrants and bashing energy, though if you put it all under the heading "we'll all be rooned by sundown", it's just one trick ...
But the real trouble with narrow paths is there’s always a risk those travelling along them can deviate from the track. And if there’s a steep incline on either side, the consequences can be brutal.
The thing is that it’s not just the RBA walking – stumbling, even – along the narrow path, it’s also the government. The plan of the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, was to ride the naturally occurring downward path of inflation while maintaining the rate of unemployment around the 4 per cent mark.
All around the world, inflation was easing after the lifting of the supply interruptions of Covid and then the war in the Ukraine. While it was slower going here than elsewhere, some judicious cost-of-living measures, particularly electricity rebates, would ease the short-term pain for households before the rate of inflation fell back to the target band of 2-3 per cent.
In fact, Chalmers initially regarded the electricity rebates as a sort of miracle cure. They would lower the headline rate of inflation, which in turn would encourage the bank to cut the cash rate. It was quickly pointed out that the bank considers the trimmed mean CPI figure that nets out subsidies. By Chalmers’s logic, he should have gone even harder with the subsidies!
It all seemed to be going reasonably well, with the bank cutting the cash rate three times this year, even though it wasn’t entirely clear that inflation was sustainably within the target band.
The bank’s February decision, for instance, looked particularly premature, with the trimmed mean still above the target band. As it turned out, there was an over-reaction at the time to the presumed economic impact of the imposition of tariffs foreshadowed by the Trump administration.
Please don't ask the pond to comment.
Isn't it enough that the pond presents the old biddy moaning away in all her gory, accompanied by her boring visual distractions ... RBA Governor Michele Bullock after the latest decision to keep interest rates on hold at 3.6 per cent. Picture: NewsWire / Nikki Short
The old biddy's default setting is whine and moan ...
It was the first release of the comprehensive monthly CPI figures, so there may be some noise in the data. But it looks like inflation may now be on the way up, having failed to achieve the midpoint of the target band and staying there.
There is almost universal acknowledgment that the cash rate will not be cut at the final meeting of the bank this year. It’s also unlikely that any further cut will happen in the first half of next year unless economic conditions deteriorate significantly. There is some talk that the cash rate could even be increased next year. Any relief for mortgage holders looks a long way off.
This is the context in which the government must decide whether to extend its universal electricity rebates. Recall that at the last budget in March, the Treasurer decided to award these rebates for six months only. At a cost of around $2bn for a six-month extension, it’s not a cheap decision.
One suspects that Treasury advice would be to terminate the rebates. Any further deterioration in the fiscal position should not be considered given the prediction of a decade-long run of budget deficits. Moreover, the impact of lifting the rebate on the headline rate of inflation will have to be confronted at some stage; it’s best to get on with it.
The alternative view – and one assumes taken by Anthony Albanese – is to continue the rebate. It is electorally popular and what’s $2bn when the government is spending close to $800bn annually and the deficit is projected to come in at around $40bn this financial year
The risk is that these rebates will become a permanent outgoing for the federal government. Given the likely upward path of electricity prices, notwithstanding the messaging about renewables being the cheapest form of new energy, the political option seems likely to prevail.
The broader point is that the Treasurer’s economic strategy is fraying, mainly because of the complete inattention to fostering productivity growth and the excessive increase in government spending. Any expansion in the economy is quickly hitting supply constraints, which in turn generates higher price pressures.
As always Jimbo was at the back of the aged groaner's ire, Treasurer Jim Chalmers faces a tough decision on energy rebates. Picture: AAP
Eventually the old biddy sputtered out ...
More than 80 per cent of new jobs over the past two years have been either directly or indirectly funded by the government. It’s this spending that has kept unemployment low, not market forces.
Further budgetary pressures are also emerging. Notwithstanding the pledge to constrain the growth of spending on the NDIS, the indications point to an ongoing unsustainable escalation in the costs of the scheme because of the rise in the number of participants, particularly young ones.
A botched deal with the states in which a separate scheme – Thriving Kids – was to be established for autistic and developmentally delayed children will lead to an increasing burden of higher hospital costs being borne by the federal government. And bear in mind, putting dollar figures in one scheme rather than in another doesn’t do anything to improve the budget bottom line.
As the year grinds to an end, it has been a good one politically for Labor. A massive electoral victory in May, an opposition divided and positionally uncertain, and the passing of amendments to the EPBC Act courtesy of the Greens add up to triumphal year for Labor.
The fact remains that there are serious clouds on the horizon when it comes to the economy, even if there is a tick-up in business investment associated with the construction of data centres.
It looks like both the government and the Reserve Bank have failed to navigate the narrow path of achieving both inflation within the target and low unemployment. Unless the government is prepared to constrain wasteful and excessive spending as well as address the real impediments to productivity growth, the likelihood of interest rates staying where they are, or even increasing, will be locked in.
