The Australian today brings us a second round of figures from the weekend Newspoll survey. It shows that in spite of everything, the Prime Minister is rated the leader “more capable of handling Australia’s economy” by 48 per cent to Kevin Rudd’s 33 per cent, while Peter Costello leads Wayne Swan as “most capable of managing Australia’s economy as federal treasurer” by 53 per cent to 21 per cent. The Prime Minister is also rated the leader “most capable of keeping interest rates lower”, although his lead over Rudd has narrowed since last month.
The fact that the Liberals anbandon their ship by not to contest Labor seats, show how doom they understand they are. I’ve heard that in this election, the Liberal only concentrate on keeping / holding their current seats. Well, with that sort of defeated strategy, why should we have confidence on them?
The fact that Coalition MPs distance themselve from their leader Howard by not wanting Howard goes near / attends their campaign speech; by not mentioning the unpopular Howard in their campgain leaflets. Well, why should we have confidence on Howard?
I really couldn’t care less about the economic credentials of the treasurer, as long as his policies are sound. He has the treasury to advise him on all the details, he just has to be willing to take their advice. I am far more concerned with this current government. Howard seems to be willing to throw caution to the wind in his bid to get re-elected.
I am looking forward to the Rudd era, not only for good economic management, but compassionate social policy. The Howard government is the highest taxing government in our history, yet education, health care social security and housing affordability have never been worse. As Hugh Mackay says, we have been asleep, but there are signs we are waking up http://www.smh.com.au/news/book-reviews/advance-australia–where/2007/09/24/1190486175335.html
Gary Bruce,
Glen doesn’t have an answer to your question because, essentially there isn’t one. The general thrust of a conservative response to that question would be something akin to what Patricia Karvelas wrote for The Oz today….
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22516432-11949,00.html
“The contest will be between a long-time successful treasurer and a newcomer with no runs on the board.” – Patricia Karvelas. Hell if we use that as the yardstick we would never change government and never change treasurers not even within one party. Stupid argument.
CTEP @ 78
I’ve been arguing for some times that interest rates are not such a great issue for the ALP much to the dissaproval of people on this blog. I just don’t think anyone believes the interest rates rises we’ve had would not have occurred under a Labor Government.
I really, really wish that was true. I would love it every single member of the electorate was forced to take an economics 101 course so that they knew once and for all that the government has very little control over interest rates. It would kill so many negative campaigns by both parties before they even begun. Sadly, I don’t think that day will come, although we have come a long way in the last three years. I’m sure a lot of people still think the government has some control of the rates
Interesting that you suggest that Labor should avoid arguing on economic grounds, because isn’t that promoted as a main reason for Latham’s downfall? Admittedly he didn’t have a 10 point lead in the polls, but still.
Out of curiousity, if you guys feel like engaging in, you know, debate… does anybody think the libs will use latham in the election campaign? Or has he lost that much credibility that it will be seen as a negative? Back when his book was released, everybody was predicting it was ammo for the upcoming election… not so sure now.
***
Rebecca @ 71
Gillard more popular then Costello? Big call. I agree the scare campaign is daft, as most scare campaigns are, but I don’t know if she is that more popular…or maybe it’s my bias showing.
I think most voters will see it Rob’s way (92).
One of the unfortunate but inevitable side effects of the Lib-NP government propaganda advertising blitz of recent years and particularly in very recent times will be its impact on the perceived credibility by the Australian public of the objectivity and professionalism of government departments.
By so closely linking “Australian Government’ with the dissemination of pro Lib-NP propaganda [too many examples to list] the obvious bias of the latter will be, I strongly suspect, be linked in the minds of ordinary Australians to the general performance of our public service.
In fact, I suspect many people will now view the public service as no longer serving the needs of the general public but merely [and I know by and large this is probably partly inaccurate] an arm of the Coalition political parties.
The level of trust will be diminished.
Sad.
such opinion polls are expected…. however economic policy is also
about the FAIR distribution of the surplus….. not just creating a surplus
(growth) ….. the fact that the govt seems to me so awash with money
suggests the settings are such that either taxes are too high or there
is not enough necessary expenditure or both! …… Is this current
policy good economic policy?
