A very rare UPDATE:
In the lizard Oz:
Sadly the archive versions were before the judgement came through, but this is the nub of in the Nine rags:
Court’s damning comments as Lehrmann fails in high-stakes appeal
Lee found the interview in 2021 on the now defunct The Project program suggested that Lehrmann, who was not named but was identifiable to some viewers, raped Higgins in Parliament House in 2019. However, Lee said that Ten and Wilkinson could rely on the defence of truth.
On Wednesday, the Full Court of the Federal Court – Justices Michael Wigney, Craig Colvin and Wendy Abraham – dismissed Lehrmann’s appeal and ordered him to pay his opponents’ legal costs.
The court went further than Lee and made a significant finding that Lehrmann was not reckless about whether Higgins was consenting to sex, but was aware she did not consent and went ahead anyway.
In a summary of the decision, read in court by Wigney, the court said the “only reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts, known and observable to Mr Lehrmann at the time he had sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins, is that Mr Lehrmann did turn his mind to whether Ms Higgins consented to sex, was aware that she was not consenting, but proceeded nonetheless”.
This provided another basis for upholding Lee’s finding that Lehrmann raped Higgins, the summary said.
Lehrmann’s lawyer, Zali Burrows, had argued in court that Lee had insufficient evidence to find the former federal Liberal staffer was a rapist.
Lee found the interview in 2021 on the now defunct The Project program suggested that Lehrmann, who was not named but was identifiable to some viewers, raped Higgins in Parliament House in 2019. However, Lee said that Ten and Wilkinson could rely on the defence of truth.
On Wednesday, the Full Court of the Federal Court – Justices Michael Wigney, Craig Colvin and Wendy Abraham – dismissed Lehrmann’s appeal and ordered him to pay his opponents’ legal costs.
The court went further than Lee and made a significant finding that Lehrmann was not reckless about whether Higgins was consenting to sex, but was aware she did not consent and went ahead anyway.
In a summary of the decision, read in court by Wigney, the court said the “only reasonable inference to be drawn from the facts, known and observable to Mr Lehrmann at the time he had sexual intercourse with Ms Higgins, is that Mr Lehrmann did turn his mind to whether Ms Higgins consented to sex, was aware that she was not consenting, but proceeded nonetheless”.
This provided another basis for upholding Lee’s finding that Lehrmann raped Higgins, the summary said.
Lehrmann’s lawyer, Zali Burrows, had argued in court that Lee had insufficient evidence to find the former federal Liberal staffer was a rapist.
Now will Dame Slap give it all a rest? Or will she keep on with her jihad, with Linda cosplaying for Bruce?
Will she insist on endlessly traumatising the hive mind?
The real trauma?
Being bludgeoned on the head repeatedly by Dame Slap, blunt force trauma by repeated violent blows with a heavy instrument, the pond made brain dead by her endless jihad ...
Only trauma is Labor’s for being caught out in Linda Reynolds and Fiona Brown cases
The Albanese government’s justification for hiring $25,000-a-day barristers to crush two legal claims has been branded ‘risible’ by critics who question the real motives.
By Janet Albrechtsen
Columnist
The Albanese government’s justification for hiring $25,000-a-day barristers to crush two legal claims has been branded ‘risible’ by critics who question the real motives.
By Janet Albrechtsen
Columnist
And just to add to the trauma, a couple more blunt instruments ...
SENATE ESTIMATES
Taxpayers’ exceptional bill to fund counsel of war on Reynolds
The Albanese government has paid a barrister more than $5000 a day to fight compensation claims from Linda Reynolds, while Finance Minister Katy Gallagher admits reading court rulings that demolished Labor’s cover-up allegations.
By Elizabeth Pike and Noah Yim
Taxpayers’ exceptional bill to fund counsel of war on Reynolds
The Albanese government has paid a barrister more than $5000 a day to fight compensation claims from Linda Reynolds, while Finance Minister Katy Gallagher admits reading court rulings that demolished Labor’s cover-up allegations.
By Elizabeth Pike and Noah Yim
And by the way, the reptiles produced a blatant lie by claiming that Dame Slap's yarn went up at 5.22 am. The archived version was dated 2nd December at 8.55 pm.
Why lie on such a trivial matter? Why the window re-dressing?
Whatever, won't someone make her stop, please dear long absent lord, make her stop, or persuade a lizard Oz editor to make her stop ...
And while we're at it, make him stop, please dear long absent lord, return and make him stop ...
Donald Trump Melts Down in Unhinged Late-Night Posting Spree
Trump, 79, Reposts Unhinged Typo-Filled Late-Night Rant
Can the pond just have a moment of peace and quiet?
Of course not, it's Wednesday with the reptiles, and the task is to choose the reptile who can be titillating without being utterly jihad tedious ...
First let's get the "news" that batters out of the way ...
EXCLUSIVE
Former Japan envoy slams Labor’s silence on China bullying
Japan’s former ambassador has accused Australia of abandoning its closest Asian ally after failing to condemn China’s vicious threats against the Japanese Prime Minister.
