The keenly awaited monthly Nielsen poll of 1400 respondents has Labor’s two-party lead down just slightly to 56-44 from 57-43 a month ago. Likewise, Labor’s primary vote is down a point to 45 per cent and the Coalition’s is up one to 38 per cent. Kevin Rudd’s approval rating is down three points to 68 per cent and his disapproval is up five to 28 per cent. Malcolm Turnbull’s approval is up two points to 37 per cent, and his disapproval is steady on 53 per cent. Rudd’s lead as preferred prime minister has narrowed marginally from 69-23 to 68-22. Michelle Grattan provides further details on responses to asylum seeker policies:
As the effort to persuade the 78 Sri Lankans on the Oceanic Viking to disembark in Indonesia continues, 47 per cent of Australians disapprove of how the Prime Minister is handling the asylum-seeker issue; 45 per cent approve … Nearly two-thirds of Coalition voters disapproved, compared with one-third of Labor voters and just over half the Greens supporters … just 13 per cent thought the Government’s asylum-seeker policy was too harsh; 37 per cent said it was about right. Only 6 per cent of Coalition voters and 14 per cent of ALP voters said the policies were too hard. Labor voters were more than twice as likely to rate the policies too soft as too harsh. Nearly four in 10 Greens voters said they were too harsh.
UPDATE: The Australian offers results from that follow-up Newspoll we’ve been hearing about, but at this stage at least there are no figures on voting intention. It instead focuses on attitudes to asylum seeker policy, with results that largely echo those of last week’s Essential Research survey: 53 per cent disapprove of the government’s handling of the issue against 31 per cent approve, but only 22 per cent believe the Coalition would do a better job against 21 per cent for Labor. Forty-six per cent believe the government’s response has been too soft against 16 per cent too hard.
UPDATE 2: Essential Research: 59-41, i.e. unchanged on the last few weeks. However, Rudd’s approval ratings have taken a hit. Further questions on interest rates and yet another one on whether the government’s asylum seeker policies are tough, weak or just right.
[It is indeed illegal to enter Australian waters without a passport, visa and Australia’s permission. Punishable by mandatory detention.
Now this legislation was introduced by none other than the Labor Government of Hawke and Keating. ]
I think you will find that this has been the case for many, many decades prior to Hawke and Keating but was always dealt with by immediate deportation.
Except for the latter years since 1948 whereby if a person claimed asylum, Australia had to fulfil its obligations under the UN convention on refugees, otherwise they are still deported to their country of origin!
[It is indeed illegal to enter Australian waters without a passport, visa and Australia’s permission]
Why aren’t they all charged, tried and sentenced then?
Bronwyn Bishop on the ABC news. On asylum seekers. The government’s new buzzword is “complex” which, apparently, is just a way of saying to the Australian public “you are too stupid to understand.”
Bronnie, you’re all class.
[It is indeed illegal to enter Australian waters without a passport, visa and Australia’s permission
Why aren’t they all charged, tried and sentenced then?]
If I’m not mistaken Howard didn’t charge, try and sentence them either, the bloody softy.
Ah they’re a nutty lot over the Tasman…
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,26330337-23109,00.html
[ A KIWI MP has leapt from the frying pan into the fire by following an expletive-ridden email to a constituent with calls for the country’s opposition leader to be shot.
Hone Harawira, a Maori Party politician, was supposed to be apologising for an abusive written tirade accusing “white motherf…ers” of ripping off indigenous people when he went on New Zealand radio today.
Instead, he came out with even more swear words, calling the country’s Labour Party leader a “bastard” who should be “lined up against the wall and shot”. ]
[If I’m not mistaken Howard didn’t charge, try and sentence them either, the bloody softy.]
Gave most of them refugee status IIRC. What a fraud he was.
Headline – “Bronny says The Australian Public Are Too Stupid to Understand.”
[Migration Legislation Amendment Act 1989
In the context of an increasing number of unauthorised boat arrivals from Indochina, ]
Indonesia is “not” classed as part of Indochina. It is a separate identity ie Indonesian Archipelago!
