On voting intention, the latest Newspoll is no worse for Labor than usual: they trail the Coalition 55-45 on two-party preferred, their primary vote is down a point to 30 per cent, and the Coalition and the Greens are steady on 46 per cent and 11 per cent respectively. However, it seems just about every poll has an added sting in the tail for Julia Gillard these days, and this one finds her recording yet another slump on her personal ratings, which are now at a disastrous 28 per cent approval and 62 per cent disapproval. Tony Abbott by contrast is up four points on approval to 39 per cent, although his disapproval remains steady at a thoroughly unimpressive 52 per cent. Worst of all for Gillard, Abbott now leads her as preferred prime minister for the first time: 40 per cent to 39 per cent, compared with Gillard’s 41-38 lead last time.
The latest weekly Essential Research survey also has the Coalition 55-45 in front, from primary votes of 48 per cent for the Coalition (up one), 32 per cent for Labor (down one) and 11 per cent for the Greens (down one). It too has its own particular sting for Julia Gillard, finding Labor would be leading 53-47 if Kevin Rudd was leader from primary votes of 45 per cent for Labor and 42 per cent for the Coalition. However, it also finds the Coalition would be much further ahead (59-41) under Malcolm Turnbull than Tony Abbott, so it is likely there is a fair bit of mischief-making by partisan respondents going on. Nonetheless, it is hard to overlook the fact that there is an eight-point difference in the results for the two Labor contenders against a four-point difference for the Liberals.
UPDATE: Kevin Bonham in comments, responding to the assertion of Dennis Shanahan in The Australian that “only Paul Keating has had a worse personal rating than Gillard’s today”:
Depends how you measure it, but:
• If measured by net satisfaction there have been 18 worse results. One by Howard in 2001, one by Hawke in 1991 and the other sixteen by Keating, but six of Keating’s were before the election that he won. This is also true if measured by disapproval rating.
• If measured by approval rating there have been 19 worse results. One by Hawke and eighteen by Keating with eight of Keating’s before the election that he won.
Sweet dreams BK.
Dr Good
After she dumped the carbon policy in April, why was the Citizens’ Assembly process announced in the election campaign going to take 3 years?
There would have been no action on a carbon price in this parliamentary term without the minority government.
Night BK,
Dan,
Thanks I have just retweeted.
[Why go to particular lengths to rule out a Carbon Tax but not rule out an ETS unless you were planning to start bringing in an ETS?]
“Planning” might be too strong a word. She was certainly “hoping” to bring in an ETS but wanted a few little black ducks to line up to enable it.
JV
I couldn’t give a flying fig if you are unoffended by that moniker, or what you think about how far third party sensitivities can be taken. I have registered my thoughts on the matter. I do not like the use of a word that is used to describe Indigenous Australians in a derogatory manner and I have a concern that people of Aboriginal heritage may be offended by it.
Your giving it the tick of approval neither changes my opinion of the former nor demonstrates the falsity of the latter.
JV
I agree that we are getting a separately legislated fixed price period reasonably early because of the minority government situation.
The evidence seems to point to a majority ALP government starting to bring in an ETS instead but maybe later in the term.
Temporary shelving of the CPRS was the only option given the parliament in the first half of 2010.
j.v.
Incorrect.
The Citizen’s assembly was meant to be an education tool; it would have taken ‘ordinary’ people through the various arguments and options, in the belief that this process would educate the public at large and that any sensible person, confronted with all the evidence, would not only choose action but choose an ETS as the best model for action.
It was meant to keep up the momentum in the period between the election and when it was thought that real action could be taken – a way of keeping the issue at the forefront.
At one stage, the PM said that the CA would not necessarily change the government’s mind as to its preferred course of action.
Some evidence – which you will, of course, ignore – drawn from a very quick google:
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/gillard-defends-citizens-assembly-20100815-124td.html
[Our climate change policy comes from someone who believes in climate change,” she told the Nine Network on Sunday.
“The citizens assembly will be one vehicle for taking the community through the debate.”
Labor in April delayed introduction of its planned carbon pollution reduction scheme until at least 2013.
But Ms Gillard said she was committed to the idea of a cap on carbon.]
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-election/pm-pledges-peoples-assembly-on-climate-20100722-10myh.html
[A JULIA Gillard government would create a ”citizens’ assembly” of ”real Australians” to investigate the science of climate change and consequences of emissions trading, under a plan to build a national consensus for a carbon price.]
[Launching the first details of the government’s revamped climate change policy, Julia Gillard will commit to vigorously arguing in public and in the Parliament for cutting greenhouse gas emissions through a carbon trading scheme.]
[It would provide an indication of the level of consensus over the current emissions trading model, but would not be ”the final arbiter or judge” on what the government does.
