Home at last....sort of

Back in 2003, we knew - we, the people of Australia. We knew that the US invasion of Iraq was a giant sized mistake. We knew we did not want Australian troops there on an American joy-ride. Well, a joy-ride for the Bushies - not for the families of the American war dead with whom we mourn. And we marched and we marched and we marched to tell Howard and his henchman. But to no avail.

To-day Prime Minister Rudd announced the Australian troop withdrawal. Well, most of the troops will be withdrawn. Troops to guard the embassy will remain along with a further 800 Australian troops supporting troops in Afghanistan and providing diplomatic security.

Australians will not be satisfied until all troops are out of Iraq. But this begs the question of when the USA - which has put more emphasis on poor military decisions and strategies than constructive nation building - of when the USA will go home. After all, it seldom leaves a nation once it has arrived.

~~~

When you can do nothing else: bear witness.

Blogging this year has been sporadic. Miss Eagle has been living life instead including pleasuring herself in the Northern Territory during the last month. But I have to burst into print to-day over Kevin Rudd and his so called "work ethic".

Let's take a little walk down memory lane.

It is Queensland in the 1990s and Wayne Goss (Wayne Swan was State Seceretary of the ALP) has just ousted the National Party from 32 years in government. Wayne Goss was elected Premier of Queensland on 2 December 1989 and remained there until 1995. Two things characterised the Goss period of government - arrogance and aloofness - and they were demonstrated before Goss was ever sworn in as Premier.

On election night in the tally room, he famously told a group of cheering young Labor supporters who were beside themselves with understandable excitement that they should take a cold shower. In my view, it was - eventually - this same sort of arrogance and aloofness which brought the Goss Labor government unstuck so that, on the morning after the loss, Queensland Treasurer Keith de Lacey could say "There's a message in there somewhere but I don't know what it is."

And what has this to do with Kevin Rudd's so-called work ethic? Heaps - if one could just learn from the Queensland experience.

It is said that, when Rudd was interviewed by Goss for the position of Chief of Staff, Goss was taken aback when Rudd asked if there was any objection if he took Sunday off. And so the Rudd "work ethic" entered political life.

But it is not just this anecdote that provides our lesson. When the Goss government came to power it had the support of most of the Queensland Public Service. To be sure, not the support of the high-ranking bureaucrats who were put to one side with in-trays and no out-trays. But, generally speaking, the support of most members of the Queensland Public Service. Within about twelve months, the Goss Government - with Rudd as a significant player - had lost the support of the Queensland Public Service because of the way it was treated.

There was no mention then of huge work demands - they were just treated shabbily. In fact, all round many long time, long term supporters of the ALP and the incoming Goss Government were treated shabbily. However, it could also be fairly said that the Queensland Public Service was the first to feel the heat, the first to lose the faith.

So my heart goes out to the public service tribe of Canberra when people say it is a public service town, a Labor town and now people there, the "working families" there, cannot stand a fair chance of establishing the work-family balance.

I have often wondered what Kevin Rudd has learned from the Queensland experience that would change his attitudes this time around - if change there would be at all. And then I thought that Canberra is a large stage with a diverse group of players which might limit some of the attitudes seen in Queensland. Perhaps this is happening. Perhaps, behind the scenes, Rudd is receiving some astute advice - if he is not too arrogant and aloof to listen.

But - as I have always said to my kids -

if you don't chose to listen and take on board good advice.

That's OK.

Life has a way of teaching you.

It seems that the

Australian Public Service and the Commonwealth Public Sector Union

might just have a life lesson for Kevin Rudd.

~~~~
When you can do nothing else: bear witness.

Christian Palestinian needs next?

Picture from the website of Sabeel

Following this report, I hope the next thing we hear is that Kevin Rudd will attend a fundraiser for Christian Palestinians - if there are any left in Palestine as their mass exodus continues due to Israel and Hamas et al trying their best to exterminate one another.

In the West, it seems we are either apathetic and ignorant with regard to our Christian brothers and sisters in Israel and Palestine, some of whom trace their Christian origins in a direct line back to the time of Christ, or we are so carried away by Israeli and Jewish propaganda and the Christian Zionist line, predominantly from the United States, that we just go with the flow.

To know more about Palestinian Christians on the West Bank and in Israel, please go here.

Sabeel, the Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center in Jerusalem, is in the processing of establishing Waves of Prayer. The idea is that each Thursday people will pray at 12 noon in their own time zone with Sabeel for peace and justice in Israel and Palestine. Sabeel intends that Waves of Prayer will begin first in Australia's time zone.

Kevin Rudd mentioned in his speech that the estabishment of the state of Israel in 1948 was "Australian Labor government handiwork". This refers to the fact that H.V. Evatt, Australia's Foreign Minister at the time and later Leader of the Australian Labor Party, cast the first vote for the establishment of the state of Israel in the United Nations General Assembly.

Meanwhile, Christian Palestinians suffer. Christian Palestinians have their lands and livelihoods stolen. Their lives are taken in the violence and they are discrimated against by the Israelis both personally and systematically.

So, Kevin, how about it? In fact, as you and Therese are Anglicans, why not give public support to the Waves of Prayer and, while you're at it, please give Anglicord a ring. Contact details here.

When you can do nothing else: bear witness.

Is the ACTU under pressure?

Miss Eagle was forced to ask the question above after reading this. The ACTU is, perhaps, flinching under the fruit of success. It's wonderful Your Rights At Work campaign was central to the Rudd Labor Government's ascent to the reins of power.

We all watched open-mouthed the me-too campaign run by Labor in the lead up to the election. We wondered if this is what really had to happen to come to power and if Rudd would change his public tune when he came to power. Rudd seems set on being a promise-keeper and appears determined not to follow John Howard down the dishonest path of core and non-core promises.

