The latest Essential Research survey has Labor’s lead down from 58-42 to 57-43, remembering that this is a two-week rolling average which was half conducted before Malcolm Turnbull replaced Brendan Nelson. Also included (just from the last week’s sample) are various questions on leadership and one on industrial relations (45 per cent think the government moving “too slowly”).
http://www.commsday.com/node/269
[Oh! SO SORRY!]
No arguments aye? 🙂
GP, I’m really not keen on people making demands of other commenters. If you feel like chalking up a win on your own personal scoreboard, go for your life. It’s of no interest to anybody else.
Although I was against a DD election at first, it’s starting to look like it may eventually have to come to that if Fielding keeps on caving in to the Liberals’ pressure. Labor is not being allowed to govern properly, with Fielding’s dumb argument about poverty stricken families not being able to afford health insurance once premiums go up being the latest example.
Let me see if I’ve got it right…
These are the poor dirt farmers who need luxury Range Rovers and not Toyota Hi-Aces. They are in town quite often, driving there in their gas-guzzling fully optioned but utterly necessary vehicles, because they have to look for cheap petrol – even one or two cents cheaper – which they will be unable to find because Labor’s Fuel Watch will force prices up. Granny in the back is sick and in a wheel chair, needing premium Medibank Private health insurance so she can have a chance at walking again. But now this is impossible, because nasty Mr. Rudd wants to force them to pay higher premiums by the mechanism of giving the workers on their farm, who earn even less than they do, a tax break on their own public system health costs. The farm hands are, it seems, cheering on the squatter family as they leave the property every day in their quest for cheap fuel. Of course, if Fuel Watch was allowed to pass then the strugglers in their 4WDs needn’t waste time or gasoline driving into town to search for a discount because they could look it up on the net. However, even there they are confounded, due to Labor’s lack of action on broadband which cuts them off from the world. Meanwhile, Granny’s pension is stuck at the poverty rate and her daughter’s carer’s allowance isn’t even getting a look-in. Labor should fix that too. Today.
At the same time father uses up some precious petrol and goes off to a National Party meeting where he hears Labor can’t manage the economy because they want to put taxes up, not all taxes, not even put them up nett, but amazingly just the taxes that are designed keep him, his wife, Granny, the five kids and the Range Rover on the poverty line. Labor can’t even manage the surplus. It keeps getting cut all the time in the Senate, over silly things like pensions, LCT and medical expenses that they should not touch, because the Coalition will be back in power next election due to Rudd being a “oncer” (and in the meantime they should do as little damage as possible). The problem with most Australians, the squatter knows, is that they have an overwrought sense of entitlement. They expect the government to live their lives for them, cradle-to-grave, to bail them out of all their troubles. Lucky *his* family values aren’t like that, eh?
I’m sure I missed something, but is that roughly the narrative?
Steve Fielding has committed a (reverse) Meg Lees.
He is Leesing himself.
(Leesing is a form of political prostitution/suicide)
The Victorian ALP – on whose preferences Fielding was elected – should give themselves a giant collective pat on the back for allowing the “Family First” stooge into the senate.
And ALP types have the gall to complain about The Greens…
Labor will have to do another deal with Fielding on the Medicare bill!
I’m angrier at the Liberals, who are still behaving as if November 24,2007 never happened. For crying out loud, Rudd has a mandate to govern and get bills passed!
The Libs in parliament are a shambles, it’s like watching a train wreck, they’re a bunch of spoilt 3 year olds!
BTW: G’day Fagin, it’s your old mate Landslide from the other place!
How’s Wagga Wagga?
Turnbull just now on AM, asked by Uhlmann how Labor is “mocking pensioners”:
No answer.
Asked why the Libs did nothing on pensions last year…
“That was then. This is now.”
I guess he means it all went belly-up on November 25th.
Oh yes, and he said the first thing Labor should do to fix things is not act like a rabble in Parliament! the economy is too important for petty point scoring (like 38 disallowed points of order from the Libs yesterday, I suppose).
And so much for Turball representing something new……it’s still the same old obstructionist bunch of cry babies masquerading as a political party!
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not happy with Fielding, but he’d be irrelevant if the Liberals in the Senate stopped the stunts and started acting responsibly!
Just read up on the Clerk Of The House’s “defiance” of the Clerk Of The Senate: duelling opinions.
The COS argued that pensions were a standing appropriation of moneys and that there the Opposition Senate bill did not seek to appropriate *new* monies. Hence, not ultra vires under s53.
