The standout finding of a very interesting post-election Newspoll survey of 1125 voters is a question on preferred Liberal leader: 34 per cent responded for Turnbull, just 18 per cent for Nelson and 14 per cent for Julie Bishop, with the optimistic Tony Abbott on 9 per cent. Rudd predictably is streets ahead of Brendan Nelson as preferred prime minister, leading 61 per cent to 14 per cent (91 per cent to 1 per cent among Labor voters).
Unforunately, Matthew, this blog doesn’t have a ‘sarcasm’ tag…
As I’ve said before KR, Kevin may not be the most inspiring speaker, but I’ve a feeling the actions of his government will be enough inspiration for us all.
Albert and Lefty. It’s good to enjoy the sunshine again – and yes, it was humbling to be so warmly received by the world after standing apart for so long.
Mathew Cole. I think he was being sarcastic. well i hope he was.
Yes the sunshine feels good. Thankfully the rest of the world are a patient and forgiving bunch.
Did everyone see the deluge of rain that fell on Melbourne yesterday. I was right in saying that it always rains more under Labor. There have been 16 wet years since 1972 and 13 of those have been under a labor government.
The Gods have forgiven us for our 11 years of sin, cuddeling up to the devil with his promise of money and consumerism at the expense of our souls.
Here’s what I like about Ruddster: He’s sober, a bit of a dull technocrat, but has set the Howard legacy eradication rotor to filt tilt. 0 to 100 in 10 seconds.
I dare say he’s surprised a few cynical timeworn lefties on homelessness too.
Centaur – you’re right. It’s one of those quirky accidents of history that Australia has received more rainfall under federal Labor administrations. It’s a wonder they didn’t use it in their election advertising! I guess they can save it for when Turnbull is opposition leader: “You may think he’s a wet – but under Labor you will always be wetter!”
Forget Howard’s “interest rates will always be lower” lies. Using the same logic the ALP can honestly claim – “Under Labor, rainfall will always be higher!”
Lefty E #106,
And all without breaking his election promises too!
It’s all in the way he does it. Rudd goes about things in such a fashion as to make us proud to go along with it.
Put short – Howard believed (and made us believe) that he could do anything.
Rudd made us want to help him achieve anything, including the Brucifixion of John Howard.
I detested JWH, but that salt in the wound was too much.
Also, with the giant gone, the dwarves are squabbling about the remains of the giant’s belonings. It really is quite sad……:-)
On the narrowing – it was much maligned during the course of the campaign. However, it did seem to occur in the last week – very much against the run of play as well.
With hindsight and a bit of creativity I think it was possible that Howard could have won the election. If the following had happened I think the election would have been very close.
1) The election should have been called to avoid the 7th Nov rate rise.
2) Tony Abbott should have been sent on vacation
3) The pamphlet scam avoided
4) Avoided the post APEC leadership speculation
5) Abandoned most of the wedges. They failed to secure their target seats and weakened the overall coalition vote. They would have been better of without the Haneef and Mersey wedges and the NT intervention should have been on a softer consultative basis.
Had they put all this together, I think it would have been a very close election. Its pure speculation of course – but I’m very happy they botched it.
I think the problem Rudd will have is not public support but Labor support. Rudd claims to be an economic conservative and he all but proved it while working for Goss. The question is will Labor continue to support him if he remains a conservative.
Stephen, I (and I’m sure many of us on the Left) don’t like the term ‘economic conservative’. I’d prefer ‘economically responsible’ but understand that the term conservative was used for politico/marketing purposes. It was all part of the plan to remove all distractions and focus attention squarely on the issues Labor wanted to fight the election – mostly Workchoices and climate change. Rudd’s broader policy agenda is, at this stage, far from ‘conservative’ as his signing of Kyoto, saying sorry to Indigenous Australians and comments on homelessness all testify. He is behaving like a social democrat and is very much in the Labor tradition.
Isn’t amazing not only how quickly Howard and his cronies have become irrelevant, but how comprehensively his legacy is being seen for the worthless charade it always was.
Makes you proud to be Australian at last!
FG. spot on. Labor needs to prove its credentials there so they are free to implement a “non-conservative” (its a horrible way to reference logical policies, but so be it) agenda in areas such as health, climate, indigenous affairs etc.
The most interesting test for what Rudd really believes in…. whether he is a social democrat, or a fiscal conservative or whatever… will be what he does in the face of the inflation pressures….
