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).
I find it difficult to see just what the bunfight between Palmer and Bligh has to do with Nicholls in any official capacity. He is not Leader of the LNP, Deputy Leader, Shadow Attorney General or anything else even closely associated with the situation.
http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/view/legislativeAssembly/documents/memberBio/NichollsTimothy.htm
You said today Q’ld Libs electoral problams were somewhat due to Nats undemocratic practises I’ve always thought it was due to from joh on of Q’ld Libs were dispectd & with all Nats policys in Govt , Libs almost invisible , and no hint of Libs separate normal policys , so surburbs saw Libs as Nats Merger just will reinforse that perseption to Labor’s gain
“IMF endorses Treasurer’s deficit plan as “the medicine the country needs” to fight global financial crisis”
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/bitter-pill-for-recession/2009/02/01/1233423045473.html
If Julie Bishop and Malcolm Turnbull are having trouble understanding what they are about or cant get intelligent advisers maybe a quick Google might give them same information as is available to everyday Australians.
Bishop is a first class goose. Turnbull is either being opposite for its own sake or he really is an economic incompetent or more likely supports solutions that pays most of the money to LNP mates.
[Bang for the buck (wonkish)
Bang for the buck also heightens the contrast between effective and ineffective stimulus policies. Stay with c = 0.5, t = 1/3, and look at the effects of a tax cut; the multiplier is 0.75, half that for public investment, but bang for the buck is 1, only 1/3 that for investment.]
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/bang-for-the-buck-wonkish/
Economists, ideology, and stimulus
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/19/economists-ideology-and-stimulus/
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/31/another-temporary-misunderstanding/
ruawake, Howard’s IR reforms in his first term would have been MUCH harsher if the Democrats left it unaltered.
[ruawake, Howard’s IR reforms in his first term would have been MUCH harsher if the Democrats left it unaltered.]
If only they let them go through, then maybe Howard would’ve lost in 1998, on a WorkChoices like backlash.
Socrates
#273 “Ron, I must admit I agree with you on the protectionist tendencies of Obama…..I don’t think I have ever actually heard Obama speak in favour of free trade.”
Missed your post Socrates , diog sidetrackd me at time
One Obama quote last year:
“It’s (‘free trade’) a game where trade deals, like NAFTA, ship jobs overseas and force parents to compete with their teenagers to work for minimum wages at the local fast-food joint or at Wal-Mart.” Quite protectionast
Obama voted in US Senate against th CENTRAL American Free Trade Agreement , has threatened to pull US out of North American Free Trade Agreement (Mexoco & Canada) unless they agree to renegotiate terms , criticised ‘trade’ agreement with China & has stated reluctanse about trade deals overall
So my cautions last year he was a protectionist were based on this sort of bits , and th result wuld be damage oz econamicly , and also less developd poor countriess NOW of coursr there is th even worse Obam/Dems protectionist Bill passed , AND one consequence is th NAFTA Treaty has been ½ torn up
Econamicly for world trade & oz , it would be a reel disaster Quite unsure if this effect been well reportd and understood widely
But what about th ‘change’ message to World as well , “a new America” of ‘moral authority’ but surely not replasing th bush gun/tortures with Uncle Sam’s dollars taken from poor/undev Countrys …because such protectionst policys will most devastate poor and less developded Countrys , what message does it send them about th Usa internet tells people direct these days
Also , what mesage does it send about CC mitigation at Copenhaggen of US lack of selfishness , seeing like protectionist thoughts that obama had shown before his electon , I also highlited his non support for ratifying Kyoto at all
Somone can say they suport CC , promise/introduce environmentel or R E oil dependense reducing measures , but if there is not con currently a unqualified comitment to Kyoto CC then such “aparent” US CC policys becomes reely US finacialy self interst based …and not CC based , meaning Co2 mitigaton may or may not be a priority or outcom
So three policy messages concern here , econamic World trade & us , less develeped Countrys fair trading & social well being and Copenhaggen climate change We need to hope for rethoughting on all 3
.
recent science study “shows how changes in surface temperature, rainfall, and sea level are largely irreversible for more than 1,000 years after carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are completely stopped” Recently mentioned polar ice age meltin quicker info , now this …another eg of CC damage is long term
Steve,
(221 222 223)
Well said sir. I used to work in the Brisbane head office of a major bank and was threatened by Joh on a number of occasions. As soon as Flo is six feet under I’ll be able to tell the real story of why Joh didn’t take his superannuation!
Judith,
Nice to see someone honouring the memory of Ray Whitrod. There’s a man, and his wife, who stood fast against the most appalling pressure from the Nationals to allow them to continue to receive their kickbacks from brothels and sly groggers.