By Ben Packham
Former Japan envoy slams Labor’s silence on China bullying
Japan’s former ambassador has accused Australia of abandoning its closest Asian ally after failing to condemn China’s vicious threats against the Japanese Prime Minister.
By Ben Packham
Ah, in the archive version that became Japan slams Labor’s silence on China bullying, with the former ambassador given "whole of country, whole of nation, whole of government" status.
That was backed up by an "opinion" piece ...
Where is Australia in Japan’s moment of need?
A Chinese diplomat’s death threat against Japan’s Prime Minister has escalated into economic warfare, with Beijing now questioning Japanese sovereignty over Okinawa itself.
By Shingo Yamagami
Contributor
A Chinese diplomat’s death threat against Japan’s Prime Minister has escalated into economic warfare, with Beijing now questioning Japanese sovereignty over Okinawa itself.
By Shingo Yamagami
Contributor
Relax, Mr Yamagami, the pond understands that the government is sending a load of pig iron your way. Use it wisely and well.
And the Australian Daily Zionist News was at it again...
EXCLUSIVE
Jews’ nightmare with no end: two years of hate, violence as anti-Semitism takes root
Australian Jews have endured 1654 anti-Semitic incidents in the past year as hate attacks reach five times pre-October 7 levels.
By Cameron Stewart
Jews’ nightmare with no end: two years of hate, violence as anti-Semitism takes root
Australian Jews have endured 1654 anti-Semitic incidents in the past year as hate attacks reach five times pre-October 7 levels.
By Cameron Stewart
That was turned into an "opinion" piece too, on the basis of want not ...
Party leaders need to prevent racist hate becoming the new normal
The report on anti-Semitic attacks in Australia is a wake-up call for leaders around the country to stop the normalisation of hatred.
By Cameron Stewart
Chief International Correspondent
The report on anti-Semitic attacks in Australia is a wake-up call for leaders around the country to stop the normalisation of hatred.
By Cameron Stewart
Chief International Correspondent
Sure beats having to write about a far right government, led by a corrupt, pardon-seeking PM, intent on the ethnic cleansing of Gaza and the claiming of the West Bank.
Belatedly, the pond realised the intent of the reptiles' cunning plans.
All that jihad carry-on was designed to make supping on "Ned's" natter seem like a real treat ...
The header: Recover economic clout or Liberals risk wilderness; The more the analysis, the more astonishing is the 2025 election outcome. The damage to the Liberal Party brand is deep and wide – it has run everywhere including into the party’s once strongest suit.
The caption for poor old Susssan: Leader of the Opposition Sussan Ley addresses the House. Picture: NewsWire / David Beach
As a bonus, this "Ned" climb was no Everest climb, more like a 5 minute Mount Kosciuszko stroll, and at least the lettuce read it with interest ...
The more the analysis, the more astonishing is the 2025 election outcome. It has empowered Labor and demoralised the Coalition. The most astonishing aspect is that at a time of punishing cost-of-living pressures and rising interest rates Labor replaced the Liberal Party as the superior economic manager.
At face value this makes no sense. Its only logic lies in an economic perception tied to a deeper view about the credibility and conviction of Labor and Liberal as governing parties. The damage to the Liberal Party brand is deep and wide – it has run everywhere including into the party’s once strongest suit.
It is a reminder that democratic politics is relative. The Albanese government might be seen as an uninspiring and ineffective bunch but, compared with the Liberals, it was united, diligent, with a superior leader and a brilliant communicator as Treasurer. That reversed decades of electoral history on the economic ratings test.
Unless the centre-right grasps where it went wrong in 2025, it won’t recover. Two big features of the election campaign stand out, policy credentials and leadership perceptions. Labor was totally dominant on both tests and they were the tests that mattered.
These are the conclusions from the recently released 2025 Australian Election Study conducted by the Australian National University and Griffith University, its central thesis being the vote reflected a nexus of short-term and long-term factors that, unless checked, “point to Labor dominating federal politics for the foreseeable future”.
At face value this makes no sense. Its only logic lies in an economic perception tied to a deeper view about the credibility and conviction of Labor and Liberal as governing parties. The damage to the Liberal Party brand is deep and wide – it has run everywhere including into the party’s once strongest suit.
It is a reminder that democratic politics is relative. The Albanese government might be seen as an uninspiring and ineffective bunch but, compared with the Liberals, it was united, diligent, with a superior leader and a brilliant communicator as Treasurer. That reversed decades of electoral history on the economic ratings test.
Unless the centre-right grasps where it went wrong in 2025, it won’t recover. Two big features of the election campaign stand out, policy credentials and leadership perceptions. Labor was totally dominant on both tests and they were the tests that mattered.
These are the conclusions from the recently released 2025 Australian Election Study conducted by the Australian National University and Griffith University, its central thesis being the vote reflected a nexus of short-term and long-term factors that, unless checked, “point to Labor dominating federal politics for the foreseeable future”.
