Roy Morgan has leapt in with last weekend’s face-to-face polling of 1050 respondents, showing Labor’s lead has actually nudged slightly upwards: from 60.5-39.5 to 61-39. Labor’s primary vote is down one point to 51 per cent, but the Coalition’s is also down two to 32.5 per cent. Contra Newspoll, the Greens are up two to 9.5 per cent.
Other news:
• Imre Salusinszky of The Australian reports Julia Gillard hopes to save “soft Left” colleague Laurie Ferguson by moving him to Werriwa, whose member Chris Hayes would have to make do with Macarthur – in turn cutting loose Nick Bleasdale, the candidate from 2007 who appeared lined up for another shot. It appears Hayes will suffer that fate in any case, as it has been agreed Werriwa should go to the Left. However, Anthony Albanese’s “hard Left” wants it to go to Damien Ogden, an LHMU organiser who defeated incumbent Ken McDonnell for preselection in Sutherland Shire Council’s “E” ward before last year’s elections, but ultimately failed to win the seat. Hayes is understandably not keen, and is calling for the matter to be determined by the local branches – as Ferguson did last week when his ambition was to stay on in redrawn Reid at the expense of John Murphy. That appears to be off the table because the seat is reserved for the Right. Importantly, Phillip Coorey of the Sydney Morning Herald reports the Prime Minister is also of a mind to throw Ferguson a lifeline.
• VexNews tells of a further brush fire in Macquarie, to be vacated at the election by Bob Debus. According to VexNews, Debus and the hard Left would have the national executive decide the issue in favour of Susan Templeman, principal of Templeman Consulting, who sells herself as “one of the country’s leading media trainers and coaches”. However, local branches favour Debus antagonist Adam Searle, a “soft Left” member whose designs on Debus’s old state seat of Blue Mountains were thwarted by Debus’s recruitment of Phil Koperberg. When Debus agreed to make life easier for the Prime Minister by relinquishing his position in the ministry in June, Glenn Milne in The Australian reported talk he had done so on the condition that he get to choose his successor in Macquarie.
• The Australian reports Warren Entsch will try to win Leichhardt back for the LNP at the next election. Entsch retired before the last election, and Labor demolished the 10.3 per cent margin he had built up with a 14.3 per cent swing. He floated the possibility of running for Cairns or Barron River at the March state election, but thought better of it. Teresa Gambaro, who lost Petrie at the election, plans to nominate for Brisbane, where the redistribution has cut Labor’s margin from 6.8 per cent to 3.8 per cent. UPDATE: AAP has reported Gambaro has indeed been preselected (thanks to LTEP in comments).
• Imre Salusinszky of The Australian reports a preselection challenge from the Right to Philip Ruddock in Berowra has been withdrawn. The identity of the challenger is not offered.
This sounds rather familiar:
[Those who were called skillful leaders of old knew how to drive a wedge between the enemy’s front and rear; to prevent co-operation between his large and small divisions; to hinder the good troops from rescuing the bad, the officers from rallying their men – Sun Tzu’s The Art of War.]
[I reckon the ABC should have a National newspaper as well.]
I don’t. Newspapers are dying.
[I don’t. Newspapers are dying.]
I didn’t know that 🙂
[Actually, Rudd four times in his speech names me as a member of this inner circle of evil. For instance:
Malcolm, Barnaby, Andrew, Janet – stop gambling with our future.]
Someone should ask the Bolta why, if the description doesn’t fit him, he knows he’s the Andrew referred to.
If he was innocent of all these charges, wouldn’t he assume Rudd was referring to someone else?
Or is the man so arrogant that he thinks he’s the only Andrew in Australia?
Howard realised it was always good for his support to get into the occasional stoush with someone the public generally didn’t respect. A Imam, refugee, boat person or maybe journo for example.
At the moment the right wing media go about their bias with impunity and nothing Rudd does will stop them from trying to attack him and replace him with the Libs. Come election time these papers/journos will ramp up their anti-Rudd campaign.
