Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Voice

Joined
3 July 2009
Posts
25,073
Reactions
20,276
Allowing a politician to lock anyone up indefinitely was always at odds with Australian values.

Courts should be the only mechanism for locking people up and even there it should never be indefinite.

Realistically there are no unintended consequences just the law in operation unfortunately taking 20 years making.

The Coalition attacking Labor over the release of all other than the person in the court case shows they have no regard for the law.

Also the Coalition urging Labor the lock people up using terrorisms laws real is a turn into Nazism.
The problem with anything that is in the constitution, it is open to interpretation and how the High Court will interpret it is an unknown.
As now the Victorian Government has found out with the EV mileage tax.
Even what someone can challenge in the constitution is ambiguous, so I have very little confidence in anything being put in the constitution, but hey we all see things differently.
That's the problem. :rolleyes:
 
Joined
28 August 2022
Posts
4,270
Reactions
6,722
The problem with anything that is in the constitution, it is open to interpretation and how the High Court will interpret it is an unknown.
As now the Victorian Government has found out with the EV mileage tax.
Even what someone can challenge in the constitution is ambiguous, so I have very little confidence in anything being put in the constitution, but hey we all see things differently.
That's the problem. :rolleyes:
We all have our own version especially if wearing rose tinted glasses !!!!!
 

JohnDe

Property, ASX, US stock market investor
Joined
11 March 2020
Posts
3,022
Reactions
3,804
Allowing a politician to lock anyone up indefinitely was always at odds with Australian values.

Courts should be the only mechanism for locking people up and even there it should never be indefinite.

Realistically there are no unintended consequences just the law in operation unfortunately taking 20 years making.

The Coalition attacking Labor over the release of all other than the person in the court case shows they have no regard for the law.

Also the Coalition urging Labor the lock people up using terrorisms laws real is a turn into Nazism.

But an important fact revealed in the High Court’s reasons for its ruling against indefinite detention exposes just how shambolic the government’s approach has been.
In paragraph 63 of the reasons for its ruling, it is revealed an agreed statement of facts between the government and the solicitors for the plaintiff – the child sex abuser known as NZYQ.
The concession given by the government on May 30 this year, was that the plaintiff could not be removed from Australia and there was no prospect of the plaintiff being removed in the foreseeable future.
This admission by Immigration Minister Andrew Giles made the High Court’s decision inevitable.
It effectively handed the issue of indefinite detention to the courts to decide on the basis that the government had conceded that the basis on which it is founded could not be fulfilled in this case.
In paragraph 66, it is further revealed that on August 29 O’Neill went on a mad rush to try and deport NZYQ by contacting Australia’s closest allies – Five Eyes partners of the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand.
Unsurprisingly, none of them were interested in taking a convicted sex offender. Why would they?


Detention disaster of Labor’s own making, even if Clare O’Neil is blaming everyone else

The immigration detention disaster now engulfing the Albanese government is one entirely of its own making.

The High Court documents released on Tuesday confirm this.

Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil has sought to shift blame to everybody else.

But an important fact revealed in the High Court’s reasons for its ruling against indefinite detention exposes just how shambolic the government’s approach has been.

And the threat to keep parliament sitting until the government can fix the problem is nobody else’s fault but its own.

In paragraph 63 of the reasons for its ruling, it is revealed an agreed statement of facts between the government and the solicitors for the plaintiff – the child sex abuser known as NZYQ.

The concession given by the government on May 30 this year, was that the plaintiff could not be removed from Australia and there was no prospect of the plaintiff being removed in the foreseeable future.

This admission by Immigration Minister Andrew Giles made the High Court’s decision inevitable.

It effectively handed the issue of indefinite detention to the courts to decide on the basis that the government had conceded that the basis on which it is founded could not be fulfilled in this case.

The government clearly knew it had stuffed up.

In paragraph 66, it is further revealed that on August 29 O’Neill went on a mad rush to try and deport NZYQ by contacting Australia’s closest allies – Five Eyes partners of the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand.