Rudd and Gillard prior to the election were intent on projecting an image that was business-friendly and business wanted what they had got out of Howard. But, as the union movement is set to remind Rud and Gillard, the Your Rights At Work campaign by the ACTU delivered government. People who had never voted Labor before changed their vote. John Howard's Work Choices were, for most people, a bridge too far. Business has to face that fact. After all, they do love the benefits of a democracy governed by the rule of law, don't they?

And why this magic year of 2010 before things can really begin to change - if at all? Rudd had said that this was because business had to make forward plans. But, really, Kevin. A business that does not factor in the "change of government" risk? A business that can't figure out that industrial relations might change with Labor in power?

People are - by year's end - going to want demonstrable workplace change. They really would like it sooner, like right now. But their patience may stretch to year's end. After that, Kevin and Julia, if there is no demonstrable and meaningful change you will be seen as someone who keeps your word - to business but not to ordinary working Australians.

The left unions are restless. The Socialist Alliance - not an organisation brim-full of burgeoning membership - had a State conference here in Melbourne. The Saturday afternoon panel was devoted to the industrial relations scene and the AMWU, Textile, Clothing & Footwear Union, and the CFMEU as well as the Geelong & Region Trades and Labour Council turned up and clearly expressed their points of view.

The contribution of these unions was indicative of what could be a groundswell from the Left. The AMWU with its strong foothold in a declining Victorian manufacturing base clearly wants a return to the previous way of operating including Pattern Bargaining. While the TCFU outlined lucidly the way in which flow-ons have operated in Australia, the AMWU's dream of pattern bargaining is a wish that Miss Eagle predicts will remain unfulfilled. Somewhere, though, between the traditional flow-on practices and the rigidity and targetting of pattern bargaining there could be an opportunity for some new and negotiated thinking.

Traditionally, there have been unions like the AMWU and the Construction Unions who have set the pace. They have used their clout to progress demands and those with less clout - particularly in industries whose workforce is populated by women and the young - have, in time, been able to apply for flow-ons into their own industrial instruments.

However, back in the 1980s the AMWU and the Construction Unions overlooked one very important factor: the service sector. There was a time back then when the service sector was the one area of the economy that displayed marked growth at the same time as manufacturing entered its decline and some areas of construction were in the doldrums.

The AMWU drove through enterprise bargaining. This was a disaster for workers in the service sector such as the retail and hospitality industries. Enterprise bargaining has potential in the tradeable goods area and in construction. The economies of these industries were the meat and milk of the old Industrial Relations Club. The IR Club knew the ins and outs intimately and its people on a first name basis. The service industries were foreign to them - even to the men who ran the trade unions who serviced these industries. No thought had been given to how they operated: their culture, their economic milieu. I'm not sure that this has occurred yet. Draw an AIRC Commissioner into conversation over a coldie and he (very few she-s) would admit his ignorance.

To put it simply, dear Reader, in Enterprise Bargaining one could negotiate efficiencies in this wise:
If the business was making 500 ball bearings per day but efficiencies were negotiated and work practices not currently facilitated by the industrial award were streamlined and 750 ball bearings per day could now be made, then workers could negotiate a share of the increased productivity. Dead easy.

Then you go to the service industries. A check-out operator has no control over the number of customers served; the room attendant has no control over the number of beds made and rooms cleaned; the bar attendant has no control over the number of customers nor beers pulled. And while, in this day and age, it is possible to measure anything. When people do not want to find quantifiable or qualitative data, that data will never be forthcoming - particularly in relation to the work of women. This is why, in the end, Enterprise Bargaining became associated in these industries not with improved productivity but being forced into giving up conditions and working horrible hours without penalty rates. Of course, the more this sort of Enterprise Bargaining became the norm in these industries the fewer people joined trade unions. Mmmmm.....!

So to-day we look at the linked article which seems to be attributed more to Jeff Lawrence (himself from a Left union, the LHMU) than to the Rudd Government. It is interesting that this has come within ten days of the union panel at the Socialist Alliance. Within ten days of the panel at the Socialist Alliance saying that the current position of the ACTU was quite confused; saying that if the ACTU was to mount any sort of campaign it would be months away.

But the revival of the Australian Labour Advisory Council will hardly be a sop to disgruntled unions. This would have been likely to occur anyway. Similarly, union business committees to consult on legislation - as has been advised by Miss E's AWU contacts. This process is always likely under a Labor Government.

What Australian trade unions don't take to kindly is having a Labor government giving business its wish list or giving business an upper hand to the disadvantage of trade unions and, particularly, trade union rights as spelt out in ILO conventions.

And, as you are aware Kevin and Julia, the CFMEU want the abolition of the draconian Office of the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner forthwith.

Brendan Nelson stays home and sulks.

It is becoming clear just what sort of people dominate the 2008 manifestation of the Liberal Party. They are the people who just don't get it. They are the deaf who will not hear, the blind who will not see. Miss Eagle presumes that these sensory defective people have the numbers. I do not presume that there are no right-minded people in the Liberal Party. After all Pietro Georgiou, for one, is still there. I haven't heard that sort of voice getting any traction in recent debate on Aboriginal matters.

To-day Brendan Nelson and the Liberals are sulking: sulking so badly that Nelson has refused the bi-partisan offer made by the Prime Minister last week for the Leader of the Opposition to visit Aboriginal communities. The Prime Minister has nominated Friday as a day when Ministers do not have to be present in Question Time and backbenchers have greater freedom to have their say. Can someone explain to me what is wrong with that? I only have a problem with people who live in Northern Australia and the fact that they won't be home in their electorates on Friday nights, if for the weekend at all. But that's another story.


The fact is Brendan Nelson is protesting. He is not protesting about or for people. No, he is protesting about how the business of Parliament is being organised. In the current context, not the greatest item on the Agenda since the Magna Carta. In fact, Parliamentary procedure is never more important than humanity. This appears to have escaped Nelson and Abbott.


Of course, a visit to Walgett may be on the embarrassing side for Nelson - and for Abbott, too, if he were ever to move beyond the Northern Beaches of Sydney. After all, Walgett - like them and their electorates - is in New South Wales.