Rudd be engaging them in a open fight now at least helps to reveal the bias and notion that maybe some papers/persons are just out to run Rudd down. This will lessen the potency of their attacks in an election year.
[Come election time these papers/journos will ramp up their anti-Rudd campaign.]
I doubt all of them will. Some of them like to back winners because it makes it look like the paper actually reflects mainstream views, hence they will say that Labor deserves one more term.
Some of the articles in The National Times have been pretty good. Phillip Coorey is always interesting. Annabel Crabb goes off the deepend at times but has some funny lines.
ShowsOn might be right and they’ll do it differently to Murdoch. His interview has definitely laid out the plans for the year ahead as regards Labor – if we didn’t already know it.
[ As soon as it’s over the dotted line of the Australian maritime zone, the ship starts to turn back (or otherwise gives an indication that it might not end up in Australian port after all). The SLs riot.
Entrapment now?]
No, not entrapment. The ship is already substantially under the hijackers’ control where it is anchored in Indonesia. It cannot go about its business. The occupiers are threatening a fight to the death (theirs, admittedly, but it won’t be a cakewalk for the crew either) if anyone tries to forcibly disembark them. they have made demands: specifically to come to Australia and be processed as refugees.
MY suggestion is to ask them, once they are in Australian waters, and under the jurisdiction of Australian law, if they wish to continue their insistence that the ship proceeds to an Australian port.
One way of doing this is to just ask, of course.
Another way is to attempt to turn the ship around – which, in case you had missed it, the ships crew are entirely authorised to do, as it is their ship, not the Sri Lankans, and it did have a mission to complete, i.e. customs patrolling in South East Asian waters – and see what happens. If the Sri Lankan continue to insist, under threat of violence on the high seas, in Australian waters, that the ship proceeds to their preferred port, then they would most likely be guilty of a crime.
Although the crime was originally perpetrated in Indonesia, it has been repeated in Australia, and this time a corrupt local governor wouldn’t have a say in the proceedings. There would be no problems with conflict of laws if they repeated their insistences that the ship comes to an Australian port against the captain’s and charterers’ wishes. It would be an all-Australian affair.
So, no entrapment. Merely the question being put as to whether the Sri Lankans want to continue in their criminal activity, and if so, possible prosecution.
Say they had hijacked a plane over the Pacific, and forced it to fly them to Australia, claiming to be refugees. No guns, no knives, no bombs, just force of numbers. They had told the pilot there were 78 of them and there would be bhig trouble if he didn’t take them where they wanted to go. I doubt whether their refugee claims would over-ride a prosecution for hijacking. Now, substitute “ship” for “plane” and that’s my scenario.
Lastly add in that their “leader”, “Alex” seems to be the people smuggler and may be wanted by the Canadian authorities for crimes of violence and then tell me I’m being unreasonable, or that the Sri Lankans currently on board the OV are squeaky clean, and that we should welcome them here after what they have done, no hard feelings.
[I doubt all of them will. Some of them like to back winners because it makes it look like the paper actually reflects mainstream views, hence they will say that Labor deserves one more term.]
I agree but think they will focus more on why the Opposition doesn’t deserve to be in Government yet (pointing to the failures of Malcolm Turnbull). A ‘they’re bad but the other side isn’t ready yet’ angle.
The Liberals ar ein dream land if they think the disunited rabble that they are will make it through an election campaign.
Think of the pressure placed on ALP candidates to make sure they said the right things, or the media was reporting it as the ALP policy being confused. The Libs have people on the front bech saying different things. During an election campaign the magnifying glass comes out big time, and it never hides cracks.
The only thing the Libs will have is that Turnbull will do ok in the debate. The only problem for them is that Turnbull will comes across too “look at me I’m wining the debate” in the debate.
[Turnbull will do ok in the debate]
But the worm loves Kev 😀
The only problem Labor will have is if some of its slightly disgruntled start leaking to Oakes. Milne I discount because you can never trust is stuff to be truthful but if some Laborites think it’s OK to leak to the better journos it will be a pity.