Unsurprisingly, none of them were interested in taking a convicted sex offender. Why would they?

By then it was all too late. The question the government refuses to answer is whether O’Neill knew in the first place or was dispatched to try and clean up Giles’ mess.

The Opposition immigration spokesman Dan Tehan suggests that the admission that NZYQ could never be deported should never have been made in the first place by the government.

It made a rod for its own back.

There can be no doubt that this is a monumental stuff up at a senior Ministerial level.

SIMON BENSON
 
Joined
28 August 2022
Posts
4,270
Reactions
6,722
But an important fact revealed in the High Court’s reasons for its ruling against indefinite detention exposes just how shambolic the government’s approach has been.
In paragraph 63 of the reasons for its ruling, it is revealed an agreed statement of facts between the government and the solicitors for the plaintiff – the child sex abuser known as NZYQ.
The concession given by the government on May 30 this year, was that the plaintiff could not be removed from Australia and there was no prospect of the plaintiff being removed in the foreseeable future.
This admission by Immigration Minister Andrew Giles made the High Court’s decision inevitable.
It effectively handed the issue of indefinite detention to the courts to decide on the basis that the government had conceded that the basis on which it is founded could not be fulfilled in this case.
In paragraph 66, it is further revealed that on August 29 O’Neill went on a mad rush to try and deport NZYQ by contacting Australia’s closest allies – Five Eyes partners of the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand.
Unsurprisingly, none of them were interested in taking a convicted sex offender. Why would they?
In my troubled mind these sort of people "oxygen thieves" deserve only 1 thing a lifetime of looking at four walls. They don't have the right to have freedom, no matter how well controlled it is. Case that comes to mind is the Birney's here in WA. Gaoled for life and then held at the Governer's Pleasure. In other words a truley life sentence.
 

Sean K

on permanent holidays
Joined
21 April 2006
Posts
20,848
Reactions
8,561
But an important fact revealed in the High Court’s reasons for its ruling against indefinite detention exposes just how shambolic the government’s approach has been.
In paragraph 63 of the reasons for its ruling, it is revealed an agreed statement of facts between the government and the solicitors for the plaintiff – the child sex abuser known as NZYQ.
The concession given by the government on May 30 this year, was that the plaintiff could not be removed from Australia and there was no prospect of the plaintiff being removed in the foreseeable future.
This admission by Immigration Minister Andrew Giles made the High Court’s decision inevitable.
It effectively handed the issue of indefinite detention to the courts to decide on the basis that the government had conceded that the basis on which it is founded could not be fulfilled in this case.
In paragraph 66, it is further revealed that on August 29 O’Neill went on a mad rush to try and deport NZYQ by contacting Australia’s closest allies – Five Eyes partners of the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand.
Unsurprisingly, none of them were interested in taking a convicted sex offender. Why would they?

O'Neil and Giles are quite possibly the two worst ministers in government history. Airbus is obviously going to spin the magnets and get them out of any position of responsibility during the reshuffle.
 

JohnDe

Property, ASX, US stock market investor
Joined
11 March 2020
Posts
3,022
Reactions
3,804
O'Neil and Giles are quite possibly the two worst ministers in government history. Airbus is obviously going to spin the magnets and get them out of any position of responsibility during the reshuffle.

Amateurs.

