Comments on Michelle Graton "The implosion of Turnbull’s ‘big idea’ will raise further doubts about his substance and style", 2/04/2016
To resolve the so called vertical fiscal imbalance is one issue and defining both expenditure and revenue responsibilities and make each government responsible to their actions/policies (accountability) is another and a different issue. The mistake by the PM is that he wanted to hit such two birds with one stone and the State and Territory Premiers and Chief Ministers didn't like the PM approach. As a result, the PM failed badly.
I think the States and Territories would probably only like to focus on the first issue, that is, to get more revenues from the Commonwealth as untied grants, that is, a fixed share of income tax. They clearly didn't like to be seen as having to raise more revenue in their own name to pay the bills for education and health.
The PM should now be a bit of more statesman like, and agree with the States and Territories for them to have an agreed and fixed share of revenue from personal income tax, and possibly the revenue from company income tax. If that is done, it would be possible to resolve the vertical fiscal imbalance, should the shares are appropriately determined.
The PM, however, needs a better and carefully considered approach to the second and more thorny issue of real and effective accountability, that is, linking spending responsibilities with revenue responsibilities. What occurred this past week was simply not good enough for the PM.
Where was his leadership and judgement for him to rush such a ill-prepared tax and federation reform plan? Where is the role played by his advisers including from both the POM and the PMC?
I suspect they were probably not well consulted or not consulted at all. If that is true, that would not be too different from the chaotic situations that was accused of the former PM Rudd, as reported or argued by some of his ALP former colleagues.
It seems that our national leadership is lacking leadership skills and is failing the nation badly, when the nation's top political leader behaves like what they have shown us! It is so miserable and pitiful, not just for themselves but for the nation as a whole, because the nation suffers as a consequence!
Showing posts with label true leadership. Show all posts
Showing posts with label true leadership. Show all posts
2016-03-29
China, Asian countries and new Asia order
Comments on Hugh White "Can Asia break free of great-power dynamics?" 29/03/2016
Some comments point out some unsaid issues, including what a new Asia order would look like and how to bring that peacefully.
While I am an economist as opposed to international strategist, I would venture a hypothesis that the best scenario for a new Asia order to appear peacefully would be for China to work not only for its own interests but also for the interests of all Asian countries, so that Asia is truly for all Asians as a whole, irrespective for China to confront the US or not.
The underlying assumption is that Asians will benefit from a new Asia order.
If you don’t look after your neighbours, they will not support you in your endeavours.
I think that will need China to make some hard decisions and choices, including to make some compromises and perhaps sacrifices in the process for it to rise as a true and powerful leader in Asia. America will naturally fade from Asia or its assumed uncontested leadership in Asia will be diluted, in that process.
It will be wise for China if it can do that. I think there will be enough wise people in China for it to realise that is the best option forward.
Some comments point out some unsaid issues, including what a new Asia order would look like and how to bring that peacefully.
While I am an economist as opposed to international strategist, I would venture a hypothesis that the best scenario for a new Asia order to appear peacefully would be for China to work not only for its own interests but also for the interests of all Asian countries, so that Asia is truly for all Asians as a whole, irrespective for China to confront the US or not.
The underlying assumption is that Asians will benefit from a new Asia order.
If you don’t look after your neighbours, they will not support you in your endeavours.
I think that will need China to make some hard decisions and choices, including to make some compromises and perhaps sacrifices in the process for it to rise as a true and powerful leader in Asia. America will naturally fade from Asia or its assumed uncontested leadership in Asia will be diluted, in that process.
It will be wise for China if it can do that. I think there will be enough wise people in China for it to realise that is the best option forward.
2015-06-30
An orderly and well designed Grexit may be beneficial
Comments on Barry Eichengreen "Path to Grexit tragedy paved by political incompetence", 29/06/2015
I agree with the author on the point that the current mess reflects the lack of leadership in all the major parties involved, though for quite different reasons. To me, the lack of political leadership lies in the lack of creative thinking in coming to a well considered and coordinated strategy for the Grexit, as opposed to the author's view that a Grexit will be disastrous. An orderly and well designed Grexit is likely to be beneficial to all major parties, because it can have all the advantages of within the euro zone, but have extra advantages of of more flexibility for Greece.
Both Greece and its creditors have had enough of the painful experiences and there should be a quick but orderly end to those pains.
I agree with the author on the point that the current mess reflects the lack of leadership in all the major parties involved, though for quite different reasons. To me, the lack of political leadership lies in the lack of creative thinking in coming to a well considered and coordinated strategy for the Grexit, as opposed to the author's view that a Grexit will be disastrous. An orderly and well designed Grexit is likely to be beneficial to all major parties, because it can have all the advantages of within the euro zone, but have extra advantages of of more flexibility for Greece.
Both Greece and its creditors have had enough of the painful experiences and there should be a quick but orderly end to those pains.
China and Japan: share the most responsibilities for Asian leadership in the Asian Century
Comments on Peter Drysdale "Leadership in Asia under scrutiny", 29/06/2015
While the currently perceived and real lack of leadership in Asia, to a degree or in part, reflects the complexity and diversity of Asia and Asian countries, the most pivotal part underlying those, in my view, lies in the often difficult bilateral relations between China and Japan. They are the two largest economies in Asia, but they often do not see eye to eye with each other. Further, they are the largest developed and developing countries respectively in Asia.
