The first Roy Morgan face-to-face poll in a fortnight shows Labor’s two party lead down from 61-39 to 59-41. Labor’s primary vote is down 1.5 per cent to 50 per cent, while the Coalition’s is up 3 per cent to 36.5 per cent. Possum detects a negative correlation between Morgan’s sample sizes and Coalition primary vote. I would observe that there are two clusters of sample sizes, around 900 and 1800, depending on whether the poll was from one weekend of polling or two (the latter being the case on this occasion). Perhaps the correlation tells us something about how Morgan decides whether to sit on its results for another week (conspiracy theories ahoy).
Elsewhere:
• Tune in for live coverage tomorrow night as voters in three of Tasmania’s 15 Legislative Council districts go to the polls. Independent Ivan Dean, who was approached by John Howard to run in Bass at the 2004 federal election, faces a strong challenge from independent competitors in Windermere, which covers outer Launceston and the eastern side of the Tamar Valley. The retirement of independent Norma Jamieson has produced a tight four-horse race in the Devonport seat of Mersey, the field including Jamieson’s daughter Carolynn. Bartlett government Treasurer Michael Aird is unlikely to be troubled in his bid to keep Derwent (outer Hobart and Derwent Valley) as one of four upper house seats held by Labor. In the regrettably unlikely event that you wish to discuss this, please do so on the dedicated thread. Further reading from Peter Tucker at Tasmanian Politics. Further coverage tomorrow from Antony Green.
• Gary Clark, husband of former MP Jackie Kelly, has been found guilty for his role in the Lindsay pamphlet scandal. This was for the benign-sounding charge of “distributing unauthorised electoral material”, which carries a fine of $750. Former Liberal powerbroker Jeff Egan was acquitted, the court accepting his explanation that he was not aware of the content of the pamphlets. Not content with that, Egan has launched a private prosecution (presumably because his complaints have failed to interest the authorities) for assault against the Labor “possé” who caught the Liberal trio in their act, which includes Senator Steve Hutchins.
• Michelle Grattan of The Age reports that Josh Freydenberg has provided a formidable pair of referees in his application for the Liberals’ Kooyong preselection: John Howard and Andrew Peacock (the latter of whom held the seat from 1966 to 1994, in between Bob Menzies and Petro Georgiou).
• The Warrnambool Standard reports that Sarah Henderson, former host of The 7:30 Report and daughter of former state MP Ann Henderson, has entered the crowded field for the preselection in Corangamite. Others mentioned include former Kennett government minister Ian Smith; Graham Harris, head of the Liberals’ Corangamite electorate council; Victorian Farmers Federation president Simon Ramsay; “Internet expert and former Howard government adviser” Rod Nockles; Simon Price, unsuccessful Colac Otway Shire Council candidate and former electorate officer to Stewart McArthur; and Michael King, “Geelong businessman and owner of Kings Australia funeral services”.
• Peter Brent of Mumble comments on the audacity of Liberal Senator Michael Ronaldson expressing concern about the electoral roll in an excellent piece for Inside Story.
• After being reduced to the deadly third position on the Liberal ticket, conservative Tasmanian Senator Guy Barnett reportedly has his eyes on Bass, which Labor’s Jodie Campbell won from Michael Ferguson in 2007.
• If you thought Possum’s booth maps was dope, wait till you see Nathan Lambert’s Google Earth files.
[You can believe that if you like but there’s no evidence to suggest that’s the case.]
Thanks, that’s exactly what I believe.
Just as well Oz gave you permission to believe it, then.
Personally, i’m fascinated by today’s proceedings.
Turnbull puts pressure on Rudd to ‘brown down’ the ETS in a fairly lame attempt to get some political traction.
Rudd (oddly) does so, giving Turnbull the chance to say ‘aren’t i great?’. Turnbull does the exact opposite, reinforcing the argument that the opp. is obstructionist.
