Brisbane’s Courier-Mail today carries a Galaxy poll of 800 Queensland voters showing Labor leading 51-49 on two-party preferred, compared with 50.4-49.6 at the November 2007 election. Both parties are down on the primary vote – Labor from 42.9 per cent to 41 per cent and the Coalition from 44.5 per cent to 44 per cent – while the Greens are up from 5.6 per cent to 9 per cent. Also included are questions on preferred leader (Kevin Rudd 57 per cent, Malcolm Turnbull 34 per cent) and economic management.
The first Essential Research poll conducted entirely on Malcolm Turnbull’s watch should be through either this afternoon or tomorrow morning.
UPDATE: No bounce for Turnbull from Essential Research, whose two-week rolling average has moved a point in Labor’s favour to the Nelson-era level of 58-42. Also featured are leadership approval ratings and questions on preferred Treasurer (Swan 34 per cent, Bishop 19 per cent), Kevin Rudd’s overseas travel (51 per cent believe he should have gone to the US, 30 per cent say he shouldn’t) and the value of a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” (Churchill)
Adam in Canberra @ 349. Some people here call Julie Bishop Mesmerelda on account of her strange staring. I’ve got to admit I find her staring very off-putting though I’m not given to calling her Mesmerelda. As to the other “pet” names people acquire, I think “Tip” for Costello got immortalised by Keating’s description of him as “all tip but no iceberg” remark. Other people get nicknames for all sorts of reasons, but usually because people cling together with like-minded people and revile “the other”. I’m as guilty as the next person, though I can’t explain or understand the degree of emotional volatility I see on the U.S. election thread.
Turnbull cops a dressing down by ANZ chief economist Saul Eslake. As Vera said, he has forgotten that he is no longer Shadow Treasurer.
Either that or he doesn’t trust Julie Bishop to handle the job. After her early efforts, I think he has good reason to keep her under wraps.
[ONE of Australia’s leading banks has scolded Malcolm Turnbull over his claim that banks will have no excuses for not passing on the full value of any official rate cut.]
[But Mr Eslake said today Mr Turnbull was wrong.
“You can’t … go around pressing banks to do things which will significantly undermine their profits as the Leader of the Opposition, to my surprise at least, seeing as he ostensibly represents the more pro-business of our two big parties, wants the banks to do,” Mr Eslake told Sky News.
“People wouldn’t expect the banks to absorb an increase in Reserve Bank driven rates without passing it on. I am not sure why an increase in market driven pressures should be seen any difference.”]
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24430988-5013871,00.html
Thanks Harry. I find everything about Julie B off-putting. Her hair looks like it’s made of some ceramic substance.
I’ve given up on the US thread – it’s like arguing with Scientologists.
“You can’t … go around pressing banks to do things which will significantly undermine their profits as the Leader of the Opposition, to my surprise at least, seeing as he ostensibly represents the more pro-business of our two big parties,
Maybe Turnbull wants to see one of the banks go under so he can save it. Strictly on a bipartisan basis of course.
Adam in Canberra @ 256 –
Why are people at this blog so keen on calling everyone by silly derogatory nicknames? And not even names which have public currency, just ones that seem to unique to this blog.
You mean there is life beyond this blog? Well I’ll be a…! <swoon> 😉
I’m with you Adam – Julie B doesn’t need a nickname – her policies do all the work for her.
I thought William had put a clamp down on nicknames since the move?
Grog, I’ve only said that I wish people wouldn’t do it.
I don’t think we should get too carried away with how hopeless Bishop is. Treasury is a difficult gig and takes a while to learn. Swan wasn’t too crash hot at first, either, but he’s getting rapidly better. Bishop is not a fool although she is an ideologue. She will probably improve.
Adam in Canberra @ 354. You’re most welcome.
Frankly, I find the most off-putting about Julie B. is her politics. It’s a lot like the stuff about Sarah Palin. It’s not that she’s a woman that’s problematic, it’s that she thinks being able to eyeball Russia from Alaska somehow gives her foreign affairs cred.. It’s not the person’s gender or race, it’s their ability to think clearly about what’s good for the common good, in my view.
The U.S. thread, well, all I can say is I have an occasional look, and leave.
358 – I wasn’t impressed with her before she took over the treasury gig, and thought he terrible all last year as Minister.
Yep Swan was bad at first – but the treasurer gets lots of opportunity to improve (or fail); the shadow treasurer struggles to really get oxygen to change perceptions, as Turnbull will do most of the big economic lifting – to whit his attack on Swan going “soft” on the banks…
Which incidentally has drawn a response from the ABA:
[The Australian Bankers’ Association (ABA) says Mr Turnbull’s comments demonstrate a lack of understanding of the funding position of the banks, and labelled his suggestion “extremely poor” policy.
The head of the ABA, David Bell, says such a move could potentially weaken banks further at a critical time.