TP @ 404
The comparison is generally grossly unfair. It is very unkind to geese of any class. They are a noble bird and proud of mien. Pairs show devotion and care for one another and for their goslings. Geese do not do stupid things as a matter of course, and have never ruined an economy.
Unlike a certain other organism, when they do honk, they do it for right reasons, which includes saving their country, as geese did when they warned the Romans that a mob of baddies were trying to break in.
Geese do have one small failing. It is their eyes. They have a weird kind of fixed stare…
Steve @ 401
Maybe it is an old professional reflex thing … he can’t help himself when there is a scent of blood in the water.
The problem with a liberal/national marriage is that rural socialists invariably end up getting right up the noses of the hard dry ecorats. Deals can be done when in power, but sleeping in the same bed becomes intolerable when everybody wants to go ‘pure’, that is to say, when they are out of office.
The Federal libs and nats right now are a case in point of the latter.
ruawake
Posted Sunday, February 1, 2009 at 7:05 pm | Permalink
Socrates
If it was not for Whitlam the ACT and NT would probably have no Senate representation.
Nor would the ACT people have had the same HOR representation – by that I mean someone representing the people of the ACT and having full representation in the HOR and not just being allowed to vote only on matters dealing with the ACT.
Not quite – the member for Australian Capital Territory was granted full voting rights in 1968.
If you want to save many billions on democracy and on octuple handling (more if you count duplication), I suggest the following:
1. Get rid of the Senate and get rid of the state and territory governments. They are sheltered workshops for far too many incompetents delivering absolutely nothing but drivel.
2. Combine councils until you get a reasonable critical regional mass.
3. Get rid of this ridiculous business of having a GG and 7 (or whatever) governors, their housing, and their staff. These gladhanders don’t do zip for the economy. Do not replace them with a president. Presidents cost money and they invariably get into conflict with PMs and parties who got elected some other way than the president. The conflicts delay decisions and cost money.
4. All elections on the same day. Fixed terms of five years. Saves boodles on elections. (As a logjam breaker, PM’s would have an option of going early but they would personally be banned from competing in the following early election. This should just about stop the rot of going early. I can hardly imagine any of the ones we have had since federation really falling on their swords for the good of the country.)
5. Have one national health system, one national legal system, one national education system and so on, and so forth. They are only for 21 million people, plenty of countries do many more people on one system. Currently the ACT, TAS and the NT combined have what? About 1 million people. They do not need three systems of anything, let alone three systems for everything. What a dreadful waste.
6. Absolutely no duplication of responsibilities anywhere, anytime. Duplication would be a criminal offence. Citizens would be able to report duplications to an independent Anti Duplication Authority. Offending politicians and bureaucrats would get a mandatory jail sentence. Remissions of sentence would be given to those jailbirds who spot duplications elsewhere.
7. Regional councils would do the usual town stuff – rubbish, local roads, drains and such like. Regional reps would be paid, full time folk. Development rules would be set nationally, once, so we don’t have this silly business of states or regions competing by bribery and we don’t have the silly state-based business of beggar thy neighbour when it comes to the national interest.
8. Drop out of the Commonwealth while we are at it. Gabfests, ineffective diplomacy and a second-rate sporting association. Any small useful bits can be hived off and become part of our normal foreign affairs business. Saves many more millions.
Now, apart from the pleasure of seeing a whole lot of unrepresentative people trying to find, and even do, productive work…
… if I had the many billions thus saved, I would spend them on…
Thank you to those of you who pointed out the possible dangers of too much heat and a certain class of drugs. I was worried about an elderly family member and the extreme heat, but was also able to warn another family member about the drug/heat issue.
Good to see, HSO, that you are on the case as well and that you will be able to get the authorities to systematise the public warnings.
Three cheers for the Bludgers.
Not sure how accurate the article is, but those who are hoping that China might be the locomotive that drags away from the abyss may want to read the following:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24993116-2703,00.html
Oh dear, what a mess. Springborg is ‘laid low’ but then again he has said before that he is not keen on working on weekends. The other five days in the week don’t tend to produce a lot of policy either.
[His comments came as Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg, who has borrowed Mr Palmer’s helicopter to get to and from work, laid low after revelations the mining magnate had served Ms Bligh with a defamation lawsuit.]
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24993529-3102,00.html
Steve @ 417
They would have to be goners. Brown paper bag manufacturers will be disappointed.
The story, and the accompanying photograph, sort of reminds me of B grade movies about good ol’ boy Louisiana politics.
