Author: Neville

  • Australia Post faces backlash over increased delivery charges

    Australia Post faces backlash over increased delivery charges

    DateApril 8, 2013 – 3:34PM 281 reading now

    Be the first to comment
    Read later

    Sarah Whyte

    Sarah Whyte

    Consumer affairs reporter for the Sydney Morning Herald

    View more articles from Sarah Whyte

    Follow Sarah on Twitter Email Sarah

    Zoom in on this story. Explore all there is to know.
    Tabitha Fernando
    National Bank Australia
    Chris Elworthy
    Matt Levey
    .

    inShare.
    Pin It
    submit to reddit
    Email article
    Print
    Reprints & permissions

    .

    Australia Post is increasing its service charges for parcel delivery.
    Australia Post is increasing its service charges for parcel delivery. Photo: Simone De Peak

    Price increases by Australia Post for delivery services will make it impossible for Australian websites to compete online with their foreign counterparts, worried business-owners say.

    Australia Post on Monday faced a social media backlash from online shoppers furious over its increased prices for prepaid parcels, which came into effect this week.

    Across Twitter, Facebook and the Australia Post website, the national postal service was inundated with hundreds of complaints over its decision to overhaul the postal system, resulting in increased costs for online sellers of up to 40 per cent.

    Australia Post said the increase in prices were mostly “less than 7 per cent” and would now include tracking as standard.

    Advertisement

    In the new scheme customers will now be able to choose a speed – same day, next day, or regular – and then choose add-ons such as extra cover or cash on delivery, a spokeswoman said.

    However, online retailers will now have to pay for such services, some of which they used to receive for free as part of using registered post. That could mean price increases of up to 40 per cent, some retailers revealed, once add-ons were included.

    The cost of Australia Posts’s signature-on-delivery service, once restricted to eBay sellers via the Click and Send service but now universally available, almost tripled, from $1 to $2.95.

    Online business owners said the new price scheme meant they could no longer compete with international sellers.

    Bookstore owner Chris Elworthy from Port Macquarie said he would now have to pay $11.70 in postage to send an $8 paperback book.

    Booksellers in the UK can send the same book to Australia for around $3.

    “They are bleeding us dry,” he said. “Why would people buy from Australia when they can buy from overseas?”

    Online retailer Tabitha Fernando, who sells handmade clothes and nappies from Brisbane, said Australia Post’s price increase was a “direct hit” on online shopping.

    “It’s really upsetting to a lot of people,” she said.

    The price of a 500 gram prepaid package was $6 when she launched her online business three years ago. As of Monday, Ms Fernando would have to pay $8.35.

    “We are being forced out,” she said. “I’m seeing New Zealand postage prices and it’s cheaper [for consumers] to buy from there than here.”

    Consumer watchdog Choice demanded answers from Australia Post, saying the additional costs would be passed through to consumers.

    “They have a fundamental responsibility to explain this,” Choice’s head of campaigns Matt Levey said.

    “They are operating in an environment where people are buying domestically online at a faster rate than overseas.”

    Australia Post’s changes come in the face of increased competition in the parcel delivery business, with online shopping in Australia now worth $13.1 billion, according to National Bank Australia.

    On Monday, Toll Group signed up with the technology group TZ, chaired by Mark Bouris, to implement a locker system for online retail parcel deliveries, to begin in May.

    This would give online shoppers access to their parcels via convenience stores, petrol stations, corporate and retail buildings and office parks across Australia.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/australia-post-faces-backlash-over-increased-delivery-charges-20130408-2hglc.html#ixzz2PqiVbbh3

  • NBN costs could top $90 billion: report

    NBN costs could top $90 billion: report

    AAPUpdated April 8, 2013, 8:48 am

    tweet1

    Email
    Print

    A business group is urging the federal government to explain the true cost of the national broadband network after claims it could top $90 billion.

    The coalition estimates the final price tag of the NBN could more than double to $90 billion-plus, and that it will take an extra four years to complete, News Limited reports.

    The claims are made in the coalition’s broadband policy, obtained by The Daily Telegraph, which opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull has promised will be released soon.

    The Australian Industry Group says the $90 billion figure, if true, is “extraordinarily high” and it wants the government to conduct a rigorous cost-benefit analysis.

    “It’s a project that the business community broadly supports, as long as it’s done properly and with the proper costings in place,” AIG boss Innes Willox told ABC radio on Monday.

    The government should have conducted a cost-benefit analysis from the beginning, but releasing the true figures now would do no harm, he said.

    “It can only instil further public confidence in the rollout of a broadband network which we support,” he said.

    Mr Turnbull told The Daily Telegraph that Australia had some of the most expensive communications costs in the developed world.

    He criticised the government for handing the network builder, NBN Co, a blank cheque.

    Communications Minister Stephen Conroy denies the NBN will cost as much as $90 billion, accusing the coalition of running a scare campaign.

    The policy was costed every year by the auditor-general’s office, which determined the price tag was $37.4 billion.

    Senator Conroy said the coalition was making baseless claims about the NBN.

    “They rely on misleading statistics and misleading data to try and make these scare campaigns,” he told ABC radio on Monday.