The reptiles were determined to remind the hive mind of how we got here ...Peter Dutton visits Mount Sheridan in the electorate of Leichhardt during the 2025 election. Picture: Richard Dobson
This endless contemplation of the runes, this relentless return to considering the entrails, this feckless ferreting through the tea leaves, must make the lettuce extremely pleased ...
Our political culture is changing in fundamental ways. There is voter dealignment from the main parties – Labor and Liberal – yet the country overall is moving to the left in this dealignment story, which means Labor wins office through the preference system. Unless the centre-right understands this decisive phenomenon it cannot recover.
The study identifies the unprecedented aspect of the 2025 election (in the context of its surveys dating back to 1987), notably that Labor prevailed on nine out of the 10 policy issues. The study called this a “significant departure” from the historical trend. Labor won on every economic issue: on economic management 32-28 per cent; on cost of living 37-22 per cent; on tax 31-23 per cent; and on housing affordability 34-16 per cent. This was despite a sustained fall in living standards, though Labor argued pre-election the economy was picking up after the Reserve Bank began to cut interest rates.
The survey makes clear that economic issues dominated the campaign. Two-thirds of voters said an economic issue was their top concern. This should have given the Coalition a critical advantage but that didn’t happen.
Moreover, voters were pessimistic about the economy, with 42 per cent feeling the economy would be worse in a year compared with only 24 per cent who believed it would be better.
There was no great confidence in Labor’s economic management but even less confidence about Liberal management on inflation, tax and housing. The explanatory factor is Liberal weakness, not Labor strength.
The study’s co-author, ANU political science professor Ian McAllister, said: “The Coalition has been losing ground on those economic issues for at least the last two elections.”
The study shows that at the 2016 election the Coalition led on the economy by 27 percentage points, falling to 12 percentage points at the 2022 poll and collapsing into negative territory in 2025. This was the weakest Liberal economic perception at an election in the party’s history. Yet the decline has deep roots. Unless it is reversed the Liberals cannot win an election.
The study identifies the unprecedented aspect of the 2025 election (in the context of its surveys dating back to 1987), notably that Labor prevailed on nine out of the 10 policy issues. The study called this a “significant departure” from the historical trend. Labor won on every economic issue: on economic management 32-28 per cent; on cost of living 37-22 per cent; on tax 31-23 per cent; and on housing affordability 34-16 per cent. This was despite a sustained fall in living standards, though Labor argued pre-election the economy was picking up after the Reserve Bank began to cut interest rates.
The survey makes clear that economic issues dominated the campaign. Two-thirds of voters said an economic issue was their top concern. This should have given the Coalition a critical advantage but that didn’t happen.
Moreover, voters were pessimistic about the economy, with 42 per cent feeling the economy would be worse in a year compared with only 24 per cent who believed it would be better.
There was no great confidence in Labor’s economic management but even less confidence about Liberal management on inflation, tax and housing. The explanatory factor is Liberal weakness, not Labor strength.
The study’s co-author, ANU political science professor Ian McAllister, said: “The Coalition has been losing ground on those economic issues for at least the last two elections.”
The study shows that at the 2016 election the Coalition led on the economy by 27 percentage points, falling to 12 percentage points at the 2022 poll and collapsing into negative territory in 2025. This was the weakest Liberal economic perception at an election in the party’s history. Yet the decline has deep roots. Unless it is reversed the Liberals cannot win an election.
Economic issues?
Lucky Killer was on hand to sort those out, as the reptiles inserted a snap of triumphant Sauron, Anthony Albanese gestures with his partner Jodie Haydon and son Nathan after winning the 2025 election.
"Ned" carried on with his woulda, coulda, shoulda dance ...
This should have led to a post-election priority Liberal strategy: to regain ascendancy on the economic agenda, to reclaim this traditional Liberal strength, a tactic that would have been assisted because Labor’s economic lead was always fragile and as 2025 advanced the government’s economic vulnerability only intensified; witness the recent increase in inflation.
This tactic was a no-brainer. Progress would have been readily available on the single most vital policy priority. But the Coalition did the opposite.
It waged instead a huge public brawl against the net-zero concept based largely on the notion the Coalition had to move sharply to the right, maximise differences with Labor and prove its economic credentials by spearheading an assault on Labor’s high energy prices. Whether this gives the Liberals more credibility on economic management in this term remains to be seen.
How the Coalition’s policy delivers cheaper energy prices is not yet apparent. And this follows the flawed nuclear power plant policy at the election with the study finding public opinion narrowly split 38-37 per cent in favour with distinctly low support among ALP voters.
On the issue of leadership the Liberals have a serious problem. The study found that since Anthony Albanese became leader “Labor has attracted a greater share of votes based on leadership”. On a scale of 0 to 10, the study found Peter Dutton rated at 3.2 compared with Albanese at 5.1. Dutton’s popularity rating was the lowest of any political leader in the survey’s history back to 1987, with Scott Morrison’s 2022 rating making him the second most unpopular leader. Albanese had ranked 13th out of the 28 party leaders contesting elections since 1987. The biggest Albanese-Dutton gap on traits came on compassion, with the study concluding there was a “consistent pattern” whereby Labor leaders “are perceived as being more compassionate” than Liberal leaders.