I mean, everyone is doing the wrong thing. The only people who benefit out of this is the govt, but only because Turnbull is a dolt.
I think the penny has dropped.
[ Link
Mon 04 May 09 (04:02pm)
And yet the coalition now says they will vote against the bill in the senate, when it is more or less in line with what *they* proposed? What gives? ]
[Caroline Overington
Mon 04 May 09 (04:07pm)
He’s opposed to anything that Kevin supports? ]
I mean does anyone else feel like they’re part of some nation-wide monty python sketch right now?
Brown’s shift to 25% is more apparent than real:
“The Greens have set a bottom line for Australia to make an minimum unconditional emissions cut of 25% below 1990 levels by 2020, with a commitment to move to 40% conditional on the success of the Copenhagen conference. ”
http://bob-brown.greensmps.org.au/
The key word is “unconditional.” Rudd’s embrace of 25% is *conditional* on a Copenhagen agreement. His only unconditional target is 5%. So there is still a wide gap between Rudd and Brown. I don’t blame the Greens for sticking to their principles. But this disproves the view that Rudd and Brown have convergent positions so there was no need for Rudd to make the decisions he announced today. Labor, the Greens and Xenophon cannot pass a CPRS bill without either the Coalition of Fielding. To assemble a Senate majority Rudd needs *either* the Coalition *or* everyone else.
Well if Rudd just wanted to expose that Turnbull had no intention of agreeing to any meaningful ETS he has succeeded. Well-done Malcolm, you have lowered the bar yet again. You could have scored a point, but its yet another own goal instead.
Despite my previous criticism of the Rudd ETS (which still stands) I accept that its impossibleto get something up if the opposition is opposed to even this low level of cuts. Alas poor planet, I knew you well.
Yep, quite right Adam, this Bill looks all but dead.
Thankfully for Australia there is still time to have a double dissolution election before Copenhagen.
Well the Government can forget about Fielding and Xenophon.
[But the Government will still need the support of independent Nick Xenophon and Family First’s Steve Fielding to steer the CPRS through the Senate, and both responded negatively to today’s announcement.
“The governments CPRS is fundamentally flawed,” Mr Xenophon told The Australian Online. “The model is unfixable and the changes announced today are simply window-dressing.
“If you give a lame duck a hair-cut, it’s still a lame duck.”
Senator Xenophon said the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme still needed stronger emissions reduction targets. “The only way to achieve strong targets is to implement a fundamentally better designed scheme,” he said.
Family First’s Steve Fielding said the government was “still intent on putting Australian jobs at risk” through the CPRS.
“Four months ago the Prime Minister told Australians it would be ‘reckless and irresponsible’ to delay this scheme and now he has done just that,” Senator Fielding said. “I’m concerned that this government is taking a huge risk by demanding it lead the world with its climate changes scheme, and it’s a risk that will carried by the Australian people.”]
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25426410-601,00.html
[I’m concerned that this government is taking a huge risk by demanding it lead the world with its climate changes scheme]
Errr Steve, it may pay to read a newspaper occasionally or look at the News on TV sometimes.
The government can rightfully say now they’ve bent over backwards to get the CPRS through no matter what the result. Turnbull can’t take any kudos heaped on him for the changes because he still won’t vote for it. A win/win for the government but not the planet.
Agreed, Gary.
In these uncertain times, Australia needs certainty in its government, a government that is able to rely on a Parliament that will act on the critical issues our nation, indeed, the world, must confront.
It would be irresponsible of the government to allow itself to wait until the end of next year before Australia has this certainty.
[Turnbull is an idiot]
Turnbull is not an idiot. He’s still an investment banker. Once a IB, always an IB. You see, IB never satisfied, happy or contented. He wants more and more and more. They just dont get it. I think this joke from the Web says it all:
[An American INVESTMENT BANKER was at the pier of a small coastal Greek village when a small boat with just one fisherman docked. Inside the small boat were several large yellow fin tuna.