Who cares if Kev is a control freak – they haven’t been in Govt. for a long time so need a tight hand.
Isn’t 4 Corners about Turnbull this week. Wonder if they’ll make it kinder now after this past week.
[Turnbull will comes across too “look at me I’m wining the debate” in the debate.]
Turnbull will not be able to lose the I’m u-beaut Barrister attitude. It’s a turnoff.
Time to get a new keyboard. This thing sticks and misses letters.
BTW – is Ruawake OK. He’s been quiet lately. Hope you doing Ok Rua.
Rudd and his pet worm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plc3eVh66SI
BB@509:
[Another way is to attempt to turn the ship around – which, in case you had missed it, the ships crew are entirely authorised to do, as it is their ship, not the Sri Lankans, and it did have a mission to complete, i.e. customs patrolling in South East Asian waters – and see what happens. If the Sri Lankan continue to insist, under threat of violence on the high seas, in Australian waters, that the ship proceeds to their preferred port, then they would most likely be guilty of a crime.]
But any reasonable person would see it as entrapment – or at least a credible case could be made for it.
Now, it may be that the Australian people would happily sweep that under the carpet. But the opposition would not, methinks. And yes, they don’t have much power, but they can make a lot of embarrassing noises.
So let’s suppose all that comes to pass, and they are refused a visa for Australia. What do you do with them then?
Would Sri Lanka accept them? Would India accept them?
Come to that, what happens to any other asylum seeker who is denied entry to Oz? How is that handled with the recipient countries? What happens if they refuse to have the returnees?
Anybody know?
[Turnbull will do ok in the debate]
Until a question is asked about gullibility, Godwin Gretch and fake emails. That’s when his worm will wriggle through the bottom of TV sets.
[So let’s suppose all that comes to pass, and they are refused a visa for Australia. What do you do with them then?]
Oh fer Chrissake, Don. The Sri Lankans have already taken effective control of the ship, in that their actions determine where it goes, or at least that is the attempt so far. Once in australian waters, by simply maintaining their insistence on the ship coming to an Australian port, they have committed a second crime (or re-committed it, if you like), this time under Australian jurisdiction. Asking them the question once in Australian waters would be giving them on last chance to give it up.
[So let’s suppose all that comes to pass, and they are refused a visa for Australia. What do you do with them then?]
Put them in jail, like any other hijackers and (in at least one case) people smugglers. They can have their refugee status examined once they’re in the clink for all I care.
This action by them cannot stand. It would make a mockery of our system of border protection, a mockery of our government, and would be politically crazy.
What I am suggesting is one possible way that Rudd would have of keeping the public happy that this kind of thing – the hijacking – will be stopped cold and won’t be tolerated. To just let them in, all peace and sunshine, after what they have done, is wrong.
If you feel like a good laugh, just read this tirade by Turnbull lol
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/turnbull-slams-vain-rudd-government-20091107-i2os.html
BB
No subtlety in your plan at all, all. Clumsy. Drawn out. Equivocal outcomes.
The solution that has been staring the Rudd Government in the face but they haven’t seen it yet, is to scuttle the Oceanic Viking. Everybody’s honour would be saved. The Indonesians could rescue the survivors with despatch: heroes. The crew of the Ocean Viking? Self-sacrifciial heroes. The 78? Just another chapter in their lives: heroes.
The Ozzie Scaredy Cats? Thank Gold Almighty, Peace at Last.
Rudd? Tough but humane.
[I can’t believe I am living in a time when the Govt are blatenly lying, creating panic/hysteria to destroy us. ]
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/or_up_to_your_decayed_ankles_in_100_years/
This lass must have been asleep during the Howard years.
Interest rates will always be lower etc! Australians have never been better off!
Labor is the high taxing-high interest rates party!
The Mabo legislation will mean Aboriginals will take over your homes and properties!
Union Thugs will turn off the lights and take over your businesses!
