Australian Politics, Mark II


Not really beni.

You just tend to confuse yourself; the rest of us are very clear about your Agenda.


What? Assuming the libs are full of ■■■■? I do have an agenda to prove that most of them are on the take if that’s what you’re referring to?


Yes, proceed.


Benfti is correct - This kind of debating tactic has been around for yonks - All we’ve done is give it a tag.



Interesting that he’s running for the Greens.

I thought it would be benifitial to run as an Independent.

Like Kerryn Phelps


That’s what I was thinking. Don’t think rusted on libs would ever vote greens no matter how good the candidate.


I’d say it’s because Oliver Yates is running as an independent in that seat as well, if Burnside ran as one also they’d be stealing a lot of the same votes.

I just want to see Frydenberg burn.

Rusted on Libs only vote for Libs, Nats in a pinch.


Can politicians also perform legal work? I assume there is conflict there somewhere.

I’d prefer burnside in the courts rather than parliament.


No, but with that being said if you’re a lawyer who’s invested in serving the public interest you can do more in parliament.


Burnside is a very good man. I have been to a number of sessions where he has spoken on the plight of refugees and he is so compelling. I also reckon he would be better as an independent, as even Labor people may be interested in voting for him, but I reckon depending on preferences he could give the Liberal grub a fright.


Don’t think too many people in Toorak area are much worried about the plight of refugees so hard to see him giving the Tories a fright there. Hope I am wrong.


Actually think you would find a much greater level of support for refugees in Toorak and South Yarra then most working class suburbs.


A lot of doctors wifes, as they say.


Frydenberg would be carrying the Liberal campaign in Victoria and Morrison would be a negative here. Frydenberg would want to run the campaign mainly in his Treasury hat, but will be forced to to give greater focus on climate change policies. It would certainly be an issue in his constituency , where he will have to engage on Greens policies.


And latte sippers?


Don’t you mean the chardonay set?


Yep, and that’s also the main issue Yates is running on, climate, which the Libs policy is rubbish.

He’s got a very hard time going against those two, ones a ex lib and the other is very well respected.


Treasury scolds Coalition for exaggerating impact of Labor’s proposed negative gearing overhaul

Federal Treasury has scolded the Coalition for overstating the impact of Labor’s negative gearing changes.

The revelation blunts the Government’s attacks against the proposed overhaul of housing tax concessions.

The Australian Labor Party wants to curb negative gearing deductions by limiting the tax break to new investment properties.

Since 2016, the Coalition has continued to claim the plan would “smash” housing values with a “sledgehammer”.

But it can be revealed Treasury explicitly told the government it should not even claim home values “will” fall under the proposal.

Emails obtained by the ABC reveal that last January, Acting Treasurer Kelly O’Dwyer’s office asked officials to fact-check the statement that Labor’s policy to increase capital gains tax by 50 per cent and abolish negative gearing would reduce house prices.

After consulting specialist teams, the department sent back the following correction:

“The … statement is not consistent with our advice.

“We did not say that the proposed policies ‘will’ reduce house prices.

“We said that they ‘could’ put downward pressure on house prices in the short-term depending on what else was going on in the market at the time.

“But in the long-term they were unlikely to have much impact.”

The exchange is a rare public display of tension between the bureaucracy and a government of the day.

The documents were obtained by the ABC under freedom of information laws after a months-long investigation.

The correspondence between Treasury and the Minister’s office took place on January 8, 2018.

That is the same day the ABC first revealed Treasury’s view on the Opposition’s housing tax plans – that the changes would only have a “small” impact on prices.

negative gearing reform|582x373

Kelly O’Dwyer’s office was told Treasury did not say Labor’s proposals would definitely reduce house prices. Photo: AAP

‘Caught red-handed’

Shadow treasurer Chris Bowen said “the Government’s been caught red-handed” misrepresenting official advice.

“This is quite a significant revelation,” Mr Bowen said.

“[The government should] stop abusing the Treasury processes, abusing the independence of the Treasury, misrepresenting what the Treasury has said.”

Former senior public servant Andrew Podger said the advice would have been “very carefully” prepared and he praised Treasury for its “pushback”.

“Treasury’s main concern would be that it should not be misrepresented, and it should not itself be drawn into the partisan battle,” he said.

In response to questions, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg pointed to forecasts produced by the property sector, which is fiercely resisting Labor’s plan.

“Independent economic modelling commissioned by the Master Builders Association found that new builds will slow, jobs will be lost, and billions drained from the economy,” he said.

“A survey of more than 1000 people by the Property Council of Australia found … half of all investors admitted they would be forced to charge more rent and around six in 10 current investors would be discouraged from investing in property.”

Treasury appears to have maintained its view about the likely impact of the ALP’s negative gearing and capital gains policy on prices in the three years since it was announced.

In early 2016, the department confidentially told then-treasurer Scott Morrison the overhaul would likely have a small impact on prices.

“Previous changes to negative gearing … and the introduction of the [capital gains tax] discount … had little discernible impact on the market,” officials wrote three years ago.

“[But] the housing market itself has been highly cyclical and it is possible that uncertainty arising from the policy change itself could compound upon a cyclical downturn that may be underway at the time.”

Since then, the national median cost of residential property peaked and has begun falling – although that median price is still higher than three years ago.

Negative gearing on the election agenda

Taxation is set to be a battleground between the major parties at this year’s federal election, with the Coalition attacking the ALP’s tax policies on housing and shares.

Negative gearing allows investors to deduct rental losses from their income tax bill.

If elected, the ALP would restrict negative gearing to new properties and increase taxes on any profit from the sale of a rental property.

The housing tax changes would add an estimated $3 billion to the budget each year, even though existing investments would be protected from the crackdown.

Independent think tank the Grattan Institute and the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute have called for restrictions on existing housing tax breaks.

The Reserve Bank has previously said curbing negative gearing could be a good thing for financial stability.



The LNP’s messaging resembles the motives of most Scooby Doo villain-of-the-weeks