The American complimented the Greek on the quality of his fish and asked, “How long does it take to catch them?” The Greek replied: “Only a little while”.
The American then asked why didn’t he stay out longer and catch more fish? The Greek said he had enough to support his family’s immediate needs. The American then asked, “But what do you do with the rest of your time?”
The Greek fisherman said, “I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take siesta with my wife, Maria, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine and play cards with my friends, I have a full and busy life.”
The American scoffed, “I am a Harvard MBA and could help you. You should spend more time fishing and with the proceeds, buy a bigger boat with the proceeds from the bigger boat you could buy several boats, eventually you would have a fleet of fishing boats. Instead of selling your catch to a middleman you would sell directly to the processor, eventually opening your own cannery. You would control the product, processing and distribution. You would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Athens, then London and eventually New York where you will run your expanding enterprise.”
The Greek fisherman asked, “But, how long will this all take?” To which the American replied, “15-25 years.” “But what then?” The American laughed and said that’s the best part. “When the time is right you would announce an IPO and sell your company stock to the public and become very rich, you would make millions.”
“Millions … Then what?” The American said, “Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take siesta with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play cards with your friends.”]
Condaleeza Rice – Anything the President says is legal is legal (the Richard Nixon defense)
[Days after telling students at Stanford University that waterboarding was legal “by definition if it was authorized by the president,” former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice was pressed again on the subject yesterday by a fourth-grader at a Washington school. ]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/03/AR2009050301739.html?wprss=rss_politics
Rudd could come out and say it wants to hand the Govt over to the Coalition and Turnbull would oppose it.
[Just as well Oz gave you permission to believe it, then.]
Just as well!
Heather Ridout gets it right:
[But Australian Industry Group chief executive Heather Ridout has backed the changes.
“We wanted a delay in the start date, we wanted a phasing in of the start and we wanted more support for trade exposed industries through the permit allocation process,” she said.]
I completely agree that the government has got the politics of this correct in terms of snookering Turnbull. However political capital is only useful if it’s used on something and I believe they had enough to strengthen their position.
Essential Research: 57-43.
Regardless of the merits or otherwise of the changes, it illustrates how inept Turnbull is as opposition leader. As others have noted, he could have taken credit for the changes, and dealt the opposition back into the issue. But he has opposed? Huh?? When is this guy getting replaced???
I think we’ve seen enough of Fielding, X and the opposition to realise that unless their is a shift in the balance of power in the Senate at the next election a worthwhile CPRS is unattainable and that isn’t Rudd’s fault.
Some interesting figures in there on refugees and Australia’s role in the Pacific.
[Senator Xenophon said the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme still needed stronger emissions reduction targets. “The only way to achieve strong targets is to implement a fundamentally better designed scheme,” he said.]
It will be interesting if it turns out he is the person that sinks everything. I guess he could say that the Govt’s plans weren’t perfect in his eyes, and thus couldn’t enter heaven.
Oz,
Given that both Xenophon and Fielding are both saying they won’t support this new version of ETS legislation see 409 above), how, pray tell could the Government “strengthen their position”?
All the Greens can hope for now is that Labor uses ETS as a DD trigger, hope they win a balance of power role and then negotiate.
William, do you have any idea about what the proportions of respondents by age group might be? The question about the pension increase v 1st homeowners bonus is the question I’m looking at in particular. Is it possible that the overall figure of 68% is skewed because of a higher respondent rate in older respondents?
[how, pray tell could the Government “strengthen their position”?]
Xenophon was closer to The Greens on this issue than any other party, but you’re right, even by strengthening the ETS it was unlikely to pass the Senate. But given that as many people wanted a stronger ETS than wanted the current one, plus the apparent Liberal polling that suggests they would have gotten hammered at a DD over the issue, I would have expected/liked the government to go an election over it to get it passed. I certainly believe that it’s an important enough issue to have one over.