That legislation was designed to deal with asylum seekers departing by boat from South Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore! Not Indonesia!!!!
For all intents and purposes, there were few if any, boats arriving in Australia from Indonesia carrying Asylum seekers from the main source which later sought to come through that route! ie, Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan!
805 – That MP makes Barnaby seem like a genius.
[Bronwyn Bishop on the ABC news. On asylum seekers. The government’s new buzzword is “complex” which, apparently, is just a way of saying to the Australian public “you are too stupid to understand.”]
VP, the Coalition just want the public to understand one thing.
Brown, bad; white, good!
[1. Did not wait in line like others who seek Refugee status for Australia]
They are not required to.
[2. Came to Australia without our permission and without our invitation]
They are not required to.
[3. Had various other safe havens to stay in on their way here]
They can turn up anywhere and seek asylum.
[4. Often use tactics such as blackmail to force entry]
Which is why those on the OV should not be taken to Christmas Island. They made a distress call, were picked up in Indonesia’s S&R zone, were closest to an Indonesian port and do not have the right to choose where their refugee status is determined, but they thank their rescuers by refusing to get off the boat.
[If you want to be taken seriously, hysterical rants won’t cut it here. They are actually counter-productive because everyone just assumes you don’t have anything to say.]
I find it’s well worth reading most of the PB’ers with whom I strongly disagree (eg. Glen) because they are willing to discuss issues maturely and eschew going the ranter.
You can always rely on the Libs to put their foot in it
Goodness! Something concrete is being done to arrest the flow of boat people from Sri Lanka. Fancy that and without using the Pacific solution or locking people behind razor wire in the middle of the desert!
[AUSTRALIA last night struck a bargain with Sri Lanka to help track down Tamil Tiger people smugglers in return for greater co-operation in reducing asylum-seeker numbers.
Australia will also contribute an extra $11 million, on top of $38m already given, to help the process of resettling about 250,000 mostly Tamil civilians still being held in detention camps in the former northern conflict zone.
In a joint press conference last night with Sri Lankan foreign minister Rohitha Bogollagama, Foreign Minister Stephen Smith emphasised the importance of apprehending and prosecuting criminal and terror syndicates behind the people smuggling trade.
The focus seemed designed to appease the Sri Lankan government, which insists the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam is behind the vast majority of boats ferrying asylum seekers from its shores, and from neighbouring countries, to Australia.]
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/sri-lankan-deal-to-stop-asylum-boats/story-e6frg6nf-1225796066367
[Goodness! Something concrete is being done to arrest the flow of boat people from Sri Lanka. Fancy that and without using the Pacific solution or locking people behind razor wire in the middle of the desert!]
Yes! Instead of letting them flee, we’ll let their country tighten up even further and stop those genuinely seeking asylum from persecution be stuck there rather than upholding the agreements we’ve signed, and take them in and give them refuge!
Oh how humane Labor supporters have become. Pats on the back all round.
And the bait is on the hook.
[The smarter ones realize that there will probably be more money in the long run in soil sequestration]
Boerwar 758, I heard a good piece on the Country Hour today. Farmers talking about how they can prosper with buying and selling carbon credits through sequestration, etc. They could see a good future for the rural area if the CPRS gets started now.
I was surprised to hear how positive they were after watching crazy Barnaby last night. I think he is talking to the people who want to be handfed with subsidies forever. The blokes on the radio were taking the opposite tack.
From crikey
[Right-wing commentator Janet Albrechtsen will not be reappointed to the ABC Board when her term expires in February.]
…
[Albrechtsen’s departure was subtly revealed last week when Stephen Conroy announced the appointment of Joseph Skrzynski to the Chairmanship of SBS.
“I am also calling for expressions of interest in a position as a non-executive Director on the ABC Board,” Conroy’s press release concluded.
Albrechtsen’s is the only appointment that will conclude in coming months.]
Some interesting quotes from the alarmist Vatican website on CC and the IPCC. Sorry for the length but I thought it worth leaving them in full. For the avoidance of doubt, I am a Protestant atheist but understand the Vatican’s need for diplomatic, and even bureaucratic, language.