Now, Miss Eagle is not suggesting that life for Aboriginal people in Walgett has not improved since the Freedom Ride of 1967. Aboriginal kids use the swimming pool which once was out of the question. But Miss Eagle lived in Walgett in 2001-2002 and found it a place whose population had little knowledge of the history and social construct of the three Aboriginal groups who each call Walgett their country.

All but one business had windows covered with wire mesh. Sitting outside the one meshless business and watching was interesting. And it became clear why this one business - with an owner of Chinese ethnicity - had no mesh. This was clearly a place in which Aboriginal people felt comfortable doing business. Clearly, there was mutual trust in this place which was missing elsewhere.

Walgett - which includes the opal town of Lightning Ridge - has difficulties with its own governance. It has been in administration since 2004 and will have fresh elections later this year. The Walgett Shire Council has had an Aboriginal councillor before. Let's hope that this year they can get up more than one representative.

In Miss E's view there is a silent stand-off casting a pall over Walgett. There is the dominating force of local pastoralists - many of whom seem to see themselves as a sort of landed gentry. These are the people to whom owning land is important on many levels not least of which is as an economic base.

I'm not sure that the pastoralists see that this is probably the one great thing - apart from common humanity - that they have in common with Aboriginal people. To Aboriginal people the land is important on many levels not least of which is for sustenance of life.

However, Aboriginal relationship to land is not based, as it is for the whitefella, on "ownership". But then, in fact, many of Walgett Shire's "landed gentry" would not own the land either - at least in the freehold sense. Miss E's guess is that pastoral leasehold would still be the dominant land tensure. Please correct her if she is wrong.

So to-day a Prime Minister comes to the country of the two rivers, the Barwon and the Namoi. These rivers contribute to the major arterial system of our nation - the Murray-Darling system. I hope the visit of Kevin Rudd brings a similar hope, inspiration, and change just as the Freedom Ride did. And I hope Walgett remembers the time when the Anglican minister who had been willing to provide hospitality to the Freedom Riders felt obliged to withdraw his hospitality.

Miss Eagle hopes for the day when doors are truly open to all in Walgett and the mesh can come down from the windows.

Rudd - and a report card

On Kevin Rudd's way to the Prime Ministership, Miss Eagle was hopeful - but with many reservations. The reservations had their genesis in too much me-too-ism. Memories of the worst of the Goss Labor Government in Queensland for which Rudd was the right hand man. These reservations led to a few posts with this picture:

While Kevin 07 performed the necessary gymnastics on the way to The Lodge, Miss Eagle wondered out loud what it was that Kevin Rudd would stand for, would not resile from.

We are now at the end end of the first parliamentary sitting week of the new Labor government. Michelle Grattan has published her review of the performance so far. Miss Eagle's report card is in the form of an edited version of the picture.

Miss Eagle remains unhappy with Rudd's decision to keep the full impact of changes to industrial relations until 2010. Similarly, she does not favour delaying changes in the excesses of private school funding until 2010. All this makes as much sense to Miss E as saying to Kevin Rudd on election night that he had been elected but John Howard would remain in power for another three years. Corporations - whether they are major employers or classy corporate schools - don't think twice about delaying their impositions on others. They - if they were bright enough, flexible enough - would have factored in their risks from a change of government. So there would have been no shocks and few surprises. But still they received the soft end of the wedge.

However - and Miss E does wince slightly at the "however" - after Wednesday's superb and visionary and inclusive performance Miss Eagle can forgive much. It is undergirded by Rudd's very first call on business - to deal with homelessness. If Rudd continues to prioritise justice in this way, Miss Eagle will be able to wear the other stuff. Miss Eagle must also comment on the manner in which Rudd is setting the pace: business-like in his attention to the tasks at hand; informed by the hallmarks of Labor in government; intent on setting fresh standards of civility and vision. And all this in a down to earth manner with few, if any signs, of pretension of office.

Miss Eagle looks forward to more of that which has made such a great beginning.

Sorry - a new and national beginning

To-day is an historic day for the Commonwealth of Australia. In the Parliament of the nation, in Canberra, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd will apologise to the Aboriginal people of this nation continent for the mistreatment of Aboriginal people since European settlement began in 1788. Above all, he will apologise for the forced removal of children from their families and communities - an episode referred to as The Stolen Generations.

There has been great demand for an apology since the recommendations handed down in the Bringing Them Home report. Prime Minister John Howard, Prime Minister from 1996-2007, refused to apologise. Howard - a mean-spirited, conservative, and stubborn man - merely expressed regret but went on to promulgate the lie that no ill-treatment was carried out in living memory.

One positive effect of Howard's inaction in this matter has been to increase resolve on the part of countless Australians to see the apology carried out. Most Australians want to resolve the issues and hatreds and maltreatments of the past. We do not want the bitterness, the recrimination to continue. We want to give expression to a new way doing things which is informed by the knowledge of our history good and bad. Australians want an inclusive nation - and certainly not one where the Aboriginal people are fringedwellers socially and economically.

And so yesterday a new beginning was made with the opening of the new Parliament. For the first time in Australian history, Aboriginal people were at the centre of the ceremonial inaugurating the new parliamentary term with a Welcome to Country ceremony. Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, and Leader of the Opposition, Brendan Nelson, both made clear that as long as they had anything to do with it, Aboriginal ceremony would become an integral part of the Opening of Parliament.

To-day, Aboriginal people will stand with the Prime Minister on the floor of Parliament for the delivery of the apology. The text of the apology, set out below, was tabled in Parliament yesterday and the apology is the first item of business in the new parliamentary term.

From time to time, on this blog, Miss Eagle has discussed the topic of public forgiveness. It has been discussed in the context of public figures apologising, saying sorry. How then does the public respond to that apology and advise if there is an acceptance of the apology and whether forgiveness is the response?

