Good to see your reply, you are the only one here who have actually thought about the issues and participated in discussion.
Whether Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is a China expert? (I am not sure if he has ever called himself a China expert.) It is a subjective judgement for there is no universally agreed standard of what a China expert should possess as far as knowledge on China is concerned. I think he is, not simply because he can speak Chinese or has a Chinese name, but because he, while at university, majored in Chinese and Chinese history. In some areas, he probably knows China better than a lot of us here. Later he worked as a diplomat in China for several years, then he worked several years as a China consultant in KPMG. In parliament, his knowledge on China, his experience in China and his exposure to China certainly dwarf the rest I would imagine, therefore I think he is a China expert.
Now let me tackle Project 1 for example. Grocery watch was a good idea, but it would have been a white elephant anyway. First, each supermarket chain has it own website which readily provides information for consumers anyway, so the benefit of an integrated website would have been marginal. Second, the cost of amalgamating them into one and keeping all the information accurate and up to date is simply logistically Mission Impossible, let alone practicality and maintenance. Besides, there would be other legal issues as well. Labour could say: "we have done our due diligence in response to people's outcry on grocery prices, we have tried to work out a scheme, but it is impractical. Let's find another way." It is simply an overwhelmingly complex task with little outcome, so within perspective, therefore and rightly so, 'Cut and Run' would be a reasonable position to take. I would not frame it a broken promise. That said, the public and media attention probably have somewhat acted as a deterrent on prices of Woolies and Coles to certain extend.
As far as other listed projects are concerned, your approach is inconsiderate and incomplete in my view. You chose not to look at the overall positive benefits of say, Insulation and School building programs have brought and potentially will bring, instead used exceptional examples at best to deny the merits of these program. There are always some bad apples around. If you look for them, you will find them. Of course, with the benefit of hindsight, things could have been done better.
We agree to disagree, so the debate can go on and on, this is what democracy is all about. I very much agree with what Chris Bowen said in Qanda this week, he said something like this, both sides of politics in parliament are working hard for the best interest of the country, but they have different views and different ways of doing it.
Now it is Labour in the dirver seat, Labour drives it.
Whether Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is a China expert? (I am not sure if he has ever called himself a China expert.) It is a subjective judgement for there is no universally agreed standard of what a China expert should possess as far as knowledge on China is concerned. I think he is, not simply because he can speak Chinese or has a Chinese name, but because he, while at university, majored in Chinese and Chinese history. In some areas, he probably knows China better than a lot of us here. Later he worked as a diplomat in China for several years, then he worked several years as a China consultant in KPMG. In parliament, his knowledge on China, his experience in China and his exposure to China certainly dwarf the rest I would imagine, therefore I think he is a China expert.
Now let me tackle Project 1 for example. Grocery watch was a good idea, but it would have been a white elephant anyway. First, each supermarket chain has it own website which readily provides information for consumers anyway, so the benefit of an integrated website would have been marginal. Second, the cost of amalgamating them into one and keeping all the information accurate and up to date is simply logistically Mission Impossible, let alone practicality and maintenance. Besides, there would be other legal issues as well. Labour could say: "we have done our due diligence in response to people's outcry on grocery prices, we have tried to work out a scheme, but it is impractical. Let's find another way." It is simply an overwhelmingly complex task with little outcome, so within perspective, therefore and rightly so, 'Cut and Run' would be a reasonable position to take. I would not frame it a broken promise. That said, the public and media attention probably have somewhat acted as a deterrent on prices of Woolies and Coles to certain extend.
As far as other listed projects are concerned, your approach is inconsiderate and incomplete in my view. You chose not to look at the overall positive benefits of say, Insulation and School building programs have brought and potentially will bring, instead used exceptional examples at best to deny the merits of these program. There are always some bad apples around. If you look for them, you will find them. Of course, with the benefit of hindsight, things could have been done better.
We agree to disagree, so the debate can go on and on, this is what democracy is all about. I very much agree with what Chris Bowen said in Qanda this week, he said something like this, both sides of politics in parliament are working hard for the best interest of the country, but they have different views and different ways of doing it.
Now it is Labour in the dirver seat, Labour drives it.
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”