If anyone wants a good read that explodes the myth of the coalition’s economic credentials, I’d highly recommend Andrew Charlton’s book “Ozonomics.”
After reading it, I was reminded of Paul Keating’s remarks about the economy that Costello inherited….”this guy got hit in the arse with a rainbow.”
Scotty @#88.
There wasn’t a swing to Labor in Wakefiled. A distribution prior to 2004 merged Wakefield with the old Bonython and made it a notional Labor seat. There was actually a swing to the Libs.
Patricia Karvelas in the GG:
Ok, so an inexperienced person can become Treasurer and get some runs on the board… hmmm… a fair argument.
But hold on, we nopw learn that a newcomer with no runs on the board should not even try for Treasurer.
Well… maybe… but Swan it seems – does have some runs on the board, and from Opposition (surely a harder place to bat than from the Treasurer’s office).
Good for you Swanee! But wait… there’s more… Costello is arrogant and doesn’t have the smirk. Looks like Swanee is on a winner here… uh, oh… wait on…
Thought not… apparently being arrogant and having The Smirk makes you charismatic, surely an essential qualification for being Treasurer.
So it seems anyone with no runs on the board can be Treasurer. After they become Treasurer then this principle ceases to apply, disqualifying Swan, who while not being arrogant or being a smirker, does not have the charisma that being arrogant and having The Smirk gives to Costello.
Patricia is obviously well qualified and suitably numerate to comment on the Treasurership. Just take this quote:
WTF? We economic morons couldn’t possibly hope to understand how 10 = 12. I suppose that’s why Costello has so much charisma. Peter can do these kinds of sums in his head.
Scotty – the problem with Wakefield is that you can’t compare the last result to the ones before it. The electorate of Bonython – solid Labor – was abolished before the 2004 election and was sucked into Wakefield. In elections prior to that, Wakefield was strong Liberal, Bonython was strong Labor. The Coalition only just fell over the line in 2004 courtesy of “The Latham Factor”.
This election is an entirely different kettle of fish. This seat will return to Labor, mostly because “The Latham Factor” voters will return anyway, but also because of the general pro-ALP swing in this state.
I predict 52/48 to the ALP on election night: not as large as the state-wide swing, but enough to get the Labor candidate up.
Bushfire Bill – as it’s purely a convention, yes, nothing stops the govt running ads through the campaign that the opposition disagrees with.
That the govt authorises some (but not all) ads is however an admission that the ads contain ‘political matter’ (and, if in print, ‘electoral matter’, which means likely to affect voting behaviour).
Labor would have almost nil legal grounds, but a field day if the govt kept the ‘campaign’ ads going.
GARY 94 If its the same patricia karvelas she used to edit the student paper at RMIT and was one of those hard line lefties who have made the transition to establishment. Thats right Govts would never change at all with her logic.
Rudd is very prepared to become PM. He is someone who has done many different things other than by a poli and would enter the job of PM with the experience of being a senior public servant, a senior foreign affairs offiicial, is bi-lingual, exposed via his wife to small/medium size business issues and has some empathy with the poor given his childhood experiences. He is the most prepared person to PM in modern times.
101 Bushfire Bill, you’ve made Patricia’s piece sound like the rot it is. An excellent posting.
I hope the Libs keep those ads going. They’ve been the best Labor ads our money can buy. If you think people are sick of them now how would they feel about them come election day?
Didn’t Labor lose Wakefield to the Libs in 2004? If they held the seat in 2001 and then lost it in 2004 then surely there was a swing to the Libs in that election (courtesy Latham).
So surely there should be a strong swing back to Labor in this election, given the strong polling in SA and the absence of a Latham factor. Or am I missing something?
Hey Glen,what did you think of Howard as Treasurer????
I agree about the effect of the government ads. Everybody must be absolutely sick of them by now. If Labor keeps pushing the line that this advertising money would be better spent on hospitals etc, it will be a very effective campaign weapon.
Ah no, I’m confused. Wasn’t held by Labor, but they only just missed out on winning it 2004 despite Latham.
“Didn’t Labor lose Wakefield to the Libs in 2004? If they held the seat in 2001 and then lost it in 2004 then surely there was a swing to the Libs in that election (courtesy Latham).
