Morgan: 52.5-47.5

584 comments on “Morgan: 52.5-47.5”

1. “and only fools and agenda peddlers like the Murdoch press, and mining billionaires would have you believe otherwise.”

   And Tony Abbott and his merry band. Your rant represents the true basis for re-election of the Rudd govt. The liberals refuse to acknowledge this which is why Rudd must debate Abbott on the Economy urgently – that would set the agenda and completely debunk the lies of Abbott and the Australian.

2. [It wasn’t the government’s economic record which almost lost it the last election.]
   It won the election convincingly in the end.

3. immacca – I understand the only event which might cause election difficulty (now Obama is off the agenda) is Rudd going to Europe on about 19 July to bury the diggers again. Dunno if he can have that in the middle of a campaign. If not it will be a late August electoin.

4. [Dunno if he can have that in the middle of a campaign. If not it will be a late August electoin.]
   He would have to take Abbott with him.

5. Interesting how the Australian, after claiming for weeks (thanks Shana) that Rudd was about to do a backflip is now calling on him to be presidential and strike a deal.

   http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/sensible-for-a-truce-on-tax-fight/story-e6frg9io-1225875515540

   Don’t do it, Keviee. It’s a trap. It’s a trap. You won’t be presidential, you’ll just be a backflipper.

6. [Section 13 says that the relevant date is the date of the election, not the date of the issuing of the writs. So we could have an election on the first Saturday in July 2010 and the Senators’ terms would still begin on 1 July 2011.]

   As Antony Green notes in comments here, the High Court (very early in the piece I believe) ruled that “the election” means “the entire election period” initiated by the issuing of the writs. So the writs could not in fact be issued before July 1.

7. re 55 yes Rosa completely hypocritical. I just wrote an email to John Durie on this very matter. durie trying to lure him in for his collegue shanahan to nail him.

   Still I think there is merit in taxing the coal seam gas industry on the PRRT same as the offshore industry. Santos would be happy and it woulld resolve one part of the debate

8. Why should Rudd “do a deal”. Who is he going to deal with?

   Or are they asking him to modify policy because a powerful lobby has the snits? What can the miners offer? OK Kev we will stop calling you nasty names if you roll over.

   Tough luck.

9. [Interesting how the Australian, after claiming for weeks (thanks Shana) that Rudd was about to do a backflip is now calling on him to be presidential and strike a deal.

   http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/sensible-for-a-truce-on-tax-fight/story-e6frg9io-1225875515540

   Don’t do it, Keviee. It’s a trap. It’s a trap. You won’t be presidential, you’ll just be a backflipper.]

   Whats presidential about striking a deal?

   Isn’t it common practice in negotiations to strike a deal?

   Didn’t Costello strike a deal with the Democrats on aspects of his GBNT the GST?

   Is the Australian leading a charge for a republic now? We have first amongst equals in our system of govt, no bloody presidents.

   Oh i get it – Become President of the Banana republic of minersville

10. [understand the only event which might cause election difficulty (now Obama is off the agenda) is Rudd going to Europe on about 19 July to bury the diggers again. Dunno if he can have that in the middle of a campaign. If not it will be a late August electoin.]

    Why doesn’t he invite Abbott to go as well and the Shadow Defence

11. It’s World Environment Day tomorrow. It’s not just about polar bears and gorillas.

    Did someone mention a Climate Change conference in Bonn this week. I bet it wasn’t the mainstream media. I have a dream that Kevin and the Greens will deal after the election if we’re not stuck with Tony Jockstrap Abbott.

12. From a parliamentary research note by Scott Bennett:

    [In 1907, during a High Court case relating to the filling of a Senate vacancy, Chief Justice Griffith found it necessary to define a Senate election. According to him, ‘It is plain that sec. 13 [of the Constitution] was framed for the purpose of fixing the term of service of senators elected in ordinary and regular rotation. The term “election” in that section does not mean the day of nomination or the polling day alone, but comprises the whole proceedings from the issue of the writ to the valid return [of that writ]’.]