The COH argued that any *extra* monies (in this case $1.4 billion) sought to be appropriated were in fact “new” appropriations. Hence ultra vires on s53.
Further, s56 of the Constitution mandates a letter from the Governor-General recommending that appropriations bills be considered in the Reps. As such letters can only be sent at the request of the executive Government (i.e. Rudd and his ministers), and as no such letter existed, ultra vires s56.
Also some questions regarding House Of Reps practice and procedure, which were not strictly constitutional matters.
Albanese’s Constitutional summary:
[…it is
clear on the basis of legal advice that the bill can only
originate in the House.
It can only be introduced into the House by a minister
and it cannot be passed by the House without a
message from the Governor-General. It is very clear
that this bill cannot be considered by the House. We do
not actually have an option in that. That actually is not
a political decision by either side of parliament. It has
something to do with a responsibility by us as members
of the House of Representatives to act in accordance
with the Constitution.]
Albanese’s political summary:
[There is no mechanism in the bill to ensure that increased
payments are not taken up by increased rents,
and that is because they have not taken this issue seriously.
In the Senate yesterday, they could not even get
a second speaker on this bill. The shadow minister responsible
for this portfolio cannot be bothered to be in
the chamber for this debate. They have a shadow minister
who regards the Families, Housing, Community
Services and Indigenous Affairs portfolio as not being
the main game. He is not interested in the portfolio that
he has been given.
…
The member opposite (Chris Pyne) says that
they would like us to take their bill up. We are not going
to take up inadequate, hopeless work that leaves
out two million Australians. We are engaged in immediate
assistance for pensioners, right now. But we are
also engaged in a comprehensive review to make sure
that we actually deliver real reform—unlike those opposite
who were unable to do it. It is extraordinary that,
in their suspension of standing orders motion today,
they actually called upon the government to introduce
their legislation. I will tell you what: this government
is about introducing our legislation—our agenda that
understands that people who are doing it tough need to
be looked after.
Labor has a proud history of looking after pensioners
and the less well off in our society. Unlike those
representatives of privilege opposite, we will act in
accordance with our proud history of some 117 years.]
All in all, a pretty conclusive argument. All this piffle about duelling Clerks on the ABC is a Coalition talking-point. “How dare those Labor interlopers defy the *Upper* (i.e. more “senior”) House? Are they out to wreck *all* our institutions? etc. etc.” Crap.
As a PS…
One of the spin-doctors on ABC (Sydney) Radio’s “The Spin Doctors” segment suggested that Rudd will fall from grace and Turnbull triumph over the trip to New York. He said that a snap poll of listeners would prove him absolute correct. Snap poll taken, or rather organised itself:
26 “He should be in New York”,
1 “He should have stayed home”
Another phoney issue.
Bushfire Bill: I’ve given up on ABC Radio in Sydney! That morning show has gone downhill in recent years, and the “Spin Doctors” segment is just an excuse for 2 liberal party hacks masquerading as PR experts to bash Labor!
At least Alan Jones doesn’t pretend to be anything other than a right wing shock jock!
[Bushfire Bill: I’ve given up on ABC Radio in Sydney! ]
And I wrote some harsh words yesterday abotu Deborah Cameron, but, to her credit, Cameron was quite triumphant in presenting the refuting figures to the Spin Doctor and the audience. As the segment progressed she kept updating them. Final figures were 30 to 3 in favour of Rudd going.
So much for a “master” of spin. He had to admit he was wr… wr… wrong. Who’d pay an idiot like this?
I’ve come across a few of these snake-oil merchants in my time and mostly they’re just urgers out for a percentage – any percentage – of the take. They’ll start out with 10%, which will buy their (non-specified) “:influence” and “skill”. When you say “That’s a bit steep,” they drop the 10% to 5%, and then 2% if you keep complaining. Even 2% is something for nothing, so they’re ahead if they get you to agree. Classic “Nigerian Scam” con-man technique: let the mark beat you down on the con and think he’s winning. If he only pays you $10, then that’s $10 you didn’t have before. Repeat as necessary.
We are seeing a massive fraud being perpetrated on the public by types like this and their pals in the Press. We keep hearing about how “The Rudd government is in trouble” (presumably as opposed to the “Turnbull” government). Or, “Pensioners are angry…”. Or “Kevin-747 is a lughing stock.” etc. etc. But there is never any serious polling on this. There are polls on two flies crawling up a wall, on whether Turnbull is more popular than Nelson, but no polls, or very few, on the actual issues they claim, from their News Ltd. and Fairfax boiler rooms, are affecting the nation’s thinking.