The government knew the High Court was likely to rule against the indefinite detention of a stateless person, a convicted child rapist known only as NZYQ, and initially sought to circumvent an adverse ruling by deporting him to a third country.
But when that didn’t work out, it failed to develop a plan B. As the furore grew over the release on to our streets of numerous foreign criminals who had no right to be here, including murderers, rapists and pedophiles, Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil first falsely claimed the government was caught flat-footed because it had been advised it would win the case.
Then she said there was nothing that could be done because “you can’t out-legislate the High Court”. Then she introduced legislation that she claimed was the toughest and fastest ever, only to have to accept a series of opposition amendments to strengthen it, such as mandatory reporting requirements and ankle bracelets.
And even after the government’s self-proclaimed leap from impotence to faux-toughness, there was more.
First it turned out some criminals had been released without ankle bracelets; then it turned out that at least one had simply refused to wear an ankle bracelet and had been allowed to abscond without one. Then, once the court’s judgment was issued, it turned out ongoing detention would likely be permitted after all provided immigration detainees had an “unacceptable risk of reoffending”.
And finally it turned out – if the opposition’s take on the court’s decision is right – that the court had not, in fact, required the release of anyone other than NZYQ, meaning every other criminal released is because this incompetent minister panicked and a Prime Minister who had always been soft on borders didn’t object.
The upshot of all this is that the Albanese government has needlessly exposed the community to an unacceptable risk and lied about it. What has been abundantly on display is ministers who are out of their depth and a Prime Minister who won’t take charge.

Anthony Albanese bungles policy

“Prediction is very difficult,” Nobel laureate physicist Niels Bohr said, “especially if it’s about the future.” Even so, there’s one forecast that’s becoming easier to make: namely that Anthony Albanese will lead a one-term government.

The government’s contortions over the 141-plus foreign criminals it has released into the community are a case in point.

The government knew the High Court was likely to rule against the indefinite detention of a stateless person, a convicted child rapist known only as NZYQ, and initially sought to circumvent an adverse ruling by deporting him to a third country.

But when that didn’t work out, it failed to develop a plan B. As the furore grew over the release on to our streets of numerous foreign criminals who had no right to be here, including murderers, rapists and pedophiles, Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil first falsely claimed the government was caught flat-footed because it had been advised it would win the case.

Then she said there was nothing that could be done because “you can’t out-legislate the High Court”. Then she introduced legislation that she claimed was the toughest and fastest ever, only to have to accept a series of opposition amendments to strengthen it, such as mandatory reporting requirements and ankle bracelets.

And even after the government’s self-proclaimed leap from impotence to faux-toughness, there was more.

First it turned out some criminals had been released without ankle bracelets; then it turned out that at least one had simply refused to wear an ankle bracelet and had been allowed to abscond without one. Then, once the court’s judgment was issued, it turned out ongoing detention would likely be permitted after all provided immigration detainees had an “unacceptable risk of reoffending”.

And finally it turned out – if the opposition’s take on the court’s decision is right – that the court had not, in fact, required the release of anyone other than NZYQ, meaning every other criminal released is because this incompetent minister panicked and a Prime Minister who had always been soft on borders didn’t object.

The upshot of all this is that the Albanese government has needlessly exposed the community to an unacceptable risk and lied about it. What has been abundantly on display is ministers who are out of their depth and a Prime Minister who won’t take charge.

And in politics, almost nothing is more obviously manufactured than bluster to mask the weakness and ineptitude that have been on display ever since this issue broke.

Underlying it all is a sense that the government might actually have been relieved at a court decision that could be made to justify releasing immigration detainees, thus appeasing the activist lobby inside Labor Party branches.

Add in the arrival last week of a boatload of asylum-seekers, the first to get to the Australian mainland in a decade, that could not have come at a worse time because it has compounded the reviving suspicions that Labor is incorrigibly soft on illegal migration.

Voters normally give first-term governments the benefit of the doubt. As well, governments can normally ride out rocky periods if the public thinks they’re basically right on the big issues. Albanese, though, never established a strong political brand in opposition, other than to stress that he wasn’t Scott Morrison.

That means he’s more readily damaged by obvious failure, such as the catastrophic loss of his signature voice referendum and the monumental broken promise to cut power bills by $275 per household a year.

This Prime Minister doesn’t have an accumulated store of goodwill to assuage voters hammered by cost-of-living pressure, such as home buyers whose mortgage repayments have nearly doubled since the election, especially when the government is making a bad situation worse through its own policies.

The renewable energy crusade, with transmission lines through pristine bush and prime agricultural land, and ugly wind turbines off the coast disrupting whale migration and decimating bird life, is starting to alienate the conservation forces it’s supposed to please.