Children were thrown overboard!
Iraq has weapons of mass destruction!
We are not invading Iraq for their oil!
Wheat for weapons; we know nutting!
Terrorists are hiding amongst the boat people!
No-one will be worse off under workchoices!
And on, and on, and on, we can go,for page after page of this!
So, is Rudd doing as he says, which is to do what he believes is right and is in the national interest, which may be unpopular, which he makes no apology for…
or…
Should he be doing what the majority of Australians want?
The fact nobody can ever answer this is oh so telling…
[Mr Murdoch further told Sky News he doubts so much stimulus spending was necessary in Australia.
“We were not about to collapse,” he said.
“I thought we were trying to copy the rest of the world a little unnecessarily.”]
Didn’t Rudd act before the rest of the world?
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/rudd-too-sensitive-to-criticism-murdoch-20091107-i2oo.html
Re BHs posting at 416. I think the behaviour of the media in 2001 in accepting and pushing Howard’s spin that the ALP had flip-flopped on the Tampa legislation, when as Kim Beazley says, it was actually Howard who had flip-flopped, was one of the most incompetent and reprehensible displays I have seen from our media. The original legislation put forward by Howard was the most ridiculous, draconian piece of legislation I have seen, and it was designed only to ensure that the ALP couldn’t vote for it. From then, Howard was able to push the myth that Labor was soft on border protection. The actual legislation that passed and the ALP voted for was not totally unreasonable like the first draft, but it was still unpleasant enough that the ALP then lost the support of the left, because the ALP voted for the revised legislation.
So it was a brilliant wedge by Howard, but it would not have succeeded if the media had been doing their job.
I sometimes wonder if the Howard wedge would have succeeded in the current internet environment. I suppose the misinformation we have seen in all parts of the media including the internet about the Oceanic Viking is an indication that things probably would not have been much different.
[“We were not about to collapse,”]
Sure rupe, sure. The house was on fire and the fire brigade came and put it out, but the fire was only small… they overreacted. Anyone would think it was their job to put out fires or something…
“Re BHs posting at 416. I think the behaviour of the media in 2001 in accepting and pushing Howard’s spin that the ALP had flip-flopped on the Tampa legislation, when as Kim Beazley says, it was actually Howard who had flip-flopped, was one of the most incompetent and reprehensible displays”
The Libs won the 2001 federal election fair and square.
Build a bridge and get over it already.
bob
let’s play a game. You put up your post, we won’t answer it, you can come back in 24 hours and put up exactly the same post.
We will faithfully promise to keep our part of the bargain, and not answer your post,if you promise only to clock in once every 24 hours.
Works for me.
[Just announced – Meg Lees running for The Greens in the federal seat of Sydney.
about 1 hour ago from TweetDeck]
anyone confirm this?
Bob1234 at 523
A good democratic leader should always be doing a mixture of some things the public wants (some of which may not be in the longterm national interest), and some things which the majority of the public don’t want, but which are in the national interest. In a democracy the leader and the Government are not dictators doing only what they think is in the national interest. Democratic leadership is a very delicate and difficult balancing act which involves both leadership and ‘followship’. Don’t forget the politicians are elected as representatives of their electorate, so it is part of their job to sometimes represent the views of their electorate, even when they don’t agree with those views.
Is that Meg GST Lees?
The Greens must have rocks in their head if they endorse her.
[it was a brilliant wedge by Howard, but it would not have succeeded if the media had been doing their job.]
Maybe the media had become addicted to the billions Howard was throwing their way for government “advertising”.
Money speaks louder than words, and it buys a lot of loyalty.
Now, Mr Rudd has said his government WILL NOT be spending up big and wastefully on “advertising”. I suspect that fact underlies a lot of the media’s resentment against him. Especially given that the print and electronic media have fallen on hard times in the past couple of years. How they’d love the return of the Liberal Gravy Train! – billions in assured spending by a single “client”.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2009/11/06/morgan-61-39-8/comment-page-11/#comment-348851
[If you can’t answer my query, why bother posting at all?]