While the currently perceived and real lack of leadership in Asia, to a degree or in part, reflects the complexity and diversity of Asia and Asian countries, the most pivotal part underlying those, in my view, lies in the often difficult bilateral relations between China and Japan. They are the two largest economies in Asia, but they often do not see eye to eye with each other. Further, they are the largest developed and developing countries respectively in Asia.
When and if these two countries sort out their issues and problems so they can develop a relationship similar to that between Germany and France and Britain, many issues of Asia’s lack of leadership in the so called Asian century are likely to be resolved soon.
Both countries need to make compromises for their common good/benefits. That requires true and courageous personal leadership from the top leaders among the two countries. They need to explain the benefits to their respective people and carry them with them to forge a new bilateral relationship. And that is not an easy job by any means.
Japan may need to be really independent as opposed to be a US deputy in East Asia. China may need to embrace more of the good parts of the current global governance while at the same time to form a broad coalition to reform those areas that are no longer meet the current needs of developing and possibly many developed countries. In the process, major developing countries as a coalition, working together with most of the developed countries, can develop and design a new global governance structure.
Should a constructive and cooperative relationship be developed between China and Japan, many of the existing issues in Asia will be much easier to resolve.
2012-12-19
China's new leadership and potential new strategies forward
Comments on Sheryn Lee “Taiwan–China relations under the new Chinese leadership”, 19/12/2012, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2012/12/13/taiwan-china-relations-under-the-new-chinese-leadership/
While it is true that China now is faced with many challenges, arguably there are also positive factors that may allow it to better overcome key challenges.
Inequality in income distribution: the transition from labour surplus to shortage would mean wages are likely to rise more rapidly than in the past and that will be conducive to reducing inequality.
Corruption: the new leadership could make a new and fresh start in fighting corruptions using a new approach. They could first draw a line in time from then any new corruptions will be dealt with severely and at the same time to let the past be past. This way will mean much less resistance than the past approach and is likely to be more effective. Of course, a lot of work must be done and public relations must be managed to create an environment so such a policy can be introduced.
Dispute with other regional countries: China should realistically assess the costs and benefits of possible worsening relationships with those countries and the implications for its own interests as a whole. It is not too difficult to come to the realisation that peaceful resolutions are the way to go and compromises will have to be made from all sides including China. I would say it should use examples of land border settlements with some countries in the past couple of decades or so and use that experience to settle disputes in the seas.
Taiwan unification: China could learn from its experience in the one country and two systems that have applied to HK and possibly think more boldly along the line of a confederation. Even keeping the current status quo will be working in China's favour as the two sides will get closer in many ways, such as a gradual and more liberalised China and stronger and closer economic integration.
I think the next 10 years should be a test for China and the new leadership, but the key strategy should still be peace and development. Every effort should be made to achieve this overarching objective.
While it is true that China now is faced with many challenges, arguably there are also positive factors that may allow it to better overcome key challenges.
Inequality in income distribution: the transition from labour surplus to shortage would mean wages are likely to rise more rapidly than in the past and that will be conducive to reducing inequality.
Corruption: the new leadership could make a new and fresh start in fighting corruptions using a new approach. They could first draw a line in time from then any new corruptions will be dealt with severely and at the same time to let the past be past. This way will mean much less resistance than the past approach and is likely to be more effective. Of course, a lot of work must be done and public relations must be managed to create an environment so such a policy can be introduced.
Dispute with other regional countries: China should realistically assess the costs and benefits of possible worsening relationships with those countries and the implications for its own interests as a whole. It is not too difficult to come to the realisation that peaceful resolutions are the way to go and compromises will have to be made from all sides including China. I would say it should use examples of land border settlements with some countries in the past couple of decades or so and use that experience to settle disputes in the seas.
Taiwan unification: China could learn from its experience in the one country and two systems that have applied to HK and possibly think more boldly along the line of a confederation. Even keeping the current status quo will be working in China's favour as the two sides will get closer in many ways, such as a gradual and more liberalised China and stronger and closer economic integration.
I think the next 10 years should be a test for China and the new leadership, but the key strategy should still be peace and development. Every effort should be made to achieve this overarching objective.
2011-12-16
Gillard let many people down
Comments on Dennis Shanahan “Leadership tensions turn poisonous”, 16/12/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/leadership-tensions-turn-poisonous/story-e6frg75f-1226223363282
While Rudd had his shortcomings during his prime ministership, Gillard has shown a remarkable lack of strategic leadership skills and sound judgement.
At the time when Gillard got the prime ministership from Rudd, many were hoping that she would continue her good standing that had been observed before that time.
And there were enormous good wishes from many people for the first female prime minister good and well.
So far, those people have been hugely disappointed by her dismal performance.
Gillard has let so many good wishing people down.
At the time when Gillard got the prime ministership from Rudd, many were hoping that she would continue her good standing that had been observed before that time.
And there were enormous good wishes from many people for the first female prime minister good and well.
So far, those people have been hugely disappointed by her dismal performance.