The pond doesn't know how long it can keep going with this sort of apocalyptic doomsterism.
What about a decent bit of reptile rage about the war on Xmas?
Sorry, the pond starts each dystopian day with the reptiles ducking King Donald's latest outrage or war crime.
Come on reptiles, the advent calendar began on 1st December, and if you can't offer samples of demented King Donald's latest incoherent assault on a female reporter, surely you can dig up a dinkum 'war on Xmas' story?
For a bonus, the pond was torn, with Geoff chambering a round, urging us all to get on board with dementia-laden King Donald...
Domestic politics driving wedge between Labor and Coalition on Xi threat
Minimising threats posed by Xi Jinping’s People’s Liberation Army and Chinese Communist Party puts Australia at odds with the United States and undermines the national interest.
By Geoff Chambers
In the end, it was a short, barely two minute damp squib of a read, a feeble word salad of waffle, as this sample shows...
The Prime Minister has also ramped up Australia’s huge flow of aid to Pacific nations. At the same time, he has shown reverence to Xi and Chinese Premier Li Qiang after they removed China’s unfair trade bans on Australian products and resumed high-level business and military leader dialogue.
Senior Coalition figures are opposed to supporting Labor’s approach to China but understand they must get their messaging right. The Liberal Party election review, due to be released ahead of Christmas, will repeat warnings following the 2022 defeat that the Coalition is failing to woo back aspirational Chinese-Australian voters who have traditionally backed Liberal MPs.
After losing electorates such as Bennelong and Reid to Labor, more Liberal seats were lost at the May 3 election including Menzies, Deakin and Banks.
The Liberals have lost more seats with significant Chinese-Australian voters to Labor than they have to teal independents.
While support for AUKUS and the Quad is bipartisan, Coalition MPs believe Labor’s broader approach to China is now partisan. A weakened Coalition, which needs to win back seats with high numbers of Chinese-Australian voters, must strike a delicate balance separating the actions of the PLA and CCP from the economic and trade benefits flowing from China.
Elbows up, lettuce.
The pond felt comfortable turning to ancient Troy for a bout of despair ...
The header: No party’s survival is guaranteed in new era of volatile politics, The Liberal Party’s existential challenge is writ large in a landmark electoral analysis as gender and age gaps widen – but Labor’s long-term future is not guaranteed either
As soon as the pond hears "existential", it reaches for its Sartre gun ...
The caption for the opening snap: The beginning of the opening ceremony for the 48th Parliament in the Senate chamber in Canberra last July. There are challenges for both Labor and the Coalition as their long-term vote share declines, they can no longer rely on rusted-on voters, and support for minor parties and independents is on the rise. Picture: Martin Ollman
(and the archive link for those wanting access to that opening flourish)
The pond isn't sure that screen caps will defeat the insatiable bot traffic but it's worth a try, especially as the opening was exceptionally tedious, even by ancient Troy standards ...
The pond had hoped that ancient Troy's outing would give succour and comfort to the lettuce, but even the lettuce began to wilt under the assault by way of waffle.
After that opening mumbo jumbo barrage of blather about artificial divisions of voters into meaningless age groups and into tribes (women!), the reptiles naturally followed up with a snap of Ming the Merciless ... Liberal Party founder Sir Robert Menzies would be among those astonished today at the peeling away of support for the major parties. Portrait: Ivor Hele
Likely Ming would be among those astonished at the way that the reptiles routinely feature a worshipful snap of him on a daily basis ...
The pond grew up on Hele's war images.
Couldn't the reptiles have offered something other than Ming?
Never mind ... back to ancient Troy's psephological musings ...
The AES shows that Labor was strongly preferred over the Coalition on leadership and policy in 2025. Peter Dutton is the most unpopular opposition leader in almost 40 years. Albanese far outpolled Dutton on traits such as intelligence, strength, compassion, competence, honesty. Leadership has always been a critical factor in elections, although leaders are generally less popular these days.
The most important issue for voters was cost of living. It was a back-to-basics election at a time of high inflation, concern about housing affordability, health and education. In an extraordinary finding, Labor was preferred over the Coalition in nine out of 10 policy areas, including taxation and economic management. Only on national security did the Coalition have a small edge, 28-22 per cent.
It's almost as if the reptiles wanted to make the bro feel like the read of the day, as they hastily interrupted with an AV distraction ...
Redbridge Group Director Kos Samaras says the 6 million Australians who voted for minor parties but preferenced the Labor Party were “instrumental” in Labor’s federal election victory. “The 6 million or so Australians that voted for other parties, their preferences were quite instrumental when delivering the Albanese government a massive win,” Mr Samaras said. “Not only, obviously, did we see an increase in the Labor primary, but also that preference flow was absolutely significant to Labor. “It’s very clear that all the votes that the Coalition lost over the last eight to nine weeks to minor parties, those Australians decided to actually preference the Labor Party.”