So surely there should be a strong swing back to Labor in this election, given the strong polling in SA and the absence of a Latham factor. Or am I missing something?”
Yes and no. South Australia had 12 seats before the 2004 election. Redistribution cut away a seat. The safe Labor division of Bonython was abolished and absorbed into the safe Liberal division of Wakefield. This “new” Wakefield had a notional Labor majority of 1.5. Bonython incumbent Martyn Evans ran in this seat. The then-incumbent Liberal member for Wakefield from 1983-2004, Neil Andrew, stood down. David Fawcett, of course, won the seat, and the seat counted as a notional Liberal gain.
Karma @ 121:
Right. So Labor didn’t win the seat despite a notional 1.5% margin after redistribution. That would suggest that people there weren’t too keen on what the Latham ALP was offering I guess. Is there any reason to think that Wakefield will swing substantially less than the state-wide average? On a margin of just 0.7% in SA, I would have thought this would be one of the first seats in Labor’s basket on election night…
Costello v Swan….hardly likely to be foremost in peoples’ minds when they mark their ballots. And interest rates? It’s not the issue it once was. This is now a minor component in a larger picture and will most likely be subsumed in the broader issue of who is “most preferred.” In any case, it is hardly an issue that Howard can campaign on: he will also have some big negatives when it comes to whether he can be trusted on interest rates.
Terry McCran finance editor in the Herald Sun makes no bones about it, he is hoping for a Coalition win. Even tried to play the analyst and interpret the polls in apostive light for the Coalition? What makes these characters think Rudd will be done over slowly in a long election campaign. For what it’s worth I think he will win the campaign given the material he has to work with and given that he has the voters essentially on side. Amazing stuff really.
[Even tried to play the analyst and interpret the polls in apostive light for the Coalition? ]
To be fair, he did point out that even on the most positive statistical outlook for the government, they will still currently lose (53 / 47).
I wonder just how long these partisan journalists think they can run a party campaign through the newspapers and not eventually get accosted by a disgruntled punter? They are playing with fire sometimes so blatant and malicious their reporting. I am sure people like Ackerman and Milne must have body guards by now.
I get hate mail simply for my letters to the editor I can imagine just how angry people will be with journalists who have a daily voice to spruik their bias.
I don’t think you have to worry about him. This is Wayne Swan’s response
to such piffle:
Gary (124)
I suspect Terry McCran is just playing to Rupert Murdoch tune. Hes smart but I am sure he even has a puke bucket next to his desk after he flogs out some of the dribble that makes print.
I’m sure he knows it bullshit …but he knows what side his bread is buttered!!!
Punctuation is not a left-wing conspiracy, Gary @77 and elsewhere. It’s a handy means of making the spoken word intelligble in written form. Let’s not score own goals when things aren’t going the Coalition’s way. It betrays a sense of panic.
Kina… they’ll manage. I presume they’re just doing what they’re paid to do, write stories for newspapers. That people would have any real anger for them is a bit alarming. Why get angry with someone for voicing their opinion? I thought this was a democracy.
I’ll try again, this time with the tag closed.
That’d be the poll’s TPP average from June 2006?
I’mm getting tired of hearing about these treasurers “managing the economyâ€. They don’t. They collect taxes and decide where to spend them. Sometimes where they spend them has an effect on the way in which the economy grows, like when they give cash incentives to an industry. Most often it doesn’t.
Occasionally, governments will choose to do something that alters the economy structurally. Like floating the $, or deregulating industries, or reducing tariffs, or making people work more for less. This particular government has not done very much of that sort of thing, at least until whetever it is that the stupid IR policy is called now.
This treasurer is really nothing more than a glorified tax accountant; really all he’s done is collect more and more money every year, redistributed some, and saved some more. to be honest, he’s done that pretty well, but enough of this garbage about “managing the economyâ€, or “running a trillion dollar economyâ€. That’s just garbage, the Federal treasurer does the same job as the guy at the cricket club who collects the rego fees and buys the equipment, just on a larger scale.
If Labor wins the election it will mean Australia will be a single party Federation and anything that goes wrong will be Labors fault. What will the Labor government argue that the Coalition left the country in a good shape?