    “What you’ve seen today is a classic policy-free zone claim by the coalition.”
    The benefits of the NBN would outweigh the costs, and revenue from the scheme would eventually be paid back to taxpayers, with interest, Senator Conroy said.

  • Postage costs soar by 30% as online retail booms

    Sarah Whyte Consumer affairs reporter for the Sydney Morning Herald

    The prices of prepaid Australia Post packages have been raised by up to 30 per cent to take advantage of the online shopping boom.

    For the first time, most of Australia Post’s revenue comes from parcels instead of letters, and 70 per cent of parcels are from online transactions.

    The rises, which come into effect on Monday, also mean the cost of getting a signature on delivery, a requirement for most online sellers, almost triples from $1 to $2.95.

    (more…)

  • What Chance of Julian Assange Being Elected to the Senate?

    December 13, 2012
    What Chance of Julian Assange Being Elected to the Senate?

    I think Julian Assange has next to no chance of being elected to the Senate at next year’s election.

    It all sounds like a side-show to me, but let me go through the legal and political hurdles that have to be cleared.

    The first step to register a political party is easy. It requires a party name of up to six words that must not be obscene or likely to be confused with the name of another party. It requires a standard association constitution that includes as one of its aims the intention to run candidates for Parliament. It must have 500 members whose names are on the electoral roll and not already counted towards the membership of another political party. The party must permit the AEC access to the register to verify the membership exists.

    Once registered, the registered officer of the party would be permitted to lodge nominations at the next election on behalf of the party. If the party wished to nominate Julian Assange, then as an Australian citizen he is permitted to contest a Senate seat in any state, even if he is not registered in the state.

    The oddity is how Assange would be permitted to nominate. A candidate needs to be over 18, a citizen, and to quote Section 163 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act be “either (i) an elector entitled to vote at a House of Representatives election; or (ii) a person qualified to become such an elector;”

    What is strange here is the voter does not have to be on the electoral roll. One of the peculiarities of the Commonwealth Electoral Act is that it establishes a broad entitlement to enrolment in Section 93, but then sets out a range of administrative reasons why a voter can’t be on the electoral roll.

    This is especially the case with overseas voters who, while entitled to enrol, often run into the following administrative procedures in Section 94A.

    (1) A person may apply to the Electoral Commissioner for enrolment for a Subdivision if, at the time of making the application:

    (a) the person has ceased to reside in Australia; and

    (b) the person is not enrolled; and

    (c) the person is not qualified for enrolment, but would be so qualified if he or she resided at an address in a Subdivision of a Division, and had done so for at least a month; and

    (d) the person intends to resume residing in Australia not later than 6 years after he or she ceased to reside in Australia.

    So there are a collection of administrative reasons why Assange may be unable to get his name on the electoral roll, but the way the act is written means he only needs to be qualified to be entitled to enrolment to have his nomination accepted.

    Do I think Assange can be elected? No. He will be competing with Labor and the Greens for a seat in whichever state he contests, especially against the Greens. Assange would first need to get enough first preferences, say 4-5%, to give him a chance of getting ahead of a Labor or Green candidate, and then need to get both Labor and Green preferences. I would expect Labor and the Greens to swap preferences ahead of Assange. I think it highly unlikely he would receive Coalition preferences, or the preferences of any of the smaller conservative and populist parties.

    If he did fluke election, could he take his seat? Probably not, as if he steps outside of the Ecuadorian embassy in London to take his seat, he would be arrested and extradited to Sweden. At some point after 1 July 2014 his seat would be declared vacant by reason of absence and the relevant State parliament would be permitted to fill his vacancy, with the qualification that the person must be a member of Assange’s party.

    Then there is Section 44 (i) of the Constitution that disqualifies any person who “is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power”.

    I’m not sure how Mr Assange’s current status as an asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy comes into play with Section 44. If Mr Assange was elected and if Section 44 were to be a problem, then the High Court could rule after the election that Mr Assange was not eligible to be a Senator and therefore not eligible to be a candidate. In that case, the court would instruct a re-count take place in which case the second on his party ticket would almost certainly be elected in his place.

    So in short, Assange can have a party registered. Under the electoral act he can be nominated as a candidate in any state he wants to be nominated. Section 44 might be a problem but could only be tested after the election. If he were elected he may have difficulty ever taking his seat.

    However, having overcome the nominations problems, I also think he has very little chance of being elected.

    Posted by Antony Green on December 13, 2012 at 11:25 AM in Electoral Law, Federal Politics and Governments, Senate Elections | Permalink

  • “Critical decade” or “lost decade”? (1) The conservative tide

    “Critical decade” or “lost decade”? (1) The conservative tide

    Posted: 06 Apr 2013 10:53 PM PDT
    Political parties which vacillate between denial and delay on climate action are set to dominate Australian politics for the remainder of this decade, so how should we respond?

    by David Spratt | First in a series |

    The global average temperature is now higher than
    at any time during the Holocene, the period of
    human civilisation
    Australian Climate Commission reports in recent months (here and here) emphasise that this is “the critical decade”. Yet the bookies say there is an 85-90% probability that the Gillard Labor government will lose this year’s federal election – and by a big margin – heralding an era of conservative domination of Australian politics at national and State levels.

