Aug 272007
 

“If Kevin Rudd and Labor believe they are ready to govern, they should take the Australian people into their confidence and start telling the truth about their policies and positions.”

This, from a man with a reputation for ‘non-core’ promises and a litany of grey-shaded tales which bear a passing resemblance at best to the truth.


Labor has already spelt out it’s policies in terms of budgetary savings on those programs already announced, yet Howard still wants the public to believe that in-principle undertakings given by the Opposition to the NT intervention, Workchoices, Mersey Hospital one-offs, and so on, should be honoured regardless of how esoteric or blatantly stinking of pork they might be.
The Mersey Hospital takeover won’t happen, despite the level of rant Howard wants to put up. The due diligence isn’t slated to be complete until after the next election at any rate, and can’t be justified on economic terms. The NT intervention will be under regular review regardless of which side wins government and Workchoices is to be scrapped either in toto or in major part should Labor win, which has already been stated. Besides, there’s no statutory requirement for Labor to lay out publically, before writs have been issued, the chapter and verse of its budgetary commitments. That all comes to pass before election day, which no-one – except for John Howard – knows the date of.
What is a “double-dishonest game” in the first place, given that Howard is only supposing that Labor won’t be honouring any or all of the government’s budgetary programs?

If Mr Rudd has now decided to oppose the government’s commitments, which of them will be axed if Labor wins government?”

Note the operative word there. IF, and it is a big if too. Howard doesn’t know what will be axed and what won’t, but yet again, it’s the bogey-man scare tactic. No substance, merely fear and loathing. It’s all rather sad really. Losing in the polls and this is the best John Howard can come up with in the turn to the home stretch. Will there be a budgetary blow-out? With a surplus of seventeen-point-whatever billion dollar surplus, I don’t think so. I think we all know just how that surplus comes about as well. If Labor chooses to use it rather than store it away like a squirrel does nuts, then the country can only benefit.