‘Better late than never': Frigate deal ‘cements' quasi-alliance with Japan
'They did make the right call, this is a good decision by the Albanese government,' Mr Sheridan told Sky News Australia.
'In the end, it is still a tier two warship, but it is better than anything we've got at the moment, and it's a very capable ship.
'It also cements the quasi-alliance we have with Japan.
'As long as defence doesn't bugger it up by demanding a million changes, which is what it normally does, this is a good move and it's sad it is in the second term of the Albanese government, better late than never.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
12 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Work-from-home is for employers to decide
Should business owners lose the right to determine where their staff should work? It's a radical notion, but it's being proposed by the Victorian government. Employers have always had the right to say where their staff should be sited, but the proposal is to take away this foundational right and force employers to accept two days of work-from-home for employees who want it. Lest governments in other jurisdictions are tempted to go down this path, let's be more specific about the flaws in this proposal. I'll start by explaining how businesses maximise productivity regarding work arrangements and what we stand to lose. The critical element is that each employer has the right to set those work arrangements themselves. Having this choice allows employers to decide on work-from-home arrangements that work best for the business, depending on their individual circumstances. A travel agent in town A, for example, might have lots of work-from-home employees, and that works for them for the type of staff they're looking for and, as a result, they enjoy high productivity levels. That's great. Loading On the other hand, a consulting firm in town B might insist all staff be on deck to foster teamwork and camaraderie, which result in high productivity. That's also great. The key point here is to allow individual firms the choice of whether to have work-from-home or work-from-work arrangements, or indeed some sort of hybrid arrangement. Allowing that choice allows the town A as well as the town B business to thrive. Denying that choice would – by definition – cause one of those businesses to suffer a productivity hit. The importance of allowing individual businesses to choose is critical not only to the success of millions of businesses across the country, but also to the national economy. Some people make the mistake of making sweeping generalisations about what level of work-from-home is best for Australian businesses, but these one-size-fits-all proposals fail to account for what works best for each enterprise. They come in all shapes and sizes, with all sorts of business models, meeting all sorts of customer needs, and that is as it should be in a modern, dynamic economy.
The Age
12 minutes ago
- The Age
Work-from-home is for employers to decide
Should business owners lose the right to determine where their staff should work? It's a radical notion, but it's being proposed by the Victorian government. Employers have always had the right to say where their staff should be sited, but the proposal is to take away this foundational right and force employers to accept two days of work-from-home for employees who want it. Lest governments in other jurisdictions are tempted to go down this path, let's be more specific about the flaws in this proposal. I'll start by explaining how businesses maximise productivity regarding work arrangements and what we stand to lose. The critical element is that each employer has the right to set those work arrangements themselves. Having this choice allows employers to decide on work-from-home arrangements that work best for the business, depending on their individual circumstances. A travel agent in town A, for example, might have lots of work-from-home employees, and that works for them for the type of staff they're looking for and, as a result, they enjoy high productivity levels. That's great. Loading On the other hand, a consulting firm in town B might insist all staff be on deck to foster teamwork and camaraderie, which result in high productivity. That's also great. The key point here is to allow individual firms the choice of whether to have work-from-home or work-from-work arrangements, or indeed some sort of hybrid arrangement. Allowing that choice allows the town A as well as the town B business to thrive. Denying that choice would – by definition – cause one of those businesses to suffer a productivity hit. The importance of allowing individual businesses to choose is critical not only to the success of millions of businesses across the country, but also to the national economy. Some people make the mistake of making sweeping generalisations about what level of work-from-home is best for Australian businesses, but these one-size-fits-all proposals fail to account for what works best for each enterprise. They come in all shapes and sizes, with all sorts of business models, meeting all sorts of customer needs, and that is as it should be in a modern, dynamic economy.
AU Financial Review
12 minutes ago
- AU Financial Review
Recognising Palestine would play into Israeli extremists' hands
The government is moving with unstoppable momentum towards recognising a Palestinian state without a negotiated end to the conflict with Israel. It is a longstanding bipartisan Australian policy, and the policy of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, to support the notion of two states for two peoples.