OK, so 35 callers to ABC sydney radio ain’t scientific either (even if the guy DID say a “snap poll of your listeners”). However, on alcopops the other day there *was* a proper poll: 57% in favour of tax increase under any circumstances, rising to 80% if the proceeds were spent on health matters. Yet how often do we hear about the government being “out of touch” on this issue? They’re so in touch it’s uncanny!
What is going on out there now is a massive spin operation, using unscientific postulation in a very professionally designed disinformation campign.
Roxon challenges Fielding to block the Medicare tax cut again:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24399954-601,00.html
From that short article:
[It could deliver a double dissolution election trigger for the Government but Clerk of the Senate Harry Evans has told The Australian Online that if it is a new bill it may have to be rejected twice to deliver a trigger despite the fact the first legislative attempt has already failed.]
Suddenly Harry Evans is the “Go To Guy” on matters procedural. Nothing against Evans, but this new meme that “he is not to be defied” is gathering strength.
Bushfire Bill: right on mate!
Well said!
To be fair to Harry he has a reputation of getting stuck into the Govt. of the day. He gave Howard a spray for abusing the Senate enquiry system when 27 enquiries set up by the Govt. were not acted on and the Govt. didn’t even bother to respond to them
Harry needs to get real though, the Govt is formed in the HoR not the Senate.
When the “snap poll” of listeners proved the Spin Doctor wrong, he caved immediately. This is the “If not 10%, then 5%” part of the scam. They move on to their next mark.
Similar to the “Betting Advice” or “Sure Thing” scam:
You get $100 each from 100 punters on a footy game. You give a random 50 the tip that “Side A” will win. The other 50 get told “Side B” will win. That’s $10,000 straight up.
Out of the 100 punters, 50 will lose, so they won’t come back.
You then get another $100 each from the 50 winners. That’s another $5,000.
On the third game you only have 25 punters left, but they’re two-time winners using your advice, so you can slug them $500 each for “premium” tips. That’s another $25,000.
When the final 12 or 13 contact you to thank you, you’ve “gone on leave” with their $40,000. But that 12 or 13 will forever tell their friends how wonderful you are at picking winners. Bide you time for a while, move locations and then use their praise as testimonials.
Voila! We have a Spin Doctor.
[Harry needs to get real though, the Govt is formed in the HoR not the Senate.]
The House of Reps and Senate have their own departments remember (which obviously creates a lot of waste and duplication).
Evans is just defending his territory as the Head of the Department of the Senate.
I was careful to say “nothing against Evans” in this matter. He DOES have a rottweiler reputation, no fear or favour to either side. It’s his elevation to the role of arbiter of procedure for BOTH houses that concerns me. The insinuation, to my mind, has been that because the Senate is the “Upper” house, Evans’ opinion somehow has more weight than the Clerk of the House of Representatives’. Here we have Labor in the lower house “defying” their “betters” in the upper house. Wreckers!
In reality both Clerks are both completely independent of each other and can disagree all they like: it’s the Speaker and the government of the day that decide this matter, in the HOR. That is as it should be, in my opinion.
Albanese’s basic argument was that no money bill appropriating any extra money can be introduced anyway in the Senate, and certainly not put to the HOR without a letter of recommendation to the HOR from the GG. This is designed to guard the right of the Executive Government to allocate money for various expenditure categories.
The Clerk of either House does not tell governments what to do.
“Entire economy at risk – Bush”
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,27753,24400359-31037,00.html
OH REALLY!?
This guy is great, he’s totally on top of EVERYTHING
(that was happening a month ago)
Yeah, it does smell fishy… the ENTIRE economy?
However, I was listening to James Shug this morning (early morning London financial correspondent for the ABC, 5.10am), and he’s usually pretty straight-up. Given that he works for Westpac, who would be a potential beneficiary, he was pretty admant that the bailout – or at least some kind of bailout – was necessary, and soon to “unblock” the financial pipes. Apparently banks are not lending to each other, even on a routine day-to-day basis, as they are concerned that they might not get their money repaid by the end of the day.
I’m no financial expert (although I do know what “short selling” is), but it seems to me that if the bailout doesn’t proceed there may be a massive dummy-spit from Wall St. It only reinforces the concept that they are blackmailing the entire world, of course – “Bail us out or the World Economy gets it!” – but what is there that can be done? I’m not caving in on this, or being defeatist, but should we call Wall St.’s bluff? (especially on severance payouts, which apparently they still think they are entitled to, despite the near ruination they have brought down on us all).