Ancient Troy seemed to think trust in political parties had broken down, and managed this feat without once referencing the malign interference of News Corp, faux noise Sky after dark, screeching tabloids, and so on, a trend that hasn't been halted, only made worse by being amplified on social media...
In the immediate post-war decades, those who always voted for the same party were often 70-80 per cent. In 1987, that fell to 63 per cent. By 2007, it was down to 45 per cent. It declined to 34 per cent this year. This means a more volatile electorate.
When looking at political allegiance – those who identify with a party – this too shows Labor and the Coalition to be in trouble. In 1987, those who had a commitment to Labor numbered 49 per cent. This was Bob Hawke’s third victory. This year it was 31 per cent, having crept up a little. In 2004, Howard’s fourth victory, Liberal partisanship was at 42 per cent. It declined to 24 per cent in 2025.
Related to this is rising support for neither major party. The two correlate: voters turning away from established brands looking for something more independent or insurgent, opting for independents and minor parties. In 1990, only 4 per cent had no political allegiance; now it is 25 per cent. The Greens have risen from 1 per cent voter identification in 1996 to 9 per cent in 2025.
It is said you can’t fatten a pig on market day. In other words, most voters make up their minds about a leader, party and policies long before election day. But this is less true as only 32 per cent of voters say they decided how to vote before the campaign. It is also concerning that voters are relying less on mainstream media – newspapers, radio, television – to inform their voting.
The decline in support for the major parties, and the widening gender and age gaps between them, represent fundamental shifts in political behaviour. It portends a more unpredictable and unstable politics, with no party guaranteed long-term survival. But for now, the Liberal Party is going out of business. This is not opinion hyperbole; the data confirms it.
There is another point to make. While only 32 per cent of voters believe that people in government can be trusted, we can take some pride in there being 70 per cent of voters satisfied with how democracy is working and 74 per cent support for compulsory voting. But these too are in decline.
If we are not careful, we may have more to worry about than the survival of the major parties.
For once I find myself in great agreement with the Bro:
ReplyDelete"Each set of reforms allegedly solves all the problems of the past."
and
"Who knew fundamental change required so little actual ministerial work."
Or, to quote the ancient wisdom: Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
But I shall await some input from Chad to get the full flavour.
The wisdom of the Groaner: "It [the electricity rebate] is electorally popular and what’s $2bn when the government is spending close to $800bn annually and the deficit is projected to come in at around $40bn this financial year."
ReplyDeleteYeah, well, Australia's GDP is US$1.75trillion (about AU$2.69trillion) which is 1.65% of the world economy. Australia's population is just a bit short of 27 million which is approximately 0.33% of the world.
So what does that tell us ?
The Reptile Jihad appears to now be reaching the stage of demanding answers to questioning akin to “Are you still beating your wife?”.
ReplyDeleteA predictable yet satisfying squeal from the Bromancer. No real analysis beyond the level of sneering “utter baloney” (can’t even come up with an Australianism, Bro?), and the umpteenth demand for more military kit and more boots on the ground. Oh and as expected, a citation of Jennings of the Fourth; I expect his contribution will be along shortly.
ReplyDeleteConfused? Preposterous? Bromancer, know thyself.
So here we go with the flow of the Bro:
ReplyDelete"...Albanese understands the threats posed by China"
And just what exactly are the "threats posed by China"? An ICBM attack ? And how do we defend against that ? A million or two high-tech drones always in the air somewhere over Australia ? A defensive ICBM attack that our very good and dependable allies (aka Trump's troops) would unleash upon the Chinese in retaliation after we've all been wiped out ?
Or maybe a swathe of invading ships carrying a million Chinese soldiers ? That would only be about 1/5th (at most) of the Chinese armed forces and about 1/1400th of the Chinese population as a whole. And what would our very good and dependable allies do about that ?
Ok, so: "The Prime Minister has also ramped up Australia’s huge flow of aid to Pacific nations."
Ok, so when he says "ramped up" does he mean that it's still just a small percentage of what's spent on the energy rebate and a barely visible percentage of what's spent on NDIS ?
What does the Bro mean by these facetious claims ?
Troy Brammy: "The only age cohort where the Coalition has a lead over Labor is with Boomers (born 1946-64)..."
ReplyDeleteYeah ? Then what about us Silent Genners (1924-1945) and the Greatest Generation (1901-1924). There's probably not a lot of Greatests still around (Whitlam was one), but there is still quite a few of us Silents - nearly all of my matriculation (aka year 12) contemporaries (numbering 35 of which 17 were female) are still alive and voting.
But according to Troy there's not a majority vote for the Liberals ? Not even from Brighton (Melbourne) which is where our then school (which opened in 1955) still stands.