After the apology to-day, Miss Eagle expects that we will enter - for a time - the realm of public forgiveness. The apology will be discussed. We will hear critiques and criticism. We will find out who is satisfied with and by it and who is not. To-day we formally enter the time of new beginnings - of repair and building. All Australians are not at the same place on this matter. But enough of us are to carry the day throughout the nation, to demand inclusion, to demand involvement so that Aboriginal people are do-ers, not done to: so that they are self-determining actors in their own story and that all Australians - settlers and Aboriginal people together - will build a new and equitable way of operating to bring that great tradition of a fair go to everyone.

THE APOLOGY

Today we honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the oldest continuing cultures in human history.
We reflect on their past mistreatment.
We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were stolen generations - this blemished chapter in our nation's history.

The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia's history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future.

We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians.
We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country.
For the pain, suffering and hurt of these stolen generations, their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry.
To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.
And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry.

We the Parliament of Australia respectfully request that this apology be received in the spirit in which it is offered as part of the healing of the nation.
For the future we take heart; resolving that this new page in the history of our great continent can now be written.
We today take this first step by acknowledging the past and laying claim to a future that embraces all Australians.
A future where this Parliament resolves that the injustices of the past must never, never happen again.
A future where we harness the determination of all Australians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, to close the gap that lies between us in life expectancy, educational achievement and economic opportunity.
A future where we embrace the possibility of new solutions to enduring problems where old approaches have failed.
A future based on mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility.
A future where all Australians, whatever their origins, are truly equal partners, with equal opportunities and with an equal stake in shaping the next chapter in the history of this great country, Australia.

And another thing, Kev....about the body and the law

Miss Eagle is indebted to Dale Hess for drawing her attention to this article by David Marr on locking up the refugees and interfering with citizens' rights to habeas corpus. So how about it, Kev? Is this repeal of laws on your list? Or will it be like the repeals of Work Choices...a bit selective, a few dregs to remain, a few bits of equity not quite addressed?

What were we really thinking? What are Kev and Krew really thinking?

What were we really thinking all through 2007 ...

....as Kevin Rudd topped the polls

....as his me-too-ism made him a small target for the Liberal/National Coalition

....as Kevin and Julia made promises to business about AWAs

....as Kev courted people with religious affiliations who had never voted Labor - ever

....as Bill Shorten of the AWU and Greg Combet of the ACTU trumped pre-selection processes and long standing, faithful sitting members to gain pre-selection and election in safe Labor seats and then rewarded with positions as Parliamentary Secretaries

We - the trade unionists, those who cared about wage and income equity, those who marched for justice - kept putting our views forward persistently. We did not say what we really felt when the ALP policies were watered down into a new reality and The Greens put forward an industrial relations policy we found more understandable. The ACTU did not want to ruffle feathers and merely expressed disappointment.

We were realistic. We wanted Howard and his henchmen and women gone. We knew that this would be a big ask. We understood that Kev and Krew would have to play it cool to get across the line. We were not going to rock the boat. We would stay on message - even if it meant biting the anxious tips of our tongues off.

Kevin got across the line - but, just as Miss Eagle questioned during the campaign the state of Kevin's Spine, she now questions Kevin's gratitude.

There has been much watering down of industrial relations policy in an attempt to mollify business interests. Changes will not be fully in place until 2010.

Let's get frank now, Kev.

You were elected in December 2007. How would it be if we said to you, Kev, "Congratulations, Kev. You've won the election, Kev. You've beaten Howard, Kev. But, Kev, you will not take power until 2010. Until then Howard remains in power and continues to live at Kirribilli. He'll water down his behaviour and his hubris a bit. In fact, he'll try very hard not to use the numbers he has in the Senate to really rock the boat. But, Kev, go away and stay cool until December 2010."

Makes real sense, doesn't it Kev. Highly rational.

In fact, Kev, in 2010 we are due for another election and - if you lose it (I realise it is considered unlikely) - it could be that nothing of lasting consequence will have changed on the industrial front and you will go down in history as Kould-have-been, Kould-have-done Kev.

To my mind, Kev, this seems darned ungrateful and downright rude.

You see, Kev, all those corporations, business people, and corporate councils you mollified or attempted to mollify did NOT turn out the vote for you, Kev. If any of them changed their vote from Liberal to Labor for you, it was precious few and certainly not in tide-turning numbers.

Not like us, Kev. Not like us - the trade unionists, the justice seekers, the footsloggers in march after march. We worked. Agreed - some of us were in targetted electorates with huge support from the ACTU, campaign organisers, and organisations like PolMin. It was these resources - financial, organisational, and human - who turned out the vote for you, Kev. True, some of them - like Miss Eagle - gave their No. 1 to The Greens for their industrial policy while ensuring the final vote went to you. But even so, we turned out more votes for you and made the difference for you in a way that no other sector of the population did - and we did it for at least eighteen straight months.

Your Rights At Work Campaign on Election Day 2007.

So, Kev, guess what? We don't give a fig for 2010. We want industrial change now. We want equity now. We don't give a fig about what you had to say to business because we think your first loyalty is to us and not to them and that there are more of us in the Australian polity than there are of them.

I realise, Kev, that it is a long time since you and Therese felt the need to have the Union help you achieve some sort of justice for yourselves in the workplace. But perhaps you might pause to think how much Unions have helped you to Christmas Dinner at The Lodge. We ask you to think about that Kev, you and your Krew, and you might be a bit indigenous about it. It is pay back time. Time to show recipricocity, recognition and gratitude. Time to be well-mannered and acknowledge how you got to be Prime Minister. Thanks, Kev. Over to you and Krew.

Your Rights At Work Teams Celebrating Kevin Rudd's Victory, December 2007

The Australian Public Service; working with us...?

To-day is Day One of the brand, spanking, shiny new Rudd Labor Government. From here the work begins. Now we know who the ministers and parliamentary secretaries are as well as those with any form of leadership responsibility. We know who are the political drivers, movers and shakers that we, Australian voters, elected.

