Morgan’s latest fortnightly face-to-face poll shows a one point narrowing in the two-party gap from 60-40 to 59.5-40.5. Labor is down one point on the primary vote to 50.5 per cent while the Coalition is up one to 36 per cent. Elsewhere:
• Not sure how much of this is news, but there’s a lot of good stuff on the Western Australian Electoral Commission site: veteran academic Harry Phillips’ 149-page Electoral Law in the State of Western Australia: An Overview; Isla Macphail’s 388-page Highest Privilege
and Bounden Duty: A Study of Western Australian Parliamentary Elections 1829–1901; and comprehensive survey data on various aspects of the September state election.
• AAP reports that Jennifer Huppert, a lawyer with the firm Maddocks and “long-time Labor moderate”, has been “unanimously endorsed” by Labor’s national executive to replace Evan Thornley in the Victorian upper house region of South Metropolitan. A “senior Labor source” quoted in the report says “Ms Huppert was the Premier’s pick, chosen from four women candidates selected by Federal MP Michael Danby and state Treasurer John Lenders”. The Herald Sun earlier reported that “a list of six names – four women and two men – had been submitted to the Labor Party’s national executive”, with the Left-aligned Laura Smyth named as frontrunner.
• Rick Wallace of The Australian reports that a looming split in the Right of the Victorian ALP could produce “another round of bloody winner-takes-all preselections replete with branch-stacking, brawls and backstabbing”. The next Victorian opinion poll will be interesting to observe, given the stresses the present heatwave has placed on Melbourne’s infrastructure.
• Malcolm Mackerras muses on the recent history of by-elections and upper house vacancies in the Canberra Times.
• Annual financial disclosure returns for 2007-08 can be viewed at the Australian Electoral Commission site (UPDATE: … from Monday – thanks to Ruawake for pointing that out).
If we go into recession the Libs should win back some seats in 2010 but the ALP will still hold on most likely…almost like a 1998 election (though without such massive swings)…
Philp Morris Limited
2007/08
ALP: $0
LP: $96140
NP: $42700
When asked “how much influence does $96140 buy?”, the Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing, Peter Dutton, became agitated. He said, “there’s nothing unhealthy, in an open and multi-party democratic system, about individuals and groups supporting the political process. There’s nothing at all unhealthy about that. I mean, and in some cases, I mean … what sort of question is that anyway? What have been smoking!”
Coca Cola Amatil
2007/08
LP (national): $70,000
LP (NSW): $250
There you go Barry, go and get yourself an ice-cream …
Trubbell–408
i was very lucky and honoured to be able to call Ray and Mavis my friends, by the way Flo’s scones couldnt have ever been as good as Mavis’s. 🙂
I wonder what effect ABC Learning’s $50K donations had on that whole fiasco.
I apologise for linking this rubbish but we should all be reminded just how bad our last Foreign Minister was. Downer lists his favourite two leaders as Truman and Thatcher (he doesn’t like Churchill).
His least favourite seems to be Rudd whose “rantings” about Reagan, Thatcher and Howard are
[Mr Rudd’s first major political mistake.
In the end, it could prove fatal.]
OMG!! Should we all say goodbye to Rudd while we’ve still got the chance??
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,,24994118-22202,00.html
Inner Westie
Can you post a web link to this source of enlightenment on the inner workings of the “democratic” (one dollar, one value) process.
Inner Westie
I’d love to see donation figures on:
Manildra
BHP/Rio/coal mining oligarchs (remembering who denied climate change was real)
ABC Learning
ABB (who kept their grain monopoly)
Dio, Dolly only gets a gig on mondays because one of the editors owes him big time, his poncy fatuous remarks are only good for a giggle, saying that i never bother to read them. 🙂
Steve 447
I can’t remember the exact details but I think Joh actually signed away his rights to the scheme. I recall he made a big deal out of doing it in a fairly binding way.
Piece of piss, Socrates. Just whack ’em in here.
So now we’ve got our annual update on rort that we call democracy, any got ideas about donation reform?
What are the con’s of a blanket ban on private donations and relying purely on a public funding model? As I understand, in the countries were this is the case, there has been some public discontent. But I don’t know the precise reasons.
ABC going all out beating the Coalition’s drum before parliment resumes to try and give Turnbull a boost.
The midday report was all doom and gloom with Bishop, Minchen, Abbott and Joyce all getting air time one after the other with rubbish comments like, Rudd must say how he’ll get us back in surplus, and the stimulus was all spent on pokies etc. I thought they were going to let Joyce stammer and stutter on all program, then Bob Brown had a go. ALP’s Adams from Tassie got to say the next stimulus should be on big infrastructure projects and ABC tried to give the immpression that he was critisising Rudd. What happened to balanced reporting?