Gillard has let so many good wishing people down.
2011-08-12
Scared they've been on the run
Comments on Dennis Shanahan "erils for PM in hanging on to surplus", 12/08/2011, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/commentary/perils-for-pm-in-hanging-on-to-surplus/story-e6frgd0x-1226113362948
Gillard and Swan and their government has been particularly stubbon in promoting the budget surplus line of argument, so much so that they have greatly damaged their images and lost touch with the public. the flood levy, for example, was completely unnecessary, especially in the context that they had also pledged a carbon tax to come and the public were uncertain and concerned about the impact of the carbon tax in the coming years. Consumer confidence as well as business confidence have further eroded by the persistence of the surplus pledge at the expense of prudent economic and budget management.
Of course, Gillard and her coleagues have been aware of their broken promises, particularly the one on carbon tax, and the potential damage of further broken promises. But one has to weigh the benefits and costs of each policy and the totality of all policies and make the best choices and choose the lesser evils.
Unfortunately, Gillard and her colleagues have been scared and have not been able to show they are able to do the best and right things. they have tended to make policy on the run and rush to announcements without fully consider ttheir effects, for the nation and for themselves.
What all these show that Gillard and her colleagues in government have been unable to show true leadership. And that is not good particuarly for Gillard.
PS: see also: Alan Kohler "A surplus of political stupidity", 12/08/2011, http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Wayne-Swan-budget-Julia-Gillard-economic-crisis-ma-pd20110812-KMSTR?OpenDocument&src=rot.
Gillard and Swan and their government has been particularly stubbon in promoting the budget surplus line of argument, so much so that they have greatly damaged their images and lost touch with the public. the flood levy, for example, was completely unnecessary, especially in the context that they had also pledged a carbon tax to come and the public were uncertain and concerned about the impact of the carbon tax in the coming years. Consumer confidence as well as business confidence have further eroded by the persistence of the surplus pledge at the expense of prudent economic and budget management.
Of course, Gillard and her coleagues have been aware of their broken promises, particularly the one on carbon tax, and the potential damage of further broken promises. But one has to weigh the benefits and costs of each policy and the totality of all policies and make the best choices and choose the lesser evils.
Unfortunately, Gillard and her colleagues have been scared and have not been able to show they are able to do the best and right things. they have tended to make policy on the run and rush to announcements without fully consider ttheir effects, for the nation and for themselves.
What all these show that Gillard and her colleagues in government have been unable to show true leadership. And that is not good particuarly for Gillard.
PS: see also: Alan Kohler "A surplus of political stupidity", 12/08/2011, http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Wayne-Swan-budget-Julia-Gillard-economic-crisis-ma-pd20110812-KMSTR?OpenDocument&src=rot.
2010-11-08
How the PM can deal with the crisis of authority
Comments on Paul Kelly “Prime Minister's crisis of authority”, 6/11/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/prime-ministers-crisis-of-authority/story-e6frg6zo-1225948547720
While those issues “arising from the resources boom, the finance sector, federal-state relations, climate change and boat arrivals” as Kelly put it, are challenging, they are not insoluble.
The two issues related to resources boom and federal-state relations can be dealt with by allowing resources booming states to retain a reasonable portion of their resources rent/tax with no redistribution among the states, similar to what Canada does.
Climate change can be dealt with by introducing a low carbon tax that is revenue neutral and trade neutral, with the provision to raise/change the tax rate consistent with international actions on climate change. This should be politically possible.
In terms of the finance sector, much stronger competition should be introduced with strong enforcing measures. It is interesting to note that when superannuation funds are concerned, there has been talk about default low fee funds. Why isn’t it possible to consider a similar mechanism for mortgages? It is more complex, but there is considerable scope in this field.
The issue with boat arrivals can be more difficult, mainly because of Labor’s refusal to use Nauru as the solution. But it could use it as an intermediate step until a new regional agreement is reached. Australia has provided aid to Nauru in relation to the detention/processing centre there. Why could Australia re-use it temporarily?
While those issues “arising from the resources boom, the finance sector, federal-state relations, climate change and boat arrivals” as Kelly put it, are challenging, they are not insoluble.
The two issues related to resources boom and federal-state relations can be dealt with by allowing resources booming states to retain a reasonable portion of their resources rent/tax with no redistribution among the states, similar to what Canada does.
Climate change can be dealt with by introducing a low carbon tax that is revenue neutral and trade neutral, with the provision to raise/change the tax rate consistent with international actions on climate change. This should be politically possible.
In terms of the finance sector, much stronger competition should be introduced with strong enforcing measures. It is interesting to note that when superannuation funds are concerned, there has been talk about default low fee funds. Why isn’t it possible to consider a similar mechanism for mortgages? It is more complex, but there is considerable scope in this field.
The issue with boat arrivals can be more difficult, mainly because of Labor’s refusal to use Nauru as the solution. But it could use it as an intermediate step until a new regional agreement is reached. Australia has provided aid to Nauru in relation to the detention/processing centre there. Why could Australia re-use it temporarily?