But there is a layer of decision-making and moving and shaking below them whom we do not elect. These are the senior executives of the Australian Public Service.

The motto of the Australian Public Service Commission is working with you - but do they? Do they always? They are responsible to their political masters - but not to us. They know nothing of having to go out into the electorate and face the music. They are insulated from that.

By the time a senior executive in the Australian Public Service has reached his/her exalted position quite a few skills and defensive mechanisms have been learned. They have learned how to snow ministers, defend their positions, dodge blame, pass bucks, and cleverly word documents and legislation.

One of the reasons why the British TV comedy, Yes Minister, was such a success is because it reflects - and not necessarily with exaggeration - reality: the reality of parliaments and the public and civil service within the Westminster system of government.

In Miss Eagle's experience, governments come to power with a slateful of promises to implement. These promises, in the best of all possible worlds, have been developed by community consultation and lobbying from their own constituencies such as party branches, business or worker organisations. But, if a government has any measure of longevity, these commitments are exhausted within one three year term at least; and, if not, by half way through the second term.

One of the lessons from the Hawke period of government is that branches and party forums were sat upon. There could be no public voice let alone dissent. The solemn and hard facts were that input from party branches and forums dried up. Policy input from the bottom up virtually disappeared. This is likely to be repeated under Rudd.

What then happens is this. The reforming government gets its slateful of promises put to bed and dealt with. Government then turns around to see what is next to keep the policy ball rolling and the body politic interested and paying attention.

There is no difficulty finding what is next: there is the agenda of the non-elected senior executives of the Australian Public Service. They have a full to over-flowing slate of policy suggestions, dear Minister!

Australians learned for themselves what a difference a head of department makes when Whitlam took the reins of government in 1972 but still had a public service with a history of and symbiosis with 23 years of Liberal Party government. Adjustments then began over time in the public service which has lead to its clear (rather than obscured) politicisation.

Part of this has been the move to short term contracts which, to some of us, has meant that the senior executive service can not always pride itself on giving impartial advice to government without fear or favour.

Miss E has not the time or space to give instance after instance within the tenure of the Howard Government but Miss E suggests a detailed examination of Immigration, Defence and Attorney-General's would keep you busy for quite a long year, dear Reader.

Rudd has come out of the Australian Public Service. He held the most senior position in the Queensland Public Service under the Goss Government. He certainly has not made the mistakes of the incoming Whitlam government. He gives no public appearance of rushing to judgment on senior executive appointments although detailed scrutiny finds some ripples on the water.

Peter Shergold is still in place as Head of the Dept of Prime Minister and Cabinet. He has made it clear he wishes to leave the APS and his history makes it clear that he would not be a boon companion to the incoming government. However, Shergold is a public service professional and there is little doubt he will provide sound transitional service to the Rudd/Gillard team. Ken Henry in Treasury seems, at this stage, in little danger. He, too, is professional and has, at times, dissented from his political master, Peter Costello. It will be interesting to see how Wayne Swan manages Henry's advice.

But the departments that Miss E will watch with interest are:

1. Gillard's superportfolio of education, industrial relations and workforce participation which she sees as, virtually, a department of productivity
2. Immigration - can the culture really be changed?
3. Defence - will the senior executive service throw up talent appropriate to the extraordinary political leadership now in place
4. Attorney-General - it would be good to see true Labor traditions shining through the A-G portfolio in a manner comparable at Federal level with the manner in which Rob Hulls in Victoria has managed that state's A-G portfolio. It is necessary to counteract the stealth and development of pro-terrorism responses coming from the ghostly Philip Ruddock.

And Miss Eagle is also waiting to see the colour of the Rudd government's money on social inclusion. What will it mean in practice?

In fact, what will public service appointments within the senior executive service mean for the Rudd government and what will be measure of its service to the Australian people?

Rudd at the Rudder: measuring the homeless

At last, we have an Australian government who understands justice and equity. Earlier in the week our new Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, instructed all Labor MPs to visit a public school and a private school in their electorates to inform the schools about Labor's education policy which includes a computer for every child in Grades 9-12.

Now he has instructed his MPs to undertake a second visit: to visit homeless shelters to report on the extent of the numbers of homeless people being turned away from shelters. During the campaign Rudd had declared that the numbers of homeless people would be halved under Labor. Rudd is concerned that the turn away rates may be in the vicinity of 80-90%. Just not on in a rich and comfortable nation such as Australia, says Rudd.

Looks like good news for the poor, I say!

And for more enlightenment on Rudd at the Rudder, see here.

Absentee voting in Kowloon and Hong Kong?

Was there absentee voting in Kowloon and Hong Kong for the Federal Election? Why not? How many Australians - especially those of Chinese ethnicity - commute between HK & Oz? Anyway, Labor and Kevin Rudd had the campaign covered there. It is a matter of photographic record over at club chaos.

Bring the old team back: Joe Hockey for Leader, Kevin Rudd for PM, and Sunrise for Speaker

As Kever Klevvie kontemplates his Krew this week, Miss Eagle has a few suggestions.

Kevin Rudd and his wife, Therese Rein, vote on Saturday.

One of the things that helped Klever Kevvie to popularity and being seen as a human being with a smile rather than a dour nerd was his regular appearance on Sunrise in tandem with Joe Hockey for the Liberals.

Joe Hockey, David Koch (Sunrise anchor) and Kevin Rudd

Now it seems to Miss E that poor avuncular Joe has been getting stressed out of his mind since he was given the job that Kevin Andrews could not do - sell Work Choices. We now know, don't we dear Reader, that no one could sell Work Choices. It seemed to Miss E that Joe put on weight that he needs to get off under all that dirty work he was given to do. Get the gastric lapband, Joe - and soon. Miss E has had it done. The Director, Miss E's sister has had it done. Go for it Joe in good health.

