|
June 18, 2010
What is wrong with the Rudd Government? On the one hand, we have the passage of paid parental leave legislation that provides a mandatory paid leave for new parents (18 weeks of leave paid at the national minimum wage) for the first time. On the other hand, we have the removal of the National Funding Authority for health.
Remember how the $50 billion health and hospitals package was sold as an example of co-operative federalism, the biggest reform since Medicare, and an example of how Rudd Labor could solve the nation's health crisis? This reform package is now being undercut with the dismantling of the National Funding Authority, which was to oversee the distribution of Commonwealth health funding to the states.
Plans for the National Funding Authority were agreed to by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, and also by premiers at the Council of Australian Governments summit on health reforms in April.The authority had been proposed to ensure health funding transparency between the Commonwealth and the states.If it has been dropped because it is not needed, then the health funding arrangements were not thought through.
Do I detect the hand of the NSW Right (Karl Bitar and Mark Arbib) here? One strong on (focus group) politics and weak on policy? Where is the strategy in health reform? What has happened to the challenge to the special interests of state governments and their health bureaucracies? There is little chance of establish a permanent, independent, professional and community-based statutory authority, an Australian health commission, similar to the Reserve Bank in the monetary field.
We know that after the collapse of the Copenhagen climate change talks and the decision of the Coalition to withdraw its support for the government's ETS, the Greens proposed adopting an interim arrangement - proposed by the government's own climate change advisor Ross Garnaut - which would have imposed a relatively small carbon tax until a more substantial price mechanism for carbon emissions could be agreed.The government however refused to discuss the proposal with the Greens.
What next in the roll back of reform?
We have the "education revolution" but it isn't going that far to address the negative effects of the inequality caused by globalization. Over the last 20 years that inequality has a consistent geographical spread in Adelaide and it is inter-generational.
|
Will the mandatory internet censorship policy join the government's list of "politically toxic subjects" and be shelved until after the federal election?