    Just before Easter, ALP stalwart and former ACTU secretary Bill Kelty wrote that: “The politics of the next few months is no longer about the result of the next election” (emphasis added). Everybody knows Labor is lost, baring Kevin Rudd rising from the dead and at least giving the conservatives a shake.

    The next day, the Australian Financial Review reported that “Labor faces annihilation in marginal seats”. Polling in 54 marginal seats found the two-party-preferred (2PP) swing against Labor since the 2010 election had almost doubled, to 9.3% from 4.8% in two months, exposing Labor “to the loss of all 24 marginal seats it holds across Australia and risking up to 15 more semi-marginal electorates”. It concluded that, at worse, Labor could win “as few as 32 seats in the 150-seat Parliament”. This was just after the Crean-Rudd leadership fiasco.

    The irony is that while Prime Minister Gillard may proclaim to be personally “tough”, her government is anything but. It is strategically incompetent, communicates poorly, is disunited and faces an electoral wipeout. In Crikey, Guy Rundle wrote persuasively of 15 reasons why Labor is “on the edge of the abyss”. ABC presenter and former editor of The Drum, Jonathan Green, asked “Is it time to wonder whether saving the ALP is either necessary or desirable?”

    The most recent Newspoll (25 March) had the ALP’s primary vote at 30%, whilst the Liberal–National Party (LNP) opposition had 50% of the primary vote and 58% 2PP. Just 26% approve of Prime Minister Gillard’s performance, whilst 65% disapprove. Crikey’s Bludgertrack 2013 (which averages and weights recent polls) as at 3 April points to an election result on current data of 48 seats to Labor and 99 to the LNP, excluding consideration of the five seats presently held by The Greens and independents.

    In summary, most electors have long stopped listening to Julia Gillard (the corollary is that the higher her media profile, the more certain it is than Labor will lose), the LNP is likely to have a majority of 30+ seats, and is very likely to be in power for at least two terms, till 2019. (The last one-term federal government in Australia was that of Scullin in 1929-31.)
    Electors’ dislike of Tony Abbott is only surpassed by their dislike of Julia Gillard, which is why Rudd as leader would have been a relief to many voters. At this late stage, Rudd would have been unlikely to keep Labor in power, but he would have at least saved some seats. These propositions were obviously too complex for the majority of members of Labor’s federal caucus.

    THE SENATE: Team Abbott requires Senate support to amend or repeal the carbon price, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Renewable Energy Target. The Climate Authority and Australian Renewable Energy Agency can easily be trashed by administrative measures.

    It is not impossible for the conservatives to control the Senate after 1 July 2014, with the willing support of the one current DLP Senator, John Madigan. This could happen in a number of ways:

    Scenario one: The LNP would need to win one of the two spots in each of the two Territories, three of the six Senate spots in four States, and four of the six Senate spots in two States. The latter is far from impossible and requires the conservative side of politics to win just over 57% of the two-part preferred (2PP) Senate vote in that State. The latest Newspoll puts the LNP’s national 2PP vote at 58%, whilst Bludgertrack 2013 says 2PP support for the LNP is currently 60% in WA, 57-58% in NSW and Queensland, and over 55% is SA.
    Scenario two: In NSW and WA, the final Senate sport (after the LNP claim 3 and Labor 2) will likely be between the LNP and The Greens. It is likely that the Katter Party (Qld) and Xenophon (SA) will win Senate spots, which would exclude the LNP winning a fourth Senate spots in those States. However, either or both of these could support the LNP in repealing or amending climate legislation. If the DLP, Katter Party and Xenophon all support the LNP, then it only needs to win three of the six Senate spots in each State (very likely) to have a Senate majority. In which case…
    Scenario three: The Greens Senate candidate in the ACT, Simon Sheik, has the opportunity to win that seat from the LNP, a result which may be crucial to who controls the Senate if Scenario two were otherwise realised.

    If the LNP cannot muster a Senate majority on climate issues, then it would need a double dissolution, which would be unlikely before 2015, and after the next Victorian State election. This may be politically difficult: some of the gloss will have gone from Team Abbott and lower house seats would likely be lost, especially if the tide turns on State LNP governments with another two years in power; the economy may dip for global and/or domestic reasons; and punters don’t like unnecessary elections. Of course should Labor cave in (not impossible given the repeated pattern of backflips on climate policy) on some if not all climate legislation, then there would be no Senate impediment.
    Turning attention from national to State politics, a look at the political balance of power and climate policy-making in the major economic states is also sobering.

    QUEENSLAND: Labor was wiped out in 2012, and now has seven seats in Queensland’s one-chamber parliament, compared to 75 LNP seats. The most recent State Newspoll found the LNP with 62% of 2PP, similar to the result at the State election, with Labor’s primary vote at 27%. It’s hard to imagine how Labor can be competitive in 2015, or the LNP could possibly lose. Given the coming federal Labor wipe-out in Queensland, the odds are on the LNP maintaining government for the remainder of the decade.

