Talking Politics | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Talking Politics

scottyturnerscurse

Tiger Legend
Apr 29, 2006
5,167
2,009
Interesting, look forward to the next instalment "Ex Rudd Gilard ministers in The same noble profession"
Conroys gig as head of Responsible Wagering Australia would be hard to toss.

Imagine being a former minister, under the old, ridiculously generous super scheme who decides after leaving parliament to shill for big gambling. Conroy should be ashamed of himself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
18,201
17,597
Camberwell
Agreed
Harold Holt was probably the last one who didn't go into a massively paid private sector job after leaving the Prime Ministership.
Or did he?????????????
I agree with the sentiment about ex politicians and there are plenty of examples of noses in the trough but I am struggling to remember an ex prime minister who did this . Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke, Keating, Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Turnbull? I stand to be corrected but is there an example?
 

22nd Man

Tiger Legend
Aug 29, 2011
9,185
3,597
Essex Heights
I agree with the sentiment about ex politicians and there are plenty of examples of noses in the trough but I am struggling to remember an ex prime minister who did this . Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke, Keating, Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Turnbull? I stand to be corrected but is there an example?
Think you are right...first 5 were in their late 50 s or 60s when they were rolled by the electors or their own party and pretty much retired to write their memoirs. Rudd on global campaign for relevance funded by his wife's fortune, Gilard acedemic, Turnbull funded by his own fortune.
 

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
18,201
17,597
Camberwell
Think you are right...first 5 were in their late 50 s or 60s when they were rolled by the electors or their own party and pretty much retired to write their memoirs. Rudd on global campaign for relevance funded by his wife's fortune, Gilard acedemic, Turnbull funded by his own fortune.
yes. Fraser was on the "campaign for relevance" as well from memory. I think he ran for the head of CHOGM which had some relevance in those days and was involved in landmine campaigns as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

tigerman

It's Tiger Time
Mar 17, 2003
24,150
19,619
The enquiry into the Australia Post Cartier watches brouhaha will not be made public, Morrison from marketing wants his faux outrage to be forgotten.
It's funny how the enquiry is set up to conclude, and then kept hush hush just before Christmas.

What a despicable, hypocritical Government.

Communications Minister Paul Fletcher signalled on Monday the report would kept secret, despite indicating last month that it would be made public.

 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 3 users

tigerlove

Tiger Legend
Aug 9, 2014
16,601
7,003
Not sure it is a disincentive to not support industries where a lot of people are employed, I think it has a lot more to do with how much influence the industry has.

As for that article, it claims 258,000 people employed in mining in 2018. No idea where they get that from, still, Dept of Industry so I suppose they are blowing their own horn.

But, if jobs are an issue why do they keep screwing education, far more jobs in education as shown by the figures on employment by industry on the parliament website:

QG-EmploymentIndustryStatistics-002.png


The Arts, even after the COVID impact which was particularly bad for the arts, employs more people.

Mining employs about 1.5% of the workforce so not huge.

I know there is also employment to support mining, but the same can be said for other industries. With FIFO being a fair part of the mining workforce they also don't contribute as much to wherever they are located. Plus, they leave a mess behind.

Mining is a highly automated business these days and we all know how Qatar makes multiple times out royalties from exported gas even though they export a similar amount.

So, I am not convinced of the supposed huge contribution to Australia that mining apparently makes.

In any case, mining things like coal and gas is not a great long term prospect, fact is the world is moving away from fossil fuels. Time to invest in the future not the past.

DS

That's incorrect regarding mining. If you include all services that are based around the mining industry the link I gave you states this:

”When mining services are included, the broader sector accounts for more than 1 million employees.”

You are vastly underestimating the value to Australia not just in employment but in export dollar and investment into Australia.

Again I'm not agreeing with the strategy, I'm just explaining the complexity politically. We have 4 year terms, governments are thrown out at a whim. Our system is not designed to encourage long-term decisions, it's all about the now if you want to be re-elected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

22nd Man

Tiger Legend
Aug 29, 2011
9,185
3,597
Essex Heights
yes. Fraser was on the "campaign for relevance" as well from memory. I think he ran for the head of CHOGM which had some relevance in those days and was involved in landmine campaigns as well.
And ended up quitting the Liberals... But as we don't have local royals ex PMs can open doors for causes as well as cash.
 

DavidSSS

Tiger Legend
Dec 11, 2017
10,523
17,875
Melbourne
Yes, mining does have support services around it which also create employment.

But the contrast I gave was education. Are there no support services around education providing jobs? Well, I think there are a hell of a lot of support services around education providing jobs Housing for international students. All the services students need. All the services universities, colleges and schools need.

The fact is mining is increasingly mechanised, is not the huge employer it is made out to be, and all industries have services which create second order employment.

Why is mining always singled out as needing support over and above other industries? Why the special treatment? Why such low royalties in Australia? Why do we support an industry where so many of the big players are pumping their profits overseas?

DS
 

Althom

Tiger Superstar
Jul 23, 2016
1,175
1,027
Think you are right...first 5 were in their late 50 s or 60s when they were rolled by the electors or their own party and pretty much retired to write their memoirs. Rudd on global campaign for relevance funded by his wife's fortune, Gilard acedemic, Turnbull funded by his own fortune.
Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Turnbull all employed on and earning plenty on the public speaking circuit and for their "contributions" in the media.
Gillard is on several boards as is Turnbull.
All earning an absolute fortune whilst being paid +$200k + expenses by the taxpayer.
 