Then there’s the increased risk of blackouts this summer as coal-fired power stations age and there’s no gas back-up for intermittent wind and solar energy (because to buy off the Greens the ALP is now anti-gas, too).

On the industrial relations front, changes to workplace laws are more about union paybacks for millions in electoral donations than any real wins for workers and will do nothing to boost our productivity, which the Reserve Bank warns is critical to get inflation under control and sustain our prosperity.

5c96f596fff572ca0d97db8a174ff477.jpg
Anthony Albanese and Clare O'Neil arrive for Question Time at Parliament House in Canberra. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Finally, there’s the government’s instinct to try to buy votes with cash from taxpayers – robbing Peter to pay Paul – on every perceived problem, such subsidised electricity bills, instead of addressing the underlying cause, in this case unachievable targets on renewables that can’t be met, will cost us hundreds of billions, do virtually nothing about lowering emissions and just make us even more energy vulnerable as a nation.

Unlike former Queensland premier Peter Beattie, who made a virtue of owning his government’s mistakes, or former prime minister John Howard, who revived a flagging first-term government with tax reform boldness, this Prime Minister’s response to vicissitudes has been to get on a plane rather than to get behind his desk and do the job needed to reset his government.

That might work if our leader is looking dominant on the world stage but, instead, he’s just derided as a “handsome boy”, reluctant to confront the Chinese dictator over deliberate injuries to Australian sailors. For Albanese right now, the trouble with the perception that he is not up to the job is that it starts to become self-reinforcing.

Of course, political success doesn’t require absolute excellence in government, just basic competence plus voter sentiment that the opposition could be even worse. But right now, not even this is working in the government’s favour.

Peter Dutton’s decision to oppose the voice back in April when it still had 60 per cent support showed a rare disposition to do what’s right rather than what’s merely politically expedient. And his success in out-arguing and out-campaigning the Prime Minister should have given the Opposition Leader the confidence to create a clear and compelling contrast on other issues, too.

We can see he’s the one driving the mop-up of the government’s detainee mess, but it’s more than that. There’s a push inside the opposition for a bigger, bolder version of Morrison’s super for housing policy. There’s a growing understanding that it’s now legal rather than illegal immigration that’s out-of-control, driven not by our national interest but by universities’ business model. And last week the Coalition energy spokesman flagged a policy centred on no further retirements of coal-fired power, rapid development of new gas fields and an end to the nuclear ban.

What’s not to like in policies that turn renters into owners, put the government rather than unaccountable institutions back in charge, and make it affordable to keep the lights on?

If Dutton can get these policies into voters’ minds without much internal dissent, Labor really will be in trouble.
 
Joined
28 August 2022
Posts
4,270
Reactions
6,722
O'Neil and Giles are quite possibly the two worst ministers in government history. Airbus is obviously going to spin the magnets and get them out of any position of responsibility during the reshuffle.
And to add to the woeful list the Ag Minister Watt. All gone the sooner the better
 

JohnDe

Property, ASX, US stock market investor
Joined
11 March 2020
Posts
3,022
Reactions
3,804
And to add to the woeful list the Ag Minister Watt. All gone the sooner the better

Sadly, the PM is lost in the Canberra gutter.

Anthony Albanese has effectively thrown his Ministers for Immigration and Home Affairs under a political bus as he struggles to avoid the backlash over the gutter politics of accusing Peter Dutton of “protecting pedophiles over children”.
The Prime Minister has refused to repeat the allegations, endorse what his ministers did and stands accused of abrogating his duty as Labor leader.
After a week of intensely emotional attacks on the Leader of the Opposition in an effort to deflect the blame for the mishandling of the release of more than 100 convicted criminals including murderers, rapists and child sex offenders, Dutton has declared the Prime Minister has “crossed the line”.