This tactic was a no-brainer. Progress would have been readily available on the single most vital policy priority. But the Coalition did the opposite.
It waged instead a huge public brawl against the net-zero concept based largely on the notion the Coalition had to move sharply to the right, maximise differences with Labor and prove its economic credentials by spearheading an assault on Labor’s high energy prices. Whether this gives the Liberals more credibility on economic management in this term remains to be seen.
How the Coalition’s policy delivers cheaper energy prices is not yet apparent. And this follows the flawed nuclear power plant policy at the election with the study finding public opinion narrowly split 38-37 per cent in favour with distinctly low support among ALP voters.
On the issue of leadership the Liberals have a serious problem. The study found that since Anthony Albanese became leader “Labor has attracted a greater share of votes based on leadership”. On a scale of 0 to 10, the study found Peter Dutton rated at 3.2 compared with Albanese at 5.1. Dutton’s popularity rating was the lowest of any political leader in the survey’s history back to 1987, with Scott Morrison’s 2022 rating making him the second most unpopular leader. Albanese had ranked 13th out of the 28 party leaders contesting elections since 1987. The biggest Albanese-Dutton gap on traits came on compassion, with the study concluding there was a “consistent pattern” whereby Labor leaders “are perceived as being more compassionate” than Liberal leaders.
Want more salt rubbed into the wounds? Why not beam up the liar from the Shire? Scott Morrison
"Ned" failed to feel the rapture, but did sound like he believed in end times:
All of the above results must be seen in context – the nation over 2022 and 2025 has been moving to the political left, in both substance and style, with the centre-left primary votes accruing from Labor, the Greens, the teals and a range of independents. Dealignment from the major parties has taken the nation to the left.
While Labor’s primary vote was weak in 2025 at 34.56 per cent, Labor is a big winner on preferences as smaller pro-left parties and independents preference Liberals below Labor as people vote down the card. The study concludes that “independent voters tend to be left of centre”.
The Liberals lose because a majority of voters dislike them more than they dislike Labor. If the country is moving culturally left and the Coalition is moving to the right, how can the Coalition attract the preferences it needs?
The forces driving this shift to the left run deep. The study shows the Coalition is losing the votes of people aged under 40 years: in 2022 it won just 25 per cent of this group while in 2025 that fell to 23 per cent. The study shows that younger voters are moving left and millennials are defying the orthodoxy that people will change and vote more conservative as they age.
While Labor’s primary vote was weak in 2025 at 34.56 per cent, Labor is a big winner on preferences as smaller pro-left parties and independents preference Liberals below Labor as people vote down the card. The study concludes that “independent voters tend to be left of centre”.
The Liberals lose because a majority of voters dislike them more than they dislike Labor. If the country is moving culturally left and the Coalition is moving to the right, how can the Coalition attract the preferences it needs?
The forces driving this shift to the left run deep. The study shows the Coalition is losing the votes of people aged under 40 years: in 2022 it won just 25 per cent of this group while in 2025 that fell to 23 per cent. The study shows that younger voters are moving left and millennials are defying the orthodoxy that people will change and vote more conservative as they age.
Finally came the coup de grâce, a shot of hapless Susssan herself, Sussan Ley, looking a little odd:
The lettuce rubbed leaves with glee ...
The generational trend is reinforced by the gender trend. At the 2025 election 37 per cent of men voted Coalition but only 28 per cent of women, revealing the modern gender gap allocates women significantly to the left of men. McAllister highlights the role of education: “The electorate is becoming progressively more left. That’s being driven by the ‘big three’ – gender, generation and university education. If you know somebody’s age, their gender and their university education, you can predict with a degree of certainty how they are going to vote.”
Two forces shape politics – what politicians do and the lens the public uses to view politicians. Because more Australians view politics with a leftist cultural lens they will be less sympathetic to leaders such as Dutton and Morrison, less impressed by Liberal economics when their bias is to Labor’s government spending and state intervention.
The so-called new conservatism wants the Liberals to follow Donald Trump and move to the right on energy and immigration along with ditching liberal economics as so yesterday. But it needs to explain how that delivers a 50 per cent plus vote via the preference system in our Australian democracy.
Two forces shape politics – what politicians do and the lens the public uses to view politicians. Because more Australians view politics with a leftist cultural lens they will be less sympathetic to leaders such as Dutton and Morrison, less impressed by Liberal economics when their bias is to Labor’s government spending and state intervention.
The so-called new conservatism wants the Liberals to follow Donald Trump and move to the right on energy and immigration along with ditching liberal economics as so yesterday. But it needs to explain how that delivers a 50 per cent plus vote via the preference system in our Australian democracy.
And that was it, "Ned" done and dusted, but for determined masochists, this is the archive link to "Ned's" outing.
That way lies access to links in "Ned's" piece, and to more madness.
For example, that late-breaking reference to so-called new conservatism contained a link to a barking mad piece, though still naturally within the hive mind ...
