|
Who's Mr Flip Flop Now? John Howard: "I think [superannuation is] capable of becoming a political diversion and I don't believe in diversions." This quote shows that the little voice within which serves to remind us to do the right thing when we are about not to, has long been missing in John Howard. The fragmenting of his psyche is so complete that he is unaware of the glaringly, bleedingly obvious fact that for him diversionary tactics are the prime mover. He does it so often that he is no longer aware he is doing it. While Howard apologists feebly struggle to paint his superannuation pre-emptive strike on Mark Latham as sensible politics, the rest of us are smelling his blood, and it is mixed with the foul odour of fear. His super flip flop is a case of being forced, screaming and kicking, to do the right thing, but only to save his skin. He continues to believe in government as a branch of the private sector. Matt Price: "He still insists the super scheme is part of an overall package that under-rewards the men and women who run the country." So he doesn't believe in cutting super, he has just done it for political expediency, in the hope that by removing it as a vote loser he can concentrate on the issues of "national importance" such as encouraging terrorism and xenophobia, and handing Australia over to America as their 51st state. Having vowed to pass the most contentious legislation in decades (from a politician's point of view), Howard is now telling us on commercial radio that while he detests having to do so, he is not prepared to "die in a ditch" over it. He is trying to play it all down by giving the subject a "two or three out of 10" rating on the scale of important issues. Mark Latham and just about every citizen of Australia begs to differ. Let us pray someone had a hidden camcorder during the furore in the Coalition party room when he did a Rumpelstiltskin to get his way. How wonderful it would be to see leaked footage of Bronwyn Bishop going berserk as she sliced and diced Howard for caving in to Latham. Howard is said to have been furious at his suddenly back-talking spaniels. George Brandis said Latham would be the winner out of all this, while Christopher Pyne seconded the motion, claiming Howard's credibility would be damaged. Hee-hee. Credibility! Another MP told the PM: "You were in a staring contest, and you blinked." Is this a case of three Blinks and you're out? Because Blink Number One occurred last week when Howard caved in to the US on Free Trade. The new superannuation scheme, bringing the taxpayer contribution to MPs' from the obscene 69 per cent of salary down to the community standard of 9 percent, won't kick in until the next election, which sure beats putting it off to the election after that. Maybe this will encourage ratbags like Wilson Tuckey to quit politics. With any luck, we might see an exodus of ratbags. Ron Boswell, National Party Senate leader says: "How are we ever going to get reasonable judges and people in this place (Parliament) if the standard of remuneration is reduced. In the worst possible way, it is populist." I hate to keep bringing in the personal (remember, I'm just a bloke from the burbs), but here is why Boswell is wrong. Last night my daughter's basketball team won by 20 points and everyone got a goal. This happened because the star player, whom everyone likes but who often hogs the ball, was absent. Usually if she is hot they win and if she's not hot they lose. Without her every other player got more than their share of the ball and they all came through like champs. Remove the so-called "stars" from the political equation, that is the ones who see becoming an MP or a judge as a career move for primarily lucrative reasons, and these positions will suddenly become available to far more qualified people who are usually too busy on the front lines keeping our social democracy alive to be bothered with putting on tutu's and becoming privileged parliamentarians or judges. Ironically, John Howard, the big end of town's pet puppet, might have signalled the beginning of the end for rorting politicians. John Hewson says that too many parliamentarians come from the ranks of party appartchiks who have never held a real job. That 30 or 40 years ago the men and women who entered politics were leaving behind succesful careers in other fields to--get this--serve their country. Leave us not hold our collective breath, but in the not too distant future we could once again be electing a parliament of the people instead of the usual plutocratic muster* of lawyers and corporate con men. Then again, this may only signal the beginning of a parliamentary stampede to the compensatory wage rise trough. Sorry for being so naive. * a group of peacocks is referred to as a muster. PS: An article by Andrew Bolt, conservative to the point of being fascist, leads one to believe that Howard might not last until the election. His replacement would be Peter Costello, who everyone hates, or Tony Abbott, who everyone hates. Churches throughout the land should get their bells of liberation polished and ready to peel. Links: |
SCUM AT THE TOP is not copyrighted and may be used in whole or in part for any purpose the reader chooses.
Published in Melbourne, Australia by the Political Prisoners of the Future.