By Rudds own admission the buck will stop with him when it comes to health. Any problems it’s Rudds fault. With emplyment the way it is any decline in emplyment will be Rudds fault.
So no passing of the buck and things getting done or being held accountable? Sounds pretty good to me John of Melb.
Pat I doubt there will be no passing the buck. NSW health will probably still be in a mess.
Pat why not hold the incompetent State ALP Governments accountable?
Ashley @ 122 – the reason I think this seat will swing less is that Fawcett has worked it hard over the past 3 years, no doubt mindful of his razor-thin margin. It will still be a Labor gain mind you, but the incoming Labor member (Nick Champion) will have a lot smaller swing than the ALP members who will win Kingston and Makin, even though all three seats require similar swings to win.
No doubt buck-passing will be attempted if thought to be politically worthy, however it would seem to me that the ability of outsiders to be able to say ‘it’s all Labor’ might make both sides more inclined to work towards solutions rather than playing each other off. That can’t be bad.
John of Melbourne –
Lucky thing you’re in Melbourne, eh?! You don’t have to worry about NSW Health! Just keep voting Labor in Vic. and you’ll be fine!
I’ve been to the Crikey web site & there is an interesting article on how a odds boffin has come up with a list of probable Labor gains. Have a sgwizz!
http://www.crikey.com.au/Election-2007/20071002-Polls-enter-the-final-quarter.html
That comment is with regards to health – not necessarily a defence of Sussex St et al.
Pat in your argument as I read it you imply that all sides are not working to their optimum level towards solutions, would this be the States or Federal government?
In my opinion ther will always be buck passing why would you accept the blame for something that goes wrong?
LOL, hasn’t stopped Howard from continually reliving 1996 and basking in the glorious economy that Keating handed him, sheesh, 11 years on he is still blaming all his mistakes on them.
As for Costello V Swan, it is pure myth, of his own making, that Costello is painted as a good treasurer. Facts are he has done nothing more than collect the proceeds of the reforms that were instituted for him and the boom from China. In the not too distant future that myth will be well and truly shattered when Swan opens the books and allows the treasury officials freedom to speak the truth.
From Tina of Canberra
Fred (107) The upper echelons of the Public Service have long been politicised, and Labor is at fault as much as the Coalition for doing this. It will be interesting to see what , if any, department heads remain if Rudd gains power. However, the masses of workers for the government will continue as they always have, regardless of political persuasion. I think that they regard their political masters with a healthy scepticism, regardless of ideology.
Interestingly, Canberra provides the ALP with two of its safest seats, and that is unlikely to change this election. Of course, the value of a vote in the ACT is about half to two thirds that of Tasmania or the NT, but that’s another story. It’s clearly not in the Coalition’s interest to provide another safe seat for Labor by allowing one vote, one value in the ACT.
I heard a funny story the other day relating to what could be described as ‘Phantom Pork’. Apparently, Mr. Cobb’s office ring up a mid-level medical bureaucrat (not federally employed!) in Far West and demands that a press release be sent to local rag announcing 200k of extra federal health funding. Bureaucrat replies that they’ve had no details of new funding – nothing on paper… heard nothing at all. Mr. Cobb’s ppl get huffy and say ‘it’s all happening – it’s all approved’ just do the press release. Bureaucrat politely declines pending further details or at the very least something on paper!
Anyone else heard any stories of Phantom Pork?
Howard getting grilled by Latham and Crean – Howard looking distinctly mouldy after this episode.
“Howard meets Honan: You be the judge whether he lied about it”
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/12/1060588384214.html
kina that article is over 4 years old.
yes I know.
Glum sez
Surely it is not our job as more or less supporters of the left to hold them accountable. This is the job of the state Tory oppositions. The only problem is the Tories are even more useless.
In NSW in particular The Greens attempts to hold the ALP governments responsible are often stymied by the homophobic, godbothering Liberals and Nationals who often side with Labor to prevent proper and full inquiries and block reasonable amendments.
See http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2007/09/30/1191090936579.html for examples
Lol, Johnny Rocket wouldn’t dream of it. (I like your post it made me laugh) Vic health is in a bad state too if memory serves me correctly I think Moorabin hospital. We also have issues with Police corruption