2010-10-19
Gillard needs to change direction and priority
Comments on Niki Savva “Lead on reform or lose way”, 19/10/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/lead-on-reform-or-lose-way/story-e6frg6zo-1225940390052
Gillard appears to be a good negotiator that is good for operation, but not a leader with strong vision and strategies to achieve that vision.
While it is a fact she succeeded in forming a government, with incumbent advantages and some left leaning Greens and independent MPs, she has paid high price over her poor performance since she became the Labor leader and PM before the election.
Real Julia versus other Julia. East Timor processing centres fiasco. No carbon tax versus her remark of silly games of ruling in and ruling out. Citizens assembly, dumping it and parliament committee. The debacles of her ministry names and inclusions or exclusions. All within a matter of how long?
They do not reflect well on her leadership.
She needs to delegate some of her negotiation tasks to her colleagues and concentrates on big issues and gets them right.
Maybe she hasn’t got a strong advisory team around her.
PS: For climate change policy, she needs to move to a flexible carbon tax with distribution of income to people. She needs somehow to broaden the mining tax base and lower the tax rate but have a lower floor. She needs an effective border protection strategy.
Gillard appears to be a good negotiator that is good for operation, but not a leader with strong vision and strategies to achieve that vision.
While it is a fact she succeeded in forming a government, with incumbent advantages and some left leaning Greens and independent MPs, she has paid high price over her poor performance since she became the Labor leader and PM before the election.
Real Julia versus other Julia. East Timor processing centres fiasco. No carbon tax versus her remark of silly games of ruling in and ruling out. Citizens assembly, dumping it and parliament committee. The debacles of her ministry names and inclusions or exclusions. All within a matter of how long?
They do not reflect well on her leadership.
She needs to delegate some of her negotiation tasks to her colleagues and concentrates on big issues and gets them right.
Maybe she hasn’t got a strong advisory team around her.
PS: For climate change policy, she needs to move to a flexible carbon tax with distribution of income to people. She needs somehow to broaden the mining tax base and lower the tax rate but have a lower floor. She needs an effective border protection strategy.
2010-09-19
Wen's advocate of political reforms in China
Comments on David Kelly “China’s top leaders tango on political reform”, 19/09/2010, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/09/19/chinas-top-leaders-tango-on-political-reform/
Whether there was any split in the Chinese top leadership or not, it is interesting to note why Wen didn't advocate more political reforms earlier in his premiership.
Just consider the fact, his tenure has always been expected to be 10 years from the day he become the premier. If he intended to introduce more political reforms, it should have been done or at least started much earlier. This is generally the case in western democracy, a government will introduce nastier budget in the first year of government and sweeten the electorate with a nicer budget for the election year.
The question is: why didn't Wen do that in his first 5 year term? Now it is close to the end of his premiership, he is talking about political reforms.
One explanation is that his present political reform urge has been the knowledge accumulated or learnt over the past years.
However, if that is the case, it may have the risk to create problems for his future successor in terms of political stability or instability rather.
It is better for a political leader to finish what he or she can do and achieve while on the post.
It is another matter to bring in a situation where he or she could not do and cannot finish and leave difficulties to newcomers.
A true statesman needs to show leadership at the most appropriate time. Timing is the key in many issues, especially for difficult political reforms in China.
Whether there was any split in the Chinese top leadership or not, it is interesting to note why Wen didn't advocate more political reforms earlier in his premiership.
Just consider the fact, his tenure has always been expected to be 10 years from the day he become the premier. If he intended to introduce more political reforms, it should have been done or at least started much earlier. This is generally the case in western democracy, a government will introduce nastier budget in the first year of government and sweeten the electorate with a nicer budget for the election year.
The question is: why didn't Wen do that in his first 5 year term? Now it is close to the end of his premiership, he is talking about political reforms.
One explanation is that his present political reform urge has been the knowledge accumulated or learnt over the past years.
However, if that is the case, it may have the risk to create problems for his future successor in terms of political stability or instability rather.
It is better for a political leader to finish what he or she can do and achieve while on the post.
It is another matter to bring in a situation where he or she could not do and cannot finish and leave difficulties to newcomers.
A true statesman needs to show leadership at the most appropriate time. Timing is the key in many issues, especially for difficult political reforms in China.
2010-09-01
Citizen's assembly dumped - what is next?
Comments on Samantha Maiden and James Massola “Gillard replaces citizens assembly in Labor alliance deal with Greens”, 1/09/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/gillard-replaces-citizens-assembly-in-labor-alliance-deal-with-greens/story-fn59niix-1225912717634
The idea of a citizen's assembly was silly from the start and now it has been dumped by Gillard.
How many days did that item of election policy proposal last? Not too many!
The proposal and ditch of it has demonstrated a failure in leadership, in the process of policy formation and development and in judgment.
That does not reflect well on the maker of that policy proposal.
What are the implications for the future policies of the Gillard government, especially now with the alliance with the Greens?
You guess or bet, but I shudder at the thought!
The idea of a citizen's assembly was silly from the start and now it has been dumped by Gillard.
How many days did that item of election policy proposal last? Not too many!
The proposal and ditch of it has demonstrated a failure in leadership, in the process of policy formation and development and in judgment.
That does not reflect well on the maker of that policy proposal.
What are the implications for the future policies of the Gillard government, especially now with the alliance with the Greens?