The perennial problem of bias in the media wouldn’t be a problem if we had a great diversity of ownership and a non-partisan ABC. The ABC and media ownership was sabotaged by Howard. Now that will work fine for the Liberal party and has been so far – but if one particular owner should change their mind on politics it could back fire. In the meantime for Labor the only hope is in the growth of formal and informal on-line information and news channels.
It might be beneficial for the Labor party to develop Real Clear Politics etc type Australian sites and promote them and to make them interesing/diverse enough to attact a variety of users but not just purely poltics. Thus you have something to suite the very young, young, yuppy, middle aged etc – the idea is to have something that attracts, authorative etc and then you have an audience who may look at some of the politics and PR etc.
I am sure we the should call Wall streets bluff. You can bet otherwise that half the bail out will dissapear down mysterious holes never to be seen or known about again. And those CEOs are really playing with fire – there will be enough gun owning loonies about that would become incensed over them using bail out money for their payouts. but this should be the US thread I guess.
Erica Betz has called the LCT obscene – he does not like Family Last’s amendments. Sorry Erica if your rabble had passed the original bill the amendments would not be in place. 🙂
What, it’s obscene that Porsche drivers in Mosman are getting taxed?
The Liberals once again demonstrate what their true priorities are
[… Sorry Erica if your rabble had passed the original bill the amendments would not be in place.]
… which was Swan’s point yesterday, in responding to Truss’ question. If the Coalition and independents, plus Greens hadn’t forced the amendments there wouldn’t be the anomalies, derived directly from the amendments, that there are now.
Abetz’s point is, I guess, that a law with anomalies is a bad law. But that is entirely for the two houses – HOR and Senate – to decide. They have apparently decided in their favour.
Who is this bill going to upset? Porsche and RR drivers, for one. No-one cares about them. Then there are people – country folk or city slickers – who want to purchase all-bells-and-whistles 4WDs, for another. I guess there could be a few stragglers who’ve got a reasonable case, but their increased tax is a deduction.The 8% increase becomes a little over 5%, after deductions. Say a shearer, working out in the mulga in the heat and dust, needs a Range Rover for $70,000 or so. The extra tax would boil down to about $3,600, after deductions. Spread this over, say, three years and it’s $1,200 a year.
My solution?
Keep the car for four years instead of three and pocket the saving, even under the next tax threshold. My car’s 11 years old and still goes beautifully.
Or buy a cheaper car, like a Toyota Hi-Ace with all the trimmmings (seems to be the standard car out there in the bush anyway).
Hardly “obscene” propositions.
Boy o boy, these Libs sure know how to look after each other.
[MORE than $1 million in federal funding was promised to the medical clinic that hired former Liberal MP Kym Richardson.
Mr Richardson is the chief executive officer of the Fountain Valley Medical Centre, which is in his former electorate. It received $200,000 in start-up funding in 2006.
Five days before last year’s federal election, the government promised the clinic $1.25 million plus an annual boost of $350,000.
Kingston was held by Mr Richardson by a margin of just 0.1 per cent before the election. ]
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24398762-5006301,00.html
Here’s a classic example how the current crop of MSM commentators join the dots, throw in a little summation and guess what the people involved might be thinking, topped off with a bit of outright fabrication.
[THE decision of ambitious federal Labor MP Bill Shorten to leave his wife for the daughter of newly appointed Governor-General Quentin Bryce has presented Australia’s fourth richest man with an excruciating dilemma.
Billionaire Richard Pratt, who is the godfather of Mr Shorten’s wife Deborah Beale, has to choose whether or not to remain the patron and friend of Mr Shorten, who is often touted as a future prime minister.
In Labor circles, it is being asked whether or not the split will hurt Mr Shorten’s career.]
These people should be ashamed to have such dribble exposed in print. The whole MSM commentary area seems to be going from bad to worse.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24399207-2702,00.html
Was there an interview with Richard Pratt on the subject?
In fact, the only concrete evidence provided was that Pratt would NOT sever relations.
What a crock. People get divorced, it happens everyday. People re-marry, it happens everyday. Some people get divorced more than once, some people are onto their 3rd wife and had to remove an ear-ring.
But if you can link “famous” people it becomes “news”, despicable. 🙁
BB,
This sort of rubbish is almost worse than some of the concocted nonsense that the tabloids and gossip columnists vomit up regarding so-called film stars, TV stars & sporting celebrities & celebrative celebrities such as Paris Hilton etc.