Why Australia’s legacy Liberals don’t get the ‘new right’
The Liberal Party does not need cosmetic changes, more attractive candidates or better rhetoric. The problem is it clings to a stale consensus that is out of step with successful centre-right parties across the rest of the world.
Dan Ryan
The Liberal Party does not need cosmetic changes, more attractive candidates or better rhetoric. The problem is it clings to a stale consensus that is out of step with successful centre-right parties across the rest of the world.
Dan Ryan
This Dan was hot to trot on all things Nige and King Donald ...
Poor old "Ned":
...Instead, they continue to want to run on a platform that resembles something Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, John McCain or David Cameron or Paul Kelly would approve of – cutting taxes and regulations, budget repair, rolling back DEI, more flag waving patriotism, increase in defence spending and the like. There is nothing inherently wrong with these positions. But they are not new, nor are they sufficient to win.
The pond keeds, it keeds, there was no mention in that par of "Ned", though there coulda and shoulda been.
Just like Dame Groan this rogue Ryan was keen on bashing furriners ...
...The tragedy of Peter Dutton’s election campaign was that it embraced some second order MAGA issues, but ignored the far more important and popular ones. For example, there was much enthusiasm for Elon Musk’s cost cutting program, DOGE. Yet the program was only announced after the US President was re-elected. Similarly, the slogan “Drill baby, drill!” was not used at all until 2024 and was a rehash of a line first popularised by Sarah Palin. Trump was broadly supportive of nuclear power, but did not lead with it.
The Dutton campaign thus managed to attract all the opprobrium of the Trump brand but got none of the upside of his more salient core policies.
Trade policy was not mentioned in any significant way by Dutton. Yet it was the first thing Trump mentioned when he launched his initial campaign, and this ultimately proved crucial in electorally significant blue collar industrial Midwest seats and elsewhere. Now there is a bipartisan position in Washington for at least some level of tariffs on China and many other countries.
In Australia, by contrast, the centre-right continues to support an agreement, signed by Tony Abbott’s government (on almost the same day Trump first came down the escalators in 2015), that allows 100 per cent of Chinese manufactured goods to come into Australia duty-free. If that stays in place we will largely remain, in Andrew Hastie’s words, “a nation of flat white makers” and never have any sort of substantial industry in Australia ever again.
Scepticism about past foreign policy was also a key factor of Trump’s appeal. His harsh criticisms of Iraq and other interventions were a direct repudiation past Republican administrations. These were popular with the public who had grown tired of the misguided and pointless “forever wars”. Yet there has been no real evidence of reflection or contrition in this area from the Howard era right, which appears stuck in the age of George W. Bush.
Hastie seems to get change is required. Other Middle East war veterans who now occupy senior positions in the White House, such as Vance, Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Hegseth and Jamieson Greer, certainly recognise that a new prudence and realism is needed compared to the last 25 plus years.
Immigration is another area that is central to the rise of the “new right” across the Western world. But it is a subject that has moved well beyond “stopping the boats” of the Howard era. Back then there was an oft-repeated mantra that because our government was able to control illegal immigration Australians welcomed higher levels of legal immigration. If that was ever actually true, it is not true now. Now the far bigger issue is legal immigration numbers.
“Mass migration poses an existential threat to Western civilisation and undermines the stability of key American allies”, Rubio’s state department recently announced. Yet the shadow Immigration Minister Paul Scarr refuses to even use the term “mass immigration” and reprimands people like Hastie for their language when they try to talk seriously but sensibly about it.
The Liberal Party does not need cosmetic changes, more attractive candidates or better rhetoric. The problem is it continues to cling to a stale consensus which is increasingly out of step with successful centre-right political parties across the rest of the world.
Dan Ryan is executive director of the National Conservative Institute of Australia.
The Dutton campaign thus managed to attract all the opprobrium of the Trump brand but got none of the upside of his more salient core policies.
Trade policy was not mentioned in any significant way by Dutton. Yet it was the first thing Trump mentioned when he launched his initial campaign, and this ultimately proved crucial in electorally significant blue collar industrial Midwest seats and elsewhere. Now there is a bipartisan position in Washington for at least some level of tariffs on China and many other countries.
In Australia, by contrast, the centre-right continues to support an agreement, signed by Tony Abbott’s government (on almost the same day Trump first came down the escalators in 2015), that allows 100 per cent of Chinese manufactured goods to come into Australia duty-free. If that stays in place we will largely remain, in Andrew Hastie’s words, “a nation of flat white makers” and never have any sort of substantial industry in Australia ever again.
Scepticism about past foreign policy was also a key factor of Trump’s appeal. His harsh criticisms of Iraq and other interventions were a direct repudiation past Republican administrations. These were popular with the public who had grown tired of the misguided and pointless “forever wars”. Yet there has been no real evidence of reflection or contrition in this area from the Howard era right, which appears stuck in the age of George W. Bush.
Hastie seems to get change is required. Other Middle East war veterans who now occupy senior positions in the White House, such as Vance, Tulsi Gabbard, Pete Hegseth and Jamieson Greer, certainly recognise that a new prudence and realism is needed compared to the last 25 plus years.