You guess or bet, but I shudder at the thought!
2010-05-26
More capable people needed to lead the country
Comments on Paul Kelly “Labor is caught in a catch-22 of its own creation”, 26/05/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/labor-is-caught-in-a-catch-22-of-its-own-creation/story-e6frg6zo-1225871284897
The whole RSPT drama turning now to a fiasco created by the Rudd government with Swan as the Treasurer and other two senior ministers also at the core of decision making without full cabinet participation in that process shows the four people at the core are totally incompetent and do not have a proper sense of economic management.
If this was the only economic issue they have created, it would be forgivable though nothing short of disappointing. Sadly that is not the case here in Australian federal politics over the past two and a half years.
There have been so many and big economic mistakes and mismanagement by this government in its first term in less than three years. The list is long: home insulation disaster, the BER program wastes, the Indigenous housing, the NBN, the public hospital take over, whatever you name it. Added to that was the case of cash handouts, not once but twice when the budget in deficits and debt rising.
We don’t really know what have been the core causes of the Rudd government’s problems. Rudd’s leadership clearly should be one of them, because not only he is the prime minister, but also he has shown a strong inclination of excessive personal control, he’s media driven and non-inclusive and does not like proper and effective consultations but media opportunities.
But on so many economic issues, other senior minister, especially the Treasurer and the deputy prime minister at the core should have also played their due roles. It is ultimately the Treasurer’s responsibility of economic management. One may also ask what role top Treasury bureaucratic advisors have played in so many economic policy fronts.
Besides, given the so many portfolios the deputy prime minister has, she should also have been an important part of it. She appears to be very intelligent and sensible. But the BER has been unfortunately badly designed, managed or implemented. Whether it was her role or the department role has been unclear.
Taking together, the public would be wondering: is it only the senior government ministers who messed up so many issues? Or may some parts of the bureaucrats have also been a significant part of it?
The work has been exposed, and summarised already.
It is hardly possible for old dogs to learn new tricks!
We need more competent people with strong leadership who can deliver to lead us forward.
The whole RSPT drama turning now to a fiasco created by the Rudd government with Swan as the Treasurer and other two senior ministers also at the core of decision making without full cabinet participation in that process shows the four people at the core are totally incompetent and do not have a proper sense of economic management.
If this was the only economic issue they have created, it would be forgivable though nothing short of disappointing. Sadly that is not the case here in Australian federal politics over the past two and a half years.
There have been so many and big economic mistakes and mismanagement by this government in its first term in less than three years. The list is long: home insulation disaster, the BER program wastes, the Indigenous housing, the NBN, the public hospital take over, whatever you name it. Added to that was the case of cash handouts, not once but twice when the budget in deficits and debt rising.
We don’t really know what have been the core causes of the Rudd government’s problems. Rudd’s leadership clearly should be one of them, because not only he is the prime minister, but also he has shown a strong inclination of excessive personal control, he’s media driven and non-inclusive and does not like proper and effective consultations but media opportunities.
But on so many economic issues, other senior minister, especially the Treasurer and the deputy prime minister at the core should have also played their due roles. It is ultimately the Treasurer’s responsibility of economic management. One may also ask what role top Treasury bureaucratic advisors have played in so many economic policy fronts.
Besides, given the so many portfolios the deputy prime minister has, she should also have been an important part of it. She appears to be very intelligent and sensible. But the BER has been unfortunately badly designed, managed or implemented. Whether it was her role or the department role has been unclear.
Taking together, the public would be wondering: is it only the senior government ministers who messed up so many issues? Or may some parts of the bureaucrats have also been a significant part of it?
The work has been exposed, and summarised already.
It is hardly possible for old dogs to learn new tricks!
We need more competent people with strong leadership who can deliver to lead us forward.
2009-12-24
What is global leadership?
Comments on Greg Sheridan “Don't look to Beijing for global leadership”, 24/12/2009, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/dont-look-to-beijing-for-global-leadership/story-e6frg6zo-1225813287831
Sheridan has probably used his own or a partial definition of global leadership.
In that definition, China can have global leadership if and only if it sacrifice its own interests and the interests of developing countries to the interests of the developed countries, otherwise China fails to have global leadership.
Not surprisingly, others may respectfully and strongly disagree with his definition. By resisting the unfair demands by some of the developed countries that China must reduce its emissions as the developed countries do even though China's income level is still very low and its per capita emissions are only a small fraction of the developed countries, China has done justice to the world and especially to the developing countries.
Why should the people in developing countries pay a high price for the high emissions of the developed countries just to maintain their high living standard while the people in developing countries are still living in poverty?
Even leaving the historical factor aside, the developed countries need to pay for the damages they are still causing to the world climate. There is no reason for them to continue to escape from their responsibility.
Sheridan has probably used his own or a partial definition of global leadership.
In that definition, China can have global leadership if and only if it sacrifice its own interests and the interests of developing countries to the interests of the developed countries, otherwise China fails to have global leadership.
Not surprisingly, others may respectfully and strongly disagree with his definition. By resisting the unfair demands by some of the developed countries that China must reduce its emissions as the developed countries do even though China's income level is still very low and its per capita emissions are only a small fraction of the developed countries, China has done justice to the world and especially to the developing countries.