PM throws his Ministers for Immigration and Home Affairs under a political bus

“The Prime Minister crossed the line this week. The fact is, it’s the complete opposite of the truth and you can say that is the rough and tumble of politics but I really think that the wheels are falling off the government,” Dutton said on Friday.

“I think they’re becoming more and more desperate and they lash out like this and the Prime Minister sent his ministers out. He didn’t have the guts to make the comments himself,” he said.

Immigration Minister Andrew Giles and Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil accused Dutton in Parliament of being responsible for the “whole thing” in the release of the immigration detainees as well as being a “protector of pedophiles” and “an apologist for child sex offenders”.

Other Ministers agreed with the attack on Dutton as part of a government-wide effort to destroy the resurgent Coalition Leader.

O’Neil continued the parliamentary attack on Thursday accusing Dutton of being a protector of pedophiles and had to be brought into line by the Speaker, Milton Dick, who forced her, over government arguments, to withdraw the remarks and moderate her language.

On Thursday evening, despite other ministers endorsing O’Neil’s attack, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles refused to repeat the allegations as did former Labor Leader Bill Shorten who said they were not his words and said he would have mounted a different attack on Dutton.

Shorten has previously refused to parrot the lines distributed to Ministers on moral and political issues, most recently taking a strong stand against the rise of anti-Semitism.

Shortly after Dutton’s television declaration on Friday morning that Albanese had gone too far, had “crossed the line”, had sent his ministers out on the attack and didn’t have the guts to make the comment himself, Albanese tried to distance himself from the accusations in a final interview with Melbourne’s 3AW host Neil Mitchell.

When asked twice if he endorsed the words of his ministers accusing Dutton of being a protector of pedophiles, Albanese said: “I’m accountable for what I say”.

When Mitchell said “you’re the boss” and asked again if he endorsed what was said Albanese repeated: “I’m responsible for what I say”.

He then said it was time that Dutton was “responsible for what he said”.

Despite leading the Parliamentary attacks and standing by the ministers who ferociously attacked Dutton, Albanese is now refusing to repeat the words, endorse his ministers or apologize.

Even as a victim of Parliamentary attacks Dutton is coming out on top of Labor’s ministers, demanding Albanese take leadership responsibility and turning public opinion further against Labor.

DENNIS SHANAHAN
NATIONAL EDITOR
 
Joined
28 August 2022
Posts
4,270
Reactions
6,722
Sadly, the PM is lost in the Canberra gutter.

Anthony Albanese has effectively thrown his Ministers for Immigration and Home Affairs under a political bus as he struggles to avoid the backlash over the gutter politics of accusing Peter Dutton of “protecting pedophiles over children”.
The Prime Minister has refused to repeat the allegations, endorse what his ministers did and stands accused of abrogating his duty as Labor leader.
After a week of intensely emotional attacks on the Leader of the Opposition in an effort to deflect the blame for the mishandling of the release of more than 100 convicted criminals including murderers, rapists and child sex offenders, Dutton has declared the Prime Minister has “crossed the line”.
Airbus Albo, may he stay airborne much longer
 

Sean K

on permanent holidays
Joined
21 April 2006
Posts
20,848
Reactions
8,561
Sadly, the PM is lost in the Canberra gutter.

Anthony Albanese has effectively thrown his Ministers for Immigration and Home Affairs under a political bus as he struggles to avoid the backlash over the gutter politics of accusing Peter Dutton of “protecting pedophiles over children”.
The Prime Minister has refused to repeat the allegations, endorse what his ministers did and stands accused of abrogating his duty as Labor leader.
After a week of intensely emotional attacks on the Leader of the Opposition in an effort to deflect the blame for the mishandling of the release of more than 100 convicted criminals including murderers, rapists and child sex offenders, Dutton has declared the Prime Minister has “crossed the line”.

O'Neil and Giles' positions are untenable. The half term reshuffle is going to be dramatic.
 

Sean K

on permanent holidays
Joined
21 April 2006
Posts
20,848
Reactions
8,561
Not as dramatic as the next election

(sorry Voice thread)

Couldn't possibly be a one term. I don't think Dutton is electable.

