The latest Roy Morgan survey of 1804 respondents has Labor’s two-party lead unchanged at 58-42, with their primary vote down 0.5 per cent to 49 per cent and the Coalition’s down 1.5 per cent to 36 per cent. The Greens are up a point to 9 per cent. Much else to report:
• On Monday, Galaxy published a survey of 1004 respondents showing federal Labor with a two-party lead of 55-45. The primary vote figures of 43 per cent for Labor and 40 per cent for the Coalition are similar to those from the 2007 election, suggesting the two-party result flatters Labor a little. Furthermore, 17 per cent nominate themselves less likely to vote Labor if an early election is called against 12 per cent more likely. Kevin Rudd was rated “arrogant” by 31 per cent against 47 per cent for Malcolm Turnbull, while their respective ratings for being “out of touch with ordinary Australians” were 29 per cent and 48 per cent. However, Rudd performed worse than Turnbull on the innovative measure of “someone who can turn nasty if he doesn’t get his own way”, scoring 43 per cent to Turnbull’s 31 per cent. Peter Brent at Mumble has tables.
• Tasmanian Electrical Trades Union secretary Kevin Harkins apparently plans to proceed with his bid for Senate preselection, despite having been told by Kevin Rudd his chances were “Buckley’s and none”. Harkins was endorsed as candidate for Franklin ahead of the 2007 election, but was compelled to step aside four months beforehand after his colourful activities as a union leader emerged as a political liability. It was reported at the time that the pill had been sugared with offers of “an elevated union position, increased salary and a future Senate seat”. Harkins is the favoured candidate of the Left faction for one of the two safe Senate seats, with incumbent Kerry O’Brien set to be dropped to loseable third. The Hobart Mercury reports that the Left’s position is now likely to go to Australian Manufacturing Workers Union secretary Anne Urquhart, who is seen as acceptable to the Right. The Right’s position at the top of the ticket will remain with the low-profile Helen Polley.
• Michael Owen of The Australian reports on tension in the South Australian Liberal camp over Senate preselection, with Right faction colossus Nick Minchin “warning off” moderate state president Sean Edwards. Minchin says Edwards had undertaken not to seek preselection when he ran for the presidency in 2007 so he could focus on next year’s state election. A “party source” says the Right has secured the postponement of preselection until April next year so a newly elected state council can provide them with a more favourable result, potentially leaving the party unprepared for an early election. The Right’s chief concern is to secure a seat for David Fawcett, defeated in Wakefield at the 2007 election, at Edwards’ expense. Alan Ferguson, who is associated with the Right faction and the conservative Lyons Forum, is “expected to retire” rather than seek another term.
• After holding the seat since Malcolm Fraser’s departure after his 1983 election defeat, David Hawker has announced he will retire as member for Wannon at the next election. Andrew Landeryou at VexNews has a comprehensive form guide of potential preselection aspirants, including “complicated Costello loyalist” Georgie Crozier; Victorian Farmers Federation president Simon Ramsay, said to be facing a losing battle against former Howard government adviser Rod Nockles in his bid for the less appealing prospect of Corangamite; Institute of Public Affairs agriculture policy expert Louise Staley, who challenged Kevin Andrews for preselection in Menzies ahead of the 2001 election; former police sergeant and anti-corruption crusader Simon Illingworth; “farmer, vet and former local councillor” Katrina Rainsford; and the similarly credentialled Matt Makin.
• Left faction Victorian state MP Carlo Carli has announced he will not re-contest Brunswick at the next election, perhaps boosting the Greens’ vague chances of snaring the seat. Andrew Landeryou at VexNews once again offers a goldmine of detail on preselection contenders, describing the seat as an “area of conflict” between the competing Left faction camps associated with federal Bruce MP Alan Griffin and Senator Kim Carr. Griffin faction aspirants include former state secretary Eric Locke and Moreland councillor Alice Pryor, while the only identified contender from the Carr camp is 23-year-old Enver Erdogan, a staffer to House of Representatives Speaker Harry Jenkins. Apparently straddling the two camps is Danny Michel, an adviser to Public Transport Minister Lynne Kosky. Moreland’s Right faction mayor Lambros Tapinos is also named as a “wild card”.