Good question, Bob! The fact that “you” can’t answer it is oh so telling because if nobody can answer it, then it can’t be answered, can it?
I take it that you are included in “nobody” which is an all encompassing term and would have to include you! Unless of course you don”t belong to the human race like the rest of us nobodies! Maybe an omnipotent being, perhaps.
Surely you can do better than that, Bob?
[The fact nobody can ever answer this is oh so telling…]
“Mr Murdoch further told Sky News he doubts so much stimulus spending was necessary in Australia.
“We were not about to collapse,” he said.”
What’s with this “we” in reference to Australia thing? I thought he was a US citizen and gave up his Aussie citizenship so he could rule the world through his media empire? Personally I wouldn’t give the creep a visa to come here at all but that’s just me. LOL
Bushfire Bill on your scenario for the Sri Lankans – I tend to agree with you. Holding the country to ransom the way they are and basically dictating terms does not IMO send the “tough” signals to people smugglers if/when we eventually allow them anywhere near Australia. My “solution” would be to sail the ship to Darwin and put the buggers on a plane to Colombo but I’m just an old fogey who doesn’t like my country to be dictated to so I imagine some bleeding hearts will think this is not the humane thing to do.
[Bob1234 at 523
A good democratic leader should always be doing a mixture of some things the public wants (some of which may not be in the longterm national interest), and some things which the majority of the public don’t want, but which are in the national interest. In a democracy the leader and the Government are not dictators doing only what they think is in the national interest. Democratic leadership is a very delicate and difficult balancing act which involves both leadership and ‘followship’. Don’t forget the politicians are elected as representatives of their electorate, so it is part of their job to sometimes represent the views of their electorate, even when they don’t agree with those views.]
Thanks for that honest answer! I’m glad to see you have conviction and beliefs, unlike the drones common around here.
A PM shouldn’t just do what’s popular, which is what’s being advocated on here.
[Just announced – Meg Lees running for The Greens in the federal seat of Sydney.]
Funny how a couple of years ago with the Democrats in decline and the Greens emerging, it was proposed by a number of insightful people that it would be a good idea for the Greens and Democrats to merge!
The Democrats rejected this outright and vowed to push on as a discrete identity.
Strange how a complete political annihilation can change people’s opinions! 🙂
[Mr Murdoch further told Sky News he doubts so much stimulus spending was necessary in Australia. “We were not about to collapse,” he said.]
Oh dear, Kev has really opened up the Eastern Front. Rupe is now manning the Rupeygrad.
[ Just announced – Meg Lees running for The Greens in the federal seat of Sydney. ]
Hopefully she manages to achieve the same outcome as she did with the democrats.
Extinction.
Scorp
I dont know if it is spoof but the only source is via twitter
or
maybe she heard bartlett was standing in greenland
😉
[Is that Meg GST Lees?]
I hope there’s not more than one of them! 🙂
She would be better off joining the Liberal Party. I bet she would feel right at home with them!
[ Is that Meg GST Lees?
I hope there’s not more than one of them! 🙂
She would be better off joining the Liberal Party. I bet she would feel right at home with them!]
Mind you with the Greens now playing footsies with the Libs, is there any difference ? 🙂
I bet Labor have some nice piccies of Meg and Howie holding hands celebration their GST. 😉 Not a pretty sight for the green supporters I would have thought?
She might be the “new blood” to take over as leader when Bob retires?
She’ll be right at home voting with the Libs in the senate anyway 😛
[I bet Labor have some nice piccies of Meg and Howie holding hands celebration their GST. 😉 Not a pretty sight for the green supporters I would have thought?
She might be the “new blood” to take over as leader when Bob retires?
She’ll be right at home voting with the Libs in the senate anyway :P]
and puts paid to the cry from our Green Friends that they “wouldn’t do a Meg Lees”, yet accept her with open arms.
Hypocrites.
[I bet Labor have some nice piccies of Meg and Howie holding hands celebration their GST.]
