Today’s Morgan poll is a face-to-face survey of 842 voters, showing Labor’s two-party lead widening to 61-39 from 60.5-39.5 at the similar poll last week. This was conducted last weekend, and thus offers no guidance on the government’s honeymoon status in the post-FuelWatch leak era.
Other news:
• State and federal ministers met in Sydney today to discuss reform proposals being considered for a green paper to be issued in July, including bans on all corporate and union donations. The Coalition has confirmed that opposition is where it belongs by indicating it will oppose government legislation reducing the threshold for public disclosure of donations from $10,000 to $1000, after the previous government wantonly used its Senate majority to increase it from the existing $1500. A “Coalition spokesman” quoted by the Financial Review said the current government move was “like asking the Collingwood Football Club to review the AFL’s salary cap” – perhaps I should offer some sort of prize to the commenter who can best make sense of this analogy. Senators John Faulkner (Labor) and Michael Ronaldson (Liberal) jousted over electoral reforms during yesterday’s lively Senate estimates hearings, but transcripts are not yet available.
• A paper by Phillip Senior and Peter van Onselen on leadership effects in federal elections, published in the latest issue of the Australian Journal of Political Science, is freely available online (or at least, I thought it was – now I can’t find the link). Using Australian Election Study data from 1990 to 2004, they find leader preference scored higher than issue variables in driving vote choice at every election except 1998, when the GST mattered more than opinion of Howard or Beazley. The GST also scored notably high in 1993, though not as high as opinion of Keating.
• Unelected candidates for Franklin at the 2006 Tasmanian state election have been invited to nominate for the June 10 recount to replace Paul Lennon, who has retired from the parliament as well as the premiership. This will involve counting preferences from the 16,666 primary votes cast for Lennon, which will have gone overwhelmingly to unsuccessful Labor candidates Ross Butler and Daniel Hulme. Both the distribution of Lennon’s preferences and the primary votes (1066 for Butler, 620 for Hulme) suggest that Butler, taxi driver, retired school principal and former president of the Tasmanian Teachers Federation, will succeed in his bid for the seat. The Hobart Mercury reports that Hulme, a 28-year-old “former Labor student who has worked in Mr Lennon’s Kingston electoral office for the past year”, will also nominate.
The Caretaker Conventions are quite clear.
4.1 Governments avoid entering major contracts or undertakings during the caretaker period. When considering whether a contract or undertaking qualifies as ‘major’, agencies should consider the dollar value of the commitment and also whether the commitment involves a routine matter of administration or rather implements or entrenches a policy, programme or administrative structure which is politically contentious. A further consideration is whether the commitment requires ministerial approval.
4.2 If it is not possible to defer the commitment until after the caretaker period, for legal, commercial or other reasons, there are a number of options. The Minister could consult the relevant Opposition spokesperson regarding the commitment. Agencies could also explain the implications of the election to the contractor and ensure that contracts include clauses providing for termination in the event of an incoming government not wishing to proceed. Similarly, in the case of tenders, agencies should warn potential tenderers about the
implications of the election and the possibility that the tender might not be completed.
http://www.pmc.gov.au/guidelines/docs/caretaker_conventions.pdf
The former Government was prone to this – I lodged a complaint with Kelvin Thomson’s office after the Latham election because our local member made several major commitments during the caretaker period.
It was done again this election and is now being used as a stick to beat the Government with – “the Howard government committed X to this project, and now Rudd’s letting this community down when it was told that it had this money”.
Dr Alcopop: I love it, that’s Nelson’s nickname from now on LOL
Maybe Nelson might care to meet someone with Type 2 diabetes before he claims the obesity problem is being overstated! This bloke was a former AMA president? I shake my head in disbelief!
There was a book I purchased before the last election but did not read knowing that it would really get me going so I left it until now which, turned out to be a good thing. A good thing because it puts everything in its proper context and helps me remember what good has now been done.
I take a little quote from the early pages of the book concerning the Howard government.
“….it stands to reason that national governments normally strive to avoid measures that threaten these sectors viability. That a government might not just fail to avoid but actively countenance measures disadvantageous to its own country – in so many critical policy areas – is arguably without precedent in the modern world.”
“….and to identify a pattern – a strategic consistency in the government’s choices that raises serious questions about the allegiance of our political leadership and the legitimacy of its national security credentials. ”
“Howard has made choices that we document…..not because he seeks to do good for Australia’s security (the opposite outcome being the usual result), but because he seeks to do good for himself and the party that keeps him in power.”
..and so on….