• Yet more from the House of Landeryou: preselection challenges apparently loom against two senior Victorian state Liberals, Shadow Police Minister Andrew McIntosh in Kew and Shadow Health Minister Helen Shardey in Caulfield. The story in Kew goes that a Josh Frydenberg federal preselection victory in Kooyong would unleash “irresistible pressure” for McIntosh to be dumped in favour of “Costello loyalist” Kelly O’Dwyer. In Caulfield, “local power-broker” Frank Greenstein proposes that Shardey make way for David Southwick, who previously contested the federal seat of Melbourne Ports in 2004 and was narrowly pipped by short-lived Labor member Evan Thornley for an upper house seat in Southern Metropolitan in 2006. Ted Baillieu is apparently very keen that none of this transpire, as both McIntosh and Shardey are loyal to him.
• The Australian reports the June 30 deadline for Victorian Liberal federal preselection nominations has ratcheted up speculation about Peter Costello’s future plans, with the overwhelming expectation he will seek another term in Higgins. Kevin Andrews is expected to face a challenge in Menzies, but is “believed to have the numbers”.
• UMR Research has published one of its occasional polls on attitudes to republicanism, showing little change since November. Support is up one point to 51 per cent, opposition is up two to 30 per cent. Support for direct election of the president is up a point to 81 per cent, with opposition stable on 12 per cent. Fifty-three per cent support a referendum during the next term of parliament.
[If Brown was bankrupted and then kicked out but then donations solved the debt would/could he be reappointed?]
I’m pretty sure he could be reappointed to his own vacancy if he was quick enough. I’m not across the details of bankruptcy though!
Greensborough
Your replies are empty. All you can do is call him names and claim I want to gloss over facts.
I think you’ll find you are the one with no facts. Your claims if his bad behavior, even by your own standards, are wrong. He will pay the bill on time and therefore is bahving ‘good’.
Why don’t you find out how much money Bob has spent on standing up for what he believes in rather than simply throwing as much mud as you can in the hope some will stick.
itep,
See Antony Green’s post @ 1147.
Anew Lib tactic, just don’t show up?
[Coalition boycott stalls health inquiryJune 9, 2009 – 10:39AM
A midnight email sent by a Liberal senator has helped delay a hearing into the Rudd government’s plan to means test the private health insurance rebate.
The coalition has boycotted the Senate economics committee into Labor’s plan to means test the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate for singles earning more than $75,000, and households taking home more than $150,000.
The committee can only proceed if a majority of the seven substantive members are in attendance.
But the coalition’s three committee members Alan Eggleston, David Bushby and Barnaby Joyce failed to show up at the scheduled time of 8.30am (AEST).The decision to reschedule was made one hour after a quorum was not reached.
Independent senator Nick Xenophon had media engagements in South Australia and was unable to make up the quorum with government committee members.]
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/coalition-boycott-stalls-health-inquiry-20090609-c1ea.html
All i’m saying is that there are allegations that Rudd has acted untoward. Whether it’s true or not is another story. That is the controversy.
As opposed to Bob Brown, who is simply asking for donations to get his court bill paid, without special favours in return.
You cannot compare apples and oranges, or watermellons for that matter.
Astrobleme,
I’ve called him Brown or Bob Brown throughout. I’m sorry for your sanity if you think I’ve been talking about someone else.
astrodeme says, “He will pay the bill on time and therefore is bahving ‘good’.”
Bob Brown says, “I simply don’t have $240,000 and have put a huge amount of money already into this court case and to defending the Gunns 20 court case,”
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/09/2592759.htm
Now who should I believe?
[Anew Lib tactic, just don’t show up?]
Absolutely disgraceful! Seriously, what are they thinking? How do they think such behaviour will play out in the electorate?
GG
Loathe as I am to diss St Bob, I feel this is a cynical exercise by him to
1.garner extra support
2.suck some more media oxygen
3.bring the swift parrots plight to the national stage
Unfortunately the means do not justify the end in this case
[Independent senator Nick Xenophon had media engagements in South Australia and was unable to make up the quorum with government committee members.]
Serious? Mr X was busy with media engagements? I’m shocked!
Greensborough
You called him “St Bob the Pernicious” and a “65 year old teenager”
Now you said he was behaving bad by paying late – at least now you admit he hasn’t paid late, and that there is the question of him not having the cash handy. So the question now moves to HOW he will pay the bill.
So:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25609279-29277,00.html
“Senator Brown today said he would pay the bill before its due later this month and keep his seat.”
So by your standards he is behaving ‘good’.
So if Dick Smith bails Bob Brown out and he keeps his seat, I wonder if we’ll see the anti-Green Laborites such as GG and Frank boycott Dick Smith stores? 😀
Astro,bob,luke et al
1.Brown is the consumate polly, but his actions certainly have tainted his aura (at least to me)
2.Dont even try to compare Rudd utegate (read smear) with brown’s cynical media spin
3.recognise that mea culpa means you cop it sweet (and as if one of the green’s benefactors wouldnt have bailed him out puhlleeeeaaase)
I think a valuable political lesson is being obscured by passion
Universal support in parliament for Bob Brown: Burke
http://www.watoday.com.au/national/universal-support-in-parliament-for-bob-brown-burke-20090609-c1eo.html
[There is a universal hope in federal parliament that Greens leader Bob Brown is not expelled from the Senate over of an outstanding legal bill, Agriculture Minister Tony Burke says.]
What a pickle for the anti-Green Laborites! Agree with a Labor minister and thus implicitly support Bob Brown, or disagree with a Labor minister!
Oh the conundrum!
Those who are opposed to Dick Smith bailing out Bob Brown – What favours do you think Dick Smith can expect from BB in return? What could BB do for Dick Smith which would make it in his interest to fork out such a large sum?
Gusface
1. how have his actions ‘tainted’ his aura. His ‘aura’ would demand he do what he did. If anything his actions ‘demonstrate’ what he is about.
2. I haven’t. I don’t think Rudd’s car means anything in this context (or any other) and don’t know why people are comparing the two issues.
3. This doesn’t make much sense. Should he have remained silent and said “oh it’s no problem, don’t worry about it? My friends will pay?”. No, certainly not.
Astrodeme,
I called him Sir Bob the Impecunious (look it up). However, I do like your description of him as Sir Bob the Pernicious. But I can’t and won’t claim ownership. Asking your parents to bail you out when you get into financial difficulty is a very teenage thing to do. Both are fair comment and (failed) attempts at humour.
So now Bob has decided he can pay out his sordid little debt with the help of his rich friends. Good for him. I only hope it’s all above board, declared on his statement of Parliamentary assets and liabilities. I am concerned that Parliamentarians like Brown are using their station as a begging pulpit for their personal gratification. I would like to know the status of Bob Brown i.e. whether he is a registered charity. Furthermore, I would like clarification about whether any payments made to Bob Brown are income and how should the tax office handle such payments.
Now, these are all legitimate questions for Brown to answer.
What this little episode does for Brown’s credibility, goodness knows.
[1. how have his actions ‘tainted’ his aura. His ‘aura’ would demand he do what he did. If anything his actions ‘demonstrate’ what he is about.]
To use the court of public opinion to champion his cause demeans a very smart polly. Most people will be wondering,why whinge Bob, you lost cop it sweet. To then go crying poor and that FT was agin him is pretty poor form.
As many have said he had 12 mths, was offered a reduced amount, and at the last minute cries foul, bearing in mind that many wealthy Green benefactors would have settled his debts.
[3. This doesn’t make much sense. Should he have remained silent and said “oh it’s no problem, don’t worry about it? My friends will pay?”. No, certainly not.]
If all of a sudden bob has discovered he aint got the readies to pay, then by any measure he should resign for gross financial incompetence
And the arch-anti-Liberal Laborites are agreeing with Bronwyn Bishop! Oh the ironic lulz!!
[However, Senator Brown’s plight drew questions from opposition backbencher Bronwyn Bishop.
“I find it very strange that the Greens have come out and said quite deliberately that Bob Brown took this action himself without their backing and therefore it’s not their problem,” she told Sky News.
It was also strange that he hadn’t put in place a fund to fight the legal battle, she said.
Ms Bishop said she had no doubt that he would find supporters around the place who will assist to pay the bills.
“But … it’s a bit of hubris I think to say that `I took on this great fight and now I’m facing this plight’ when he would have known that right from the beginning.”]
I thought i’d repeat it again, it’s just so gold.