Could someone please forward to Tony Abbott ?
“At the end of the last century, mankind looked back at its achievements of the last one hundred years and felt justifiably proud. It had unlocked the secrets of the atom and had split the nucleus to unleash its energy, it had discovered that the universe is expanding, that life’s architecture is based on a beautifully simple double helix of DNA and it had traveled to the moon not to conquer but to learn. We are entitled to a moment of reflection on God’s gift of the human intellect.
However, then came the realization that the same mankind that had understood the forces of nature had left out one of them: mankind itself had become a force of nature, so powerful as to be potentially capable of changing our world for centuries to come.
This force has brought about the greenhouse effect and the scientific community at large is now in broad agreement as to the implications of this man-enhanced phenomenon. Indeed, “there is a new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last fifty years is attributed to human activities” and that coming changes will affects all aspects of the environment and societal well-being, especially for the poor, the vulnerable and the generations yet unborn. (IPCC; “Climate Change 2001, The Scientific Basis”, 2001)”
and
“Climate change is a serious concern and an inescapable responsibility for scientists and other experts, political and governmental leaders, local administrators and international organizations, as well as every sector of human society and each human person. My delegation wishes to stress the underlying moral imperative that all, without exception, have a grave responsibility to protect the environment.
Beyond the various reactions to and interpretations of the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the best scientific assessments available have established a link between human activity and climate change. However, the results of these scientific assessments, and the remaining uncertainties, should neither be exaggerated nor minimized in the name of politics, ideologies or self-interest. Rather they now need to be studied closely in order to give a sound basis for raising awareness and making effective policy decisions.
In recent times, it has been unsettling to note how some commentators have said that we should actually exploit our world to the full, with little or no heed to the consequences, using a world view supposedly based on faith. We strongly believe that this is a fundamentally reckless approach. At the other extreme, there are those who hold up the earth as the only good, and would characterize humanity as an irredeemable threat to the earth, whose population and activity need to be controlled by various drastic means. We strongly believe that such assertions would place human beings and their needs at the service of an inhuman ecology. I have highlighted these two extreme positions to make my point, but similar, though less extreme attitudes, would also clearly impede any sound global attempts to promote mitigation, adaptation, resilience and the safeguarding of our common future.”
Now, let me see. There 78 boat people wanting asylum and there is anthropogenic global warming.
Hmm. Which one should I worry about? Let me look at the main stream mice, they’ll have things in proportion.
[Bronwyn Bishop on the ABC news. On asylum seekers. The government’s new buzzword is “complex” which, apparently, is just a way of saying to the Australian public “you are too stupid to understand.”]
This piece by Donald R. Rothwell, professor of international law at the Australian National University college of law is a good explanation of the current situation that the Australian Government finds itself in and also explains just how “complex” it is!
That complexity is all the more highlighted in that he can’t really offer suitable solutions himself.
I bet the Coalition are thanking their lucky stars that “they” are not the ones who have to solve it without alienating the whole political spectrum! They are just quite happy to sit back and snark!
[Howard’s way still figures large in asylum-seeker policy ]
[LOCATION, location, location is a common catchcry and it has particular meaning when it comes to search and rescue in the oceans.
The Oceanic Viking asylum-seekers sitting in the Indonesian port of Tanjung Pinang were rescued at sea on October 18 in the Indonesian search and rescue zone by the HMAS Armidale.
After their transfer to the Oceanic Viking they were eventually taken to Tanjung Pinang, where since October 26 they have refused to disembark.
On the other hand, the asylum-seekers whose boat sank on November 1 north of the Cocos Islands and within the Australian search and rescue zone, who were then rescued by the Bahamas-flagged LNG Pioneer, have been taken to Christmas Island, where they will be able to make asylum claims and their status as refugees assessed under Australian law.
At no time was there any suggestion that the Bahamas should take those who had been rescued at sea.
There is some irony in these events that the Rudd government, so keen to distance itself from the policies of the Howard era, is relying on some of the precedents set during that time.