Ms Gillard will say she believes the assembly would back her commitment on climate change. ”If I am wrong, and that group of Australians is not persuaded of the case for change, then that should be a clear warning bell that our community has not been persuaded as deeply as required about the need for transformational change.”]
Yes, she was going to delay introducing a carbon price longer than I would have liked, but the situation is not as black as you paint it either, and you have clearly misunderstood the role the CA would have played.
JV and Dio
I think that our resident surgeon has the less blinkered eyesight on the evidence here
Dr Good
The Citizens Assembly was dumped after the minority agreements were struck. That was because the minority agreements stipulated action in place of inaction this term. All a Labor government would have had time to do after the CA was take something to the next election. And that means no action this term.
[The Citizens Assembly was dumped after the minority agreements were struck.]
jv, welcome to reality.
So twiggy, et al wish to secede from the rest of Australia do they. Have they considered that it might take more than all the profits they suck annually from this country and squirrel away in their bank accounts to run a country.
If WA was stupid enough to secede where would they get the $50B plus to set up a military, the other billions to set up the rest of the infrastructure supplied by the Commonwealth.
I am sure those proud Australians twiggy, gina and the rest of those parasites are going to be very happy to dig their slimy, grasping mitts into their own pockets……. not.
They would be in their shiny jets flying out of there looking for some other paradise to turn into a gaping black hole.
[Planning” might be too strong a word. She was certainly “hoping” to bring in an ETS but wanted a few little black ducks to line up to enable it.]
Dio it makes sense if you think about it a little.
Rudd got leaned on to delay introducing an ETS. Now its debateable if that was a good idea or not but the thing a lot of people forget is that the original decision was to delay, not to dump. Problem is that before they could figure out how to announce the decision it got leaked and then spun out of control.
Julia was simply carrying on with the same general plan – to bring in an ETS. And what she was trying to do was say look we’ll have it if there’s enough consensus. Now naming a specific mechanism for that (the people’s whatever it was) was a really dumb idea. She should have just stuck to saying “look, its a good idea but it has to have consensus and I’ll work to build consensus”. But hey, whoever ran the ALP campaign should have his nuts cut off anyhow.
There is a continuity to this, and I doubt if Rudd were still here, he’d be doing anything different. Still have to deal with the Greens. Still have to defend stepping back from consensus building.
Puff TMD
We’ve both expressed our opinions on the issue then – one more strongly than the other.
Surely no need for a flying infructescence.
When the MSM is talking of Gillard being worse than Whitlam, you know she’s got problems.
Labor has got a good story to sell in many areas of government, but they’re monumentally hopeless at it(even allowing for the fact that the media is inherently pro-conservative).
Gillard could turn it all around, but she needs to shake up her cabinet and her office – that’s desperately required.
Scarpat
I am in the process of trying to welcome others to that same reality.
Arbib/Bitar have a lot to answer for – they were the idiots who ran the last election campaign.
No more focus groups, please!
[The Citizen’s assembly was meant to be an education tool]
Agreed. Its still generally “consensus building”. I think though that in retrospect she should have refrained from being specific.
zoomster
I know exactly what role the Citizens’ Assembly played. And that role is encapsulated in this sentence from your quoted extract, with the key term being ‘2013’ – election year. That is; too late.
[I am in the process of trying to welcome others to that same reality.]
jv, this what what makes this term of government so interesting. It enables certain actions to be accelerated and others to be tempered.
z
She did also say that if the CA disagreed with an ETS that she wouldn’t proceed with an ETS, ie “clear warning bell” that a requirement for change hadn’t been reached.
[”The role of this citizens’ assembly will not be to become the final arbiter or judge of consensus, but to provide an indicator to the nation of the progress of community consensus,” she will say. But she also implies that if the assembly is unpersuaded, an ETS is unlikely to be brought in.
”If I am wrong, and that group of Australians is not persuaded of the case for change, then that should be a clear warning bell that our community has not been persuaded as deeply as required about the need for transformational change,” the speech says.]
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/climate/gillard-seeks-citizens-group-on-ets-policy-20100722-10mzp.html#ixzz1Qr09k2LN
Bitar’s gone and Arbib spends his time explaining the loss of the soccer World Cup in 2022.
Richo bleats continuously on his paid gig on Sky.
You know why? The NSW Right have no push in Canberra atm.
[The Citizens Assembly was dumped after the minority agreements were struck. That was because the minority agreements stipulated action in place of inaction this term.]
We now have the evolution of the “citizens assembly” in the form of the travelling roadshow of scientists. But had there been a real “assembly” it certainly would have been great PR. It would have put climate science on the front page in a way the roadshow isn’t.