Universal support in parliament for Bob Brown: Burke
http://www.watoday.com.au/national/universal-support-in-parliament-for-bob-brown-burke-20090609-c1eo.html
[There is a universal hope in federal parliament that Greens leader Bob Brown is not expelled from the Senate over of an outstanding legal bill, Agriculture Minister Tony Burke says.]
What a pickle for the anti-Green Laborites! Agree with a Labor minister and thus implicitly support Bob Brown, or disagree with a Labor minister!
Oh the conundrum!
[So now Bob has decided he can pay out his sordid little debt with the help of his rich friends. Good for him. I only hope it’s all above board, declared on his statement of Parliamentary assets and liabilities. I am concerned that Parliamentarians like Brown are using their station as a begging pulpit for their personal gratification. I would like to know the status of Bob Brown i.e. whether he is a registered charity. Furthermore, I would like clarification about whether any payments made to Bob Brown are income and how should the tax office handle such payments.]
And there, writ large, is the political lesson that seems to have been ignored.
BTW well said GG
🙂
[And there, writ large, is the political lesson that seems to have been ignored.]
You can just see the seething red-hot anger in GG’s words. It’s great. 😀
Bob,
“I do think it’s fair to say that across the parliament … there is a universal view that people hope that we don’t end up with his career concluding in this particular way,” Mr Burke told Sky News.
The above is different to what the headline says.
Even I hope that Bob Brown could organise his affairs so as not to create the shame of his being expelled from Parliament. But, if he’s determined to go out that way, then
who can stop him
Dick Smith would be a pretty good Senator me thinks.
Greensborough
Oh so now you did call him names? Glad to see you changed your mind.
“Asking your parents to bail you out when you get into financial difficulty is a very teenage thing to do.”
and yet again making stuff up. Why do you persist in making stuff up about Bob Brown?
“Now, these are all legitimate questions for Brown to answer.”
Greensborough, well you better keep an eye on him. I know you’re the man to make sure everything is above board. But… hang on… you keep making stuff up. Inventing facts. Actually I think you’re not that man after all.
Gusface
“To use the court of public opinion to champion his cause demeans a very smart polly. ”
What? You really think that? You think it is bad for him to make people aware of what happened?
“Most people will be wondering,why whinge Bob, you lost cop it sweet. To then go crying poor and that FT was agin him is pretty poor form.”
I doubt it. And Forestry Tasmania ARE against him. Hell they print brochures about why he is evil.
“As many have said he had 12 mths, was offered a reduced amount, and at the last minute cries foul, bearing in mind that many wealthy Green benefactors would have settled his debts.”
12 months ago they were negotiating. When did the negotiations end?
Why do you think he should keep quiet about it? Why shouldn’t he bring it to the public attention? Especially given that wealthy supporters will help him pay – if he had done it quietly there would have been even louder outrage. People would have been claiming he had something to hide. This way it’s out in the open and freely discussed.
This Green vs ALP bickering is getting pretty damned tedious, guys. You all sound like prissy Chrissy Pyne arguing with his twin sister.
Gusface
GGs comment:
“So now Bob has decided he can pay out his sordid little debt with the help of his rich friends. Good for him. I only hope it’s all above board, declared on his statement of Parliamentary assets and liabilities. I am concerned that Parliamentarians like Brown are using their station as a begging pulpit for their personal gratification. I would like to know the status of Bob Brown i.e. whether he is a registered charity. Furthermore, I would like clarification about whether any payments made to Bob Brown are income and how should the tax office handle such payments.”
Is nothing but faux outrage. This is exactly why Bob Brown had to announce it, so that people would be completely aware of what was going on. Imagine if he had done this quietly.
GG is soley intent on attacking Bob Brown. He has no facts, only name calling and innuendo.
“sordid little debt”
why is it sordid? Gusface, if you are fooled by such flowery language then more fool you.
[The above is different to what the headline says.]
Hair splitting. Hope, support, big whoop.
[So now Bob has decided he can pay out his sordid little debt with the help of his rich friends. Good for him. I only hope it’s all above board, declared on his statement of Parliamentary assets and liabilities. I am concerned that Parliamentarians like Brown are using their station as a begging pulpit for their personal gratification.]