    NEW SOUTH WALES: Following the March 2011 election in NSW, Labor holds 20 lower-house seats compared to the LNP’s 69 seats. The LNP also control the upper house with 19 seats plus the support of Fred Nile and Shooters and Fishers Party (4 seats). Labor hold 14 seats and The Greens 5 seats. The most recent State Newspoll gave the LNP 63% of the 2PP, compared to 37% for Labor, whose primary vote is down to an astounding 23%. NSW has fixed four-year terms, with elections in 2015 and 2019. Amongst many stenches surrounding the NSW ALP, the present ICAC hearings featuring Labor luminaries Eddie Obeid and Ian Macdonald are killing Labor’s brand. There is a very high probability of the LNP retaining power in NSW till 2019 at least.

    VICTORIA: The first-term LNP State government, which controls both houses of parliament, had been trailing Labor in the polls, but the recent leadership change will improve its position. The next State election is in late 2014 and both sides have an opportunity to win.

    WESTERN AUSTRALIA: In this year’s March state election, the LNP won 64% of the seats, compared to 36% of seats to Labor. The ALP primary vote was 33%, compared to 53% for the LNP. In the upper house, the LNP have 61% of the seats. The LNP is in power till 2017, and are likely likely to be there till 2021 unless the state economy unwinds.

    Taken together, it looks very likely that Australians nationally and in the big economic states – with the possible exception of Victoria – will be governed by conservative parties infested with a sizeable proportion of climate-denial parliamentarians, and with climate policies which could be charitably described as the politics of delay. Slash-and-burn of good environment and climate policies is probably a more honest descriptions, if the actions of incoming LNP governments in Victoria, NSW and Queensland over the last two years are any guide.

    My perception at the moment is that most people in the climate movement think an Abbott victory is both appalling and all but inevitable. One big threat now is that the sense of inevitability combined with Team Abbott “looking like winners” may draw more (and especially younger?) voters to “back a winner”, which could effect both The Greens’ vote and the Senate balance. “Winners are grinners” is an old political maxim.

    Labor-leaning environment and climate advocacy organisations (defined as those who have been unwilling to make substantial public criticism of Labor over the last decade, even when it was warranted) seem very subdued. Many have been largely off the radar since the climate bills passed in late 2011, and there are few signs yet of strategic discussion on a likely Abbott victory. My comments last year still seem valid:

    What is even more disturbing is the evidence in 2012 that many of the larger organisations who have been concerned about winning better climate policy also seem to have taken climate off the public agenda for now. Many big groups campaigned in 2011 under the “Say Yes” banner for the carbon price, which was legislated at the end of that year. That was the start of a new battle, but in 2012 most of those objectively disappeared from the public discourse, leaving Labor and the Greens alone to fight it out against the opposition, the miners, the Murdoch press, the deniers, the shock jocks and all and sundry. To be honest, I have seen hardly a peep in the media in defence of climate action from the ACTU or unions, the aid and welfare sectors, or many of the big eNGOs. I can see only four explanations, all disturbing. Some ran for cover because it got too difficult or they had gotten what they wanted (for example, the welfare lobby); some didn’t understand the strategic need to continue fighting it out in public; the media and communications professional in those organisation were not up to the job; or these organisations and their campaigners were simply “exhausted”. All four point to management failure.

    Perhaps because Labor decided to take climate off the agenda – selling its climate legislation as only about “clean energy” and those mysterious “household compensation” TV ads on tax cuts that made no link to the climate bills – then some groups also considered Labor’s electoral chances would also be bolstered if they sat on their hands as well. Their general unwillingness to take full advantage of the considerable public space created by the scientists, meteorologists and the Climate ACommission on the link between current extreme weather events and global warming is not a good sign.

    In contradistinction, some of the smaller advocacy groups are full steam ahead at a State, regional and sectoral level. The “Lock the gate” campaign against coal seam gas has garnered amazing local community support and gained great momentum and state and national political and media attention, and the campaigns against coal expansion are growing across the eastern States, they are better resourced and attracting critical support from both local communities and experienced climate activists. There has been strong community support for renewable energy, reflected in both the one-millionth solar PV domestic installation, and in the “big solar” Port Augusta campaign.

    When all is said and done, and despite the comings and goings in Canberra, closing down the polluters is always at the heart of effective climate activism and advocacy, especially since end-use emissions from Australia coal and gas exports will dwarf domestic emissions by a factor of three- or four-to-one. Researcher Guy Pearse says that the expansion of Australian coal exports with the bipartisan blessing of Labor and the LNP will mean that by “2020 or soon thereafter, Australia is exporting nearly twice as much CO2 as is Saudi Arabia today.” Pearse estimates that:

    … Australian coal exports will generate around 75Gt (billion tonnes) CO2 between now and 2050 – perhaps another 5Gt will come from domestic coal use, and 8-10 Gt from LNG if the expansion of coal seam gas proceeds.

    This totals around 90 billion tonnes of CO2, compared to current total domestic emissions of 0.55 billion tonnes a year, or just over 20 billion tonnes in total to 2050 if current emissions were held constant.