    Further:

    [According to Malcolm Mackerras, former Chief Electoral Officer Keith Pearson once claimed to him that half-Senate writs could not be issued before 1 July, and suggested that this had been the view of electoral officials for many years.(8) In a communication with the author, the Parliamentary and Litigation Section of the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) has stated that, ‘Given Griffith CJ’s decision in Vardon v O’Loghlin, the AEC agrees that the only safe course is to proceed on the basis that the second paragraph of s.13 of the Constitution precludes the issue of writs for a half-Senate election more than a year before the date that the Senate places become vacant’.(9) Griffith’s words appear still to colour the official view.]

13. I suppose Abbott would be going anyway. And, I suppose, it doesn’t really matter much if they do it in the middle of an election campaign.

14. [Rudd going to Europe on about 19 July to bury the diggers again.]

    Just a guess but I reckon he will not go.

15. [Other nominees were Fang, a Child Flight helicopter pilot from Wagga Wagga, John Minogue, a farmer from Barmedman, Bill Maslin, a Gundagai councillor, and Mark Hoskinson, a farmer from Kikoira.]

    Hi William….

    Am I reading this wrong, or does ‘Fang’ need a first name?

16. [Am I reading this wrong, or does ‘Fang’ need a first name?]

    Is he related to Sting?

17. It wasn’t the government’s economic record which almost lost it the last election.

    It won the election convincingly in the end.

    With a 3 seat majority, yes. Convincingly, no. I will be first to say the election was a clear and fair victory for the Rann govt, but to use the word convincing, when we lost the popular vote and controversial activities occured in the marginals, is pretty egregious.

    But, Labor did win that election. Or, more appropriately, the Liberals lost it. However, the economy was not the issue of the election (as much as Andrew Bolt tried to paint SA being a collapsing economy, from the comfort of his Melbourne office,) nor was it stadiums or hospitals (although they did influence votes, especially the latter in Adelaide and Norwood.) It was the government’s perceived arrogance and complacency, and that they were getting stale – that was the crux of the issue. Three men, in particular, were highlighted as being particularly arrogant. One has left, another will leave sometime this term and the other is Foley.

    More importantly, on that last point. It is the worst kept secret in South Australia that Rann will retire some time this term (2012 is the best bet) which means a shake up of the government. Foley is tipped to go with him. This is just hastening Foley’s departure. I am sure he has a business opportunity awaiting him. Nobody is commenting that his departure well ruin Labor. Even if he somehow becomes Premier (unlikely) it will mean a new Treasurer. Does that mean economic ruin?

    Either way, Foley isn’t going to be Treasurer at the end of the term. For better or worse, that is how it is. A slightly earlier departure will make no difference.

18. [A fire has broken out in the Bank Hotel at Newtown in Sydney’s inner-west.

    The Fire Brigade says seven crews are trying to put out an electrical fire in the basement of the historic hotel.]

    Eeek, now this is serious.

19. [Am I reading this wrong, or does ‘Fang’ need a first name?]

    Cool as it would be if he was just called “Fang”, my sentence was in fact missing a Wesley.

20. Frank
    Thanks for the leaflet. One question: ‘What is to stop individual states from continuing to incease their mining royalties once the RSPT is in place?’

21. [Thanks for the leaflet. One question: ‘What is to stop individual states from continuing to incease their mining royalties once the RSPT is in place?’]

    They won’t get money from the infrastructure fund and their GST receipts will probably be cut.

22. This is what happens when you are a rat on a sinking ship.. you jump overboard.

    http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/another-keneally-minister-quits-20100604-ximy.html

23. Oh, I was hoping his first name was ‘Cardinal’.

    I had a cat named Fang.

24. From the post

    UMR Research has published results on attitudes towards banning wearing of the burkha, producing intuitively correct findings of generally high support that wanes among the younger and university educated.

    Not surprising re: the educated. The ability to reason with logic makes it harder to fall for populist fear mongering. No wonder the Libs hate education. The fact the youth buck this trend gives me slight hope that maybe social attitudes are changing by generation. Although it may just be youthful liberalism.

    All in all, this doesn’t really surprise me on. With the media telling them that banning things is good and “darkies” are scary, and that if you disagree, you are a “PC thug” the only thing that surprises me is that support isn’t even higher…

25. [A fire has broken out in the Bank Hotel at Newtown in Sydney’s inner-west.

    The Fire Brigade says seven crews are trying to put out an electrical fire in the basement of the historic hotel.]

    Don’t tell me they insulated the basement with pink batts.