I don't think anyone thinks of Joe as either a dill or a bad guy - in spite of the poisonous Work Choices. Why not reward Joe for his loyalty to the Liberal Party and its dreadful policies by giving him the top job. Joe for Liberal Party leader I say.

The Sunrise Family

Then we would have the old team - Joe on one side and Kevin on the other. Well, not quite the old team, eh dear Reader? So, ergo Sunrise and team for Speaker. Who better?

At this point in time, whoever Klevver Kevie nominates as Speaker won't be experienced. But Sunrise is experienced. The Sunrise Team is used to intervening, sorting things out and making people stick to the rules of the game. OK, I know, I know. They all, including Kevvie, got a bit expeditious on the Vietnam expedition. I am sure that Mel and Kochie and Nat and Andrew can sort things out though. And the Speaker-ship might give Kerry Stokes and his meany crew something to focus on instead of The Chaser team.

Grant could tell us which way the wind blows. Mark could lighten proceedings with cricket, football (all codes), and basketball and netball scores.

All in all, I think it would the ultimate in outsourcing: Sunrise for Speaker and bring really serious entertainment to the six o'clock news!

ALL CHICKENS ARE ON THE ROOST: THE MAN OF SHAME HAS CONCEDED DEFEAT

John Howard's chickens have finally come home to roost

This morning a tune keeps coming into my mind. I hum it away but the words are a little different from the original. The tune is "After the Ball" and I apologise to Charles K Harris for the interference with his lyrics:

After the election’s over, after the votes are in,
After the worker’s leaving, after the poster’s gone,
Many a heart’s rejoicing, if you could read them all—
Many the hopes that have heightened after it all.

And here is why:

We don't know yet if John Howard has been defeated in his seat of Bennelong by Maxine McKew. But it appears more than likely. John Howard sought to make it into the history books - by longevity as Australian Prime Minister. He would have like to equalled or surpassed the long period of office of Sir Robert Menzies. He failed. He is second only to Menzies. But he will make it into the record books for another reason which he almost surely did not ever imagine - he would be kicked out by the voters of Bennelong. John Howard did not seek this record - but he will become only the second Prime Minister in Australian history to be voted out of his own seat.

As Miss Eagle's campaign against John Howard's retirement until the chickens come home to roost has shown, John Howard has meted such inhumanity out to so many people that his actions could not go unaddressed by the electorate. This has happened. The chickens have roosted. They are in the henhouse. They sit on their perch - and John Howard has been knocked off his.

John Howard was the Prime Minister for Injustice. The Minister for Injustice, Mal Brough - co-author with John Howard of the military intervention into Aboriginal life and land in the Northern Territory - has been kicked out of his seat of Longman. It is pleasing to know that the ALP has won the seat of Solomon in the Northern Territory. There are only two Federal seats in the sparsely populated NT - one was already held by Centralian stalwart Warren Snowdon for the ALP. Now the other seat has been snatched away by the ALP from the Coalition. The people of the Northern Territory have expressed their views on the military intervention at the ballot box.

Of course, a number of Liberals are in the safest of safe seats but because of their administration of injustice need to go. This raises the question of resignations and by-elections. In this category, Philip Ruddock tops the list. His horrific administration of Immigration followed by his deceptive and devious administration of the Attorney-General's portfolio has meant that he does not deserve membership in the Parliament of Australia - but the electorate of Berowra has decided to return him anyway. We look forward to his resignation from Parliament within the next twelve months.

The current incumbent in the Immigration portfolio is Kevin Andrews who has proved to have only lower-levels of competence and a complete intolerance of the heat in the political kitchen. His report card should read: Consider your future.

Another who needs to consider his future is Tony Abbott. If there is a particular hallmark in the character of Tony Abbott, it is his absolute high-level rudeness. If Tony Abbott is to continue in Parliament, graduation from a reputable charm school should be mandatory. Why should the Australian public have to witness his carry-ons?

And does Alexander Downer consider that he has a future in the Parliament? What heights of power and fame does he think he can now aspire to? Methinks, Alexander is an example of the Peter Principle. He has risen to his level of incompetence. Didn't know about the AWB corruption, Alexander? You must be incompetent then, Alexander. Otherwise, you must be telling porkies, eh?

So onto a new day...

We can't know or say what we are getting with Kevin 07 and his Krew.

We just believe that Howard & Co had to go.

We hope for a just, fair, equitable future for all.

And some of us are determined to keep Kevin and Krew to that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And - for those who might be interested in how it happened in Australian democracy yesterday - here it is

Miss Eagle did her stint at Upper Gully School.
Schools traditionally use Election Day as an opportunity for fundraising

Miss Eagle as Booth Captain was there at 5.30am setting up for Your Rights At Work. YRAW is unique in that it had no candidates of its own but it did have a voting ticket to distribute. Our organisers in La Trobe, Katie and Sam, had provided us with a huge amount of bunting and there was a huge amount of fence to take it. So YRAW won the Fence Competition!
Posters, posters all about!

Booth Workers:

The Greens; ALP, the Officer in Charge of the Polling Booth, Liberal; What Women Want; Liberal.

Within two hours, we had formed a jolly little community of civic minded people.

Election hostilities are put far away on the day.

Australia does not use computerised voting although there have recently been pilot programs for the visually impaired. We use the plain old fashioned method: pencil and paper and placing in a secure box for counting, under scrutiny of all political parties, at the close of voting. Australia does not have the big issues of electoral fraud one hears of in the U.S.A. If there are disputes arising from the polling or the counting, matters can be referred to the Court of Disputed Returns for decision.

On Election Night, there are parties - private, public, and political - so people can gather for drinks, food, and watching telecasts from the National Tally Room in Canberra. Last night, in the seat of La Trobe, Your Rights At Work and Kevin 07 people gathered in a small church hall in Tecoma and watched on the big screen - with more and more and more cheering as the night wore on. Miss Eagle was beyond applause. Euphoria would best describe her condition - sprinkled with a tear of great relief.

Howard conceding defeat - we were beginning to wonder if he every would!