Gus @
Sorry if I was a bit brusque, I didn’t see your post as approval at all, far from it.
You are right, usually it is with one ‘b’ but it is listed in the Urban Dictionary with two. I checked before I posted.
Anyone using that moniker is probably going to be:
1. An Indigenous Australian being ironic,
2. An ignoramus who was unlucky in their choice of moniker,
3. A smart-arsked prat trying to inflame or,
4. A sweet little old church-going lady who has never had a bad word spoken in her presence in her life.
jv
The CA process was one year not three.
Scarpat@5223
It is a fascinating parliament. A beauty. I love it. I just wish Gillard & Co could get out there and lead on the action that they are now obliged to take.
[When the MSM is talking of Gillard being worse than Whitlam, you know she’s got problems.]
The Whitlam government was a good government. The proof of that is that the Fraser government kept nearly all of its policies, including its 5% of GDP spending increase.
To what extent, if any will abbott get seriously criticised in the weekend press about
his *the economists* are wrong on global warming & carbon tax ?
[She did also say that if the CA disagreed with an ETS that she wouldn’t proceed with an ETS, ie “clear warning bell” that a requirement for change hadn’t been reached.]
or having a plebiscite when you are not having a plebiscite…
[I just wish Gillard & Co could get out there and lead on the action that they are now obliged to take.]
How is she not leading?
[When the MSM is talking of Gillard being worse than Whitlam, you know she’s got problems.]
When the MSM is talking of Gillard being worse than Whitlam, you know it’s News Ltd.
j.v.
I don’t like the timeframe, as I indicated, but it’s also clear that the CA’s job was not to determine policy, but to provide feedback on the options.
It was fairly clear (and I have to say that I had access to the ‘talking points’ throughout the campaign and know what the ‘line’ was) that Labor was committed to action on climate change, and to achieving the 5% target regardless.
This is why ‘stop gap’ measures (admittedly second best) like the Cash for Clunkers scheme were also announced – as ways of keeping to the target in the absence (however long) of a formal carbon pricing structure.
I had always hoped (and stated a few times on this site) that a Green Senate would result in faster action and a better scheme, but to say that Labor was not acting at all (let alone had no intention to act) is simply wrong.
Dio
She actually didn’t, if you read the quote you quoted.
It’s ‘implied’.
From memory (I can’t be bothered doing another google) she was absolutely convinced that ordinary Australians, presented with the facts, would come down on the side of an ETS.
[To what extent, if any will abbott get seriously criticised in the weekend press about
his *the economists* are wrong on global warming & carbon tax ?]
I think it will make it to Insiders and maybe some opinion pieces tomorrow.
We live in paradoxical times, there is more information more easily available to people now than at any other time in history, but it doesn’t mean people are any smarter, and it means that someone like Abbott thinks that just because he has an opinion it is good ad expert opinion.
Evan can’t think for himself. His whole life and times is controlled by what the MSM say.
The rest of us have real lives.
Here is a curiosity.
When people here first heard that Rudd was starting with a 5% range there was strong criticism and disappointment. People were very unhappy with Rudd going so low.
Then we had policy be rejected twice in the Senate giving the opportunity for a DD. There was a lot of discussion here at the time of the merits of going to a DD and especially in relation to Senate terms getting out of sync. The consensus seem to be at the time that it was better to not go the DD path.
Then there were discussions in the kitchen cabinet on the ETS and we have been made aware that Gillard and Swan urged strongly to shelve the ETS (and implication that there was some sort of threat to go with that urging, and to shelve it permanently).
Rudd within that meeting(s) finally decided to shelve the ETS for a time. And lo it was immediately leaked to the media, before Rudd and co could plan a way to release this decision to the public. (The leakers were? Can only have been Swan or Gillard you would think).
Time passes and Rudd gets knifed, there was a momentary agreement between Gillard and Rudd, apparently to stay the knifing, and give Rudd time with the undertaking he would stand down voluntarily if polls were bad. One thing we learned in that arrangement was that he was working on a ETS policy for release prior to a November election. Apparently Gillard immediately reneged on that undertaking or so the story went.
One has to wonder among other things of the common thread of a real policy on CC/GW being perused by Rudd and spoiling action/knifing by others.
Now the narrative was that Rudd’s polls went down because of ‘his’ shelving the ETS (despite the efforts he made to get something through the Senate and all but getting it through to be thwarted by Turnbull’s knifing.)
It is curious though that this narrative clashes with Gillard’s follow up policy of a citizens assembly. A quite obvious do nothing policy with no expected outcomes until some time in the distant future.