26. I’ve got absolutely no idea what Abbott thinks he can gain by wanting to can this scheme?

    [THE federal government has delivered the 300,000th computer in its Computers in Schools program, taking a swipe at Opposition Leader Tony Abbott who said on Tuesday he would scrap the scheme.

    Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard personally delivered the latest machines in the government’s rollout at Cranebrook High School in Sydney’s west on Friday.

    It aims to give every student in years 9 to 12 a computer by the end of 2011, paid for out of federal Labor’s $2.1 billion National Secondary School Computer Fund.

    Ms Gillard insists the plan is on track.]
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/gillard-delivers-300000th-computer/story-e6frgakx-1225875527644

27. From the post

    That was supposed to read “Original Post”

28. My guess is that Abbott will bundle all unspent (and unsaved) education monies and deliver them direct to P&Cs.

    The resulting shambles will take years to make their way through the system become evident.

    I am not sure how he is going to deal with the unfairness of some schools already having received things. But a few non-Gospel Abbotts should take care of it.

29. rua @ 71
    is that an educated guess or an explicit part of the policy?

30. zoomster@73

    Oh, I was hoping his first name was ‘Cardinal’.

    I had a cat named Fang.

    At least it wasn’t called Dog 🙂

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SPZVrmJ2HH8 

    (And yes I have posted this before – but it made me think of it :-))

31. [Did someone mention a Climate Change conference in Bonn this week. I bet it wasn’t the mainstream media. I have a dream that Kevin and the Greens will deal after the election if we’re not stuck with Tony Jockstrap Abbott.]

    i have a dream they will do it soon before and election

32. [Mark my words, I guarantee the Libs will never build a new stadium, and if they do it’ll be very flawed and a national embarrassment.]

    I’m with you there Pebbles. Something along the lines of Olsen’s one way southern freeway…LOL

33. Regardless of his policies, a candidate just named “Fang” would get my vote!

34. Scorps 3183 last thread – Best wishes for your OH and to you

35. Boerwar

    The proposed policy will not refund any increase in royalties, the Grants Commission takes mining royalties into account when allocating GST payments.

    I doubt, but am not sure, that a State Govt could make a good case for infrastructure funds if it does not use any increase in royalties first.

36. [Frank
    Thanks for the leaflet. One question: ‘What is to stop individual states from continuing to incease their mining royalties once the RSPT is in place?]

    when will there be car stickers’

37. [The only people Obama would have worried about offending would have been Indonesia. That was obviously his real destination. We were just another leg while he was in the neighbourhood.]

    may daugher just said we need a refund that twice now.
    Poor obama god this is a dreadful world

38. Oh i get it – Become President of the Banana republic of minersville

    You got it Joffaboy: this is a battle to see whether Australia is almost literally a banana republic – under the sway of a powerful resource expoliting lobby – or is an independent, proud nation that supports its own government against malign, vested interests that seek to divide us.

    I wish Rudd would put it just like that. There have been hints he’s edgeing that way, but I’d like to see the Australian voters pulled up with a start, and realise that the RSPT debate is a serious fight over more than just a one-off tax reform.

    So far, several people I’ve spoken to (but nowhere all of them, I might add) have sounded scared that the miners might rescind our tickets to the Gravy Train. Others are worried that “China will come in and buy all our mines”, if the heroic patriots that call themselves the Mining Council decide to pull the plug.

    We seem to be so scared of overseas bullies, so terrified of losing the easy living we have been lucky enough to have due to our mineral resources, right back to the 19th century gold rushes. If Rudd doesn’t attend a dinner he’s “gutless”, or he’s insulting these bastions of generosity and common sense, the miners. The media slavishly repeats the latest meme without comment, or clarification. Hurting miners’ feeling is, apparently, a no-no, something you can’t do lest they their lift their little fingers and crush our nation, almost as an afterthought.

    The conceited image Australians have of themselves as anti-authority, easy-going larrikins, unafraid to upset the higher-ups is in stark contrast to their mealy-mouthed, servile attitude to Big Dirt. The issue has become, not the wisdom of the tax itself, but snarky catcalling over the government’s advertising campaign. It seems that many of the punters out there would rather indulge in smartarsed sniggering about advertising, rather than the vastly more important issue of who governs the country: the people, through their government, or the miners who virtually rob us of our irreplaceable resources. Anything for a gotcha, while the real fight is ignored. Who’s going to score the next point, who will makes us giggle with the next killer jibe appears to be the only thing they are interested in.