    From this perspective, neither Labor nor the LNP by their behaviour indicate any significant understanding of the policy consequences of the carbon budget approach which the government’s own Climate Commission advocates, nor any grasp of what needs to be done in this “critical decade”. The brutal truth is that if Labor should remain in power and stick to an emissions reduction target of just 5% by 2020 (achieved by importing carbon credits) and actual emissions not peaking till 2025, this would still be largely a lost decade. With Team Abbott, the outcome is worse.

    More of this in part 3, but next in part 2 a look at the major parties after September 2013.

  • Lone ranger – The Bob Katter Story

    here: Home National Times Political News Article

    Search smh:

    Search in:
    National Times

    .
    .

    Lone ranger

    DateApril 6, 2013
    Read later

    Mark Baker

    Mark Baker

    Editor-at-Large, The Age

    View more articles from Mark Baker

    Nothing if not his own man, Bob Katter’s political rise has seen his transformation from a Bjelke-Petersen state-government minister, to independent MP maverick, to party leader. What next?

    Zoom in on this story. Explore all there is to know.
    Joh Bjelke-Petersen
    Cairns
    South East Queensland Electricity Board
    Electrical Trades Union
    .

    inShare.
    Pin It
    submit to reddit
    Email article
    Print
    Reprints & permissions

    .

    Back in the day … Katter with his father, Bob snr, in 1974.
    Back in the day … Katter with his father, Bob snr, in 1974. Photo: AAP

    It’s sweltering in Cairns. A small crowd has gathered in the shade of a huge Moreton Bay fig on the waterfront to support a protest rally by hospital staff. More than 400 of them are about to lose their jobs, thanks to the cost-cutting crusade by Campbell Newman’s Liberal National Party (LNP) Queensland government.

    Bob Katter, the workers’ new best friend, has turned up early with state MP Shane Knuth. Katter, whose federal seat of Kennedy stretches from here to the Northern Territory border and covers more than half a million square kilometres, has come prepared.

    As we march down the esplanade towards the rally, Katter, in trademark Akubra with jeans and a tie, parades a huge Australian flag tied to a freshly cut sapling. Knuth has a matching Eureka flag. Workers cheer from a construction site and greetings are shouted from passing cars.

    Bob on the job … (from left) Katter, Rodeo Queen of Australia Courtney McGeechan, Shane Knuth (top) and Adrian McLindon by a KAP campaign bus.
    Bob on the job … (from left) Katter, Rodeo Queen of Australia Courtney McGeechan, Shane Knuth (top) and Adrian McLindon by a KAP campaign bus. Photo: AAP

    So far so good for two politicians on the make. But Katter is about to put his foot in it. Or, more precisely, his size 11, suede bush boot. After short, stirring speeches from various union officials, Katter takes the microphone. He denounces Newman for taking an axe to public service jobs while preparing to spend $700 million on a new parliamentary precinct. “He’s got enough money to build a pleasure palace for himself,” he says, drawing a chorus of approving outrage.

    Advertisement

    He then chides the previous Labor state government for shedding railway jobs and tells a rambling story about a nurse sacked in Charters Towers, his current home. A worker standing towards the front yells: “What about Cairns, Bob? We’re not interested in railways and bloody Charters Towers.”

    “God bless you,” says Katter.

    Roping ’em in … Bob Katter expects Katter’s Australian Party to one day “control Queensland”.
    Roping ’em in … Bob Katter expects Katter’s Australian Party to one day “control Queensland”. Photo: Tim Bauer

    “And God bless the gays and lesbians,” chimes in a woman up the back, triggering a ripple of laughter.

    Then comes the porkie. Katter recalls his time as a minister in Joh Bjelke-Petersen’s Queensland state government. “Joh had a blind spot on unions and that was bad. But he didn’t shed a job,” he declares. “Whatever the shortcomings of that government – and there were plenty – we didn’t sack people.” Katter has failed to notice Stewie Traill, the Electrical Trades Union (ETU) organiser for far north Queensland, standing to one side of the crowd. “That’s bullshit, Bob, don’t play that game,” shouts Traill. “Don’t go back to 1985, Bob, because you’ll never win that one.”

    In the mid-’80s, the Bjelke-Petersen government sacked 1000 union linesmen employed by the South East Queensland Electricity Board (SEQEB), replacing them with contract workers. The confrontation triggered violent street protests and protracted power blackouts before the government won. Later, Katter will concede over a meal that the SEQEB fight was a shameful episode in which Bjelke-Petersen sought to break the union and crush its membership. The events contributed to his disillusionment with and ultimate estrangement from the National Party.

    Hat squad … Katter with his son Robbie, last year.
    Stetson and son … Katter with his son Robbie, last year. Photo: AAP

    Today, while the Queensland branch of the ETU might be slow to forgive or forget, Katter is best mates with a bunch of union leaders, including Victorian ETU boss Dean Mighell, whose support has been pivotal in his bold campaign to build a new force in Australian politics that will challenge both his old conservative cronies and Labor.

    The ambition of Katter’s Australian Party (KAP) is to seize the balance of power in the Senate and pick up seats in the House of Representatives in this year’s federal election. And Katter is determined to use that power, if he gets it, to turn back the tide of free trade, to revive Australia’s embattled manufacturing and agricultural sectors and to usher in a new era of “developmentalism” in Australia.