Next they went on about how the dollar, stockmarket and house prices were falling. A wonder they didn’t say the sky is falling head for the hills, may be tomorrow?
And weren’t the Libs saying only last month that house prices would skyrocket because of the increase in first homeowners grant?
[Ronster and Finns – I’m beginning to wonder about Obama.]
Diog, i heard on ABC AM this morning that some of the details of Obama’s US$850B stimulus package are really weird. Such as: $800m to buy cars for the Govt, plus there also a large number of special handouts to some 150 different federal and state programs. The general feeling is that this is a rather piecemeal approach rather than a comprehensive strategic re-tooling and re-shaping of the USA Economy.
Also the packages was passed in the Congress without a single Repug support. What ever happened to new politics and new Washington?
[A nearly $820 billion stimulus package passed the House of Representatives Wednesday without a single Republican vote. The bill now moves to the Senate, where it stands a better chance of picking up at least a modicum of bipartisan support.]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/28/obama-im-confident-stimul_n_161654.html
and thanks for doing my job for me:
[Under executive orders signed on January 22, the CIA appears to have preserved its authority to carry out renditions – by which hundreds of terrorist suspects have been abducted and transferred to prisons in countries with questionable human rights records such as Egypt, Morocco or Jordan.]
Dont tell me it’s a case of sending a boy to do a man’s job.
Oz, according to the recent electoral reform green paper, such a measure would entail the following pros:
• the elimination of any perception or risk of undue influence;
• possibly easier entry for new parties into the electoral process, subject to the level and scheme adopted for public funding.
And the following cons:
• this approach requires a much higher level of Government intervention in and funding of the political process;
• an increased cost to government and hence the taxpayer;
• a reduced incentive for parties to seek and maintain a broad-based membership;
• the possibility of constitutional difficulties in relation to the maintenance of the constitutionally prescribed system of representative and responsible government, although once again a carefully crafted scheme may be possible.
Finns
I suppose it’s a case of sending a man to do a woman’s job. 🙂
Fortunately Ron has agreed that renditions were Hillary’s domain. I can’t imagine that snatching someone from a foreign country and flying them to be tortured by a co-operative third country is particularly legal.
Our own version of the Shame of Wall St $18B Bonus. Just as well that i have never touched this B&B (Bdust & Bshirt) stuff.
[While they endeavour to negotiate a debt-for-equity swap with their banking syndicate, Babcock & Brown executives have come under fire from staff for pushing for retention bonuses.
In an email chain leaked to BusinessDay, one employee expressed dismay that the firm’s staff were being asked to work hard in order to ensure that executives received their retention payments.]
http://business.smh.com.au/business/babcock-execs-at-the-trough-20090202-7vah.html
Thanks for the link, William.
I can recognise all of those cons but I think pro number one is so important that it nullifies the first two cons. Unless you can quantify the negatives associated with the “perception or risk of undue influence”.
Number three is good point, but could be abated by banning donations from organisations yet allowing them from private donors with a cap. I think that would negate that issue. The more members and sympathisers you have, the more money you get. However, the more caveats you add the harder it becomes to regulate, I’ll concede.
I don’t know much about the constitution in regards to political funding so I’ll leave that debate to the experts.
Further to 465: the paper doesn’t seem to mention any country that has banned private donations entirely. Canada and the US ban donations from corporations. The UK and NZ cap expenditure, which seems to be just as good.
I think that it speaks volumes that the Largest donnor to the Liberal Party (600k) was a widow from Kwinana who while not even a member wanted to help re-elect John Howard.
The ALP recieved a similar amount from a group of Hong Kong interests!!(used to be called gangsters when I was a boy)
The constitutional question in a nutshell is that any law which burdened freedom of communication about government or political matters would have to be “reasonably appropriate and adapted to serve a legitimate end in a manner which is compatible with the maintenance of the constitutionally prescribed system of representative and responsible government” – which is vague enough that it would come entirely down to the worldview of the particular individuals on the High Court. Notably, the whole “implied freedom of political communication” ball got rolling when the Hawke government tried to ban paid election campaign advertising.
Vera they arent rubbish comments, the Tory Government in Canada has said how long it will take them to get out of a deficit and Rudd and Swan should be able to tell us too!
[Vera they arent rubbish comments, the Tory Government in Canada has said how long it will take them to get out of a deficit and Rudd and Swan should be able to tell us too!]