1) will he deliver Costello’s and in turn his promised tax cuts? Swan has said they will… and is arguing they aren’t inflationary
2) will he deliver deep spending cuts? They say they will – but where will they come from, and how will this sit with the social democrat agenda?
3) if they deliver the tax cuts, how will they ramp up education spending. it was noted by several observers during the campaign that the ‘education revolution’ as currently outlined is a drop in the ocean… even if you agree with the proposals so far outlined they increase total education investment by only a tiny fraction. One can only assume the real agenda was to increase education spending dramatically once in government – for instance Labor has criticised Howard govt under investment in tertiary education for some time now, but promised nothing in campaign in this regard….
the difficulty now is will Rudd deliver on this spending? and can he deliver on this spending while delivering the tax cuts?
interesting test for Rudd.
another point that many have overlooked is that the Coalition’s decision to put the big long term tax plan on the agenda during the campaign forced Rudd’s hand in a way that allows the Coalition to govern from Opposition. Rudd had to copy the policy or leave himself open… now in govt he either has to walk away from it (which will hurt him politically) or deliver it, in which case the Coalition has is in this key area still governing…. their policy will be implemented for several years to come.
Andos – the footage of the applause in Bali is here: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22865700-601,00.html
Ferny Grover @ 112
No I think the term economic conservative is the correct one, not that this may not also be responsible. Don’t expect any handouts while Rudd is around.
whats the thinking on final TPP? down to 52.87 now…. my thought a few days ago was 52.8? may go lower
Well put 10pse. The election strategy of focussing attention on the things mentioned above foced Labor to virtually adopt the Coalition’s economic policy – as Labor didn’t want to fight the election on this issue. Now in government this presents some real headaches. I have no doubt that Labor is intent on delivering the tax cuts. I’m also sure they are keen to deliver on broader social goals while also putting ‘downward pressure’ on inflation and interest rates. The latter requires a long term strategy. The challenge is in the short to medium terms. How will Labor deliver its promises and avoid putting rocket fuel on interest rates? It will make for interesting times.
Nelson has been leader for what less than a week and yet Newspoll come out with a leadership poll give me a break! Also why in the heck didn’t they make it a choice between Nelson and Turnbull, Nelson would have picked up Abbotts supporters and more than half of Bishops supporters which would of put him well into the 30s.
I blame the media for this they all talked up Turnbull and didnt say a word about Nelson. I bet Paul Kelly is happy the Australian is paying the Liberals back for choosing Nelson instead of his preferred candidate Turnbull.
I wouldn’t take any interest of political polls until after the first sitting of Parliament.
Kyoto is a waste of time we ought to spend more time on the next agreement rather than this symbolic PR stunt of Rudd in ratifying a dead agreement.
FG. I think this is why Swan is so kken to get the ‘best minds’ from Treasury involved in a broad range of policy development. Its a juggling act that is going to need a coordinated approach rather than ministries acting as sole agents. (Yay i avoided using the term ‘silo’s’!!!! woohoo!!)
Stephen, the problem is that the term ‘conservative’ has political/philosophical connotations that are distasteful to many on the left. As for handouts, I think modern social democrats have moved beyond Keynesian thinking on that front, while still being committed to a safety net for those that require it.
10pse – I think I’m more optimistic than you on the prospect of finding savings in government expenditure. The old mob had basically lost financial discipline since 2004, and had been chucking money around as a means of shoring up their electoral support. Just canning the Access Card alone gives you savings of $1bn; if (as seems inevitable) the contractors fail to fulfil their terms on the unwanted jets for the RAAF, there’s another $6bn; the rorts from the regional partnerships were blowing $500 million; the Business Council of Australia (hardly a Labor ally) estimates that there are $6bn to be saved by rationalising state/Federal programs. And all that’s before you start putting the ruler over things like government advertising, patronage-based appointments of useless Young Liberals, and wasteful policies designed primarily as window-dressing. Not to mention chucking money at ‘clean’ coal instead of encouraging renewables. And the massive expenditure on defence equipment, a lot of which seems to have been wasted. There was a comment in the Fin Review a while back about defence suggesting that their main problem was that they had so much money from the Feds that they literally didn’t know how to spend it.
115/119 In a somewhat broader context, Labor needs to address the inequalities that stemmed from the brutal implementation of ‘globalisation’ and competition policy.
If this next cycle of inflation can be addressed quickly then the resources boom will continue to help the redirection of money to the social democratic agenda.