    The media reports all the irrelevant argey-bargey and side issues as if they’re actually important. They ignore or distort the facts, dumbing the fight down to one of who snarked who the best this morning. Then they have the hide to blame the government for not communicating its position effectively and having to use paid advertising as a bias-free conduit to the public. The contents of the ads are ignored in deference to debating points about what Rudd said years ago. That the Coalition is by far the most egregious abuser of advertising rorts is dismissed as unimportant. The standards to which Rudd must conform (the media love the word “must”) are always set higher than those the Coalition is held to.

    Australians claim to have immense pride in their country, yet are prepared to give it away to the first big corporation that says “Boo!” to them. If Rudd put this dispute in terms of national sovereignty over our mineral resources, in fact sovereignty over our right to make our own decisions in our own best interests (as the miners do every time they jack up their own prices as demand soars) I think he would do a lot better.

39. [As Antony Green notes in comments here, the High Court (very early in the piece I believe) ruled that “the election” means “the entire election period” initiated by the issuing of the writs. So the writs could not in fact be issued before July 1.]

    I stand corrected.

40. Ruawake back at #14

    Newspoll gives Green as an option when it asks who people will vote for. Does Morgan? Could this be a reason for the differing numbers?

    I noticed Morgan has two sets of 2PP figures, one based on stated preferences and the other based on preferences at the 2007 election. Their ‘official’ 2PP is the one based on the last election (it always seems to have Labor at bit higher too, BTW).

    But in my opinion it has nothing to do with that. For one thing, I don’t trust the Newspoll Greens figure. It’s off the scale compared with every other poll leading up to it (including their own). I think it’s a sampling error.

    For another, I think it’s just evidence that a lot of people are withholding their Labor vote, and just shoving it anywhere else (except the Coalition) – for them the Greens are just another place to park it.

    And I think the reason for that (parking the vote) is that people are angry at Labor for reasons they don’t really understand. If the ‘anger’ is primarily media-driven, it makes it hard to recognise exactly what you believe is wrong. And when much of the media narrative begins, “The Federal Opposition says…” it sends the BS meter up. It leaves everyone with this uneasy feeling that Labor are in some way wrong, but they’re not certain in which way.

    I’ve had this a bit with people I know. They say, “Oh, Rudd’s hopeless”, or “Labor are terrible”. I ask them for reasons and they say Pink Batts or School Halls or the RSPT. But when I press them for what exactly is wrong with these things, the best they can do is ‘house fires’. Beyond that, they don’t really know.

    Nobody does. They were things that worked and did good things. But they had flaws. They weren’t bad things being scrubbed up and sold as good. And that’s where people are a bit confused at the moment. They hear bad things, but they can’t quantify them. So they’re backing off, but they’re not switching votes.

    It was easy with Howard. If you opposed the Iraq War, you had something on him. And WorkChoices was clear in its intent.

    How do you portray the RSPT as an attack on our standards, or our morals or our workers? You can’t do it without misrepresenting it. We’re in that phase of misrepresentation at the moment. But it will never resolve into a clear wrong that you can hang around the neck of Labor. So the resistance and the anger will peter out.

41. [I had a cat named Fang.]
    Zoomster
    Would you believe, so did I. It was the most retiring of the litter, hence its name.

42. [maintained a polite silence on the matter. My view is that the RSPT will be good on balance for the country but will be bad for the miners. You can’t get $9B of tax a year out of an industry and say it won’t affect the industry.]

    Dio – that is disappointing. You asked the question but how did you phrase it. You surely know enough about both sides of the argumentto have given some kind of opinion. If former mining industry heavies think it will make no difference or can actually benefit the industry you could have pointed that out to waylay fears.

    I’ve family members, several generations, and friends in mining in BH – they’ve know for years that their jobs depend only on how much is left there. Many have moved out years ago because they wanted better security. In fact I nearly married a miner but shied off because he wanted to stay in BH and I wanted to stay in Adelaide. He earned twice as much as the city guys but BH didn’t entice me.