The grim reaper was at the door-step of Australia, but then Howard lost the election, thus the nightmare that was in store for us was averted at the last minute. Rudd, be he a good or bad Prime Minister, has already made a very great contribution to this country.
The sickening thing about Howard’s disgraceful abuse of Australia is that the media and murdoch media were accomplices, instead of holding him accountable they waved the flag along the way.
Some of these murdoch journalists are not just liberal party hacks, they are dedicated hardliners and dedicated haters on anything non-howard. You can see it in their delusional writings and their willingness to continually mislead the public and to brazenly work for the Liberal party.
The alcopop thing was an obvious tax grab and nothing more, everyone knows you can’t stop binge drinking without a CULTURAL CHANGE and jacking up the prices will do nothing. Even Labor faithful should be able to admit this if they are honest.
I have no issue with “alcopops” being taxed at the same rate as spirits but what really grinds my balls is how heavy beer is taxed. Beer is the very essence of what makes the aussie bloke tick, and it’s a shame the price for a carton has increased significantly over the last few years. Yes the wowsers out there will say “beers bad for you!”, but humans have been drinking the stuff for milleniums and who the hell are you to tell us to stop now?
Stop being wowsers and crack open a tinny
149 Gaffhook
‘Fullsome’ always implies insincerity and deceit: fullsome support is thus support that only pretends to be sincere.
See William Safire, New York Times, January 10, 1999 (about Bill Clinton’s ‘fulsome apology’ for his unseemly cigar episode:
FULSOME APOLOGY
When Senator-elect Charles Schumer of New York told the Judiciary Committee that the President had already made a ”fulsome apology” — intended to mean ”copious, complete, full” — usagists like Alistair Cooke winced. Throughout nine decades of speaking good English, the former BBC commentator knew that the word meant nothing of the sort. On almost the contrary, he and other incensed hearings-watchers told me on voice mail, fulsome means ”excessive, cloying,” even ”disgusting.”
Centuries ago, the original meaning of ”full” in that word had been influenced by foul. Surely the Clinton defender could not have intended to leave the impression that the apology reeked. Had the Senator-elect erred?
Two great dictionaries disagree. Webster’s New World, now published by Macmillan, has as its first definition, ”disgusting or offensive, especially because excessive or insincere (fulsome praise).” But then it reports a second meaning: ”(apparent revival of the original sense, obsolete since 16th century) full; ample; abundant: usage objected to by some.”
Now to Merriam-Webster, whose patron saint, Noah himself, defined it in 1828 as ”gross: disgusting by plainness, grossness or excess; as fullsome flattery or praise.” In the 10th Collegiate Edition, M-W turns the tables. Its first definition is ”characterized by abundance: copious.” Only in its second sense do we get ”esthetically, morally or generally offensive.” It then gives other pejorative senses as ”effusive” and ”overdone” before swinging back to ”generous in amount.” A usage note is added: ”Unless the context is made very clear, the reader or hearer cannot be sure whether such an expression as ‘fulsome praise’ ” means copious or offensive.
This commentator says: If you mean full, say full, or if you want to put your thumb on the upscale, copious. But if you mean gross, say gross or yucky, or try an expletive like feh! Never refer to a fulsome bosom unless you want to get slugged by an intelligent woman. Indeed, cross fulsome off your list entirely. Phooey on ambiguity. Never be of two minds about ambivalence.
Kina @ 155 :
I love your posts, and agree with you on the media bias. I tend to think that a lot of the friendliness of the press to the Coalition is because of the massive amounts of advertising revenue they made when Howard was PM.
$2 Billion over a period of about 10 years, with the majority since 2004, and most of it used in conjunction with Crosby Textor to ensure Coalition wins in marginal electorates.Now such easy money has dried up.
The media like to think that they set the agenda for news, and that the opinion of their journalists and writers matter.Unfortunately there is a concentration of ownership controlled by the few that are trying to influence the opinions of many, so this is where forums such as this are vital.
The Shamaham quote from above:
“The Rudd Government’s credibility on petrol prices is in tatters, its ability to function as a sophisticated modern federal government is under question, and it’s stretching credulity on economic management.”
The statements concerning the three areas are just straight up nonsense without an adult argument to support them. Seems he is typing what he truly wants to be the case not what is the case. This is classic trashy journalism and, has a real sense of desperation and pleading about it. You can almost taste his anguish over Rudd doing so well and the Liberals being in chaos.
Of course we don’t take him seriously because we know where he is coming from.
The truth is of course the polar opposite. It is Nelson and the Liberal party whose credibility is in tatters on petrol prices and, their ability to function as a government where they in power in doubt and, their economic credentials just about non-existent.
