Scotty from Marketing

[willedoo]

Scotty from Marketing has excelled himself with his latest bushfire advertisement complete with a catchy jingle. Just what the nation needs. What a leader. Go Scotty!

 

https://twitter.com/ScottMorrisonMP/status/1213330419044638722

 

P.S. If you're in the habit of watching real estate marketing videos you'll probably recognize the tune.

 

 

[onetrack]

The only thing missing is the cheerleaders with pom-poms. I'm a little surprised there wasn't some Election Day clips of Scott putting in his vote, slipped in.

 

 

[willedoo]

One thing noted is that it's not a government clip. At the end it reads 'Authorized by S.Morrison, Liberal Party, Canberra'. So it's a party political ad which makes it even more grubby.

 

 

[old man emu]

Isn't is amazing the the Conservatives claim to be the best group to lead the country, but as soon as Trouble raises its ugly head, they flick-pass leadership to the Labor party?

 

World War 1:  The Libs were the government when war was declared, but due to the fact that they did not control the Senate, they called an election for 5 September 1914. The people ditched the Libs and put in Labor.

 

World War 2:  Menzies' United Australia Party-Country Party Coalition Government was in power from 14 March 1940 to 28 August 1941.  From 29 August to 7 October 1941 another patch-up coalition of the United Australia Party and Country Party was in power. On 3 October 1941 it was defeated during the budget debate on a no confidence motion when the two Independents, Wilson and Coles, crossed the floor to vote with Labor. Prime Minister Fadden was unable to retain majority support in the House and he advised the Governor-General that ALP leader John Curtin should be commissioned as Prime Minister. The Labor party carried the country through that war.

 

Come to the 21st Century and Labor carries the country through the GFC, despite the howls from the Conservative that to do so, Labor was spending the "Future Fund", taking the food from the mouths of future generations.

 

Now we have been suffering the effects of a conglomeration of natural disasters and the Conservative leader doesn't even have the courtesy to tell the head of the RFS, who is, by Law, in charge of the fire-fighting operations, that Army Reservist were being called up for extra help. Rural Fire Service (RFS) Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons said Scott Morrison's office had not told him about the extra resources, which he found out about via media reports. Federal Defence Minister Linda Reynolds defended the move to leave the RFS out of the decision to deploy personnel, saying the information had been passed to the Premier.

 

 

[willedoo]

Yes, maybe not too much leadership in tough times. WW1 & WW2 involvement decisions were no brainers, just a case of monkey see, monkey do considering our relationship with Britain at those times. At least Korea was part of an international coalition, so that was probably a predictable decision. The Vietnam decision was a case of subserviance in exchange for ANZUS Treaty brownie points. The U.S asked Australia to ask South Vietnam to ask Australia to help them. Not a lot of decisive leadership required there. Ditto the Gulf War - a heavy dose of a*se licking was all that was required. The only time a conservative leader showed real independent decision making and put himself out on a limb was Howard going into East Timor.

 

 

[old man emu]

As much as I hate Liberals, I'll admit that Howard made one or two hard decisions that have benefited Australians. You have to remember that he was a product of pre-personality politics, as were Whitlam, and Keating. These three went through their political apprenticeships, learning from the masters of their particular philosophies. The only problem with both sides is that they still display "cultural cringe". Australians want to be independent (but retain British links as Canada has). We can't do that until our leaders are prepared to stand up to the USA and tell them to stop warmongering. 

 

 

[Yenn]

Scomo has joined  the Donald in using tweets to tell us what he is doing. He had not advised those who should be told which has upset them slightly.

 

Really what is Scomo supposed to do about the bushfires? It is a state responsibility and they have the leaders and the personnel to take on the job. If the states want assistance they can call for help and they are already joining a body of states that ere sharing the workload, without the federal government being involved.

 

I don't believe Scomo should have been denigrated, because he was overseas on holiday and didn't come back to see the fires. in fact in my opinion he could stay overseas all the time and we would not miss him.

 

For a really good way to run the fire response we don't need a prime minister, we could give the job to one of our military generals and it would all run smoothly. Just think back to the Darwin cyclone and also to the Timor debacle. Once the politicians were divorced from the scene it settled down.