Following the Tampa incident, Norway – the Tampa’s country of registration – took its concerns to the International Maritime Organisation and was able to secure adjustments to the Safety of Life at Sea Convention and related international agreements.
These ensured that the master of a ship that successfully responded to a search and rescue request could elect to take the rescuees to the nearest and most viable available port and that country was obliged to accept those people and deal with their humanitarian needs.
Australia could point to this precedent in the case of the Sri Lankans aboard the Oceanic Viking, and Australia was well within its rights to ask Indonesia to take the asylum-seekers. This is reflected in the arrangements Kevin Rudd struck with Indonesia.]
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/howards-way-still-figures-large-in-asylum-seeker-policy/story-e6frg6zo-1225795886606
Bernard nails the Deniers
[The best moment in last night’s 4 Corners was when palaeontologist Bob Carter, giving one of his spiels about why climate science is rubbish to a group of rural Queenslanders, asked his audience who was under fifty. Two or three hands went up.
Turn the sound off, and it could have been footage of a One Nation meeting in the 1990s: old, white, rural people, confused and unhappy.
There’s a number of similarities between Hansonism and climate denialism. One Nation supporters were primarily older, conservative, low-income, poorly-educated voters, often in regional areas. Opposition to emissions trading is strongest amongst older and Coalition voters. And they share a similar approach to communication. Both are immune to rational argument, preferring “common sense” and invented or meaningless statistics over verifiable evidence or logic. Indeed, a salient characteristic of Hansonism was its equation of inarticulacy with authenticity.]
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/11/10/the-coalition-need-howards-pragmatism-on-climate-change/
“Indonesia is “not” classed as part of Indochina. It is a separate identity ie Indonesian Archipelago!”
And? What point are you trying to make exactly.
In 1989 the Hawke government was so concerned about the increase in boat arrivals from “Indochina” that they introduced new laws to lock up anyone who arrived by boat. It doesn’t actually say you HAVE to come from Indochina to be locked up, simply that it was introduced in the “context of the indochina arrivals”.
Keating went further and introduced mandatory detention for anyone without a valid visa. He also scrapped maximum 273 days of detention, so people could be kept behind the “razor wire” indefinately. This includes women and children.
The legislation clearly refers to anyone who is in Australia without a valid visa as wither an “illegal arrival” or an “Unlawful entrant”. Yet the left still try and lie and say these people are not illegal immigrants.
vp – you and Crikey have made my day. It’s good to see the ABC Board changing and for the better with independent advice re appointments.
Just about to read my crikey email so hope they’ve dissected newspolls missing numbers.
[And? What point are you trying to make exactly.]
Why don’t you read the rest of it.
The point is clearly made, but unfortunately for you, is contradictory to the misleading point “you” were trying to make and are still trying to make in your post @ 823!
Fair assessment from Andrew Crook at Crikey regarding the Newspoll Outlier Scandal. Interesting that Newspoll and Nielsen have a cosy non compete agreement. I wonder if there are any Trades Practices implications.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/11/10/the-newspoll-numbers-the-australian-wont-print/
Nice company some Libs keep. Reminds me of the shady character who used to like attending Howard’s fundraising dinners! They’re not fussy about where the money comes from, crims, tobacco companies???
[During the same period Madafferi’s supporters mounted a campaign – which included enlisting the support of Mr Billson, Mr Broadbent and Ms Payne – to overturn the decision by Ms Vanstone’s predecessor, Philip Ruddock, to deport the illegal immigrant and suspected Mafia figure to Italy.
In late 2005 Ms Vanstone overturned the deportation order on what she later said were ”humanitarian grounds”.
Last year Madafferi was arrested for drug trafficking in connection with the world’s biggest ecstasy bust. He has also since been charged with conspiracy to murder.
Ms Payne, Mr Billson and Mr Broadbent had all raised Madafferi’s deportation with Ms Vanstone or the Immigration Department after being urged to do so by Madafferi’s supporters, including some who where Liberal party donors.