The reality is that the Rudd government is functioning normally and the Liberal opposition in chaos and losing credibility on just about any issue they touch.
These people have been waiting for the Government to make some serious errors, they were sure they would, but Rudd has been sailing quite calmly right from the beginning.
The vehemence of the shamamas and others attacks I think are probably in inverse proportion to the competence and performance of the Rudd govt. Oh how they must hate seeing Rudd so relaxed and in control over everything.
Well I guess they have no truth that suits their needs so they are left with misleading their readers.
LaborVoter
Fortunately beer is taxed at a level that pretty much covers the costs incurred by the state dealing with the health ans social costs.
If alcopops are causing more health and social damage then the cost has to go up.
The title of the book by the way is:
‘National Insecurity – The Howard Government’s Betrayal
of Australia’
159 Kina
We should remember, however, that very few Australians buy The Australian let alone read Shamaham’s dizzy meanderings. If you look at the tabloids such as the Herald Sun in Melbourne, you’ll see a different world, one where Rudd is in his heaven and all’s right with the world apart from the odd scandal and weirdness:
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/
Of course I’m not saying that the Herald Sun has anything useful or interesting to say about the state of the nation, just that it’s not remotely concerned with the issues that exercise Shamaham et al: the election result that shouldn’t have been, and the imminent destruction of Australia by the Rudd government.
Shanahan, Milne, Neil Mitchell and Alan Jones had a very cosy relationship with Howard! Rudd isn’t as accomodating to right wing media hacks, that’s probably why he’s getting harsh treatment from those idiots.
And here comes the newest scare campaign from the Poisoned Dward – Grocery Prices.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,23788690-5005374,00.html
apres is of course right and we thank god that they are not all in on it at the same time.
I think one part of Howard’s plan for a perpetual Liberal government apart from destroying unions with WorkChoices was to put most media in the hands of right wing friendlies, he hoped.
I do believe that it is imperative that every bit of Howardism be expunged from the Liberal party before it every should be elected to government.
Dr Alchopop thor the NSW Libs – “Don’t Be Radical”.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,23789284-5005361,00.html
I see him as the antipodean version of Ferdinand Marcos and Lee Kwan Yew, with a good dash of Mugabe.
162 Apres
Do you know what the compartive newspaper circulation figures are? I ask because here in Adelaide the advertiser is so bad that I still see some people buy the Oz. Our house is NewsCorp-free though.
Pesonally I have gotten to the point where I simply don’t buy the Australian any more, and rarely even read their website, unless I see a link to a story I have a specific interest in. I don’t really care what Shanahan or Milne thinks either. On TV too I rarely watch current affairs except perhaps for interviews by Oakes or Bongiorno. The Insiders is on my “life is too short to waste” list. I find the SMH, BBC website and various blogs are ample for news coverage. I see better political analysis from William or Poss than 9 out of 10 journalists. I know you should try to get opinions from all sides but if these guys are nothing but right-wing trolls then why should I jsutify their existence with my attention. Make them irrelevant I say. Don’t read them. Don’t even click on their stories.
And Hyacinth as Imelda 🙂
The Australian could not change one single vote. Who the hell is this Shamahanahan? The vast majority have never heard of him. He is a nothing.
On the other hand The Daily Terror may. I came across one yesterday (would NEVER buy it) and honestly, page after page after page of blatant negativity over the Prime Minister.
The journos have increased their attack since the budget because there was zilch in it for the Top End Of Town and there is likely to be very little for them in future budgets.
BTW, between me and you guys. I’m glad Glen is currently overseas, he would have been unbearable at the moment.
On the Courier Mail’s site there are THREE negative stories on Rudd. One about what his BUTLER saw overseas, another about how public servants in the health department hate Roxon because of her temper and they blme rudd because of the work load and how Rudd has backflipped on interest in a comapany bing put in the pecunary interst register. How petty can they get?
The Age is running with how hard Rudd is working the public service. It wasn’t that long ago that rudd was being accused of galavanting around the world and should be home working, now he is being criticised for working too hard? Spare me.
Gary (171), either switch on spell check, or don’t post after a good night out!
Socrates @ 168
The ‘treeware’ 🙂 version of the australian recently reported their circulation as being ~125,000 per day (a bit higher on the weekend, but I can’t remember the number).
So for every reader of the australian, there’s probably about 30 people watching Big Brother every night – puts the australian into perspective really 🙂 (and BB’s apparently rating very poorly this year!)
The same article listed circulation figures for The Age and the SMH too & both were above 500,000.