GG, I think today’s events have established that there is NOTHING the government can do to get the senate numbers. I just wonder why they didnt just go with something more ambitious in the first place. Although I guess at least today’s events have helped diminish Turnbull even further
[William, do you have any idea about what the proportions of respondents by age group might be?]
It would have to be a representative sample that reflects age breakdown of the entire country. Doing a poll without proper age weighting would be pointless (well, unless you are investigating a particular age demographic)
Just me or does that Essential Poll have the opposite results to the Newspoll one on the question of whether Rudd is “too soft”?
From ER poll it seems the last dog whistle found a few ears. I expect a pseudo Govt ‘toughening’ up on refugees.
[I just wonder why they didnt just go with something more ambitious in the first place.]
I think we know the reason but we don’t want to admit it!
Thanks ShowsOn.
Glen, did you see this yet? 😉 ….
[
Jeb Bush, GOP: Time to leave Reagan behind
Party leaders go on ‘listening tour’ with eyes on future
“You can’t beat something with nothing, and the other side has something. I don’t like it, but they have it, and we have to be respectful and mindful of that,” Mr. Bush said.
“So our ideas need to be forward looking and relevant. I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days in the [Republican] messaging. I mean, it’s great, but it doesn’t draw people toward your cause,” Mr. Bush said.
“From the conservative side, it’s time for us to listen first, to learn a little bit, to upgrade our message a little bit, to not be nostalgic about the past because, you know, things do ebb and flow.”
The Florida governor joined former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and House Republican Whip Eric Cantor on Saturday at a small pizza parlor in Arlington for the inaugural event of the National Council for a New America (NCNA).
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/03/gop-listens-in-drive-to-thrive/
]
Andrew,
You seem to think that Labor is a homogenous block of same thinking on this issue. You would only have to read the comments of various Union officials and be aware of the internal debate within Government to understand that this issue is highly contentious within the Labor Party.
The Government also governs for all stakeholders in the community including the mining companies.
Therefore to propose an ETS that was more radical is not a simple matter of adding a sentence here or there.
The Newspoll asylum seekers results are here. They didn’t ask quite the same question as Essential Research, but at the very least both provide evidence that the public are less enamoured with Labor on this issue than most others.
Sorry Bule, I don’t have any detail from Essential Research beyond what gets published.
I buy no papers except the local rag since fairfax seems to want to emulate the Murdoch media and, avoid ABC except for headlines.
And I don’t think Crikey can emulate Huffington Post since they can only link to papers that now all appear to be right leaning.
Would be nice to have one left leaning outlet to balance the avalanche of right wing media.
Crikey ought to realise that there is no shortage of places to find stories gratuitously slagging Rudd and the Govt day in and day out so it really is adding nothing to the community by coming out with the same stuff. Why would I want to subscribe to that when I can get it everywhere?
[You would only have to read the comments of various Union officials and be aware of the internal debate within Government to understand that this issue is highly contentious within the Labor Party.]
Fair enough, and union officials representing coal miners, for example, are paid to represent the best interests of coal miners.
However, the national interest over the next two decades would be for some people who currently work mining coal to stop doing it, because it makes the country as a whole worse off. So there will come a point when that section of Labor will have to be ignored, for the good of the majority of both the party, and the nation as a whole.
If only we could offer them a domestic nuclear industry as a substitute…
BH
[Dio – what is the reaction to the ‘bag ban’ in SA. Are the stores still allowed to charge for plastic or are they banned completely.]
It’s a bit annoying but it’s a good policy. You can by a bag which costs 10c and is compostable. Evidently it will save 500M plastic bags a year ending up in landfill. Everyone knows it had to be done.
Agreed with Bule and others that a DD is looking more and more likely.
Realistically, the Coalition will never back a Rudd ETS. Many of them sincerely believe we should do nothing and I bet a lot of the rest are looking medium term and hoping to blame a second or third term Labor government when electricity bills start going up etc. They can’t do this unless they vote no now. The only way I could see the Coalition coming on board if is business really piles on the pressure in the search for investment certainty.
