Seven days to go before we finally get a chance to have our say on the future of Australia. Seven days before we put the longest election campaign in history to bed.
In the meantime, Kudelka has found the answer to the question.
Who let the dogs out?
Back in 1998, Australians got an early glimpse of John’s grand vision for a happier and more harmonious workplace on the docks of Australia. Not only did the lure of lower pay and fewer conditions for all beckon invitingly, the new regime also promised full employment for big angry dogs. Sadly, big angry dogs and the associated hired goon and balaclava and baton manufacturing industries failed to achieve their potential in the ensuing years.With the introduction of WorkChoices, a system I’m sure the electorate would have voted for if John had had the time to mention it during the last election campaign, an opportunity for a resurgence in large dog employment has arisen.
The average worker currently possesses an enormous tactical advantage in current AWA negotiations, with employers armed only with greater financial and administrative resources and the ability to sack the employee without recourse.
Legislation is in the works to have a large angry dog to be present at all workplace negotiations, with the employee given a large rare steak with which to defend themselves in the interests of fairness. AWA negotiations are sure to proceed extremely smoothly, with any associated emergency surgery or rabies shots to be provided by the employer in exchange for a few public holidays and the right to go to the toilet during office hours.
For this bold vision to work, Australia’s large angry dogs will need to be maintained at peak fitness at all times. The key is John Howard and his tracksuit. Dogs could be trained to obey only the wearer of the tracksuit while being walked to the point of exhaustion by the great man. The tracksuit would become the business suit of the new regime, with it being a sackable offence to wear the tracksuit when not in possession of an ABN.