BTW, would non-disclosure of donations, if any, be a criminal act?
Has the cat got his tongue, does he have laryngitis or is there a lack of leadership in the Liberal National Party and the lawsuit is just a red herring trying to distract everyone?
[Mr Springborg declined to comment yesterday, but Opposition Treasury spokesman Tim Nicholls said it was a private matter between Mr Palmer and Ms Bligh.]
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24994049-5006786,00.html
Boerwar, the state rules were basically explained here:
[The figures are the most accurate picture yet of Mr Palmer’s backing of the LNP as any donations made since July totalling more than $100,000 would have been declared within 14 days under new laws. None has surfaced.]
Steve
Thank you.
Good to see all this stuff coming out so the voters can make a considered decision.
Springborg recently decided that he won’t be using the Palmer helicopter and plane during the election campaign due to these laws running the risk of him exceeding the limit.
An article by Ros Gittins here explaining why the $4B Ruddbank is a sensible precaution, and may not cost that much anyway:
http://business.smh.com.au/business/from-rates-to-ruddbank-this-dip-is-distinct-20090201-7uv5.html
There is no good economic reason to oppose this legislation, and whoever does will earn the ire of both major banks and the building sector.
The Asia Pacific head of the IMF has endorsed Australia’s intention to go into deficit funding to fight the recession. Yet Turnbull opposes it? So hard to decide who is the more credible source ….
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/02/02/2479518.htm?section=justin
Can’t we hate Turnbull and the IMF?
Virginia Trioli just asked Julie Bishop how she would return the budget to surplus, if she was in government.
“Tax cuts”.
Hate to say this, but I did tell you so. How many times I have said that how come we are in deficit yet and what is wrong with the Rudd Govt. I am glad that everyone is now jumping on the bandwagon including Heather Ridout of the Australian Industry Group, who said on ABC radio this morning: “We should ask the Govt why we are not in deficit”.
btw Layoff Turnbull, you are wasting your time and energy. Turnbull represents the badly damaged brand of the free market capitalism that has brought the world this misery. He represents the indecency of rewarding themselves $18B of bonus while taking the people’s billions to repair the ruins they have created. The punters know and see thru this already, he has no future. So let talk about something more interesting than Turnbull bashing everyday and moment.
Oz, Julie Bishop is way out of her depth and will be lucky to see the week out with the embarrassing nonsense coming out of her mouth in the past couple of days. Once the heat and pressure of parliament is applied this week, something will have to be done to regain some sort of stability.
Ronster and Finns
I’m beginning to wonder about Obama. Tom Daschle’s appointment in Health looks pretty grim (Greenwald tears him apart on that here http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/ )
And economists like Krugman and Stiglitz are heavily criticising the “Cash for Trash” gifts to crap banks, where the seemingly never-ending largesse of the US taxpayer continues to prop up the seemingly never-ending incompetence of bankers, allowing them to still pay themselves $18B in bonuses despite bankrupting their company. Can governments afford $2.2 Trillion to subsidise the banks terrible performance without asking anything in return. It’s got beyond a joke now.
[Bank losses worldwide from toxic U.S.-originated assets may double to $2.2 trillion, the International Monetary Fund said in a report released Jan. 28.]
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a.GJvNfWtCX0&refer=home
Ronster
I said that there is a case for short-term protectionism in the setting of a global slump (as long as it’s short term only). And now I’ve found a Nobel Prize winning economist to agree with me.
A hypothetical government (eg Germany…) could sit back and do nothing but export more to countries that have put in place a stimulus package to improve their economy. It would be better for their budget. And they wouldn’t be helping other country’s economies improve either. But a degree of protectionism could “make the world as a whole better off” as everyone would have to stimulate their own economy.
Protectionism and stimulus (wonkish)
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/01/protectionism-and-stimulus-wonkish/#more-1333
Diogenes whatever happened to the concept of a bank to take over the toxic debt currently on the balancesheet of banks throughout the world?
Steve
That has been discussed by Krugman and elsewhere. Its a lousy deal for whoever is that bank. Its worse than the bailouts because you suffer the same loss, the bank gets off scott-free, and you don’t even get a chance to recoup some of the money when the rest of teh bank performs better.
Socrates
Wasn’t there talk of the World Bank running the “Big Bad Bank”?
The financial disclosure returns are up on the AEC’s website.
When did the AMWU shift allegiances to The Greens? They gave three times more to them than to the ALP. The ETU donates exclusively to The Greens now and even the CFMEU (albeit the construction division) gave them $40,000.