Why should the people in developing countries pay a high price for the high emissions of the developed countries just to maintain their high living standard while the people in developing countries are still living in poverty?
Even leaving the historical factor aside, the developed countries need to pay for the damages they are still causing to the world climate. There is no reason for them to continue to escape from their responsibility.
2009-08-17
Frontier Economics' Price must be heard
Comments on Danny Price “Tyranny of old ideas dogs Emissions Trading Scheme”, 17/08/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25937950-5013479,00.html
I don't pretend in any way that I understood Frontier Economics' modeling, but I am so encouraged by Danny Price's article arguing for genuine debate, because there is so much at stake with global warming and emissions reductions, as Price pointed out.
Price sounds genuine enough and open and transparent. Every of the country's leading political group should take a step back, be cool and have a serious rethink about how the country should go about ETS, or possibly another new one. Party politics must give way to national interest.
The government has shown common sense and demonstrated some flexibility in its approach to the renewable and ETS by agreeing to separate the two bills, so the less contentious renewable bill can pass the senate without too much problems. It should be commended by this courageous action.
It is now again a test of leadership. Let's hope God bless Australia and our political leaderships stand the test.
I don't pretend in any way that I understood Frontier Economics' modeling, but I am so encouraged by Danny Price's article arguing for genuine debate, because there is so much at stake with global warming and emissions reductions, as Price pointed out.
Price sounds genuine enough and open and transparent. Every of the country's leading political group should take a step back, be cool and have a serious rethink about how the country should go about ETS, or possibly another new one. Party politics must give way to national interest.
The government has shown common sense and demonstrated some flexibility in its approach to the renewable and ETS by agreeing to separate the two bills, so the less contentious renewable bill can pass the senate without too much problems. It should be commended by this courageous action.
It is now again a test of leadership. Let's hope God bless Australia and our political leaderships stand the test.
2009-08-06
Sinodinos' extraordinary vision
Comments on Arthur Sinodinos “Why not trade our way out of the climate crisis?” 6/08/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25888591-5013480,00.html
This is an excellent article with an extraordinary vision to link the three most important and urgent world economic issues, namely, climate change the global warming, the Doha round trade negotiation and the current great economic recession. Trade liberalisation is the common thread to all these issues.
All members of the international community should realise that by further liberalising international trade and investment, every nation will benefit. Undoubtedly, it will assist the world to recover from the recession. With true world leaderships by important and influential world leaders, it will accelerate the international efforts on climate change and reach a meaningful international agreement. Both developed and developing nations should participate in and contribute to the course of limiting human induced adverse climate change in a practical and equitable way.
I think Australian government needs to take Sinodinos’ idea very seriously and lead the international community in this direction. Sinodinos should be invited to be an advisor on these issues.
If the international community can achieve Sinodinos’s vision, he should be nominated for a Nobel prize.
This is an excellent article with an extraordinary vision to link the three most important and urgent world economic issues, namely, climate change the global warming, the Doha round trade negotiation and the current great economic recession. Trade liberalisation is the common thread to all these issues.
All members of the international community should realise that by further liberalising international trade and investment, every nation will benefit. Undoubtedly, it will assist the world to recover from the recession. With true world leaderships by important and influential world leaders, it will accelerate the international efforts on climate change and reach a meaningful international agreement. Both developed and developing nations should participate in and contribute to the course of limiting human induced adverse climate change in a practical and equitable way.
I think Australian government needs to take Sinodinos’ idea very seriously and lead the international community in this direction. Sinodinos should be invited to be an advisor on these issues.
If the international community can achieve Sinodinos’s vision, he should be nominated for a Nobel prize.
2009-08-04
Rudd - PM, leadership and essays
Comments on Greg Melleuish “Stick to day job and hold the essays”, 4/08/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25877024-5017272,00.html
Doing writings while in office should not be an offence itself, unless it really and demonstrably distracts one's governing duties and effectiveness in office. If a person can do both well at the same time, let him or her do it. So the real test of its appropriateness or otherwise is the person’s performance in office.
While Rudd has been very popular and successful politically, his real performance as a PM has been questionable. He seems to have too many spins and lack of substance in policy.
Cash handouts dressed as fiscal stimulus, wasteful school spending spree as education revolution, rush and stubborn on ETS, announcing NBN of $43 billion with no proper business study, many broken election promises like takeover of State public hospitals, all reflect his failures in public policy.
In this regard, Rudd has not got his priority right as the PM. He should spare his time from writing essays and focus on managing the country. As a result I agree with Melleuish on this point.
Doing writings while in office should not be an offence itself, unless it really and demonstrably distracts one's governing duties and effectiveness in office. If a person can do both well at the same time, let him or her do it. So the real test of its appropriateness or otherwise is the person’s performance in office.
While Rudd has been very popular and successful politically, his real performance as a PM has been questionable. He seems to have too many spins and lack of substance in policy.
Cash handouts dressed as fiscal stimulus, wasteful school spending spree as education revolution, rush and stubborn on ETS, announcing NBN of $43 billion with no proper business study, many broken election promises like takeover of State public hospitals, all reflect his failures in public policy.