Realistically, the Greens will never back a Rudd ETS either. They sincerely believe the current one doesn’t go far enough and they too have strong political incentives to oppose one even if it became, for them, a lot better:
1. it gives them added reason for being if they have a big differentiation point from Labor on a core environmental issue;
2. an election with climate change as a major issue would give them extra prominence in the campaign, giving them more of a chance of knocking off Tanner, Plibersek etc;
3. compromise with a major party on an issue like this would not go down well with their membership – it could even put preselections at risk if Brown wasn’t around to take the heat;
4. a DD would probably see more of them elected in the Senate.
The result: the Rudd ETS, as amended today, will pass in a joint sitting as long as Labor wins the DD, which seems pretty likely at the moment. I suppose all this is predicated on Labor wanting a DD though. I’m not really sure about this either way.
Most people would contend it is in the “national interest” that they keep their jobs. A Government ignoring those who put it in to power for some higher ideal. The last Government that did that was the Howard Government re Workchoices! And that worked out well!
As for nuclear power, it is worth discussing and debating. However, it is not where the main game is today.
Is Australia heading towards an anti-ETS led recovery? Could abandoning the ETS altogether be the recipe for an Australian led world recovery?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/04/2560532.htm?section=justin
As bad as Rudd looks on CC, Turnbull looks a whole lot worse. If his only policy is to oppose everything Rudd does and doesn’t provide any alternative, I’d be happy for Rudd to have a DD on the ETS. It’s got beyond ridiculous now. And bloody Adam was right and I was wrong and I really hate that.
Thanks re bags Dio – I’d be happy for it to come into NSW.
Juliem – I watched that Jeb Bush/Mitt Romney thing on CPAC. It actually was quite funny because they called it a Town Hall Meeting but obviously didn’t have enough people to fill the Town Hall. It was held in a small Restaurant instead with the staff joining in to make up the numbers.
The talk was quite strong on them starting their new order to become more revolutionary and take back their country from that evil Obama and his cohorts.
I’m with GG – I’d would love a stronger CPRS but the mob would hate it if unemployment crashed before the new green economy got going. Get something passed and then move fast to improve it as soon as possible.
John Edwards is under investigation about why his campaign funds wound up in an account of somebody he had an affair with.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090504/ap_on_re_us/us_edwards_affair
Diogenes, you were W’ron’G.
[“Four months ago the Prime Minister told Australians it would be ‘reckless and irresponsible’ to delay this scheme and now he has done just that,” Senator Fielding said.]
It’s getting bad when even Fielding can point out your failings as a flip-flopper who has trouble sticking to your policy.
Did anyone notice that when Rudd said that he was listening, he failed to mention that he had ignored the main criticism of his ETS which was the pitiful 5% lowball target?
[“Four months ago the Prime Minister told Australians it would be ‘reckless and irresponsible’ to delay this scheme and now he has done just that,” Senator Fielding said.]
Anyone heard of a deepening GFC?
It’s also getting bad when PBs start quoting Fielding 😉
Diogenes, he ignored the second main criticism of free permits to the worst polluters too.
That figure in Essential Research re ‘soft on asylum seekers’ is a worry. I had hoped we had grown up but obviously Malcolm’s nasty message cut through.
Geoge M’s article in the OO was emailed to us today – he is spot on about Costello giveaways which put us in deep doodoo before the GFC. Too many tax cuts and tax bonuses paid during the good times.
Greenpeace weighs in:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/04/2560560.htm?section=justin
There is a mixed message here: we’re running out of time so we should do nothing now but wait until we can achieve the (currently) legislatively impossible.
[“We’re rapidly running out of time and we’d like this scheme to go back to the drawing board until Kevin Rudd can stand up to the big polluters and take action in the interests of the Australian people.”]