The Hair Apparents

These wonderful studio portraits of John Howard and Kevin Rudd have come to me courtesy of my friend PatC. Clearly, our leaders are meant to have broad spectrum appeal and be all things to all people. So, dear Reader, take your pick:

For Gen Y Voters: Those who love Idol

Alternative Voters: Greenies and others
Young CBD Professional voters: Up and Comers

The Average Working Voter: Dad and Mum
Grey Voters: All of the Gerries
Remote Rural Voters: Tassie plateau dwellers

Crikey cartooning

The Liberals didn't lie about interest rates.

Another instance of WE'LL DO ANYTHING TO WIN SYNDROME - even tender an apology. With just over two weeks of a desperate Prime Minister still to go, could making apologies take over from kissing babies?

Howard's Hallmarks

The hallmarks of John Howard's career are a perseverance which sometimes resembles doggedness and cussedness and an unwillingness to include disparate views on the road to his decision-making. He has his own compass, skewed somewhere to the furthest right of True North, and brooks little deflection from the course to which it points.

There is an oft-used Howard quote which illustrates his doggedness, his preparedness to wait: The times will suit me.

The statement was made by Howard in a 1986 interview in Washington DC with Anne Summers. Just over three years ago, Summers revisited that interview in a piece titled: The sad times do suit him; he made them.

At that time, it looked like Howard would demolish Medicare, Australia's form of national medical insurance. The facts are that it is 2007 and we are in the first 24 hours of the Federal Election campaign which will decide who governs Australia for the next three years. Medicare is still with us.

Howard has interfered in Australian workplaces, changed the laws, left people powerless, lowered their wages. Howard's Work Choices has driven voters - it appears - into or back to the Australian Labor Party. The whole thing has left Australians feeling quite dismal.

Miss Eagle has been reminding for some time anyone who will listen that Howard's political imprimatur is neither invincible nor infallible. Medicare is here - and Howard may not be after November 24.

Why is Medicare here? Because it is quite clear that Australians appreciate and want to keep Medicare. They have made this clear year in and year out. Howard will interfere with Medicare at his peril.

This does not mean that in the next triennium, should Howard be re-elected, that he will not try to remove Medicare from the Australian landscape. And he certainly won't make such removal an agenda item at this election or any election.

Remember, dear Reader, that he promised never-ever to introduce a GST. He did. He didn't put his Work Choices legislation before the voters in 2004 - but he did it anyway as any astute political observer always knew he would. So full privatisation of medical services is part of his agenda. All those doctors want it and an awful lot of them tend to be members of, or at least vote for, the Liberal and National Parties.

But, it is clear that, if Australian voters tell the opinion polls and their politicians consistently of their support for Medicare, it will be extremely difficult to eradicate it. Similarly, for any other policy. The guarantee for survival or introduction of good policy is to demonstrate in word and deed support for that policy.

Kevin Rudd and Krew will need such reminders too should they form the next government.

The Election is on...and roosting chickens can be heard in the distance!

It's on! Australia votes on November 24, 2007.

Polls continue to say that the Australian Labor Party (ALP) will win - and by a landslide. Kevin Rudd will Prime Minister.

But...

The polls narrow things down to a two-party preferred vote.

When the results are in there could be vast differences:

1. What are the figures for the minor parties and to whom are their preferences being directed? In blunt terms, is it possible for the Greens to gain their first seat in the House of Representatives and, if so where? Is it possible for new independents to enter the House of Representatives?
2. How will votes translate into seats and how will seats translate into winning and losing?

On the major vote winner for Labor, opposition to John Howard's Work Choices legislation, will voters - when it comes to casting a ballot - accept Kevin Rudd's delay in the abolition of Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs)?

This voter won't. Miss Eagle hangs her colours out for all to see. She is in that unofficial voting bloc, Rusted on Labor that Votes Green. Miss Eagle thought that this election would see her giving her No. 1 vote to the ALP like old times were here again. But, at this point in time, no.

Miss Eagle will express her disenchantment with Labor and its Leader by giving the Greens her No. 1 vote and she is helping out in the seat of Aston because Rex, one of her fellow parishioners at St Thom's, is the campaign manager there.

However, Miss Eagle believes that this is an election where anything can happen and probably will. The Liberals have already shown how desperate they are to hang on to government. Rudd has shown how tetchy he is in rebuking his Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs and Bob Brown's temper hasn't been too even with the goings on around the projected pulp mill in Tasmania. And there's six weeks still to go!

So, dear Voter/Punter, consider your vote carefully. Don't make self-interest your only guide. And keep your vote well away from the mean-spirited...you know who I mean!

Rudd-Gillard Response to Howard's IR Policy

Yahoo, Channel 7 & Kevin Rudd: masters of disrespect

Miss Eagle continues to battle back to health as the flu won't give up its grip. However, life - and blogs - go on. The email address connected to Miss Eagle's blogs has been provided by Yahoo which, in Australia, is in alliance with free-to-air media corporation, Channel 7. To-day, Miss Eagle has opened an email account with a different provider for blog readers and has spent the day transferring documents and emailing contacts with the new address.

So, dear Reader, if you have the Yahoo address for Miss Eagle but haven't had an email to-day, please contact me rather quickly while the Yahoo account remains open for just a little while longer.

Then Miss Eagle will cancel the account - and there is a reason. Or, to be more correct, there are two reasons.

Firstly, and most importantly, there are the allegations which link Yahoo in China to the imprisonment and torture of bloggers. Secondly, there is the Channel 7 malpractice in which it purchased stolen medical records relating to AFL football players. It is possible that Channel 7 may face police charges in regard to the matter. AFL footballers - except for Essendon who are sponsored by Channel 7 - are boycotting Channel 7 refusing to speak to the channel's reporters. Channel 7 is reported to be in discussion with the AFL and the AFL Players Association. No sign of an apology yet. Two items about which Miss Eagle wonders:

• about Channel 7 demonstrating a conflict of interest in relation to its sponsorship of one AFL club and reporting denigration of the members of another;
• if the Howard Government will be brave enough to try to incorporate such activity under the coverage of its recent ACCC boycott legislation.