They must’ve just picked a year out of thin air. It completely depends on when the world economy starts growing again. Malcolm Turnbull knows it is an unanswerable question, which is why he keeps asking it. It is an example of Opposition via Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.
[the Tory Government in Canada has said how long it will take them to get out of a deficit]
So they have a crystal ball. Amazing. I would bet big money they’re out by a good margin. By the way Glen what year do they say they will be out of deficit?
No 473
Yet, when we have a Prime Minister who proclaims that climate change is the “biggest moral challenge of our time”, it is an example of Government via Fear, uncertainty and doubt.
Two can play at that game ShowsOn.
Malcolm now agrees a deficit is necessary. Surprise, surprise, surprise.
The Kwinana megadonor to whom Trueblue refers at 470 is one Josephine Armstrong. The West Australian said this about her when her donations were disclosed under the annual WAEC returns last month:
[Listening to the 5am news as she set out from her modest rural home to feed the cattle, Josephine Armstrong thought it sounded as if John Howard could do with some extra money to help his 2007 campaign for another term.
She had never been a member of a political party or made a significant donation to one, but the 78-year-old decided to contact the State branch of the Liberal Party to organise a contribution.
Mrs Armstrong didn’t want to drive into the city, so understandably the Liberal Party wasted little time dispatching a staff member to collect her cheque for $500,000. Not long after, she decided Mr Howard needed some more help, so she donated another $100,000 to the party.
As she packed up her belongings in her southern suburbs home yesterday to move to a new suburb, the Liberal Party’s biggest personal donor was surprised to learn that her generosity had been revealed under Federal disclosure laws.
Speaking reluctantly to The West Australian while dressed in tracksuit pants and a red T-shirt that she said might well have come from the Good Samaritans, Mrs Armstrong said she had not even divulged the details of her big donations to her family.
“I just have the interest of the future of Australia at heart,” she said. “It was a personal matter. I wanted to help when I thought the help was needed.”
Mrs Armstrong admitted she had a “determined” character and said she had not been pushed by anyone to donate to the Liberals.
She said Mr Howard, who thanked her personally for the donation when they met at a morning tea, had done a good job and she thought he deserved a chance to stay on.
“I turned around and I thought, they could do with some money,” she said. “I decided they needed help now. Nobody lobbied me at all.”
Mrs Armstrong admits she felt some disappointment when Mr Howard failed at the polls, but said she was willing to give Kevin Rudd a go and it was a bit early to assess his performance. “My vote is only one, everyone else’s vote is only one too,” she said. “That is the outcome, the people have spoken.”
One of three daughters of a Cornish father and Norwegian mother who migrated to Australia in 1933, Mrs Armstrong’s family bought farming land south of Perth and she has been in the area for more than seven decades.
According to land records, she reaped more than $30 million from the sale of land in the area in 2006.
Her husband Lionel died fighting a bushfire in 1987 and the couple had no children, aside from a girl they fostered for several years.
While it is difficult to prise too many details from the independent retiree, it is apparent that Mrs Armstrong’s generosity has also benefited her extended family over the years.]
[So they have a crystal ball. Amazing. I would bet big money they’re out by a good margin. By the way Glen what year do they say they will be out of deficit?]
It doesn’t really matter, Turnbull’s message was completely clouded by Julie Bishop saying the government should cut taxes to INCREASE taxation revenues.
Excactly how this can be achieved during a world-wide economic downturn wasn’t explained.
Glen, the Tories waited till the budget before doing any such thing, whatever merit it has anyway. Obviously any such prediction is pretty loose considering the nature of the circumstances.
Has there been any research done into the opinions of Australians when it comes to political donations? Accusations of outright bribery aside, it’s pretty naive to assume that these businesses and organisations with very real interests in who wins are donating simply to “Enhance the democratic process”.
Capping expenditure is a good idea, but how about capping donations a party can receive? That might look the same on the surface, but let me explain. Expenditure only relates to money spent during campaigning, correct? (If that isn’t correct you may as well ignore this part of my post.) Not all donations go towards campaigning. Money also goes to maintenance of offices, staffers etc. who are not a part of just the election campaign. So the political parties are still getting the benefit of donations and so the perception or risk of undue influence is still there.
My opinion is that political donations from corporations, unions and other organisations should be banned. Donations should be solely derived from individuals.
They are forcasting 2013-14…to return to a surplus…
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090129.BUDGETPAGE29/TPStory/National
At least they are honest…Rudd and Co wont tell us a thing!
[My opinion is that political donations from corporations, unions and other organisations should be banned. Donations should be solely derived from individuals.]