 

All Scomo is doing is trying to put himself in a good light before the electorate. You may think he has an uphill battle and I would agree with you.

 

 

[willedoo]

I agree that he's totally superfluous to requirements when it comes to dealing with the fires; about as handy as a hip pocket in a singlet. Most of the public criticism seems to be centered on the inept way he's been going about things. For good or bad, people can handle him being a prime minister, but what we're getting instead is an advertising man. The earlier version of his bushfire ad on FB had to have the donate button removed. There was criticism that it was misleading people into thinking it was for donations to the bushfire appeal, but was in fact a link for donations to the Liberal party. Bad judgement like that just keeps happening.

 

In my opinion, all the grubby, incompetent behaviour is a big distraction in times like this. He would have done the country a far greater service by staying on an extended holiday in Hawaii. Things would run a lot smoother.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Scomo is - to quote the great Paul Keating - "all tip and no iceberg".

 

 

[willedoo]

Scomo is - to quote the great Paul Keating - "all tip and no iceberg".

 

I miss Paul Keating in politics. He had the sharpest wit of the whole bunch by a long way. The likes of Fred Daly and Jim Killen were good entertainment as well. A different breed to the bland corporate product we get in politics these days.

 

 

[old man emu]

we could give the job to one of our military generals and it would all run smoothly.

 

Actually we have given the job to a high ranking trained expert. He's called the Rural Fire Service Commissioner. He, and his counterpart in Victoria have been trained in coordinating bushfire suppression. 

 

You don't think that NSW Rural Fire Service hasn't been planning and training to battle bushfires since it was established by the Rural Fires Act 1997? What has been done in the past few months is not a knee-jerk reaction sending brigades scampering hither, thither and yon like headless chooks. The problem currently facing the rural fire services is enormous, and fast moving. But pre-determined plans have been put into action. It is a maxim of military planning that "No battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy", but entering a battle without a good plan results in Custer's Last Stand. The plans that were formulated for dealing with major bushfires obviously did not survive contact with catastrophic bushfires - but part of the plan survives to guide the troops on the battle field in the counter-attack.

 

Would you be happy for an admiral to be put in charge of a land battle, or an air commodore to lead a sea battle? 

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Who is the "ScoMo" you are talking about? I have heard of Slo-Mo, though...

 

OME i right - I would rather have the heads of the RFS in charge of the operation, but in terms of coordinating response across government agencies and the military in support of the RFS in battling a behemoth, I think the military are better prepared than politicians.. That is not to say th the RFS haven't been training, but the military (well the army) tend to train for emergency relief as well as other non-combative requirements. Also, they are well trained in various engineering disciplines that could be used to effectively support fire fighting functions.

 

 

[old man emu]

And the ambulance service personnel are well trained in dealing with injury, but not in fire fighting. In any emergency they assist by providing auxiliary support. The head of the ambulance service couldn't run a fire fighting operation as effectively as the RFS boss. Obviously the specialists in various fields are better at doing their jobs than politicians (CASA excepted ?).

 

NSW, and I suppose every other State and Territory, has legislation to deal with emergencies. From the Act, emergency means an emergency being an emergency which requires a significant and co-ordinated response. In New South Wales there is a State Emergency Operations Controller. That position is help by the Commissioner of Police. The State Emergency Operations Controller is not responsible for controlling the response to an emergency if there is a single combat agency primarily responsible under the State Emergency Management Plan for controlling the response to the emergency. Combat agency means the agency identified in the State Emergency Management Plan as the agency primarily responsible for controlling the response to a particular emergency. In the case of bushfires, the Rural Fire Service is the combat agency. The response to emergencies by the States is a well-thought out system that has been included in legislation drafted after discussion between the various involved parties have reached consensus on how the response will be prepared for and acted out. 

 

What also needs to be remembered is that Australia is a federation of six states which  have their own constitutions, parliaments, governments and laws. The Federal Government has no jurisdiction over matters relating to internal operations of each State. As "good neighbours" other States can offer assistance to any State experiencing an emergency, and the Federal Government is one of those "good neighbours". However, the Federal Government can't walk in and take over. ScoMo's touring of fire ravaged areas has no more effect on operations than a tour by the leaders of the various religious denominations in the State. In fact, the presence of these political religious leaders is more of a hindrance to local operations, especially when the combat agency is ordering the populous to evacuate.