In late 2004, as Madafferi faced impending deportation, the three politicians, along with Ms Vanstone, were special guests at a Liberal Party fundraiser organised by Italian businessmen, including many linked to the Madafferi family.
Among the biggest donors at this function was Madafferi’s brother, Antonio, who was named in the 1990s as a suspected hitman in inquests into the murders of two Italian-born Melbourne greengrocers.]
http://www.smh.com.au/national/afp-questions-vanstone-over-alleged-mafiosos-visa-20091109-i5g9.html
Same source:
[AUSTRALIAN Federal Police inquiring into a mafia donations-for-visa scandal have asked Australia’s ambassador to Italy, Amanda Vanstone, to explain her decision to give a visa to an alleged crime figure.]
Wonder if she’ll claim diplomatic immunity.
[Why don’t you read the rest of it.
The point is clearly made, but unfortunately for you, is contradictory to the misleading point “you” were trying to make and are still trying to make in your post]
I’ve read the rest of it and still don’t understand its relevance.
Now, now Scorpio – you know it is only those norty, sleezy ALPers who do things like cosying up to crims. Barry O’Farrell told us so.
[Fair assessment from Andrew Crook at Crikey regarding the Newspoll Outlier Scandal]
And tellingly:
[The single issue poll was the only time in the last three years, according to a Crikey analysis of Newspoll releases, that a single issue poll hasn’t been coupled with a parallel release on voting intention.]
contrary to what some trolls would have us believe
[AUSTRALIAN Federal Police inquiring into a mafia donations-for-visa scandal have asked Australia’s ambassador to Italy, Amanda Vanstone, to explain her decision to give a visa to an alleged crime figure.]
This will be nice and juicy methinks
Looks like it is on now! Wait for the counter attack now! As someone said earlier, no wonder Costello refused to take on the Liberal Leadership.
Herding cats would be far easier than trying to gather this lot up in a coherent, strategic and sensible political force!
[LIBERAL Senate leader Nick Minchin is under fire from his own troops today over his bloody unhelpful, and uninformed, views on climate change and his decision to directly challenge Malcolm Turnbull’s authority on the issue.
Senator Minchin told last night’s Four Corners program on climate change, Malcolm and the Malcontents, that a majority of the party does not back Mr Turnbull’s acceptance of the science behind climate change.
One Liberal frontbencher told The Australian that Senator Minchin came across as a “complete fruit loop”.
“Border control is going along a treat and they come out behaving like total f…wits. They don’t know how crazy they look, because crazy people never do,” the Liberal said.
“Ironically they have made it easier for people who want to pass this legislation because we cannot be seen to give in to these people.
“I have no doubt we will support amendments, the Labor Party will accept some amendments and the emissions trading legislation will get through.”]
[Liberal MP Mal Washer told The Australian Online today that the Liberal Senate leader “wouldn’t have a clue”.
“First of all, Nick would not have the remotest idea what a majority of the partyroom thinks,” Dr Washer said.
“You get a lot of emotion generated by a few people. He should be a bit more circumspect.
“I don’t dislike Nick. But to go public on it while we’re still trying to negotiate is to say the least bloody unhelpful. Frankly, he wouldn’t have a clue. He’s out of touch. And we’re about to find out anyway.”
Liberal Senator Judith Troeth, who is backing negotiations with the Labor Party on an emissions trading scheme to protect farmers under the scheme, said Senator Minchin was openly encouraging the backbench to defy the leader.
“I mean it’s astounding that a Senate leader would say that,” Senator Troeth told The Australian Online.
“Without pointing the finger I regard those views as relatively uninformed and flying in the face of overwhelming scientific evidence.
“He’s encouraging the backbench. If it’s to be open slather, this is giving the green light to a dissenting minority.]
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/minchin-faces-liberals-backlash-over-climate-change/story-e6frgczf-1225796096325
don
The subsets of farmers who were showing really high awareness of cc were from industries where irrigation farms are now being closed down because of a lack of irrigation water. The thing is, when a couple of your neighbours basically walk away from the farm, it is very difficult not to start thinking about when your turn will come, especially knowing that the cause is completely out of your hands.