The great irony of course was that Gillard (and whoever is behind all this) ended up having to support a carbon reduction solution in order to form Govt ‘with’ the Greens.
The common denominators of all this are that Rudd seemed to determined not to give up on an ETS and Gillard was determined to stymie any action.
It is also instructive regarding her supporters here that most here were not disgusted when Gillard came out with her citizens assembly approach, a quite obvious statement of do nothing and revealing her hand as not supporting action.
It seems to me that Gillard or her backers have been dead against an ETS and the like from very early on and have been attempting to spoil it and or Rudd since it became obvious what he was up to.
So will some Labor people cross the floor to support Abbott Coalition when he tries to rescind the Greens-‘Labor’ Carbon Tax plan? I think there will be some (enough) crossing the floor to do so when the time comes under some ruse and in support of their backers or the ideology of the toxic faction.
[When the MSM is talking of Gillard being worse than Whitlam, you know she’s got problems. ]
I imagine that’s because of the Coalition’s attempts to say that. But really, being compared to Whitlam should be considered a good thing.
And I think where the ‘Rudd would be doing the exact same in this situation’ scenario falters is that from what know of his governing style and relationship with the Greens, I don’t think the negotiations would have got this far. Even with the important role of the Greens/independents, Gillard should surely still get some credit for getting it done. Not that I expect it to be given to her.
The ABC’s coverage of the anti carbon tax rally featured someone holding another of those “Ditch The Witch” signs – that sort of stuff is deeply offensive towards Gillard.
Wonder if the rest of the media will pick this up?
[When the MSM is talking of Gillard being worse than Whitlam, you know she’s got problems.]
Is the msm saying this, or is it just the Sydney shockjocks?
Rudd perhaps would have got Katter on board, if he’d been in Gillard’s position after the last election.
Katter and Rudd are meant to have a strange sort of friendship.
[Rudd perhaps would have got Katter on board, if he’d been in Gillard’s position after the last election.]
And if your aunty had gonads ….
I’d rather have Oakshott and Windsor on board than Katter. 😉
[Wonder if the rest of the media will pick this up?]
The OO have it in a photograph, situated behind Barnaby.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/industry-mobilises-in-carbon-tax-battle/story-e6frg6xf-1226085548977
Just a bit of background info.. worth it for the list at the bottom 🙂
http://www.crikey.com.au/2007/11/29/the-howard-governments-record-of-political-appointments/
z
Yes, she doesn’t definitively say she would dump it but that is a pretty inescapable conclusion given the quote.
[”If I am wrong, and that group of Australians is not persuaded of the case for change, then that should be a clear warning bell that our community has not been persuaded as deeply as required about the need for transformational change,” the speech says.]
My opinion is that PM Julia Gilard did not intend to introduce an ETS in her first term without the weight of the populace behind her. I assume the CA was an attempt to build that consensus, but the idea did not factor in the partisanship of the msm and the impossible task it would become to generate an informed social discourse on an ETS.
The make-up of the parliament and the input of the Greens has forced Julia to go further than she ever imagined she could. I believer Julia has grown into the role and found a self-belief she did not have at the beginning of her term of office. Now faced with the barrage of opposition to her policies from the reactionary right, PM Gillard is standing her ground and we will see the ETS enacted.
[Rudd perhaps would have got Katter on board, if he’d been in Gillard’s position after the last election.]
I don’t think that would be a positive for anyone
[It seems to me that Gillard or her backers have been dead against an ETS and the like from very early on and have been attempting to spoil it and or Rudd since it became obvious what he was up to.]
Arbib and Bitar reportedly encouraged Rudd to go to a DD election over the CPRS. He refused. The rest, as they say is history.
If Rudd had had the courage of his convictions, he could’ve avoided the faction heads rolling him before an election.
Diogenes
You are correct on the 12 months planned for the CA. However, it was to be long enough to delay until the end of the term:
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-election/climate/gillard-seeks-citizens-group-on-ets-policy-20100722-10mzp.html#ixzz1Qr4lgicf
[When the MSM is talking of Gillard being worse than Whitlam, you know she’s got problems.]
Anyone who lived through that time knows very well this government has very few, if any, of the problems Whitlam’s government had.
george
[Rudd perhaps would have got Katter on board, if he’d been in Gillard’s position after the last election.
I don’t think that would be a positive for anyone]
Can you imagine running a country based on Katter agreeing with you and keeping on voting for you? We laugh at Bachmann and Palin but Katter is just as bad, although not as nasty.
The biggest failing for Labor last year was not selling the good story about the economy, it was barely mentioned in the election campaign – why, I wonder?
Because they’d have to address the elephant in the room, if they promoted Labor saving Australia from the global financial crisis(the elephant being a certain member for Griffith).