Immigration is another area that is central to the rise of the “new right” across the Western world. But it is a subject that has moved well beyond “stopping the boats” of the Howard era. Back then there was an oft-repeated mantra that because our government was able to control illegal immigration Australians welcomed higher levels of legal immigration. If that was ever actually true, it is not true now. Now the far bigger issue is legal immigration numbers.
“Mass migration poses an existential threat to Western civilisation and undermines the stability of key American allies”, Rubio’s state department recently announced. Yet the shadow Immigration Minister Paul Scarr refuses to even use the term “mass immigration” and reprimands people like Hastie for their language when they try to talk seriously but sensibly about it.
The Liberal Party does not need cosmetic changes, more attractive candidates or better rhetoric. The problem is it continues to cling to a stale consensus which is increasingly out of step with successful centre-right political parties across the rest of the world.
Dan Ryan is executive director of the National Conservative Institute of Australia.
Why that would have been much more fun.
The pond could have linked to tales of Hogsbreath the war criminal, an economy being wrecked by tariffs, the increasingly demented madness of King Donald, the war on Venezuela, assorted interventions in foreign lands, while seeing just how much division and hate can be generated on the streets by roving bands of masked thugs ...
All that, and still the pond wouldn't have been able to segue to the Wilcox of the day ...
The header: The real reason inflation is high, While politicians blame external forces for inflation, a staggering truth emerges: Australian housing prices have risen almost exactly in line with the creation of new money since 2015.
The caption for the wisely uncredited collage, featuring coins (perhaps King Donald's crypto crash coins were difficult to visualise), and a genuinely meaningless graph which would shock an ABC finance report: RBA governor Michele Bullock and Treasurer Jim Chalmers are under pressure as inflation surges.
Killer was in his usual feisty mood:
The real surprise isn’t that inflation is increasing but that it isn’t higher still. More than a quarter of all the Australian dollars in existence were created in the past five years.
The consumer price index rose 3.8 per cent across the year to October, triggering a fresh round of debate about the cause, but one huge factor is almost never discussed.
Our economy is drowning in dollars as new home loans and government borrowing supercharge the money supply faster than the economy can absorb it.
In just 10 years to the end of September what economists call M3, the sum of all cash and deposits at banks, soared from $1.8 trillion to $3.3 trillion.
Yes, the Australian economy has grown since 2015 – mainly as a result of a nearly 16 per cent increase in the population – but nothing else relevant has grown anywhere nearly as fast.
And what did all that new money do?
The consumer price index rose 3.8 per cent across the year to October, triggering a fresh round of debate about the cause, but one huge factor is almost never discussed.
Our economy is drowning in dollars as new home loans and government borrowing supercharge the money supply faster than the economy can absorb it.
In just 10 years to the end of September what economists call M3, the sum of all cash and deposits at banks, soared from $1.8 trillion to $3.3 trillion.
Yes, the Australian economy has grown since 2015 – mainly as a result of a nearly 16 per cent increase in the population – but nothing else relevant has grown anywhere nearly as fast.
And what did all that new money do?
Jimbo was served up, if only so he could be knocked down ... Australian Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers addresses the media on the monthly inflation data out today. Picture: NewsWire/ Glenn Campbell
Eventually Killer got into economic history, doing his own version of Our Henry:
Most of it went straight into the housing market where, lo and behold, prices have soared.
Strikingly, capital city dwelling prices have increased about 80 per cent since 2015, according to a series kept by SQM Research – almost precisely the same as the increase in the money supply.
Houses and apartments haven’t become more expensive so much as the buying power of the currency, and unfortunately all the wages and salaries denominated in it, has collapsed.
In terms of things the financial system can’t create out of thin air, the big returns in property have been illusory. When valued in ounces of gold, long considered by many the only timeless, universal currency, Australian property has lost significant value.
It’s fashionable to complain about how expensive things have become since the Covid pandemic, as if inflation were some unfortunate act of God, but it’s a choice.
Governments around the world have pumped in trillions of new units of currency into their economies while banks have created credit like there’s no tomorrow. The value of owner-occupier and housing investment loans outstanding in Australia, for instance, has increased by $1 trillion since 2015 to $2.5 trillion, according to Reserve Bank statistics. The more than $300bn handed out to households and businesses during Covid lockdowns were all freshly created dollars.
The official inflation figures based on CPI are artificially low, excluding asset prices which is where inflation typically shows up first. New money doesn’t increase prices uniformly at the same time, a too often forgotten insight of French economist Richard Cantillon in the early 18th century.
“The increase of money will first be felt in the channels where it enters; and so gradually it will spread to other channels and raise the price of goods and products in the whole state,” he wrote in his classic 1734 essay on monetary policy.
Strikingly, capital city dwelling prices have increased about 80 per cent since 2015, according to a series kept by SQM Research – almost precisely the same as the increase in the money supply.