No surprise that there’s been barely a mention of “Four Corners” on Liberal Party Radio, aka AM radio in Sydney.
[“Border control is going along a treat”]
It’s comments like that turn people off to the Opposition
[No surprise that there’s been barely a mention of “Four Corners” on Liberal Party Radio, aka AM radio in Sydney.]
And don’t expect any in future, no matter how much the Libs start attacking each other. The ABC is riding AS as hard as it can at the moment.
That should have been ‘The ABC is riding AS as hard as it can at the moment also’
[I’ve read the rest of it and still don’t understand its relevance.]
Itep, maybe you should have read it in its totality and in relation to the point that it was meant to address in the respondent’s earlier post.
Although comprehension is often a problem here as quite a few people are just skimming through looking for something they can have a shot at and promote their own agenda no matter how wacky or out of step with general consensus on particular issues rather than put forward logical and well thought-out arguments!
I don’t put you in that classification and mean no offence to you but it is all too common!
A few sets of inverted commas missing from that opening sentence of Samantha Maiden’s.
Dario,
[The single issue poll was the only time in the last three years, according to a Crikey analysis of Newspoll releases, that a single issue poll hasn’t been coupled with a parallel release on voting intention.
contrary to what some trolls would have us believe]
Notice I didn’t respond to that poster who had the gall to post a link that I had posted on that very issue last night! Cheeky, or what! 😉
[A few sets of inverted commas missing from that opening sentence of Samantha Maiden’s.]
Ah, is that what they were. They looked messy and so I took the liberty of deleting them and putting in what I thought was intended.
I see those strange icons or whatever they are a lot on News Ltd sites. They must have something to do with a different script (non HTML) or something?
Boerwar@834:
[The subsets of farmers who were showing really high awareness of cc were from industries where irrigation farms are now being closed down because of a lack of irrigation water.]
Right, so that’s why on Poss’s data it was around 75% for irrigators but a little less than 50% for sugar cane farmers with regard to CC affecting their livelihood. I wondered about that.
[LIBERAL Senate leader Nick Minchin is under fire from his own troops today over his ?bloody unhelpful? and ?uninformed? views on climate change and his decision to directly challenge Malcolm Turnbull’s authority on the issue. ]
Like this!
Crikey, that’s different again!
TruthHurts @823 you are referring to legislation that has been superseded and no longer applies. The current legislation makes no reference to illegal entrants and instead defines two classes of non-citizen – lawful and unlawful. In this context unlawful means “not expressly authorized”, it does not mean “expressly forbidden”, there is a difference and it is important. In the case of asylum seekers they are, through necessity, unlawful non-citizens until such time as they can demonstrate a lawful reason for being within our migration zone. One such lawful reason is to seek Australia’s protection under the United Nations Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees. It is not illegal, that is it is not expressly forbidden by law, to arrive within Australia’s migration zone without documentation and without authorization for the purpose of seeking asylum. In fact the only lawful way to seek asylum in Australia is to arrive within our migration zone and say the words “I seek asylum”.
Of course, it’s possible that Newspoll deliberately didn’t ask for voting intentions so they couldn’t be accused of not releasing them, should they indicate that 52/48 was a rogue poll.
There seems to be some curious technical error in that Samantha Maiden sentence – nothing shows up at all when I look at it on my browser (MSIE).
[Right, so that’s why on Poss’s data it was around 75% for irrigators but a little less than 50% for sugar cane farmers with regard to CC affecting their livelihood. I wondered about that.]
The greater majority, probably 85% or more of cane farmers are above the Tropic of Capricorn and are in the Monsoon zone which means that they are nowhere near as dependent on irrigation. Although the Monsoons have been becoming more irregular in recent decades which explains the 48% or whatever it is!
TTH @ 791:
[Opinions change, Values and Morals never do.]
What a completely idiotic statement.
Has TTH written one post that isn’t about asylum seekers (leaving out whines about being moderated)?