Paul Kelly is mostly correct on reforms history

Comments on Kevin Rudd “Drive to reform is not bipartisan”, 8/09/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26040348-7583,00.html

The Prime Minister may have a point in arguing that neo-liberalism was not dead in 1993, if and only if he applies the point in the sense of degree rather than in purity, or in relative terms as opposed to absolute terms.

He is right that the previous government got the Work Choices IR laws a step too far to the right to provide adequate protection for workers. That may be the main and only significant issue in terms neo-liberalism of the previous government.

In terms of reform, the previous government had undertaken quite a number of big ones and continued the Hawke and Keating tradition, such as the introduction of GST and reducing personal and business tax rates, as well as the introduction of Work Choices to increase the flexibility of the economy, even though it went too far for Work Choices.

So the Prime Minister has got it half right and half incorrect. Paul Kelly has got almost completely right after all.

There is an simple explanation to this subtle or not so subtle difference between the Prime Minster and Paul Kelly, the PM is Labour and has been carrying out interventions to the economy partly due to the global crisis, while Paul is a non-partisan political journalist.