(We get the australian & advertiser at my work. Every month a different lab group in my dept. is responsible for keeping the lunchroom tidy & getting papers etc. When its our lab’s turn, I’m getting The Age instead. Take that Rupert! 🙂 )
cheers,
I haven’t bought a hard copy of a newspaper in months. Rarely switch the tele on either. Does anybody not get all their news off the net these days?
A great read is the prose from Kerry-Anne Walsh from the Daily Tele
” FEDERAL Government ministers, staff and unions are pleading with Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to slow down or risk a serious political backlash.
The Commonwealth Public Sector Union, covering more than 60,000 Federal Government employees and hundreds of political staffers, is gearing up for a showdown over conditions.”
Read as: Kev needs to slow down ’cause our normal hours are 8.30am to 4.51pm.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/slow-down-kevin/2008/05/31/1211654370878.html
170 BTW, between me and you guys. I’m glad Glen is currently overseas, he would have been unbearable at the moment.
He’s found that other countries do have computers and made a couple of appearances on the Tasmanian thread in the past 48 hours.
Brough’s win of the Qld Lib presidency has gladdened my heart, he has canned the merger of the pineapple party. Now they can return to their natural state of infighting and internecine struggle. Should see them firmly in opposition for hmmm, another 50 years with a bit of luck!
Interesting note on the “Rudd works to hard” angle.
A couple of weeks ago the Telegraph accused him of spending $1,500 on an accompanying doctor when they did the Bali Climate Change conference. Kerri-Ann Walsh accuses him of not even taking a doctor to Europe.
Which is it to be?
Is Rudd callous about his own and his staffs’ health on long overseas trips?
Or is he just another corrupt politician with his fingers in the national till, wasting taxpayers money on fancy medical hangers-on?
I think we’re all agreed: there’s lots of negative press directed against Rudd, suddenly. And a lot of it seems to have absolutely no substance at all. I would just like to know why.
bushie,etc
i think the MSM is looking for a’hook’ to hang on rudd
the other more darker reasons are
1.the current revelations re asio and its ahem political inteference
2.the deplorable state of the liberal party machine both state and federally
3.the increasing tensions from the proposed merger between the fibs and the notionals
Here’s a clue.
In Dec. 2006 Rudd’s predecessor
appointed a Emissions Task Force to investigate climate change/carbon trading and the like.
And it was stacked with big business vested interest polluters’
with nobody from an environmental or other background, a few tame bureaucrats not counting in the scheme of things.
Some of the exact same blokes and a few more of their mates have been giving Penny Wong a hard time in recent meetings. She, apparently, is not impressed with their attitude and, one gathers, they are not impressed with the forthcoming implementation of ALP policy on climate change.
Well you wouldn’t expect them to be would you?
Nicola had the same experience with the AMA/private health industry a day or so ago.
Now whose side do you reckon big business mass media, with their dependence on advertising etc, would be on?
So its a case of ‘lets blacken the ALP and its leader in every way possible’.
Not exactly a recent phenomenom.
And if we can’t get him/them on something substantive, and lets face it most of the governments announcements and policies of the last 6 months have been popular with the public as the polls clearly reflect, then we’ll blow up some trivia and get him/them with that.
All is grist to the mill, the dripping water of constant negativity will, possibly, wear away the stone of public support over time.
And then we can get back to the ‘way things should be’, with the ‘right people’ being appointed to Task Forces.
You know it makes sense.
as an addendum to 181, i recommend this article
“George Brownbill was the secretary to the Hope Royal Commission, the number two to Justice Robert Hope, who is now dead.
Mr Brownbill says these papers give new insights into the depths of ASIO’s inappropriate relationship with the conservative governments of the day.
“I should make it clear that we found a security service that had been badly politicised,” Mr Brownbill said.”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/05/27/2257347.htm
little or no mention on the MSM of this
netvegetable @ 180:
“I think we’re all agreed: there’s lots of negative press directed against Rudd, suddenly. And a lot of it seems to have absolutely no substance at all. I would just like to know why.”
I’m starting to think that the MSM are on another planet. The Opposition keep talking about how Rudd is now out of touch – when I think it’s the MSM that is waaaaaaaay out of touch with reality. I have never seen such a ridiculous beat up. They keep going on and on about the leaks, for example, when the general public I certainly deal with don’t give a toss about it and don’t see it as damaging to the government.
I just heard Barry Cassidy on Insiders say that Rudd seems to be just talking to the “Sunrise” audience instead of a “broader audience”.
Um, yes Barry, how extraordinary that the PM would be talking to a general public that would watch breakfast television instead of political junkies that watch Insiders. What a stupid comment to make, and pretty much says it all about the media’s reactions this week. Bunch of idiots that seem to have no idea about what the average joe out there is actually talking about.