But; Airbus, Blackout, Burko and the above mentioned morons are doing everything in their power to lose it.

God help us if the Marxists gain votes in the lower house and any party has to form a government with them.
 
Joined
28 August 2022
Posts
4,270
Reactions
6,722
(sorry Voice thread)

Couldn't possibly be a one term. I don't think Dutton is electable.

But; Airbus, Blackout, Burko and the above mentioned morons are doing everything in their power to lose it.

God help us if the Marxists gain votes in the lower house and any party has to form a government with them.
Well the two major parties have proved themselves to be inept and next to useless. Perhaps if Gina, Twiggy, and some of the other A listers were running the show woudl we be any worst off??
 
Joined
14 February 2005
Posts
14,419
Reactions
14,907
But; Airbus, Blackout, Burko and the above mentioned morons are doing everything in their power to lose it.
Only government, of any political persuasion, I can recall being so destructive to itself would be the Liberal - Green state government in Tasmania 1996 to its early demise in 1998.

Federally this is the closest I can recall seeing to that. They're picking fights and alienating supporters in a way that just screams self-destruction.

In truth I think we're in a situation that neither major party nor their supporters really wants to admit and that's a situation of the chickens coming home to roost. There's some pretty serious issues needing solutions meanwhile the Public Service is far too hollowed out of the sort of people needed to solve them.

Housing, energy, inflation / economy, national security / war/ geopolitics, immigration, etc. Big stuff.

Regarding that point, the PS, to be honest I think many approach it the wrong way. As a nation the thing we most need from it isn't efficiency and productivity but rather it's technical expertise and the "frank and fearless" approach. That's what's most needed, expertise and getting things right. If the bureaucracy takes a month to send out the paperwork then that's a minor nuisance - not ideal but it's getting things right that's most important, that's what we need it to be good at. Sadly it's that expertise and fearless approach that's been lost with the political and management thinking of recent years which thought sending the forms out on time was the priority. :2twocents
 
Joined
28 May 2020
Posts
4,667
Reactions
8,504
In truth I think we're in a situation that neither major party nor their supporters really wants to admit and that's a situation of the chickens coming home to roost. There's some pretty serious issues needing solutions meanwhile the Public Service is far too hollowed out of the sort of people needed to solve them.
I admire your ability to think clearly and unemotionally about many issues, but this is one I would take issue witjh.
From the ABS
1701464821667.png


The growth rate has been The PS now accounts for about 16% of all Oz employees.
Over the past decade, employment has increased by 14.3%, about inline with the general population growth.
If as you say, the PS has been hollowed it, how many more PS folk do we need to fix the issue?
Housing, energy, inflation / economy, national security / war/ geopolitics, immigration, etc. Big stuff.

Regarding that point, the PS, to be honest I think many approach it the wrong way. As a nation the thing we most need from it isn't efficiency and productivity but rather it's technical expertise and the "frank and fearless" approach. That's what's most needed, expertise and getting things right. If the bureaucracy takes a month to send out the paperwork then that's a minor nuisance - not ideal but it's getting things right that's most important, that's what we need it to be good at. Sadly it's that expertise and fearless approach that's been lost with the political and management thinking of recent years which thought sending the forms out on time was the priority. :2twocents
The larger any organisation gets, whether it be the Public Service or commercial corps like Telsatra, the banks , then the worse the bureaucratic burden becomes.
They have their systems, their reviews, the constant customer feedback etc, but in the end they are large behemoths that struggle to act quickly in anything.
I dread dealing with them, and will avoid it all costs even if it costs me money, its just not worth the hassle.
Life is to be lived, not spent sitting on the end of a phone as awful recorded music plays interspersed with a voive that tells me how valuable my call is and they will get to me as soon as possible. Then when you get to the end, they cannot or will not solve the issue.
Mick
 
Joined
15 June 2023
Posts
490
Reactions
798
I admire your ability to think clearly and unemotionally about many issues, but this is one I would take issue witjh.
From the ABS
View attachment 166568

The growth rate has been The PS now accounts for about 16% of all Oz employees.
Over the past decade, employment has increased by 14.3%, about inline with the general population growth.
If as you say, the PS has been hollowed it, how many more PS folk do we need to fix the issue?

