Therese Rein apparently built her business from nothing, into a multi-million dollar company. The problem is that one of Ms Rein’s clients is the executive government.

Ms Rein’s company, Ingeus, has lucrative contracts with the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations worth about $58 million a year… (The Age)

Bugger. What a conundrum!
Don’t sell your baby Therese; I couldn’t. You both have to find a way to make it work…

If Rudd wins, and you are able to keep the company, it would be almost as inspirational as having a female Prime Minister.

Update 28 May 2007:

Democrats Senator, Andrew Bartlett writes:

“I’m appalled at the precedent set here. Right now women portfolioholders in all political parties in the federal parliament have husbands and partners with extensive business interests. The same goes for the male portfolioholders, in all political parties, whose wives and partners have businesses. In the recent past we’ve had Deputy Prime Ministers with farming businesses. These are not bad things, they are good things.”

“The last thing we should discourage is politicians being connected into the business world. Conflicts of interest can be managed. The important thing is that conflicts of interest are openly ethically and transparently managed under proper processes.”

“The cold reality is this – the job of businesspeople is to maximise the profit share. That always holds the potential for exploiting employees. Thats why you need fair workplace laws that are enforced.”

I don’t want people to think that I am part of the Democrats PR team, but Senator Bartlett does agree with me on this issue.

The second point about business is so true. Ms Rein’s company has every right to use the unfair IR laws to be unfair toward her employees. I’m sure a lot of businesses feel that the laws are unfair, but are they really going to turn up at the AGM and say, “Well we could have reduced labour costs this year by $500,000 but we thought it would be unfair”.

Joe tried to suggest that Rudd’s appearances on Sunrise are no longer appropriate because he is the Opposition Leader. However he defended his own appearances. Why is it acceptable for a minister of Parliament to appear regularly on a light, entertaining morning show but not for the opposition leader?

He also suggested that the Labor party will spend around $100 million leading up to the election ($88 million from the unions and $12 million from the state Labor branches). This continues the governments attack on the Labor party for being ‘ruled by the union’s’. Meanwhile the Federal Government has been described as the biggest advertising spender in Australian political history – (see quote below from SHM – 2005).

“Crikey! Remember crocodile hunter Steve Irwin bobbing about on your TV screen a year or so back warning you not to bring any plants or animals into the country?

“You paid for that ad. Irwin received a $175,000 appearance fee for one day of filming, a recent Senate estimates committee revealed, and the Quarantine Matters campaign cost $5.3 million.

“Yet it was a comparatively cheap campaign for the Federal Government, which is the biggest advertising spender in Australian political history, and a significant player when compared with the corporate sector.

“Federal Government spending on advertising jumped by nearly $70 million last financial year [2004-05] to $170 million, according to Opposition figures released this week.” – Stephanie Peatling, Sydney Morning Herald, 12 Mar 2005, p.19.

Joe said the government’s spending of millions of dollars of taxpayer’s money is necessary to let people know about the policies they are putting forward. I tend to agree. However…

1. the Constitution allows political parties to advertising as much as they like,
2. the Labor party is spending about half the amount the government is spending (according to the quote above), and
3. the Labor party isn’t spending taxpayers money > unlike taxpayers, a union member can choose to leave the union if they disagree with this use of their money.

Get over it Joe… Move on…

Australian Politics, Kevin Rudd, Joe Hockey, advertising, Sunrise

“… Hicks acknowledged that he trained with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and fought with its forces against US allies in Afghanistan in late 2001 for two hours and then sold his gun to raise cab fare and tried to flee to Pakistan.” (ABC article)

+

“Hicks admitted he had trained with al-Qaeda, fought with the Taliban and that a friend of his believed he had approved of the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. ” (BT Article)

How he gets punished…

Five years of Hell on Earth

+

Seven years in jail (in Australia)

+

“Hicks’s plea agreement bars him from speaking to the media for one year and says if he ever sells the rights to his story, the Australian Government will get the money.” He was also banned from taking legal action against the United States. Hicks had previously said he was abused by the US military but said in his plea agreement he had “never been illegally treated while in US custody”.” (ABC article)

Sounds fair to me…

And who can we thank for ending this madness – JOHN HOWARD who is pissing his pants about the next FEDERAL ELECTION. Rudd has already achieved so much…

tag: John Howard, Kevin Rudd, David Hicks, Guantanamo Bay, terrorism, Australian Politics, federal election