I agree with this but doesn’t this leave open the opportunity to funnel funds from various organisations through individuals?
Eg. Jone Smith Inc., a property development company, cannot donate but Mr. John Smith can.
*John Smith. His name isn’t supposed to change half way through.
Hey Glen, I’ll repeat myself. Their forecast came out when they announced their budget. Has Swan handed down the budget? No.
And more importantly, their forecast, like any potential forecast by Swan, is conjecture. How do you expect them to get it right 5-6 in the future when they were predicting a surplus immediately prior to the budget?
[At least they are honest…Rudd and Co wont tell us a thing!]
Honest? You mean guessing.
[Rudd and Co wont tell us a thing!]
No that’s right Glen we don’t know if we’re going into deficit or not and that it’s 115b.
In this session of parliament they won’t release all the figures and won’t let us know the stimulus package. You’re right Glen, they’re telling us nothing.
But Swan and Rudd have been making additional spending annoucements since the budget so they should tell us how we stand since them spending everything in the bank?
Oz their forecast rests on the validity of the Bank Of Canada suggesting Canada will be out of a recession by 2010.
Essential Research: 61-39, up from 60-40. Also featured are questions on becoming a republic within the next few years (52 per cent support, 24 per cent oppose – the latter sounds a bit low), whether Australia should agree to allow Japan to conduct whaling if it limits its activities to the northern hemisphere (10 per cent agree, 81 per cent disagree), “how would you rate your loyalty to your employer” and “how would you rate your employer’s loyalty to staff”.
The wind under the political sail of the Libs has been completely taken by the 3 Amigos. The press conference of the 3 Amigos (Rudd, Swan and Tanner) this afternoon, as a political theatre was quite impressive.
[Oz their forecast rests on the validity of the Bank Of Canada suggesting Canada will be out of a recession by 2010.]
What was the Bank of Canada’s prediction before the recession began? 😉
Everything I said still stands.
Not even a majority of Coalition voters oppose becoming a republic. Hope you’re reading, Malcolm.
Interesting article on Rudd Vs Turnbull. One man’s opinion of course but..
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/paul-sheehan/which-chameleon-do-you-prefer/2009/02/01/1233423042098.html
Deafening silence from the ALP cheersquad re 470. How about a comment on the fact that the combined left wing spend in 07/08(ALP, Green , real climate , move on ect) topping 100mil while the Lib/Nat spend around 50mil.Those big Corporations that fund and cntrol the Libs not doing such a flash job.
The problem for Malcolm re the Essential Research poll is not the raw figures, although they’re bad enough, but the lack of improvement for Turnbull and the coalition. We can argue about the raw figures but you can’t argue about the trend. There have been enough of these Essential polls to see the trend.
[Deafening silence from the ALP cheersquad re 470. ]
What do you expect? You made a racist comment that wasn’t worth responding to.
[How about a comment on the fact that the combined left wing spend in 07/08(ALP, Green , real climate , move on ect) topping 100mil while the Lib/Nat spend around 50mil.Those big Corporations that fund and cntrol the Libs not doing such a flash job.]
This is not surprising considering that Labor holds all but one state, territory, and national government. The party that holds government always tends to get more donations, because they are in a position to change policies.
[How about a comment on the fact that the combined left wing spend in 07/08(ALP, Green , real climate , move on ect) topping 100mil]
And since when has the ALP been left wing? They are hard-line Centrists. 😉
[And since when has the ALP been left wing?]
Since Kevin Rudd’s essay in The Monthly, apparently. 😉
Essential Research has always a pro-ALP result and anyway i wouldnt expect much movement until we hit a recession this year and the shine will be well and truly off Rudd and Co…
Shows on 493
since when has Hong Kong been a race?
[Essential Research has always a pro-ALP result]
Irrelevant when comparing like with like and looking for a trend.
[i wouldnt expect much movement until we hit a recession this year and the shine will be well and truly off Rudd and Co…]
So there are many people out there who are not aware of the GFC and will blame Rudd for everything?
What makes you think the shine will go off Rudd and straight onto Turnbull?
Well who would want the Greens running the economy Gary?????
Plus we should actually have some policies out this year too.
But when Swan has to say we’re in Recession and Rudd and Co have spent everything but the kitchen sink to avoid it…not many will be happy with his way of tackling the GFC…
I’ve said it before and I will say it again Glen, while Rudd is seen as doing everything he can to protect jobs people will give him credit for it. His problem is not doing too much but being seen to be doing too little. I don’t think Rudd will let that happen.