The matters facing Yahoo and Channel 7 have one thing in common: lack of respect for the individual, in the former a right to free speech and the right to be free of torture and in the latter the right to privacy and the right to patient confidentiality. In each case, a corporate body has assumed rights for itself and made them paramount to the legitimate rights of an individual. In each case, power has been wielded well beyond the power that the individual can bring to bear. In other words, the individual has no prospect of exerting countervailing power against the corporation - public or private.

Which brings me to Kevin Rudd's backbone. You will recall, dear Reader, that Miss Eagle has taken an interest in Kevin's backbone for quite a while. Miss Eagle has wondered when curvature of Kevin's spine, under pressure, would become evident. It is now there for all to see in the form of Labor's announced IR policy.

Miss Eagle asks Rudd and Gillard and Kevin's Krew:

• how do you think you got to where you are in the polls?
• is this how you show respect for working people?
• what else will you do to show your disrespect for working people?

In case you are too middle-class and dumb to figure it out, you have done it on the backs of working people and people who care about workers' rights. These people vote and you assume they will vote for a Labor government who, supposedly, can bring them change.

Will all the executives at BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto and their $100K + a year miners vote for you, Kevin? Will they give you the numbers to govern? Or have you figured out that you can take working people for granted? Are their votes in the bag, Kevin, and you don't have to give a fig for their rights and realities?

I'd like to take you for a ride too, Kevin, when Michele O'Neil and her TCFUA officials have finished with you. Through the bleak and poor western suburbs in each of the capital cities of the eastern seaboard. You know the ones Kevin: the ones that are safe Labour seats. The ones that have a Whitlam Swimming Pool and a Wran Community Hall. The ones that are bleak and treeless. The ones that are not known as salubrious, leafy suburbs. The ones where inequity is palpable. The ones where you and Therese would never want to live - and neither would a BHP Billiton or Rio Tinto executive or their $100K+ a year miners - let alone Howard who could not tolerate Lane Cove while Kirribili was on offer.

Miss Eagle was pleased to hear Michele O'Neil on Radio National's Breakfast this morning critical of the policy and challenging Rudd to do the rounds of her members of the Textile Clothing and Footwear Union. Michele spoke powerfully of the realities of life for her members and how they could not wait the projected five years of the Rudd-Gillard policy to get out from under oppressive wages and conditions.

Miss Eagle has to-day been provided with a copy of an open letter to Rudd and Gillard by a senior union official here in Victoria. This letter is also published on Unite.

The following is an open letter to the leaders of the Australian Labor Party, Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard. It was written by Michele O'Neil who is the Victorian State Secretary of the Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia (TCFUA).The TCFUA, like UNITE are extremely disappointed at Labor's latest sellout in regards to their industrial relations policy. UNITE calls on all sections of the union movement to join with us and begin to seriously discuss the question of political representation of working people. Workers deserve much better than Rudd's Labor Party.

Dear Kevin and Julia,

Don't you get it?I represent some of the lowest paid workers in the country. They sweat in backyard garages, shopfronts, and factories to make the clothes on your back. Some of our members have now faced three years without a pay increase. If they are still getting the minimum rates, and many are not, they take home about $460 each week. If they work at home as outworkers they likely get $3 to $5 an hour.

Yesterday one of the union's officials described how after a call from a worker, she went to a factory and the employer made her sit for two hours in a small room. The boss said that if any worker wanted to see her they were welcome. He didn't tell the workers the union was on site. He wouldn't let the union notice advising workers that the union was coming, go up on the notice board. And he sat a supervisor at the door of the room.

No worker came to the room. A worker rang the union describing payment of $4 an hour. For us to inspect the time and wage book in the factory I have to name the worker, something she doesn't want me to do as she says she'll be bullied and sacked. She's scared and asks me, "why can't you fix this without the boss knowing that I rang the union?" Under the Right of Entry Laws you've promised to keep, I cannot.

Earlier this year, one of my members was badly injured when the company under those same Right of Entry Laws, forced him to walk outside in the dark during a nightshift to a room 10 minutes away from where he worked to speak to his union. He fell and broke both his hands and doesn't have good prospects of returning to work.

Last week we received two calls from women workers in tears because they were being forced to give up their rights by signing an AWA in order to keep their job. They signed the AWA because they were threatened. The same AWAs which you will now leave in place for five years. Under those Right of Entry laws, because all the workers are on AWAs, we have no right to enter that workplace or visit our members.

You know that television ad from the 'Business Action' coalition with 3 thuggish blokes turning off the power in a clothing factory? Did you believe it? Would you like to meet the women who work for this union trying to get into workplaces that exploit textile, clothing and footwear workers? You could listen to our stories about what really happens when we try to use 'Right of Entry.

'My experience of violence and thuggery is of a company boss pulling a large chopping knife out of his draw and placing it on the desk between us as he explained that he didn't employ any outworkers and that I should leave his factory now.

We like other unions, have spent our hard earned union members' money on the ACTU's campaign which has increased your chances of being elected. How do I keep explaining to them what a vote for you will mean? They can't wait until 2010 for justice and fairness or rights - that's like asking them to wait for another election. They need them and deserve them right now. Stand up for the members of my union or don't expect us to stand up for you.

I invite you both to take a day to spend on the road with an official of my union visiting factories and sweatshops, so you can understand and reconsider today's announcement.

In unity,

Michele O'Neil

Victorian State Secretary, National Assistant Secretary, Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia (TCFUA)

http://www.tcfvic.org.au/

http://www.unite.org.au

Miss Eagle thinks that the only hope for a different Labor IR policy when Rudd is Prime Minister is another Howard copycat me-tooism.

Could it be, dear Reader, that this is Rudd's first non-core promise?