The Australian’s Brad Norington, a quirky yet usually well regarded scribe in that newspaper’s patriotic family, today claimed that billionaire Richard Pratt was the godfather of Deb Beale who was recently in the newspapers.
VEXNEWS has learned this is not the case. Ms Beale has a godfather who is not Richard Pratt.
Mr Norrington was not immediately available for comment on his embarrassing error.
http://www.vexnews.com/news/836/erroneous-brad-norington-the-latest-casualty-in-the-war-on-error/
In other words he made it up.
It is possible to have more than one godfather – but it would be unusual for a Jew to be a godfather since it’s a Christian office.
Rudd should sell off their ABC. I’m sick of our taxes paying for a Lib run propoganda machine.
Pretty good up todate coverage on the money mess here
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/
[or that Norington was “attempting” to add a creative fiction element to his repertoire of writing,]
Not quite sure that “attempting” is the right descriptor here. I think “was” is a more appropriate word to describe Norington’s little piece of creative writing.
Don’t these people feel “any” embarrassment about writing such dribble.
[Rudd should sell off their ABC. I’m sick of our taxes paying for a Lib run propoganda machine.]
Then of course we would end up with the worst of both worlds: another commercial channel serving up populist crap along with a braindead right-wing bias.
RWFs always hated the national broadcaster. They never had the courage to privatise it (as ideology demands they must). So they did the next most destructive thing: turned it into a right-wing dribble pool sans advertising.
Howard may be gone but his odour continues to permeate public institutions such as Aunty.
Speaking of Aunty: get ready for a whole hour of Turnball on Q&A tonight!
I can hardly contain my enthusiasm!
I gave up on Q&A after episode 2, but if Allbull wants to dig another hole, I say let him.
Adelaide accent – tick (how did he get that in Eastern Sydney?!)
Smarmy grin – tick
Corporate uniform – tick
Lack of any self serving ideology – tick
Self importance – tick
Continued failure to understand what the electorate voted against at the last election – tick, tick, tick
How could he go wrong?
That’d be NON-self serving ideology, of course.
And yes – most politicians can tick those boxes, but when your aim is to lead your party to victory, you need to at least be seen to not have all the boxes full.
At this point he’s just reinforcing the electorates view of himself, which despite the protestations of the MSM, isn’t flash.
Sounds as though the condensate tax made it thru the Senate
[SENATE DELIVERS RUDD ANOTHER TAX WIN
A key Rudd Government Budget revenue measure – to end a tax exemption on condensate – has been approved by Parliament’s Upper House.
The Australian Greens, Family First and independent Senator Nick Xenophon all voted with the Government to impose excise on condensate, an oil by-product of gas production, ending a 31-year exemption.
The Government stands to gain $2.5bn over the next four years when the exemption ends.]
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24400906-29277,00.html
Gondolas make an appearance in QT. Appears the appellation ‘Merchant of Venice’ is here to stay.
Roxon very strong on her subject. Hockey is sounding more bitter than usual.
I would suggest the Liberal party would happily swap the Condensate decision for the medicare levy decision. Mates is mates after all.
onimod i think you just described our Prime Minister too!
Roxon and Gillard absolutely kicked the Libs’ collective ass. It’s Girl Power day in the House.
Can I post on QT if sounds like it is a real question, rather than rhetoric?
I think Swan was just caught out. Even though Local government is not part of the Commonwealth’s responsibility, he was asked whether he had any information on how many councils were exposed to sub-prime. Apart from saying that more were exposed in NSW and WZ than in other states, it seems like he fudged it a bit.
Then again, if such questions were placed on the notice paper, perhaps he could give a better answer.
Glen – as I stated – the lot of them fit most of the boxes.
The electorate doesn’t believe he has all the boxes tick though, and realistically yours and my views are pretty worthless on their own.
Your issue is that the elctorate’s view differs from yours by several hundred thousand voters; and no, just because it’s popular doesn’t make it right.
Cheers
I suspect the Opposition probably need to look for non mainstream things to ask questions about, something people are less likely to be across such as the exposure of city councils. Just waiting for the next question on a economic acronym taken from some text book.
OMG… not ANOTHER censure motion.
Kevin-747, pensions, complete economic illiteracy etc. etc.
Gagged by Albanese! LOL.
So yesterday… but will probably be reported as “pressure on the government”.
A lovely cross-chamber interjection from Albanese during the division: “They haven’t got any better Brendan.”