Last edited:

Sintiger

Tiger Legend
Aug 11, 2010
18,201
17,597
Camberwell
Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Turnbull all earning plenty on the public speaking circuit and for their "contributions" in the media.
Gillard is on several boards as is Turnbull.
All earning an absolute fortune whilst being paid +$200k + expenses by the taxpayer.
I have no problem with ex pollies and PMs on the speaking circuit but I think it depends on what it is in regards to Boards. For example if you look at Julia Gillard's Board appointments they are The Global partnership for Education, Beyond Blue, The Institute for Women's leadership, Campaign for Female Education etc. I think these are examples of what ex PMs can do to keep adding value to society. Turnbull is involved in young IT businesses which is probably fine as well given his background. I can't imagine that Gillard in particular is earning a fortune from her Board appointments.
What I don't like is when ex pollies sit on James Packer's Board or mining companies or Banks or Telstra as examples. Industries that lobby Government heavily and who would benefit greatly from inside information and contacts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

22nd Man

Tiger Legend
Aug 29, 2011
9,185
3,597
Essex Heights
Yes, mining does have support services around it which also create employment.

But the contrast I gave was education. Are there no support services around education providing jobs? Well, I think there are a hell of a lot of support services around education providing jobs Housing for international students. All the services students need. All the services universities, colleges and schools need.

The fact is mining is increasingly mechanised, is not the huge employer it is made out to be, and all industries have services which create second order employment.

Why is mining always singled out as needing support over and above other industries? Why the special treatment? Why such low royalties in Australia? Why do we support an industry where so many of the big players are pumping their profits overseas?

DS
Mining takes a back seat when it comes to supporting the construction industry.
In Victoria the minute one stop/go sign worker is out of work a $500m govt project is conjured up.
Back in April I wrote to my local ALPMHR and said when the spending stimulus comes we need something more creative and useful than a string of road and buildings. Of course that's exactly what formed the bulk of Vics budget.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Althom

Tiger Superstar
Jul 23, 2016
1,175
1,027
Mining takes a back seat when it comes to supporting the construction industry.
In Victoria the minute one stop/go sign worker is out of work a $500m govt project is conjured up.
Back in April I wrote to my local ALPMHR and said when the spending stimulus comes we need something more creative and useful than a string of road and buildings. Of course that's exactly what formed the bulk of Vics budget.
The worst thing is most of those contracts go to foreign owner companies. People get employed for sure but the real money ends up leaving the country.
 

Althom

Tiger Superstar
Jul 23, 2016
1,175
1,027
And that doesn't happen in the mining industry
Of course it does :rolleyes: but how many "Government Spending Stimulus" dollars get spent on mining projects?
The mining companies borrow from banks or self fund.
 

mrposhman

Tiger Legend
Oct 6, 2013
17,850
21,180
Yes, mining does have support services around it which also create employment.

But the contrast I gave was education. Are there no support services around education providing jobs? Well, I think there are a hell of a lot of support services around education providing jobs Housing for international students. All the services students need. All the services universities, colleges and schools need.

The fact is mining is increasingly mechanised, is not the huge employer it is made out to be, and all industries have services which create second order employment.

Why is mining always singled out as needing support over and above other industries? Why the special treatment? Why such low royalties in Australia? Why do we support an industry where so many of the big players are pumping their profits overseas?

DS

I'm not sure why you appear to despise mining companies who do pay tax (I gave the example of Woodside when you claimed they pay no tax, when they consistently have paid $400-500m per annum for at least the last 10 years). You realise that universities have tax exemptions as not for profits and therefore pay $0 in direct taxation right?

The number of jobs that you assign to mining is wrong as Tigerlove has shown. The mining companies in most cases outsource their operation hence why there is such a large amount of jobs that are not shown within MIning but are driven by the mining industry. There is also a distinct difference in average salaries within this industry as well, so the amount of indirect taxation they drive is huge. If you want to follow it all the way through too, the amount of GST and spending into other industries is also higher as because their average wages are higher then their disposable income tends to move with that too.

With regard to royalties, are you taking account purely the federal royalties or those that the states take? Most of the states are similar to overseas (ie. around 10% of the gross proceeds). The federal PRRT or MRRT is less of a benefit and should be changed IMO.

This is a recent report on what the mining industry (not clear if this also includes petroleum and gas) generates DIRECTLY to the government. This makes no mention of income taxes, GST or disposable income funding other industries. That $40bn is the equivalent of the federal spend on education. Interesting position being as you champion the education sector but dismiss what the mining industry generates.

 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Baloo

Delisted Free Agent
Nov 8, 2005
44,113
18,925
To think this guy is a member of federal Parliament.

Screenshot_20210108-071835_Twitter.jpg
 
  • Wow
  • Angry
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users

nswtiger

tiger army tiger army!! thank you very much
Feb 14, 2005
1,433
836
Nrth NSW
that is a poor (but true) reflection of the current state of our so called political system and people who represent it

and yes Craig Kelly is an Australian politician ............God help us all!!!