There is plenty of money eg future fund is a farce. But some of the biggest problems are middle class welfare allowing for ideological rundowns in public schooling and hospitals and investment policy being out of whack eg negative gearing on housing.
http://www.smh.com.au/cartoons/index.html
Dr Horatio Hornet gloved up for a reading of the entrails. But whose?
Glen @ 120 – the trouble is that we weren’t going to be able to participate in the negotiations on the next treaty unless we ratified the existing one, so the argument agin ratification wd have left us out in the cold. Also, Howard’s manoeuvring for special treatment during the negotiations over the old treaty did a lot to cause trouble even before he added insult to injury and refused to sign it.
Glen. Showing good faith to your future negotiating partners is hardly symbolic. Its imperative when trying to achieve good negotiated outcomes. Its a skill singularly lost on the Liberal party. ie NT Intervention, Kyoto, Iraq, Workchoices. Oh and the one time they tried it…. the free trade agreement, they showed blind faith. And what have we gained from it? Access to the US market for our beef and lamb industries, and wheat growers? I think not.
Glen, do you honestly believe that Turnbull is not the medium to long term Liberal leader? If so I think you’re on your own pretty much Australia-wide.
Jenny that’s bull butter and you know it, the USA isnt part of Kyoto and yet they’ll be centre stage in reaching the post-Kyoto agreement.
Jenny we signed it but we didn’t ratify it, we didn’t want to be bound by a Treaty that would force us to do certain things whereas we have met our obligations many countries like Canada who ratified are way behind their targets.
bull butter – the most hilarious turn of phrase since ‘hubris’ and only getting better. And Australia doesn’t quite have the clout of the US yet.
Jenny:
Having previously worked as a management consultant I have little doubt the federal budget could be reduced by 5-10%…$18B – $35B without cutting programs… purely through doing things smarter….
however, i have almost zero confidence that this will happen…. it is more difficult than the easier option of cutting programs… so pollies tend to go for this….
And the types of cuts you suggested all have their difficulties. for example:
Cutting defence spending? that wont be popular with the electorate – so wont happen… too easy to be painted as weak on national security
Federal/state rationalisation – i have no doubt the $6B is there… but getting it is another thing entirely… long, slow, drawn out process…. likely to have major opposition from the states… chances of achieving this are very small.
My guess, Labor wont have the stomach to make deep cuts, so it wont… it will make some easier ‘low hanging fruit’ type cuts up front to create the right impression then pull up stumps
Glen. I’m sorry but the “i’m not doing unless they do it too” argument sounds like my nephews bickering about household chores. It’s time to be a bit bigger than that.
Glen, you’re still fighting yesterday’s battles – an affliction that characterised the Coalition campaign and helped secure their defeat. As a signal to the world that Australia is under new management and is now on board in terms of climate change, the signing of Kyoto was very loud and very clear. It also made me proud – which is a jolly good reason for a policy position.
Glen: The Kyoto Protocol is in no way a “dead agreement”, as you put it. A huge part of it is encouraging the investment in technologies to reduce the greenhouse gas output of our economies, including carbon trading schemes, and it is still in force for another 4, long years.
Without this increased investment, a ‘solid base’ if you will, there would be no way that a future agreement, to take effect in 2012, would be able to produce the drastic cuts in greenhouse gas emissions that are required to avoid the worst outcomes of human induced global warming.
It seems that your objection to this so-called “waste of time” is simply a dogmatic belief reinforced by the culture of global warming denial in conservative/right-wing institutions (like the Liberal Party). Maybe you should ask the delegates at the UN Climate Change Conference in Bali whom spontaneously applauded when it was announced that we would be immediately ratifying the Kyoto protocol if they thought it was all a wast of time?
I’m sure that the ALP just paid them all to do that so that the “PR stunt” would be that much more effective.
Get some perspective.
Turnbull hasn’t the experience Pancho IMHO atm, he’s been in Parliament for what 3+ years and been a Minister for a few years, that’s not enough in my books.
Give him another 3-5 years and we’ll see, but if he continues to want to ‘say sorry’, bring on a republic, dump all of workchoices including unfair dismissals then i will find it hard to support him with any vigor. He’s too left wing for my liking. He needs to ‘dry out’ a bit more for me. The trouble is Malcolm is Malcolm and like the media he wont let Nelson have a fair go at the leadership.