43. [AUSTRALIAN IS GOING TO BLAME RUDD FOR OBAMA CANCELLING.

    seriously.

    Read this story in the Times Newspaper.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/world_agenda/article7143319.ece%5D

    now how did this get from them to there???

44. [maintained a polite silence on the matter. My ]

    may i suggest you just grit your teeth and say politely what you think

    e.g. o no its good for the country, and your children your supper will be increased
    and once the minerals are all dug up thats it australia may be a waste land in the time of your great grandchildren, we have to plan for the future.

    Or dont worry the miners will go no where its only bluff other countries do it already e.g. Finland and some states of Canada, and the miners are still there.

    Dio your patients need you they are not going any where. most old people look up to doctors, by mothers generation thought your where all gods. ???

45. Bushfire – Totally Agree.

    The problem for the miners is that if they are still running their campaign come election time, Rudd won’t have any choice but to wrap himself in a flag and say that he is defending the Australian way of life. Would be pretty powerfully stuff.

46. http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10428&page=0

    “However, the reaction internationally reveals a grain of truth in Mr Rudd’s claim that it will be good for the mining sector – just not ours.

    Toronto’s Globe and Mail newspaper has reported that Rio Tinto has approved an expansion of its iron ore activities in Canada, with an initial investment of US$400 million.

    This project has been hold since 2008, but Rio Tinto will now go ahead because of the “attractiveness of investing in Canada” and the need to evaluate the impact of the proposed 40 per cent mining tax on its Australian operations.

    There are also numerous reports of mining companies turning their attention to Africa in terms of long-term exploration and development.

    Macquarie Bank is reportedly advising its clients that Australia was “now seen as being a high sovereign risk destination to invest” and that there was a “significant risk of major capital flight out of Australia”.

    The Wall Street Journal, in its scathing assessment of Mr Rudd’s super tax, put it succinctly in its editorial, “This economic thinking runs counter to everything that made Australia rich over the last three decades: namely, the embrace of competition and capitalism, which rewards high risk with high returns. … The truth is that all windfall taxes, however they are dressed up and sold by politicians, are arbitrary and economically damaging.”

    The Rudd political spin machine also whipped up the old ideological class warfare rhetoric with the Prime Minister portraying mining companies as rapacious foreigners who take away the resources owned by Australians and fail to pay their way while sending profits offshore.

    However, Xstrata, for example, pointed out that since it commenced operations in 2002, it had invested $45 billion in Australia exceeding the $44 billion it had earned.

    As the CEO Mick Davis said: “And we were planning to continue to invest more in Australia than our operations would have generated. The proposed tax will significantly impair the cash flows available to sustain our operations and has introduced great investment uncertainty.”

    Wealth redistribution rather than wealth creation is the Labor way.

    The government has already spent the $9 billion per annum it expects to raise from the super tax.

    Given his logic that the tax is “good” for the miners, Mr Rudd must be deeply confused as to why no other sector is lining up for an additional 40 per cent tax slug to underpin their future growth.”

47. [makes it hard to recognise exactly what you believe is wrong. And when much of the media narrative begins, “The ]

    yes like mixed up teenagers

48. [The Wall Street Journal, in its scathing assessment of Mr Rudd’s super tax, put it succinctly in its editorial]

    WSJ owned by News Corp. Editorial. ’nuff said.

49. Why wont xstrata list on the ASX? Should overseas mining companies be allowed to develop Australian resources and expatriate all profits?

    Who let xstrata take over MIM ?

50. [No wonder the Libs hate education.]

    Howard ripped money off the Universities and gave huge handouts to the private education sector.

    The Libs think that education is a good thing for the rich and privileged and an unnecessary indulgence for the proletariat.

    I think they thought that Universities would be able to get by with the increase in paying students and overseas students. Now that the OS student numbers have crashed due to the GFC, Universities are really feeling the pinch.

    I got a letter from the QUT Alumini Board President which was really, a well structured begging letter for financial assistance for the University. With it was a heap of propaganda and a donation slip with a self addressed envelope.

    I liked the way they worded the slip. Cunning!

    [Please accept my donation of $35 – $50 – $20 or “my choice” hoping for the $35 one to catch the eye first.

    I’ll probably get one fron USQ in the next week too. They are probably more in need of cash more so than QUT!

Comments are closed.