The larger any organisation gets, whether it be the Public Service or commercial corps like Telsatra, the banks , then the worse the bureaucratic burden becomes.
They have their systems, their reviews, the constant customer feedback etc, but in the end they are large behemoths that struggle to act quickly in anything.
I dread dealing with them, and will avoid it all costs even if it costs me money, its just not worth the hassle.
Life is to be lived, not spent sitting on the end of a phone as awful recorded music plays interspersed with a voive that tells me how valuable my call is and they will get to me as soon as possible. Then when you get to the end, they cannot or will not solve the issue.
Mick
I wonder how many of them work from home and go walk the dog or go for a bike ride instead of getting work done. The big issue I see in Qld is the underfunding of the people who actually do work in the public system. The health system is very over stressed here, they do anything they can to delay work because they don't have enough people on the ground and much underfunded facilities. Then you have grubs like Palachook spending billions on stadiums.
 
Joined
14 February 2005
Posts
14,419
Reactions
14,907
The growth rate has been The PS now accounts for about 16% of all Oz employees.
Over the past decade, employment has increased by 14.3%, about inline with the general population growth.
If as you say, the PS has been hollowed it, how many more PS folk do we need to fix the issue?
My knowledge of the PS is state based not federal but I'm told it's much the same for both.

Key issue in the PS isn't lack of people per se but rather it's lack of the right people.

Go back a long way and the PS used to be filled with doers. Perhaps not always the most productive doers but doers nonetheless. People who did things directly and who knew their stuff. If you looked at the PS in total then the majority of its workforce were professionals, trades and other doers of some sort.

Today if you look at the PS it's very different. Pretty much the entire technical workforce is gone completely and apart from emergency services, teaching and hospitals so are most of the other frontline doers. If you can still find anyone with technical expertise, almost certainly they're doing zero work applying that expertise directly and are simply administering the contract for someone who does. They're in that job only because they were already there and it saved government paying a redundancy. Once they retire, their replacement will be someone with no technical knowledge at all such that ultimately expertise is being removed from the PS. Meanwhile the administrative workforce has massively increased, to the point of being overwhelmingly dominant in some departments.

Related to this shift is that managers are now far more easily able to "capture" an issue than was the case previously. Going back, various professions and trades would've raised all hell if someone representing them hadn't been given input. That doesn't happen when you don't have those professions and trades employed in the first place, and enables the whole thing to be controlled by one person. That leaves the door wide open to all manner of bad things happening - it's a lot easier to corrupt one individual, especially a ladder climber who's inclined to say "yes minister", than to corrupt an entire department.

Two issues with this.

First is the efficiency one. As you point out, the PS is employing a huge number of people but what's missing from those figures is that, unlike the past, today there's also an army of contractors doing the work. Your taxes are of course ultimately paying those contractors as well as the PS workers.

Second and of relevance to this subject is the loss of expertise. That leads to all sorts of silly things being done and mistakes being made that need not happen.

So my point about the PS being hollowed out isn't about numbers. It's about it having lost knowledge in a wide range of areas and replaced that with top heavy administration.

In regard to the Voice that's a bit indirect but it's of relevance to the underlying themes. :2twocents
 
Last edited:
Joined
3 July 2009
Posts
25,073
Reactions
20,276
Absolutely nailed it smurf, every level of our competency has been undermined in the name of cheap pay rises, our education system, our trades, our health system and now to top it off we are looking at recognising certifications from the countries, who are sending their kids here for a better education.
The biggest race to the bottom in living memory IMO. :xyxthumbs
Bring it on, the loonies can spend their retirement, working out how to explain it to their grandkids.:roflmao:
 
Top