I’m hearing it, but not quite yet believing it Labor’s Newspoll lead has apparently widened to a breathtaking 59-41 (from 55-45 last time). Details to follow as they come to hand.
UPDATE: Kevin Rudd’s lead as preferred prime minister has increased from 46-39 to 48-37.
UPDATE 2: Comments thread rumours tell of a Labor primary vote of 51 per cent, against 37 per cent for the Coalition.
659 comments on “Newspoll: 59-41”
Actually you make a valid point about the type of portfolios often given to women, Health & “Social” portfolios would be more common, now that you mention it.
I also agree that Gillard picked her portfolio, my guess would be due to her (justifiable) expertise in the field and admittedly, a very sincere passion for the rights of workers. In part, this can be attributed to her respect for her father, the Welsh mining background.
I think, just like the AFL, the match-ups need to be right and Gillard does a formidable job on Hockey, who often looks like a fish out of water.
Ironically, Turnbull would not have been my choice for an Environment portfolio (not sure who would be in the Libs, actually!!), nevertheless, for a variety of reasons, he has had more traction that Peter Garrett.
I think Costello EATS Swan and Tony Abbott is a greyhound to Nicola Roxon’s rabbit… not that Joe Punter really cares about parliamentary reparte.
I don’t think Gillard has the same political awareness that Rudd has, but I do think, in some areas (Health certainly NOT one of them) she does have sincerity of purpose and knowledge (whereas Rudd is yet to show passion for a singular cause… possibly education??).
Rudd was smart to allow Julia the IR portfolio. He is no friend of Unions and making it quite clear that it was “Julia’s baby” was a masterstroke. If the original policy flew, it was one less headache, if it didn’t (as was the case), he could swoop in and play hero, appeasing the business community, appearing tough on Unions (who are really painted into a corner and may even retaliate, albeit in vain, through the Greens) and coming across as a leader strong at negotiation.
Unfortunately for the ALP, I have to admit, the IR alternative is neither fish nor fowl. It leaves in the tourniquet of unfair dismissal for small business, frustrates the unions with ROE rules, confuses the public (how is it different, can someone explain AWA’s with Kevin again??) and more like Chemotherapy to cancer…
All in all, it is not a good look for Julia and a bit of DeJaVu (Medicare Gold?).
Kevin, on the other hand, is roses. That’s why he is the leader 🙂
2. East Timor – Also a positive
Uhh, Howard had to be dragged kicking and screaming by overwhelming and very strong public opinion into that one.
However, he did finally agree to it.
So definitely not 3/30, but maybe 2.5/30.
I knew you must be making a point but I could not work it out so I just let it lie where it was.
I suffer from foot in mouth without doing it deliberately so I thought the discretion was the better part of valour.
Tanner is fine and I think that he has a big future in the Labor Party
However, running a political party is like running a football team. One not only play the best players one must also balance the team.
I think Gillard has it over Tanner in IR simply on the basis of her experience outside politics. I am not sure of Tanners experience but being a partner in a leading law firm specialising in IR is exceedingly hard to beat.
Gillardâ€™s experience would have encountered all aspects of IR developing and policy analysis.
Maybe Tanner has this experience but it has escaped my attention if he has.
It is also an example of pushing women off into the â€œsoftâ€ areas of politics that I mentioned previously.
I did not know of Gillardâ€™s personal experience and her familyâ€™s background in the mining industry.
When evaluating any partyâ€™s platform one must be mindful of what they are trying to do. In this case Labor is trying to get elected after a long period and eventual period in opposition.. Everything else takes a back seat to that. This is the first rule of any political party. The rest is just froth and bubbles.
This is where I think Howard has come undone â€“ he forgot the golden rule and went off on a private sojourn to get his IR policy up in what has turned out to be the face of very angry electorate who will in the next couple of months put him out to pasture for trying on this little daydream.
Though you appear disillusioned with Laborâ€™s IR policy remember that once in and in the years ahead they will be in a position to ever so solely change the IR laws to whatever they want so long as they donâ€™t scare the horses.
To this end Rudd has positioned himself to play the Master Coach role. I would bet pounds to peanuts that Rudd and the shadow cabinet have given the OK everything that Gillard has done. However, if something does not work Rudd can come in over the top, play the decisive leader role and change things without the party loosing face.
This is a tough role for Gillard but as they say in the classics â€“â€œsomeone has to do itâ€- and leaves Rudd as you noted in your last line smelling of roses. This in the nature of current campaigning style (ie Presidential) with the Leader out in front the rest trailing along behind.
I think that to understand Laborâ€™s IR policy you only have to remember two things.
1) There are no AWAâ€™s
2) The unfair dismissals laws are back but easier to live with (i.e. do not apply within the first 12-month, does not apply to business with less than 15 employees.
The over $100,00 rule are more like common law contracts than AWAâ€™s and without going into the differences between common law employment contracts and AWAâ€™s we should accept them as such.
Now I know this is a very skimpy outline but can you list any other policy from any other party on any issue that contained mush more detail i.e. the GST which though trumpeted as simple is a very complex piece of legislation which will not be fully understood for quite some time to come â€“ie till we have had a couple of hundred court cases decided on this piece of legislation.
As an addendum I would say that business get off real easy in respect of its responsibility to workers. There are two areas that need urgent attention. Firstly, with at least one employee being killed at work each week we need industrial manslaughter legislation. Secondly, employee entitlements should be protected with the business being required to put away actual cash (not provisions) to cover all entitlements. It is not their money. It is the employees money however the current accounting standards and the law treats this money as though it is still the businesses with only provisions being made in the businesses books.
However, this is a long and detailed discussion and I think more than a little bit off topis and I â€œmayâ€ be pushing Williams â€œgoodwillâ€ with my current comments.
The people of Victoria voted for the independents too. They put their cards on the table for a number of issues such as reform of the Upper House (Liberal policy in 1973) and Labor came through. The rightness of their decision was confirmed by the results of the subsequent by-elections in Benalla and Burwood and of the Big Ones in 2002 and 2006.
When I say we havenâ€™t looked back, I am referring to the extra police, nurses and teachers, the reform to the constitution, the massive re-investment in schools ($1.4 billion so far an $1.9 billion this term), the re-introduction of proper academic disciplines like history and geography instead of the trendy Liberal mess of SOSE â€“ now to be followed by all the other states and territories â€“ except NSW, which had the good sense not to adopt SOSE in the first place because the Right rules Labor there!
Generic Oracle (533),
My apologies for misspelling your nom de screen. Not everyone can be a Victorian. Jeff Kennett did survive two terms, but the first was not the people â€œsticking withâ€ him. As a matter of strict logic, only the second can be so described.
The unemployment statistics do not come from registrations but from random surveys by the ABS. According to Ross Gittins, the one-hour boundary for unemployment has been the same for over 30 years. It was not the invention of the Howard Government, even though I keep reading that it was.
One of the betting agencies said on the radio,”the punters always get it right”. In regard to betting on elections.
LOL, well, only the punters that picked the one which actually wins!! 🙂
Glen Says: But Simon i thought Rudd said he was a Christian Socialist???
Maybe you should look up the definition of ‘liberal’ some time Glen.
Hey stop giving Glen a hard time. He’s providing a running commentary on just exactly why the liberals are heading towards decimation. Without him around, people might forget.
Alexander Downer actually cracked a funny joke, when talking about panders someone said they only mate once a year. Downer said I’m glad I’m not a pander. Mind you Peter McGaren last week was talking about stud horses serving five times a day. In reference to losses from horse flu. Red Symonds made a few comments, but he left that one alone.
Comments are closed.