Houses and apartments haven’t become more expensive so much as the buying power of the currency, and unfortunately all the wages and salaries denominated in it, has collapsed.
In terms of things the financial system can’t create out of thin air, the big returns in property have been illusory. When valued in ounces of gold, long considered by many the only timeless, universal currency, Australian property has lost significant value.
It’s fashionable to complain about how expensive things have become since the Covid pandemic, as if inflation were some unfortunate act of God, but it’s a choice.
Governments around the world have pumped in trillions of new units of currency into their economies while banks have created credit like there’s no tomorrow. The value of owner-occupier and housing investment loans outstanding in Australia, for instance, has increased by $1 trillion since 2015 to $2.5 trillion, according to Reserve Bank statistics. The more than $300bn handed out to households and businesses during Covid lockdowns were all freshly created dollars.
The official inflation figures based on CPI are artificially low, excluding asset prices which is where inflation typically shows up first. New money doesn’t increase prices uniformly at the same time, a too often forgotten insight of French economist Richard Cantillon in the early 18th century.
“The increase of money will first be felt in the channels where it enters; and so gradually it will spread to other channels and raise the price of goods and products in the whole state,” he wrote in his classic 1734 essay on monetary policy.
Just to add to the misery: Last week’s shock inflation number killed off any chance of an interest rate cut in 2025 and likely for 2026. The latest economic growth numbers this week will be a test as government spending fuels inflation. Non-productive elements of Australian government spending has prevented the economy from drifting into recession.
What’s known as the Cantillon effect describes how those who receive the new money first, such as the recipients of new loans, benefit the most as they are able to spend the money before it seeps into the rest of the economy and increases the overall price level.
Cantillon’s belief in an inextricable link between money and prices was popularised last century by American economist Milton Friedman, who famously argued “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”.
But central bankers and politicians junked this idea in the 1980s in favour of so-called neo-Keynesian economic models that ascribe inflation to excessive aggregate demand. Inflation arises when unemployment is too low and the economy overheats, they argue, or when workers and employers trigger a wage-price spiral.
It turns out Friedman’s and Cantillon’s ideas have at least as much to offer. The past few years have illustrated how shockingly useless these new theories have become.
In May 2021 the brightest minds at Treasury and the Reserve Bank, using the latest economic models, forecast inflation would never exceed 2.25 per cent across the next three years.
As readers know, within 12 months it had jumped to 6.6 per cent before peaking at 7.8 per cent in late 2023.
It wasn’t only Australian economists with mud on their faces. US Treasury secretary Janet Yellen later was mocked routinely for claiming inflation would be small – and later transitory – in early 2021.
All these forecasts from the first half of 2021 were made well after governments had pumped Covid stimulus into their economies. Indeed, they were made after inflation had already begun to rise rapidly and they occurred well before Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022 (an event that politicians, laughably, would blame later for high inflation). It should be obvious now that the increase in the quantity of money was having a significant impact on prices.
Cantillon’s belief in an inextricable link between money and prices was popularised last century by American economist Milton Friedman, who famously argued “inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon”.
But central bankers and politicians junked this idea in the 1980s in favour of so-called neo-Keynesian economic models that ascribe inflation to excessive aggregate demand. Inflation arises when unemployment is too low and the economy overheats, they argue, or when workers and employers trigger a wage-price spiral.
It turns out Friedman’s and Cantillon’s ideas have at least as much to offer. The past few years have illustrated how shockingly useless these new theories have become.
In May 2021 the brightest minds at Treasury and the Reserve Bank, using the latest economic models, forecast inflation would never exceed 2.25 per cent across the next three years.
As readers know, within 12 months it had jumped to 6.6 per cent before peaking at 7.8 per cent in late 2023.
It wasn’t only Australian economists with mud on their faces. US Treasury secretary Janet Yellen later was mocked routinely for claiming inflation would be small – and later transitory – in early 2021.
All these forecasts from the first half of 2021 were made well after governments had pumped Covid stimulus into their economies. Indeed, they were made after inflation had already begun to rise rapidly and they occurred well before Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022 (an event that politicians, laughably, would blame later for high inflation). It should be obvious now that the increase in the quantity of money was having a significant impact on prices.
Come on down Milt, help Killer out: Milton Friedman
Now the pond endured all of that burst of downbeat Killernomics, safe in the knowledge that Killer had the right answer all along ...
There you go, follow Killernomics and a $40 billion bail-out will see you right.
Oh there were doubters, but the pond reckons a $40 billion bail out should just about fix everything wrong with Argentina ... and Australia ...