Against my better judgement, I am going to buy into this. What is so sordid about his debt? It’s a sin to have rich supporters? When has Bob Brown not declared political donations made to him? How has he used his station for personal gratification? Unfounded, unsubstantiated allegations and assumptions about his personal character and behaviour. If these sorts of comments were being made about Rudd I would feel just as strongly.
The interesting thing here is how I support both the Greens and Labor, and not the coalition. People like Frank and GG have enemies on both sides in parliament.
(I don’t consider Family First a party, they’re not the governing or opposition party, nor the third party).
[“As many have said he had 12 mths, was offered a reduced amount, and at the last minute cries foul, bearing in mind that many wealthy Green benefactors would have settled his debts.”
12 months ago they were negotiating. When did the negotiations end? ]
My understanding is he refused an amended offer of 200k. 6 mths or so ago
[“To use the court of public opinion to champion his cause demeans a very smart polly. ”
What? You really think that? You think it is bad for him to make people aware of what happened?]
It just shows he is not as smart as I thought,there are better ways to skin a cat
[Why do you think he should keep quiet about it? Why shouldn’t he bring it to the public attention? Especially given that wealthy supporters will help him pay – if he had done it quietly there would have been even louder outrage. People would have been claiming he had something to hide. This way it’s out in the open and freely discussed.]
To throw oneself on the mercy of the public,when you fulwell know you arent in distress is WronG.
He certainly is not as principled as I once thought.
sadly
🙁
[Why do you think he should keep quiet about it? Why shouldn’t he bring it to the public attention? Especially given that wealthy supporters will help him pay – if he had done it quietly there would have been even louder outrage. People would have been claiming he had something to hide. This way it’s out in the open and freely discussed.]
Exactly!
[GG is soley intent on attacking Bob Brown. He has no facts, only name calling and innuendo.
“sordid little debt”
why is it sordid? Gusface, if you are fooled by such flowery language then more fool you. ]
????
Btw ta for the kidney punch
🙁
Has there ever been a case since the 1977 Senate casual vacancies referendum of a dispute over who should be elected to replace a Senator? (I am guessing not)
Gusface
So you think this had all happened quietly, no questions would have been asked? You don’t think there would have been “secret deals” headlines? You don’t think we wouldn’t seen Greenborough Growler on his little quest for truth?
It is best that this happens in the glare of the media. It is best that people know exactly what is going on.
“To throw oneself on the mercy of the public,when you fulwell know you arent in distress is WronG.”
I don’t agree that he wasn’t in distress.
[1.Brown is the consumate polly, but his actions certainly have tainted his aura (at least to me)]
I dont, see how this is the case. BB has taken on this fight for the benefit of the public at great personal risk to himself with no potential personal gain (except, of course, for the obvious political capital you build up for yourself).
[2.Dont even try to compare Rudd utegate (read smear) with brown’s cynical media spin]
I don’t think there is any issue with Rudd taking the ute as long as he declared it. Who cares whether the donations are cash or in kind. In actual fact a donation of a ute is a pain in the arse because it can only be used for one purpose unlike cash which can be put to a great range of different uses.
[3.recognise that mea culpa means you cop it sweet (and as if one of the green’s benefactors wouldnt have bailed him out puhlleeeeaaase)]
I don’t think BB iss aying he should not have to pay it. In actual fact, he is saying that he will pay it. So what, wheres the story?
[Has there ever been a case since the 1977 Senate casual vacancies referendum of a dispute over who should be elected to replace a Senator? (I am guessing not)]
No. The only such dispute I can imagine ever happening is if an independent senator resigns or dies.
[“To throw oneself on the mercy of the public,when you fulwell know you arent in distress is WronG.”
I don’t agree that he wasn’t in distress.]
So why the frigging headlines that he would be bankrupted and couldnt pay???
I hope your foot isn’t too badly shot up
Gusface
“????
Btw ta for the kidney punch
:(”
You posted GG’s comment again and claimed:
“And there, writ large, is the political lesson that seems to have been ignored.
BTW well said GG
🙂 ”
GG’s rant was nothing but florid language and assumed wrong-doing in the future.
Gusface
“I don’t agree that he wasn’t in distress.”
that sentence means that I think he was in distress. So, I disagreed with your statement.
[GG’s rant was nothing but florid language and assumed wrong-doing in the future.]