    But before all that, Katter clearly needs to polish a few aspects of his CV – including his record on industrial relations, his position on gay rights and on the story of his remarkable transformation from a leading light in one of the most right-wing governments in Australian history to the picket-line maverick of today.

    Bob Katter began life with his fists – in Cloncurry, western Queensland, the hottest town in Australia. He says his childhood made Huckleberry Finn “look like a wuss”, with he and his mates spending their free time exploring abandoned mine shafts, swimming in flooded rivers and playing with guns.

    “My mother was a Brisbane girl and in Brisbane children go to school in shoes and socks,” says Katter. “I nearly got killed. Every night after school I was bashed up. What do you think is going to happen when you are the only kid in the school wearing shoes and socks? Those kids teethed on leather. It was sort of get tough or die. So I got tough. I got real tough, actually.” Jack Fraser, an old cattleman and longtime friend of Katter who we meet one night in Mareeba, west of Cairns, can vouch for that. Fraser – whose rugged credentials include a severed hand sewn back on after a confrontation with a bull – remembers a brawl at a pub at Julia Creek when Katter was in his 20s. “This bloke kept badgering Bob, poking him in the side. He wouldn’t leave him alone. In the end Bob just turned around and flattened him,” says Fraser. “He’s a wildcat, that one.”

    The young brawler and captain of the Cloncurry Tigers rugby league team took a while to settle down. In a private tribute to his mother several years ago, Katter wrote: “After many years at university I left a failure and I buried myself in Cloncurry, the hard-bitten frontier town of my childhood. I had no profession, no business, a wife, two kids and eked out a living as a projectionist in my parent’s picture theatre. My mother’s interest in me was just the same as it would have been if she’d lived for another 10 years and actually seen me sworn in as Queensland’s youngest cabinet minister, owner of a working copper mine and 250,000 acres of unencumbered cattle station.”

    Politics was always Katter’s destiny. His grandfather, a businessman of Lebanese descent, was active in local government and his father, Bob snr, was a Catholic trade unionist who quit the ALP during the 1950s split and held the federal seat of Kennedy for the Country Party and its successor, the National Party, from 1966 until his retirement in 1990.

    Bob jnr was elected to the Queensland Parliament in 1974 and was a National Party minister between 1983 and 1989 before falling out with Bjelke-Petersen’s successor, Mike Ahern. He moved to federal politics in 1993, recapturing Kennedy from Labor. Increasingly disaffected with the Coalition’s economic policies, he turned independent in 2001.

    “I had to get out of the National Party because they were ruining my electorate. I was a dingo who stayed too long,” he says, citing the destruction of the sugar and tobacco industries and the loss of jobs in fisheries and boat-building in Cairns. “When they deregulated dairy, I had just reached the end of the road.”

    He thought his political career was doomed: “No one had ever been re-elected as an independent. I was walking into an open grave.” He has been returned at the four elections since then, now drawing more than 50 per cent of the primary vote. Kennedy has become Katter freehold.

    Bob Katter is easy to caricature: the hat, the three-piece suits, the snowy hair and rugged facial features that might cast him as a character in a Norman Lindsay sketch. Peter Beattie, the former Labor Premier of Queensland, says: “I quite like him, but he can be as mad as a cut snake. Because he is so outspoken, his political support often looks better than it is.”

    Katter is irrepressible, a whirlwind of words, ideas and energy. He turns 68 next month and had quadruple heart bypass surgery in late 2007, but nothing seems to slow him. On a two-day tour of Cairns and the Atherton Tableland, he seems to know every second person and everyone knows him. Strangers greet him like an old friend. Even folks from the opposite side of politics are polite and curious to engage with him, and he with them.

    There’s a meeting in Mareeba for workers who have lost their jobs and entitlements with the collapse of mining company Kagara. The bank is about to foreclose on George Peterson and his wife, Flo. “If Bob can’t do anything to help us, no one can,” says Peterson. “At least he has a go.”

    Katter is tough and temperamental, but away from the political bear pit in Canberra he is polite and personable in the nicest way of the bush. In restaurants in Sydney and Melbourne, he remembers the names of waiters and drops by the kitchen to thank the bemused staff before leaving. At a busy intersection in Cairns, he winds down the window to greet a couple of kids wrestling a curbside advertising hoarding in the heat.

    Over a sandwich in a coffee shop, he shares a table and animated conversation with an elderly couple who ask for his autograph and a bearded cyclist who declares himself a Greens stalwart. He wanders back from an op-shop in Mareeba with a book he doesn’t want. “Her business was slow, so I thought I should buy something,” he says, with a hint of embarrassment at the soft-heartedness of the gesture. He eschews the gold-pass perks that are the right of all members of Federal Parliament. He insists on flying economy class and refuses to use the luxurious Qantas Captain’s Club lounges, preferring to sit in the public areas with a milkshake, chatting with whoever wanders by. “How can I go travelling in first class? What would people think?” he says.