In this regard, Rudd has not got his priority right as the PM. He should spare his time from writing essays and focus on managing the country. As a result I agree with Melleuish on this point.
2009-06-29
Leadership and generational characteristics
Comments on Greg Melleuish “Talking about my generation of leaders”, 29/06/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25703956-5013479,00.html
Melleuish puts Australian prime ministers into an interesting generational context. It is also interesting in that context that Kevin Rudd and Tony Blair who are the baby boomers’ generation, have some similarity in terms of spins.
I have to confess that my understanding of generational characteristics is very limited. However, it is not difficult to understand that there can be statistically significant differences in the aggregate characteristics between different generations, due to differences in their enviornment and the influences of those differences on their thinking. Average can be shown easily.
What I am more intereted, however, is that whether political leaders should be an average of their generation, or they should be true inspirational leaders and stand tall in history, perhaps with a little display of their genrational traits. My real hope is that while Rudd cares about appearance, he should focus much more on substance in governing and leading, rather than in changing direction with the wind.
I hope Rudd will be able to stand the test of history and leaves a true legacy of leadership, rather than being a chamelon. This is especially important at a time of economic crisis.
Melleuish puts Australian prime ministers into an interesting generational context. It is also interesting in that context that Kevin Rudd and Tony Blair who are the baby boomers’ generation, have some similarity in terms of spins.
I have to confess that my understanding of generational characteristics is very limited. However, it is not difficult to understand that there can be statistically significant differences in the aggregate characteristics between different generations, due to differences in their enviornment and the influences of those differences on their thinking. Average can be shown easily.
What I am more intereted, however, is that whether political leaders should be an average of their generation, or they should be true inspirational leaders and stand tall in history, perhaps with a little display of their genrational traits. My real hope is that while Rudd cares about appearance, he should focus much more on substance in governing and leading, rather than in changing direction with the wind.
I hope Rudd will be able to stand the test of history and leaves a true legacy of leadership, rather than being a chamelon. This is especially important at a time of economic crisis.
2009-06-17
Costello political legacy
Comments on Paul Kelly “The great contender”, 17/06/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25646978-7583,00.html
I am not a liberal fan by background, but I think Costello has really done a remarkable job as the most successful and longest serving Treasurer. His leadership as Treasurer enhanced the welfare of the nation enormously and gifted the Rudd government with an excellent fiscal position of fiscal surplus and net government assets to weather the global recession.
It was a pity that he failed to become the Prime Minster. He would have been a better PM, given his attitude in a number of important issues, like the apology, climate change and Kyoto, the Republic, and etc. He is a progressive liberal and not as too conservative in the liberal ranks.
Howard overstayed his Prime Ministership that did do good both to himself and Costello - an unhappy ending to both, as well as for the nation probably. That is a historical lesson for many politicians both current and to come. Hope Rudd is the first one to learn from that, although it is still early days of the Rudd government.
I am not a liberal fan by background, but I think Costello has really done a remarkable job as the most successful and longest serving Treasurer. His leadership as Treasurer enhanced the welfare of the nation enormously and gifted the Rudd government with an excellent fiscal position of fiscal surplus and net government assets to weather the global recession.
It was a pity that he failed to become the Prime Minster. He would have been a better PM, given his attitude in a number of important issues, like the apology, climate change and Kyoto, the Republic, and etc. He is a progressive liberal and not as too conservative in the liberal ranks.
Howard overstayed his Prime Ministership that did do good both to himself and Costello - an unhappy ending to both, as well as for the nation probably. That is a historical lesson for many politicians both current and to come. Hope Rudd is the first one to learn from that, although it is still early days of the Rudd government.
2009-05-30
Leaders' lack of leadership and quality of bureaucrats' advices: the case of Australian government recent policies
Comments on George “Leaders out chasing phantoms”, 30/05/2009, http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/meganomics/index.php/theaustralian/comments/leaders_out_chasing_phantoms/
George, I liked your article when reading it. And I still like it even after I had read some comments. To be frank, although I strongly share your frustrations about the PM and wish he could and would perform better as most Australians wished so, I tend to agree with some comments that Rudd may not be what people thought or think he is.
Yes, he has ego, as most people especially politicians do. He also has brains; I tend to agree with you, because otherwise he could not have risen to the Labor leadership and became the PM. But, his character of micro-manager and policy nerd is his own enemy and will prove to his eventual downfall.
Micro-manager, in fact, is a form of small mindedness, unless that character is supplemented with super energy and balanced with a big picture strategy/approach. So far Rudd has not shown the latter, except his opportunistic talent in combining with Gillard to defeat Beasley before the last election.
That act was a superb display of a smart strategy at a crucial time of history. It succeeded at a time when Labor was in despair and lacked talent. That act solved Labor’s despair and won the following election. But it has not changed its critical deficiency, that is, lack of talent. This particular point has exposed Rudd’s own weaknesses and reduced the Labor government to a group of clowns in a circus show.
Besides the Labor’s lack of talent, I have now begun to wonder the quality of the public service, especially a number of important agencies, such as Treasury, Finance and PM&C. The government’s responses to the financial and economic crisis after it had emerged have been so poor.