“We’re concerned that their comments show a lack of understanding of the funding position of banks and, if adopted, their policy could potentially weaken the banks and further undermine the position of non-bank lenders at a crucial time for that to be stability in the financial sector,” he said. ]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/01/2379686.htm?section=justin
And William; so it’s a solid aspirational (non-binding) target??! 🙂 (sorry just finished Teh hollowmen)
Well, well, Grog, it will be interesting to see whether or not the criticism of Turnbull gets any airing in the MSM tomorrow.
Will be interesting HSO. What is a lot of fun however, is seeing how much Turbull and Costello hate each other:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24430736-5013871,00.html
[MALCOLM Turnbull has corrected Peter Costello over his claim the former government “never, ever” encouraged people to invest in superannuation in the lead up to the stock market crash.
Opposition Leader Mr Turnbull, after speaking to pensioners at the Marion shopping centre in Adelaide’s southern suburbs, said today that the Howard government had made super more attractive but had never told people how to organise their investments.
“There’s no doubt that the Howard government provided great incentives for people to save and make superannuation more attractive ,” he said.
“I think what might have been the point that Mr Costello may have been intending to make was that the previous government, no more than this government, was not telling people how to allocate their savings.
“The allocation of savings is obviously up to individuals and in the light of advice they receive, but certainly we provided considerable incentives for people to save more.”]
the latest series of Newstopia has been on sbs-micaleff up to his usual zaniness
line of the night :”malcolm was raised by wolves, ….well he lived in a flat then”
currently doing a takeoff of the costello memoirs ala the harry potter dressup
pure comedy gold
BTW, William. Again a thank you for your work here. Much appreciated. I’m glad your mum called you William.
HSO,
He was probably glad not to be called late for dinner!
Swan was bad for a few days in parliament through nerves which he quickly conquered. It didn’t take him that long at all to get on top of it. He is on top of it all now but does have a bit of an image issue accroding to some I have spoken to, I know, nothing to do with ability.
Someone ought to ask Julie Bishop if she believes workchoices typ IR is dead, since she is deputy dog now.
scorpio, it’s probably true, but nevertheless, it’s a nice name. Reminds me of my little nephew, who, when he came back from living all of his first three years in Indonesia, couldn’t speak English,and when we took him to the Botanical Gardens for a treat, he promptly went into the duck pond with an icecream container on his head as his preferred hat.
William may be very different, as you’d probably expect, but I just have this strange ‘aunty’ thing about William.
Sorry, William, if this offends, but if there are ‘aunty’ hormones, I think they’ve got me.
Yep, Grog. The internal machinations of the LNP. Wonderful stuff. They haven’t got a clue.
If I were Turnbull I would be saying nothing about Costello and especially not stirring him up.
Just watched Keating on Lateline. I wish he had a spot every week.
The electors made a big mistake in 1996. Australia could have been so much better with a man of his intelligence and vision at the helm for the past 12 years.
Instead, we got a return to Menzies 1950’s and were just treading water compared to what we could have achieved.
I’ve come over all maternal and avuncular for some unspecified reason, so good night to all.
[Just watched Keating on Lateline. I wish he had a spot every week.]
Agree. He makes Cossie look so very, very average.
Keating was fascinating and impressive.
[The electors made a big mistake in 1996. Australia could have been so much better with a man of his intelligence and vision at the helm for the past 12 years.]
Maybe not, in one book he says he would’ve handed over to Beazley during that term.
ASX now suggesting 96% chance of 50 basis point cut next week:
http://www.asx.com.au/sfe/targetratetracker.htm
[he would’ve handed over to Beazley during that term.]
I don’t think that that would have been a problem if Keating had put in train all of the visionary policy settings he had outlined.
Kim Beasley is a decent person who is also smart (Rhodes scholar) and I am sure he would have been able to carry on with Keating’s legacy.
As Keating said tonight, if his Superannuation program had been fulfilled, then there would now be 1.8 trillion dollars invested now and Australian banks would not have to beg for very expensive foreign funds to fund the current account deficit and business & housing finance.
This country would be in a far better position to ride out any global financial storm of deterioration in our terms of trade.
[As Keating said tonight, if his Superannuation program had been fulfilled, then there would now be 1.8 trillion dollars invested now and Australian banks would not have to beg for very expensive foreign funds to fund the current account deficit and business & housing finance.]
Very good point.
[This country would be in a far better position to ride out any global financial storm of deterioration in our terms of trade.]
Even better, the U.S. would be borrowing money from OUR banks, which would help them increase their profits, instead of withholding interest rate cuts.
No 377
What visionary policies? Higher unemployment? Higher interest rates? Vile and venom toward opponents?
Good riddance to Keating. Australians made the right choice in 1996 in the same sense that you believe they made the right choice in 2007.
No 351
Churchill also said that Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those others that have been tried.
I think Rudd repeated himself 10 times in that 7.30 interview. Ally clearly had him rattled. 🙂
[What visionary policies? Higher unemployment? Higher interest rates?]
They were coming down when Keating was defeated. Unlike what was happening in November 2007!
[Vile and venom toward opponents?]]
You mean like Costello to Beazley, or Howard to Rudd?
You seem to want politics to be a kids game, get real.
[I think Rudd repeated himself 10 times in that 7.30 interview. Ally clearly had him rattled. :)]
All politicians repeat themselves, it is how they get out the message they want everyone to hear.