    He is an idealist in an age of cynicism, an unaffected political everyman at a time of every man for himself. He proposes tough options when the leaders of Labor and the Coalition often chart the path of least electoral resistance on big issues.

    For a man with a keen interest in world events and the sweep of history, Katter is surprisingly untravelled. He has been overseas just once – a tour in 2006 that took him to Canada, the US and Brazil fact-finding on perhaps the dearest of his pet projects: ethanol.

    Political opponents dismiss Katter as being mad and many journalists regard him as a clown. On both counts they sell him and themselves short. Some of his policy pronouncements may be radical and unconventional – even naive and unworkable – but they are heartfelt and spring from a passionate nationalism and a conviction that the Australian economy has lost its way.

    Katter wants to abandon free-trade agreements and restore protection for manufacturing and agricultural industries. He wants to stem the tide of foreign takeovers of Australian industries, farms and jobs. He wants an end to the privatisation of state-owned assets. He wants ethanol mandated as a fuel additive to revitalise the sugar cane and grain industries. He wants a return to full arbitration in industrial relations. He wants the Coles-Woolworths supermarket duopoly broken up. He wants to force Qantas to keep most of its crew and engineering jobs in Australia. He wants it all and he wants it now.

    His message resonates with a diverse array of Australians. James Packer donated $250,000 to the party last year, praising Katter’s “passion for this great country”. Ad man John Singleton gave $50,000, as did the Victorian branch of the ETU and the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union.

    The ETU’s Dean Mighell, who, unlike his Queensland comrades, is a strong friend and supporter of Katter, has resisted intense pressure to head the party’s Senate ticket in Victoria. “Bob could be the saviour of the Australian working people if he wins the balance of power,” says Mighell. “A huge number of blue-collar people are attracted to Bob when they hear him. He has a very powerful message that free trade is killing this country.”

    Two years ago, Mighell invited Katter to address a gathering of 380 ETU shop stewards from across Victoria. “He got a standing ovation, and our blokes wouldn’t stand for the f…ing Queen. I’ve done a lot of speaking, but he put me in the shade. He absolutely killed them. He talked their language and that’s something Gillard and Rudd can’t do.”

    One of Bob Katter’s greatest passions is the plight of indigenous Australians.

    “I identify with them. I’m not white and I come from Cloncurry. I’m not too sure where my racial background has come from but I am not going to argue if someone calls me a blackfella. I’m not going to argue that I am not,” he says.

    “There’s a name in Cloncurry. We call ourselves the Curry Mob. There’s Afghans and Lebanese, a lot of Chinese. You name it, you’ll find them in Cloncurry. They’ve all intermarried over 220 years and they just refer to themselves as the Curry Mob. The blackfella radio station is Mob FM – it’s the Curry Mob. We stick like glue and it doesn’t matter whether you are blackfella, whitefella, pinkfella or whatever.” Katter is furious that native title legislation has failed to give effective land ownership to indigenous communities. He wants “Mabo II” – a fresh High Court challenge to ensure communities get land titles that enable them to borrow to build houses and businesses.

    He describes a confrontation a couple of years ago with federal Indigenous Affairs Minister Jenny Macklin, during which she defended 99-year leases. “I got angry. I said, ‘I’m taking off my member of parliament hat and now I am putting on my blackfella hat. You will not bloody well tell me, in my country, where my forebears have lived for 40,000 years, that I will have an inferior title deed to everyone else in this country.’ I was so bloody wild, she burst into tears. And I said, ‘I’m telling you, Jenny. You can cry and bawl and throw yourself on the floor, but we won’t be copping it. We want the same title deed as everyone else in this country – perpetual, freehold title deed.’ ” He says they have not spoken since. Macklin’s office declines to respond.

    Katter is proud of his four years as Queensland Aboriginal affairs minister in the ’80s. He gave communities land ownership through “deeds of grant in trust” – a scheme later abolished by Labor – and promoted projects employing Aborigines to build houses in their communities.

    Cape York Aboriginal leader Noel Pearson says he originally opposed a lot of what Katter was doing. “I realise now that I was wrong. He was 25 years ahead of his time. A lot of the things on our developmental agenda were things Bob commenced when he was state minister. I didn’t understand what he was doing breaking down the socialist enclaves in indigenous communities.”

    Pearson says Katter was a role model for his career as an activist and John Howard “made a big mistake” not appointing him Aboriginal affairs minister during his decade in power. “One of the reasons I got into advocacy and public debate was Bob. I was just out of my teens when I first got to know him. He said, ‘You guys have got to have a go. Get into the debate. Get into politics.’ ”

    Bob Katter’s faith in the power of independent mps was shattered after the last federal election when he and two other independents – Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott – emerged with the power to determine whether Julia Gillard or Tony Abbott would form government. Katter presented a 20-point list to both leaders and said he was ready to back whichever side signed up to his agenda.

    Despite their deep policy differences, Katter is close to Kevin Rudd and respects Gillard: ”She’s got guts and she sticks to her word.” But in the end he sided with the Coalition, while Windsor and Oakeshott backed Labor.