Some examples include the cash handouts as fiscal stimulus when expecting rising budget deficits and government debts, the national broadband tender processes and subsequent announcement of the new proposal of a new optical fibre of network to homes with an increase of the costs by several times of the original proposal the Labor took to the last election, the change to budgetary forward forecast process and the assumption of a lengthy period of above trend economic growth, the original disappointing and stubborn approach to the emissions trading scheme and the subsequent delay and changes to that.
Problems with the cash handouts should have been clear to economic advisors before they were proposed. If they were not clear to them earlier, they should have certainly been clear enough at the time the second stimulus package was made. But to everyone’s surprise and disappointment, they got the second cash handouts in the second package.
For the national broadband network, how could any responsible government, not to mention a federal government, announce a $43 billion infrastructure project without detailed economic and business study, or a feasibility study? They have bureaucrats such as the Communication Department, Infrastructure (Invest?) Australia, Treasury etc. Why was the government or the PM and his communication minister so eager to make that announcement? Why couldn’t they just say the government intend to investment in such an infrastructure project, pending the study of the business case?
For the ETS, the climate change minister and the PM went against the recommendations of their chosen advisor and adopted a conditional target of 15% reduction. Further, it insisted to introduce the scheme in 2010. What happened? They had to back down and raise the conditional target and delay the introduction by a year.
I doubt all the government’s policy problems just reflect the lack of talent in the government’s ministry. I wonder whether it also reflects the failures of our top public services.
That is unfortunate for the Labor government. But more importantly it is a tragedy for the nation.
George, I liked your article when reading it. And I still like it even after I had read some comments. To be frank, although I strongly share your frustrations about the PM and wish he could and would perform better as most Australians wished so, I tend to agree with some comments that Rudd may not be what people thought or think he is.
Yes, he has ego, as most people especially politicians do. He also has brains; I tend to agree with you, because otherwise he could not have risen to the Labor leadership and became the PM. But, his character of micro-manager and policy nerd is his own enemy and will prove to his eventual downfall.
Micro-manager, in fact, is a form of small mindedness, unless that character is supplemented with super energy and balanced with a big picture strategy/approach. So far Rudd has not shown the latter, except his opportunistic talent in combining with Gillard to defeat Beasley before the last election.
That act was a superb display of a smart strategy at a crucial time of history. It succeeded at a time when Labor was in despair and lacked talent. That act solved Labor’s despair and won the following election. But it has not changed its critical deficiency, that is, lack of talent. This particular point has exposed Rudd’s own weaknesses and reduced the Labor government to a group of clowns in a circus show.
Besides the Labor’s lack of talent, I have now begun to wonder the quality of the public service, especially a number of important agencies, such as Treasury, Finance and PM&C. The government’s responses to the financial and economic crisis after it had emerged have been so poor.
Some examples include the cash handouts as fiscal stimulus when expecting rising budget deficits and government debts, the national broadband tender processes and subsequent announcement of the new proposal of a new optical fibre of network to homes with an increase of the costs by several times of the original proposal the Labor took to the last election, the change to budgetary forward forecast process and the assumption of a lengthy period of above trend economic growth, the original disappointing and stubborn approach to the emissions trading scheme and the subsequent delay and changes to that.
Problems with the cash handouts should have been clear to economic advisors before they were proposed. If they were not clear to them earlier, they should have certainly been clear enough at the time the second stimulus package was made. But to everyone’s surprise and disappointment, they got the second cash handouts in the second package.
For the national broadband network, how could any responsible government, not to mention a federal government, announce a $43 billion infrastructure project without detailed economic and business study, or a feasibility study? They have bureaucrats such as the Communication Department, Infrastructure (Invest?) Australia, Treasury etc. Why was the government or the PM and his communication minister so eager to make that announcement? Why couldn’t they just say the government intend to investment in such an infrastructure project, pending the study of the business case?
For the ETS, the climate change minister and the PM went against the recommendations of their chosen advisor and adopted a conditional target of 15% reduction. Further, it insisted to introduce the scheme in 2010. What happened? They had to back down and raise the conditional target and delay the introduction by a year.
I doubt all the government’s policy problems just reflect the lack of talent in the government’s ministry. I wonder whether it also reflects the failures of our top public services.
That is unfortunate for the Labor government. But more importantly it is a tragedy for the nation.
2009-05-05
PM should stick with promised tax cuts
Kevin Rudd and his government should be commended if they stick with their key election commitment on tax cuts, at least keep the integrity of it. It may be and is likely to be unpopular, but it will demonstrate the PM and the government’s resolve to integrity, credibility and resolve to be economically/budgetary conservative and work hard to make the economy more efficient, even we are faced with the unprecedented world financial and economic crisis and enormous difficulties for any government to manage the economy and budget. On the other hand, if the government scraps agreed tax cuts, it will be viewed as cowards to avoid hard issues and only be interested in seeking easy and popular measures instead of working hard and intelligently to resolve hard issues. Popularity, though important in politics, should not be confused with good a government. The issue will be a real test for the PM and the government. The report, if it happens, will show a resilient government to withstand the test and show its true leadership. It needs this especially now at this time, and very badly so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