In 2005/6 The Greens received $0 from zero unions.
In 2006/7 they received $70,000 from two unions.
In 2007/8 they received $240,000 from three unions.
Link:
http://periodicdisclosures.aec.gov.au/
Julie Bishop is a bit stingy, she only gave $1,500 to the Libs.
Oz
That’s a co-incidence. I was just reading about the CFMEU being sucessfully sued in 2004 by Greenies for false imprisonment in Beech Forest. The logging industry had to bail out some of the CFMEU’s $2.2M costs. Looks like they are playing nicely now.
Dio
Yes the World Bank was one of various options suggested for teh Big Bad Bank. But whoever it is, the problem is the same. You are pooling the debts but the banks who caused them get to separate their other (valuable) assets so that there is no claim on getting a return off the (now good) bank to pay back the cost. It all but guarantees that the money stumped up for the bad bank is a loss. Making it the world bank just means that non-American taxpayes wind up paying for (mainly) US caused bank losses.
Needless to say unless I have misunderstood the concept I’m not a fan. I think the “bad bank” concept is just spin for abailout deal where the guilty banks walk away without any obligations. I far prefer the Swedish model – buy them out then sell it back. I.e. make any capital injections in return for equity.
“IMF endorses Treasurer’s deficit plan as “the medicine the country needs” to fight global financial crisis”
That’s a worry.
With friends like that ……
Pratt Holdings Pty Ltd
2004/05
ALP: $108,880
LP: $205,000
NP: $27,500
2005/06
LP: $200,000
2006/07
LP: $200,000
2007/08
ALP: $100,000
LP: $200,000
On the 9th of October last year Stephen Mayne wrote:
One issue which no-one has yet explored is the dithering of Peter Costello’s promise to lock-up cartel crooks and the size of Dick Pratt’s donations to the Liberal Party.
Costello is very close to ACCC chairman Graeme Samuel who is genuinely passionate about stamping out cartel behaviour. So when Samuel launched his big jihad on cartels in 2003-04, Costello promised to change the law but then never delivered. Did number one Liberal donor Dick Pratt influence this?
Correction: Stephen Mayne’s article appeared in Crikey on Oct 9 2007 (not last year).
Trubbell at Mill @ 408
Joh decided to not take his super pay-out?! I’m flabbergasted. I can’t begin
to imagine what would have been the reason behind that seeing as he had very
serious financial problems during his last few years.
Rudd is live on Sky trying to get us into deficit and recession.
The Govt tax receipts to drop by $115B
Looks like there is another “Blog War” raging. Our good friend Bolter is right in the thick of it.
I think that this one has a good chance of turning into a “lulu” and could run for a while yet.
http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermail/andrewbolt/index.php/couriermail/comments/dumbest_green_blogger_in_australia/
http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermail/greenblog/index.php/couriermail/comments/at_least_he_got_my_name_right/
It’s amazing just how passionate people can get over a discussion on Climate3 Change & Global Warming!
Steve
Joh made that super promise way back in the 70s when it helped him politically and nobody thought he would stay in office so long, or be foregoing so much cash. Needlesss to say he regretted it, as evidenced by his subsequent efforts to get Flo into the Federal Senate and be able to rely on her payout. Of course if you read the Fitzgerald inquiry report you might also conclude he found other ways to make money.
As an aside on climate change, one thing that has become apparent in the current Adelaide heat wave – how accurate the weather forecasts have become. I remember not so long ago they would only publish 3 day forecasts, then five day. Now even the 7 day forecast has proven remarkably accurate. It just goes to prove that, skeptics aside, the models they use to predict weather and climate are now pretty good.
News Ltd is cashing in on the Blog War.
[IT’S the battle of the bloggers at The Courier-Mail.]
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24995335-3102,00.html
Socrates @ 444
But why did he stick to his ‘word’ 10 or more years later? Of course he was as on very good terms with the brown paper bag delivery men but when a super payout worth hundreds of thousands of $s is up for grabs I’d expect him to take it with both hands.
Looks like we will be in deficit for, at least, in the next 4 years.
Glen, Turnbull will romp in at 2010. If they put Cossie back in the next few months, Rudd has no choice but to resign. Cossie will in the Lodge by Xmas 09 and we will be back in surplus by 2010.
I think it’s a sign of progress that the climate change “debate” has been relegated to the depths of Andrew Bolt blog and the Courier-Mail’s blog.
Thought I’d better post this before Finns and Ron find it.
[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.]
Renditions get Obama’s approval
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24996281-2703,00.html
Now that’s out the way, we don’t need to discuss the matter further. 😉