    The failure of the process to advance his agenda left Katter disillusioned and convinced there was no future for independents: “We had two weeks of negotiations. All three of us represent rural Australia. But we failed to deliver anything for the people of Australia. We had the greatest platform that any three people have ever had in Australian history and we came away with nothing.” That sense of failure drove Katter to form his own party.

    Now the stars are aligning for the KAP in Queensland. The state election last March saw Labor routed after a decade in power, reduced to just seven MPs. And already the gloss has gone from Campbell Newman’s LNP government as it has moved to slash 14,000 public sector jobs.

    A Galaxy poll in late February showed LNP support had fallen to 43 per cent, down 6.7 percentage points since the 2012 state election. This followed the resignation of two ministers for misconduct and the defection of three more disgruntled MPs. One of them was Ray Hopper, a former LNP front bencher who is now state leader of the KAP, joining Shane Knuth and Robbie Katter, Bob’s son, in state parliament.

    Katter believes he can capture enough support in the coming federal election to build the KAP into the new “third force” in Australian politics. He reckons he can expand on the base already established in northern Queensland by drawing voters disaffected with both major parties around the state, while capitalising on Labor’s unpopularity across the nation.

    The party has vowed to field Senate candidates in every state and territory and to contest all 150 House of Representatives seats. “That might be a bit aspirational, but we need to win not just in the Senate,” says Katter.

    In the Queensland election, the party scored 11.6 per cent of the vote. Exit polling indicated they would have got an extra 8.3 per cent – or a total of one in every five votes – had the state electoral commission not abbreviated their name to “Australian Party” on the ballot papers, confusing many supporters.

    Katter predicts the party will take at least four Senate seats – two in Queensland, and one each in NSW and Victoria, where he thinks it can draw sufficient support to beat other minor parties to the sixth seat at stake. He is also optimistic of snaring the House of Representative seats of Herbert and Dawson in north Queensland.

    But before it gets to the election, the KAP faces two existential challenges – maintaining unity and discipline among a disparate membership and raising enough money to run an effective national campaign. Public bickering over gay marriage and internal squabbling over preselections has cost momentum and diverted attention from policy priorities over recent months.

    The party’s former national secretary, Bernard Gaynor, was suspended in January after tweeting that he would not let gay people teach his children. He later resigned, accusing the party of refusing to oppose abortion. Then Tess Corbett withdrew her nomination for the federal seat of Wannon in Victoria after claiming paedophiles would be “next in line to be recognised in the same way as gays and lesbians and get rights”.

    Other party members have condemned Katter for failing to take a stronger stance against “gay bashers” within their ranks. At the same time, Katter has had to fend off party conservatives angered by his refusal to condemn ACT Senate candidate Stephen Bailey for publicly supporting gay marriage in defiance of party policy. The public slanging has been damaging, but Katter shrugs it off: “We have a crisis every day in this party. One day I am a homophobe, the next I am soft on gays.”

    More pressing is the issue of fundraising. The party received $2.1 million in donations last financial year. It will need a lot more to fight a federal election. “All this is predicated on us raising a lot of money. We are talking millions and there is a lot of work to do,” Katter concedes.

    He is still in touch with mining magnate Clive Palmer, who shares his distaste for the Newman government and could solve the KAP’s financial problems with one signature – if not for some serious differences on policy. Katter says he told Palmer – who was a fellow Young Country Party member in their university days – that he didn’t think they could “climb into bed together” because Palmer supports privately owned rail lines, anathema to the KAP. “That’s a beat-up by Bob,” says Palmer. “I don’t care who builds them, so long as they are built.”

    Palmer says he has a problem with Katter’s position on guns: “He’s not in favour of the current gun-control laws, and I believe what John Howard has done has saved many lives in Australia.” Palmer predicts the KAP will do well drawing support from voters unhappy with both Labor and the Coalition, but not as well as Katter thinks. “There is great dissatisfaction with both major parties,” he adds.

    Driving through Melbourne late one night, Katter has his hat on his lap and his heart on his sleeve. “I haven’t ever attempted what I am doing now. I’ve never asked the Australian people to believe there is a third way. But when I see another part of Australia being sold overseas, I just go into a rage. When I see jobs being taken away from Australia and going overseas, I get furious.”

    He sees his task as a matter of destiny: “Our family have been powerful, off and on rich, and when we walk into a room they say, ‘He’s a Katter, you know.’ And there are certain responsibilities that fall upon our shoulders. You know you are expected to stand up.”

    His ambition is to build a political movement that “ensures Australia once again becomes a country passionately committed to development, the building of railway lines, electricity lines, an ethanol industry, mobilising the superannuation funds, restoring the two million megalitres that have been taken out of the Murray Darling.”

    Peter Beattie is sceptical: “The history of elections in Queensland is that the winners tend to win by big margins. John Howard did, Joh did, I did and Campbell Newman did. Smaller players tend not to do so well. Katter is a very good grassroots campaigner. But if Abbott can hold his support in Queensland, then I don’t think Katter’s party will do that well.”

    But Katter has no doubts: “I expect we will control Queensland in my lifetime. As Victor Hugo said, there is nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come.”

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/lone-ranger-20130401-2h233.html#ixzz2Pkz8iaRG