Also Turnbull is the last thing we need now he’s too divisive, we need harmony not more factionalism and destabalisation in the Party. Turnbull would through out the Howard era including the kitchen sink and he’d be perfectly happy to lump a lot of crap on the Howard era to benefit him personally.
Also Turnbull isnt a team player whereas Nelson is, we can’t afford a one man band atm IMHO.
Can anyone name a senior labor state politician in the last 10-12 years who was not fiscally conservative?
If you’re looking for the catchword for Rudd’s approach to election promises and economic management, here it is… pragmatism. The new Federal Government has a cast-iron template for successful government hammered out over a decade by Bob Carr in NSW, Peter Beattie in Qld and Steve Bracks in Voctoria.
Spending will be screwed down across social and defence programs aside from those issues specifically promised. The dreaded efficiency dividend will bite and bite some more and dividends will be squeezed out of public trading entities, if there’s any left. The tax cuts will be delivered but their impact will be dwarfed compared to the growing cash tax receipts in a higher inflation environment. I won’t be waiting for any mad rush to social justice, maybe a gentle turning of the tide.
Meet the new boss… same as the old boss!
Re my 133 post, I meant ratifying rather than signing – both of which are now done
126/129
Australia was never going to be left out of the next negotiations whether we ratified Kyoto or not. Australia is the link between the developed and developing world. We have the economy of a developed country and the industry of a developing one. The world looks to us as the broker between the two and on an issue like this they need us.
10pse – I agree that superficial cuts are more saleable than more thoroughgoing attempts to do things smarter, but the way I read it, Labor has no real option but to go beyond the low-hanging fruit. That was the import of Costello’s blasted tax cuts, and the main casualty looks as if it was Labor’s agenda for the universities. I’m sure they had to shelve their plans for proper reform there because the tax cuts left them no room to move.
It’s interesting that Combet has been given the job of defence support, and I suspect he will find a way of selling rationalisation in that area to the electorate. A few well-placed media releases about the scandals surrounding defence spending, perhaps?
135 You prescription of what Tunrbull would do sounds to me exaclty what is needed. Is the Liberal party now a nanny state. Here’s my hanky for harmony day.
Damien J @ 136
Goss with Rudd as his chief of staff (maybe more than 12 years ago)
Beattie with Mackenroth as treasurer
I agree Jenny. I think Labor will go well beyond the easy cuts. Rudd’s personality lends itself to this as well. He will want efficiency with a capital E and I dare say he will get it. I also haven’t given up entirely on universities. Labor has a long standing tradition of supporting tertiary education and I’m hopeful of some positive steps in this direction under Rudd, albeit more muted due to the tax cut monster Labor has adopted.
Damien J,
agree with you on the pragmatism… but dont kid yourself state labor has been economically conservative…. they are all in deep debt…as we were told repeatedly $80B in total amongst them over forward estimates.
and btw, this works at state level because state opposition is even harder than federal opposition, so you get away with murder, but more importantly, it works because when you f**k everything up, people dont blame you they blame federal government (eg. hospitals, schools – both of which are state responsibilities).
the same formula does not work federally.
also, rudd’s ‘buck stops with me’ comment…. will come back to haunt him… 3 years from now when the health system is no better, and in all likelihood worse….
so i think rudd has one thing going for him and one thing alone, all australian governments, even when they balls it up, tend to get two cracks….
Glen, stop saying IMHO.
Glen, you are probably right that some of Horatio’s support would be split with Bishop and Abbott. But a better opposition leader rating “well into the 30’s” is hardly encouraging.
I expect its best for the Liberals not to look at any polls for the next few months.
I fear you are correct Albert.
Is that Victorian senate seat still up for grabs?
Are the democrats going to merge with the Greens?
Stephen, Remember, Rudd was there 16 years ago. Not in the same period. Despite Beattie and Macenroth, the pattern was really established by Carr and Egan in NSW. Budget surpluses in 10 out of 11 years, achieved by hook or by crook. Simply throw as many loss making initiatives off-budget as you can and accrue any income to the current year where possible. Long term results can be addressed later and there are splendid short term political results. The pattern has been adopted across most states now. I think we’ll find a reallocation of resources across portfolios. There’s plenty to play with in areas that are not the incoming government’s priorities. Spending can therefore be seen to be substantial but with less of a net impact in terms of budget outcomes and inflation.
I note that 27% of coalition voters prefer Rudd as PM and 38% are undecided.
Is this the emergence of a “soft” coalition vote 🙂