 

 

[willedoo]

It looks like Scotty is gaining international fame:

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-11/scott-morrison-labelled-laughing-stock-europe-climate-protests/11859988

 

 

[old man emu]

In the face of a bushfire catastrophe, our national conversation is still run by politics

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-11/australia-bushfire-crisis-just-dont-mention-climate-change/11857590

 

As a result of the research I've done in order to make sensible additions to this discussion, I have come to the conclusion that:

 

1. The climate is definitely changing.
    
   
2. The really big cause of the change is the result of natural climatic variation over a long period of geological time, of which we have only been cognizant of, and recording for about 4% of the time Modern Man has been organised.
    
   
3. The Climate Change debate is not a thing that will end with consensus because both sides are manipulating data to bolster their own point of view.
    
   
4. Those fanatically involved in the debate appear to ignore my conclusion No 2 and seem intent on putting all the blame on those participating in rampant commercialism.
    
   
5. Mankind's activities, both industrial and agricultural have added warming pollutants to the atmosphere and changed the structure of the solar heat bank, but the effects of these actions pales with respect to volcanic events, axial variation, sea current variation and solar energy inflow.
    
   

 

[willedoo]

I guess it's all relative to history. The day will come when the Earth has moved close enough to the sun to become a dead, lifeless planet. Humans are just a blip in time.

 

 

[octave]

but the effects of these actions pales with respect to volcanic events,

 

Are Volcanoes or Humans Harder on the Atmosphere?

 

 

[spacesailor]

Ask the human victims from White Island, NZ

 

spacesailor

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Humans have killed millions of other humans. Volcanoes, not so  many.

 

 

[spacesailor]

Not even Mount Vesuvius .POMPIE

 

killed the lot , & that 's  only in mans history.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Yenn]

Scotty may be a marketing guru, but the leader of the opposition is doing a good job. He wants the first day of sitting to be set aside for a gnashing of teeth and wailing experiment.

 

I am sure the average Aussie knows just how bad life has been for bushfire victims, without having to be told by parliament. It would be better for them to get on with something to alleviate the problem, rather than acting like a load of old women and sobbing on each others shoulders.

 

That is a bit unkind of me towards old women and I apologise,. The one I know best seems to think the same as me about the pollies.

 

 

[onetrack]

The volcanic explosion (and resulting tsunami) that wiped out the Minoan civilisation on Santorini (Thera) in 1500BC, with an estimated death toll of around 20,000, was pretty severe.

 

But consider that compared to the Battle of the Frontiers in 1914, where 27,000 French soldiers were killed in ONE day - and the First Battle of the Somme, where 19,240 British soldiers were killed in ONE day of fighting.

 

Tsunamis are actually responsible for more deaths than any volcanic eruption. The 1923 Tsunami that hit Japan (from the Great Kanto Earthquake) was reported as having killed as many as 200,000 people.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

Dozens of battles have killed tens and hundreds of thousands each time. Several of the Chinese ones have killed 500,000 plus each time. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_by_casualties

 

 

[onetrack]

"Casualties" is not "numbers killed". "Casualties" is a term used for ALL casualties of battle - so that is "Killed, Injured, Missing, or Sick, or Died of Sickness" totals. The total number who have been taken out of action in the battle.

 

Figures display numbers of all types of casualties when available (killed, wounded, missing, and sick) but may only include number killed

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I believe in WWII, it was 20m Russians alone that died and 6m jews.. Gawd knows how many yanks, Aussies, Japanese, Germans, Poles, Italians, Arabs, etc etc erc... So far, people 1; Volcanoes 0.

 

Hang on.. there was WW1; the Boer war, Syria, flare ups in Africa, Cambodia (don't have to be wars to kill people)...

 

People: 1; Volcanoes 0;

 

(OME - I wish your theory was correct  - wouldn't feel so guilty when I go flying, but the science seems to point otherwise in terms of the effect of Volcanoes))