Alan Goodall¡¯s Dec. 3 article, ¡±,¡± seems to suggest that younger Australians, the computer generation etc. were foremost in the Liberal government¡¯s loss in the Nov. 24 elections. I am a 50-plus Australian who is quite happy to see John Howard exit as prime minister. In celebrating the Liberal government¡¯s loss, I considered the Howard government¡¯s:
? Reckless and inequitable manner of implementing changes to workplace conditions via WorkChoice legislation.
? Lack of leadership on climate change.
? Lack of ministerial accountability.
? Outrageous use of taxpayers¡¯ money for pork-barreling and producing political advertisements rather than improving infrastructure, and the health and education sectors.
? Meanness and cynicism toward the electorate.
? Word play bordering on lies and misrepresentations.
? Inability to implement succession management. Howard could have retired as a hero but instead screwed the Liberal Party for many years to come.
In short, Howard lost the plot big time. He was not ¡°sincere.¡± Were Howard and his Liberal government really responsible for Australia¡¯s economic good times? Well, much of that was underpinned by tough decisions that a Labor government had made earlier to float the Australian dollar, free up the banking sector, etc. But least you think that I am anti-Liberal, I voted for the Fraser Liberal government way back when.
Goodall¡¯s comment that Howard¡¯s reward is ¡°a modest pension¡± is quite insulting to the Aussie battlers that Howard claimed to represent. Which planet do Goodall and Howard share?
With your current subscription plan you can comment on stories. However, before writing your first comment, please create a display name in the Profile section of your subscriber account page.