...The Trump administration’s financial and political interventions in Argentina have been declared a success, but the consequences of these actions are still unknown and remain quite risky. In late September, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced the Treasury Department’s commitment to lend up to $20 billion to Argentina’s central bank and directly purchase Argentine pesos in an effort to stabilize Argentina’s currency markets. Word then leaked that Treasury was seeking to organize a consortium of private financial institutions to invest another $20 billion in Argentine sovereign debt—although the prospective lenders were not comfortable taking on such risks absent a guarantee from U.S. taxpayers. Bessent first justified the actions on the grounds that Argentina is a “systemically important” economy and argued that the peso was “undervalued.” Later, however, he acknowledged that the Trump administration was seeking to provide its political ally Javier Milei, and his right-wing political party, a “bridge to the election” being held on Oct. 26, in the hopes the government might pull out a victory. Shortly thereafter, Trump undermined his own economic support program by stating that the disruptions in Argentina were “not going to make a big difference for our country.” Rather than an unconditional “whatever it takes”-type commitment, the United States was signaling it would only continue supporting the peso market if Milei’s right-wing party emerged victorious. This undermined market participants’ confidence in the peso’s prospects, causing it to decline again and triggering additional purchases by the Treasury. (Treasury ultimately purchased an estimated $2 billion worth of pesos.)
The fact that Milei’s party ultimately prevailed in the elections might create the impression that this episode was a successful use of financial statecraft, meaning the U.S. government’s channeling of money and capital to influence geopolitics paid off. But looks can be deceiving. It remains unclear whether these measures will stabilize the Argentine currency for the long term, as the peso experienced a brief post-election rally but soon fell back near its pre-election levels. Milei has subsequently rejected calls to let the peso float in order to rebuild the currency’s credibility. And Argentina owes the International Monetary Fund $56 billion for loans made before the U.S. intervention. All these factors mean there are still risks that the Treasury, international financial institutions, and any private U.S. lenders enlisted in this effort could end up losing money on their investments. These actions have also implicated other domestic economic policies. For example, the financial assistance benefited Argentine beef and soy exporters who compete against the U.S. agricultural sector at a time when China in particular is looking for alternatives that are not subject to Trump’s onerous tariffs. It is dangerous to prematurely declare this episode a success. When a U.S. administration lacks a sufficient appreciation for the role finance plays in geopolitics, it risks mismanaging its responsibilities—and in the process creating economic and political instability.
The fact that Milei’s party ultimately prevailed in the elections might create the impression that this episode was a successful use of financial statecraft, meaning the U.S. government’s channeling of money and capital to influence geopolitics paid off. But looks can be deceiving. It remains unclear whether these measures will stabilize the Argentine currency for the long term, as the peso experienced a brief post-election rally but soon fell back near its pre-election levels. Milei has subsequently rejected calls to let the peso float in order to rebuild the currency’s credibility. And Argentina owes the International Monetary Fund $56 billion for loans made before the U.S. intervention. All these factors mean there are still risks that the Treasury, international financial institutions, and any private U.S. lenders enlisted in this effort could end up losing money on their investments. These actions have also implicated other domestic economic policies. For example, the financial assistance benefited Argentine beef and soy exporters who compete against the U.S. agricultural sector at a time when China in particular is looking for alternatives that are not subject to Trump’s onerous tariffs. It is dangerous to prematurely declare this episode a success. When a U.S. administration lacks a sufficient appreciation for the role finance plays in geopolitics, it risks mismanaging its responsibilities—and in the process creating economic and political instability.
And so to Killer of the IPA's wrap-up - relax, that $40 billion bail out is pending ...
In economics I was taught good money should be three things: a store of value, a medium of exchange and a unit of account. Modern currencies are obviously no longer stores of value. That’s why highly leveraged purchases of things governments and banks can’t reproduce, such as land, tend to be winning investment strategies. Accelerating money creation almost guarantees their appreciation in nominal terms.
Tightening the screws on lending is one way to limit this phenomenon, but don’t hold your breath. M3 increased 7.3 per cent in the past 12 months alone.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority rolled out new mortgage rules last week – only a fifth of new loans can be to borrowers with a debt of greater than six times their income from February – that were akin to imposing a 300km/h road speed limit.
“These new limits won’t be binding on most banks so will have little impact on the aggregate flow of credit to either owner-occupiers or investors,” chairman John Lonsdale said.
The Australian dollar tap isn’t about to be turned off anytime soon.
Adam Creighton is chief economist at the Institute of Public Affairs.
Tightening the screws on lending is one way to limit this phenomenon, but don’t hold your breath. M3 increased 7.3 per cent in the past 12 months alone.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority rolled out new mortgage rules last week – only a fifth of new loans can be to borrowers with a debt of greater than six times their income from February – that were akin to imposing a 300km/h road speed limit.
“These new limits won’t be binding on most banks so will have little impact on the aggregate flow of credit to either owner-occupiers or investors,” chairman John Lonsdale said.
The Australian dollar tap isn’t about to be turned off anytime soon.
Adam Creighton is chief economist at the Institute of Public Affairs.
The pond also promises not to hold its breath or cry for Argentina, or for that matter shed a tear for King Donald's economic policies. After all, FA and FO ...
As King Donald has been mentioned a few times, the pond should and will end with the immortal Rowe, featuring war criminal Hogsbreath and King Donald ...
Forget the gung ho war criminal, and the victims of war crimes on the high seas, instead note the uncanny way that the immortal Rowe catches King Donald in all his glory ...
And this is for those who might have missed it ... more King Donald ...