Beside some emotive descriptors,GG was advocating for transperancy and probity as far as I could tell.
[So now Bob has decided he can pay out his sordid little debt with the help of his rich friends. Good for him. I only hope it’s all above board, declared on his statement of Parliamentary assets and liabilities. I am concerned that Parliamentarians like Brown are using their station as a begging pulpit for their personal gratification. I would like to know the status of Bob Brown i.e. whether he is a registered charity. Furthermore, I would like clarification about whether any payments made to Bob Brown are income and how should the tax office handle such payments.]
If you substitute MP or some such term, I presume you have no problem with the substance of the post.
1236
There is also a reduced chance of dispute over the replacement of an independent since 1984 because of group tickets because the other person(s) on the ticket would probably have to be offered the seat because of the 1977 amendment.
[This Green vs ALP bickering is getting pretty damned tedious, guys. You all sound like prissy Chrissy Pyne arguing with his twin sister]
If we didn’t have the Greens would it be faction fighting instead?
I’m not a Green, but good luck to BB.
I don’t know how anyone could criticise Brown but not Rudd when comparing this and the ozcar issue… seems a bit of a double standard. I personally don’t think either has done anything wrong.
Pegasus,
This 240k is a personal debt. The personal gratification is that he is using his status as a Senator to beg for donations to clear this personal debt. I contend this behaviour is both sordid and unseemly.
I am also asking legitimate questions about the propriety of such begging and how the funds accumulated from such begging are officially accounted. If you’ve got some answers, then I’m all ears.
I also once again refer to Brown’s hypocritical comments of less than a week when he raged:
“Prime Minister Kevin Rudd would be wise to give his gifted car to charity and cap the value of personal gifts to MPs at a couple of hundred dollars, Australian Greens leader Bob Brown says”.
……except if it’s Bob and he cant afford to pay my bills.
It’s Brown’s behaviour in this matter that is trashing his credibility and good personal standing. But go on shooting the messanger if it salves your temper.
[1.Brown is the consumate polly, but his actions certainly have tainted his aura (at least to me)]
Gus baby, the pig stye looks good, so i am going to do a bit wrestling myself. Browny is definite “the consummate polly” alright, no doubt.
Last minute emotional blackmail is what we have here. It reminds an old trick that teenagers used to do if they dont get what they want: “Dad, i am leaving home”. It probably used to work, but not anymore. My reply would be: “Good, i will call a taxi and open the door, bye bye”.
I like Browny, but on this occasion he is over doing it. He should have settled his debts quietly.
Gusface
I agree with the open-ness demanded by GG. However the implication was that something naughty was going on. Which you seemed to agree with, with your ‘polictical lesson to be learned’ claim. He seemed to be assuming something naughty was happening in the future.
I think that by bringing it into the open, as BB has done, the open-ness will be there. BB has already moved to bring this into the open, something he is being criticised for by people here. Strange.
[What a pickle for the anti-Green Laborites! Agree with a Labor minister and thus implicitly support Bob Brown, or disagree with a Labor minister!]
What a load of tosh, all this shows is that Burke is a decent polly who unlike Brown didn’t seek to parrot the opposition to put the boot in. I’m proud that we have such a high starndard of MP on the labor side
As I said unlike Brown who couldn’t wait to repeat the Lib spin about the loaner ute and again who went all out during the Qld election when campaigning with the Judus loser, to criticise Garrett for not being at the oil spill when Pete was doing a concert for the fire victims.
Bob Brown has become very grubby, I beleive Karma has just jumped up and bit him on the bum 🙂
[There is also a reduced chance of dispute over the replacement of an independent since 1984 because of group tickets because the other person(s) on the ticket would probably have to be offered the seat because of the 1977 amendment.]
This certainly isn’t clear and would be open to dispute.
[This 240k is a personal debt. The personal gratification is that he is using his status as a Senator to beg for donations to clear this personal debt. I contend this behaviour is both sordid and unseemly.]
I suppose the distinction here would be the fact that the debt arises from an attempt to fight for a public good (ie the protection of native forest). It is up to you whether you accept the distinction or not.
This is different from someone like the Scud who went public with the claim that he has spent the last 10 years shagging models and celebrities, having a great party, appearing on trashy reality tv shows and now has no money left.
vera,
Nah, that’s me!