Vera, i bet Cheryl Kernot could also help. 👿
[Mind you with the Greens now playing footsies with the Libs, is there any difference ? ]
You’ve got a point there, Frank!
Meg Lees is 61 years old. They must be intent on injecting fresh, new, young blood into the Greens. 😉
Bob Brown can’t live for ever, can he? Oh, hang on! Nah, surely not!
Meg Lees has an interesting history as a “team player”! The Greens will love her!
[Lees agreed to pass the bill, provided some amendments were made, mostly to exclude fresh food and essential items such as basic medicines. The final package was supported by the majority of party members at all state division levels except Queensland and South Australia, and Stott Despoja stated she was unhappy with the outcome, particularly the GST on books. Both Stott Despoja and Queensland Senator Andrew Bartlett would ultimately cross the floor to vote against the GST package.
However, a significant number of Democrat members remained unhappy with the GST deal, and began to agitate for a change in leadership. Under the Democrat constitution, a petition from a 100 members can trigger a leadership ballot of all the members. On the initial ballot, Meg Lees was returned unchallenged. Subsequently the Democrats faced a decline the polls, which may or may not have been related to the GST or the leadership instability. By April 2001, the polls suggested that several senators would lose their seats at the elections due for later that year. The members agitated again for a leadership ballot, and this time Stott Despoja announced her intention to challenge Lees for the leadership, and was successful. Lees’ term ended on 6 April 2001.
In mid-2002, Lees began vocally opposing Stott Despoja’s leadership, claiming that it had moved the party too far to the left. This culminated in Lees leaving the party to sit as an independent in July 2002.]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meg_Lees
RM might be well advised to see the current production of King Lear – the tragedy of an ageing autocrat demanding fealty when he’s so headstrong that he embarks on a path of extreme folly offers some parallels he should seriously ponder.vis a vis both his media empires and his political meddlings.
[Didn’t Rudd act before the rest of the world?]
Pretty well. Rupert’s just making it up, like he and everyone else who’s ever worked for the man have always done. But, by God, if he’s thinking of getting the current rabble up with their leader – as a government – he’s got his work cut out for him.
Interesting, though, to see in so many of the responses on Bolt’s blog that Bolta’s fans believe if Rupert says, “Rudd’s no good” then Rudd has to go. No question about it. No ifs or buts. “The Boss” (as one blogger over there calls Rupe) has spoken. It’s like some judge has delivered a verdict and to naysay it would be disputing the umpire’s decision.
[Both Stott Despoja and Queensland Senator Andrew Bartlett would ultimately cross the floor to vote against the GST package.]
Lees and Bartlet must have :kiss: and made up. Together againat the greenhouse 😉
This would most probably be the link between the almost simultaneous arrival of Tamil asylum seekers by boat in both near-Australian and Canadian waters!
The passengers of “both” boats were clients of “Alex” and his brother. As well, the passengers on the boat that sunk a few days ago were in al probability clients of Alex too!
[“Alex”, who led an abortive hunger strike demanding that those on board the boat be granted refugee status, was expelled from Canada in 2003, a Sri Lankan statement said.
“Alex had been involved in human-smuggling for a long time and it is believed that his office is based in India,” the statement said.
“His brother, who is now in Canada, is also involved in human-smuggling” and is being sought by Canadian police, it added, giving no further details.]
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/tamil-spokesman-alex-a-smuggler-says-sri-lankan-government/story-e6frg6nf-1225795200705
Just noticed this! Now I understand. Alex is working for Kevin Rudd. Heck, if it wasn’t for Malcolm informing us of that, I would “never” have suspected!
Now it all starts to make sense, I think! Hey Malcolm, can you provide us with a bit more information so as to clarify this a bit more, Please?
[Kevin Rudd is running an “extraordinarily vain” government that is outsourcing Australia’s immigration program to people smugglers, Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull says.]
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/turnbull-slams-vain-rudd-government-20091107-i2os.html