156
LaborVoter
don’t buy beer, brew it yourself!
I know of a good homebrewshop 🙂 🙂
Channel 9 didn’t want anyone watching their political interview. Downer was on.
You know the leak story is well and truly on the way out when the Sunday rags are talking about Rudd’s “butler”. What a bloody joke.
186 -Don’t build yourself a still however if want spirits. It can be a little dangerous…. it took months to regrow my eyebrows.
So the damaging leak comes out Wednesday night, gets a good run Thursday, is only being spoken/written about by political journalists to a select audience by Sunday. By next weekend the average Joe will have no recollection of it or care.
188 B.S. Fairman – LOL. Good one.
I’m disgusted with the SUN HERALD this morning! Gutter journalism at its worst!
Rudd ought to sue!
As for that dick Cassidy on INSIDERS: Why would Rudd bother with a show that regularly denigrates him and features that gigantic blob Ackerman spouting out his vile?
The butler issue is interesting. It is supposed to show that Rudd is out of touch by not being normal. There is the alternative arguement that the PM needs to look like a statesman. Part of the reason the media was having a go at Rudd’s wife for her dress sense was that he needed to look “statesmanlike” and she wasn’t helping that.
So I am not sure if the public is after a blue singlet wearing rum & cola drinking leader who knows the pain of the common people.
Rudd works too hard
Rudd isn’t enough of a bloke
Rudd’s wife has poor dress sense
I’m waiting for them to start attacking the family dog next.
“I should make it clear that we found a security service that had been badly politicised,” Mr Brownbill said.”
Same article also says
“ASIO was not only politicised – the Hope reports label the agency’s management as capricious, hierarchical and driven by the views and prejudices of senior staff.”
Not much would have changed over the years, but you can’t change the public service by changing the heads, you need the approach Howard took.
Sack the department heads, do wide ranging staff cuts, abolish a whole department where a leak occurred and install someone like Max to continue the politicisation.
Some say one of Whitlam’s mistakes was not instituting changes in a public service that was so blatantly anti-labor and that Rudd should not make the same mistake.
But to make changes like Howard did takes years and destroys the effectiveness of the advice, better to work with what you have, understanding what you are working with.
See Sunday has the Government-in-Exile’s Foreign Minister on today. When was the last time Laurie interviewed an opposition backbencher on the program? Certainly not once in the first year of the Howard government according to this:
http://sunday.ninemsn.com.au/sunday/archives/political_transcripts.asp
Downer was in a friendly mood. And why not, when there’s a diplomatic job in the offing?
Mayo
Funny about Downer, quote from him “And I must admit, unlike my predecessor Gareth Evans who suffered from relevance deprivation syndrome, I think for me it’s rather the reverse. There’s been a great sense of relief and I’ve been able to do good deal of work in my own local electorate as I have been doing this weekend.”
Good to see he is not suffering from “relevance deprivation syndrome”, but it appears he still can’t stop comparing himself to Evans 13 years on.
Obviously Downer is disappointed that he has not been overwhelmed with job offers, but what sort of work could you offer someone who could not recall advice he was given 276 times?
Progressive 193
I agree the attacks on Rudd’s style recently have been quite inappropriate, except for the bit about demanding long hours, which to be fair he did bring on himself with his own previous statements. But the rest are rubbish.
By comparison, Howard as PM had an arm-chair ride from the same media, which demonstrates their partisan nature. I read the first chapter of Howard’s biography a few years ago and soon realised that he had lived at home with his mother until age 32, when he got married! If you think thats conservative by todays standards imagine what that implied back in the early 60s when Howard was a young man! No wonder all his policies were focused on married couples – he never had any idea of what it was like to live single and out of home. Indeed, when you look at his parents business, father’s death, effects of wartime rationing, and paying his way into university law without a scholarship, you could see that his entire political outlook was based on a relatively uncritical response to his own experiences. Yet no serious personal criticisms surfaced during his time as PM, even though there was a mountain of material to work with. While the morning walk was lapped up by journalists for years, even though it was heavily stage- managed for them.
Rudd must be the first PM to be criticised for working too hard and for being a control freak. Wasn’t Howard revered for his strong work ethic and leadership? The difference is?
Amazing! the end of the Coalition could be in sight and it isn’t considered a major front page newstory .
http://news.smh.com.au/national/nationals-may-consider-ending-coalition-20080601-2kcm.html
“We’re looking at all the options, not just merger. We’re looking at the potential to even go it alone or to have a stronger role or a different role within the coalition
Asked if he was talking about dismantling the coalition, Mr Truss repeated that all options were on the table.”