[I think Rudd repeated himself 10 times in that 7.30 interview. Ally clearly had him rattled.]
lol Howie NEVER repeated himself
No 382
Yet amidst all that blather you failed to mention any supposedly “visionary” policies. Keating’s sole trait was acerbic arrogance.
[Yet amidst all that blather you failed to mention any supposedly “visionary” policies.]
Well you would know blather wouldn’t you!
Reconciliation and Republic are enough for me! But increasing the super to 15% would’ve been great. He probably would’ve split Telstra before selling it to annoy you as well.
[Keating’s sole trait was acerbic arrogance.]
This is how I know you are an intellectual light weight. You can’t even concede that Keating reinvented our economy in ways that Howard couldn’t. Including in ways that you should approve of! If you actually stood for anything you’d be willing to give a bit of credit where it was due.
Can someone explain how this headline “Labor Support Eases” equates with the text that follows?
[When the Rudd government was elected its support was 52.7 per cent on a two-party-preferred measure against the Coalition, which was on 47.3 per cent.
The split blew out to 60 per cent support for Labor to 40 per cent support for the Coalition for the January to March period, but has since eased.
New newspoll figures published by News Ltd today put support for Labor at 56 per cent for July to September, and at 44 per cent for the Coalition.]
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24434390-29277,00.html
Well at least they don’t say polls confirm a one term government.
56/44 is a fairly impressive level of support.
387: It was 60-40. The latest figure is 56-44. 56 is smaller than 60. Hence “Labor Support Eases”.
So Labor up 1 from the last poll… the Turnbull anti-bounce perhaps?
[You can’t even concede that Keating reinvented our economy in ways that Howard couldn’t.]
Howard commissioned the bloody report from which Keating acted. It was only a matter of time, whether they were enacted under a Fraser Government or Keating Government. Nevertheless, the Liberal Party already has acknowledged and supported the economic liberalisation of the 1980s.
[This is how I know you are an intellectual light weight. ]
Everyone’s an intellectual lightweight unless they agree with you. Typical elitist insolence from you, either way.
Knock it off, you two.
#387: I take this to mean we’ll be getting the quarterly state-by-state breakdown today. Nothing about it on The Australian site though.
The banks aren’t happy with Malcolm
http://business.smh.com.au/business/turnbull-bites-hand-that-paid-him-20081001-4s1x.html
I must say as one of th few (perhaps only) non intelectual on PB , I’m always fascinated between th descriptions of lightweight intelelctual vs heavyweight intelelctual , sort of like sport of boxing where there ar differing weight classes
GP
queston hanging over howard was not that th Report was commissioned or its recommendations , as howard apparently agreed with most …but his politcal “will” to put his politcal position on th line to implement those recommendations AND even if he did doubt re whehter that would hav convinced LCP then anyway
Histarys of Howard as Treasurer I’ve read including auto of Lynch of actual cabinet stuff indicates Howard had no reel influence on Fraser at all in desisting from non econamic rationalist econamic policys at Frasers whim/gut feel or at Frasers own historical beleifs or at Frasers politcal opportunism
No 395
Howard could not possibly have undertaken wholesale economic reform without the support of both the PM and the Cabinet. Of course, there was a crisis of political will to actually implement the necessary reforms under Fraser, but to suggest that Keating is somehow a “visionary” or “genius” for simply acting on a report that Howard actually commissioned is a nonsense.
GP
Very objective of you to take into consideration politcal will issues & differing politcal approachs/econamic thinking per my #395
Moving then to post Howard as Treasurer to Keating and Keating as Treasurer perhaps politicqal bias both ways influences peoples opinions generally anyway
At minimum I’d suggest Howard & Keating being different ‘characters’ approached things didderently anyway Keating was a “macro” guy AND combined with his general politcal approach of big picture on policy approach (whether right or wrong) meant once he saw Recommendations long term macro benefits he was going to put himself right n th line to achieve it , ESPECIALY in his own Treasurer home backyard
Might add his long term policy opinion perhaps originating from Treasury on employer supa going from 3% to ultimately 15% planned fits same principal of Keating (seeing a big picture seting & accepting its long time benefits (in his view) & he would hav implemented that in full on same basis Thats my description of Keating rather than ‘genius’
‘Labor support eases”. The Australian.
When an ease in support is about three percent higher than at the last election and would give Labor what, 10 – 20 more seats, I dream of suffering such a battering in the polls.
A DD now would be a most gratifying development.
Toughen up, Senator Fielding, the Labor party needs you.
Don’t back down, cheap alcopops is really, truly the way to go, Senator. Pretty please.
“he was going to put himself right n th line to achieve it ” meaning he had one of biggest of big politcal “tickers”…to act on his beliefs & risk himself politcaly to achieve that policy objective….magnificent politcal trait when you ar right
No 397
Perfectly fair assessment of Keating. I actually agree with the superannuation policy. I do wish that employers were less responsible for boosting retirement savings and that employees were made to contribute more from their own pocket; but in principle it is sound policy.