The latest Morgan poll combines the last two weekends’ face-to-face surveying, and shows a slight increase to the Coalition’s lead from the previous poll. Their primary vote is up a point to 46.5 per cent, with Labor steady on 36.5 per cent and the Greens down two to 10 per cent. The headline two-party figure has the Coalition leading 55.5-44.5, up from 54.5-45.5. The usual caveats should be added: Morgan’s face-to-face polls have showed a consistent bias to Labor over the years, but in the case of the two-party vote this is more than cancelled out by the highly idiosyncratic tendency of Morgan’s respondent-allocated preferences to split about 50-50 between the two major parties. Applying the more reliable method of allocating preferences according to the result of the previous election, the Coalition lead has gone from 51.5-48.5 to 53-47.
Other poll news:
• The latest seat-level Queensland state automated phone poll by ReachTEL targets 369 respondents in Lytton, to be vacated at the election by the retirement of former Deputy Premier Paul Lucas. It shows Labor’s 12.0 per cent margin set to be erased by a swing of 23 per cent, following polls indicating swings of 27 per cent in Stretton, 15 per cent in Ferny Grove, 26 per cent in Ipswich and 20 per cent in Bundamba. The poll for Lytton has the primary votes at 26 per cent for Labor, 48 per cent for the LNP, 13 per cent for Katter’s Australian Party and 9 per cent for the Greens. ReachTEL’s imperfect two-party measure (“if you were forced to make a choice between the two following candidates who would you choose?”) has the LNP leading at 62-38. Standard caveat: ReachTel is a new outfit using a methodology which is yet to prove its worth, and all the swings indicated are well over the 13 per cent indicated by recent Newspoll and Galaxy polling. Labor will preselect its candidate for Lytton tomorrow, the contenders being Peter Cumming, a Wynnum-Manly ward councillor and Left faction member, and Daniel Cheverton, described in the Wynnum Herald as a former policy adviser to Rachel Nolan who now works for an engineering company.
• A poll conducted for Australian Marriage Equality as part of Galaxy’s online omnibus surveying finds 80 per cent support for a Coalition conscience vote on same-sex marriage, with only 14 per cent opposed. It also has only 25 per cent nominating Labor as the party that best represents its views on same-sex marriage, compared with 32 per cent Liberal, 3 per cent Nationals and 13 per cent Greens, with 17 per cent for “none/don’t know”. The poll was conducted from November 25-27 from a sample of 1051; see here for delightfully detailed tables. This follows a similar poll in August which had 29 per cent strongly agreeing that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry, 31 per cent agreeing, 14 per cent disagreeing and 18 per cent strongly disagreeing. A striking gender divide was evident, with women twice as likely as men to strongly support same-sex marriage and men twice as likely as men to strongly oppose it, along with effects in the expected direction according to age and religion.
Despatches from last weekend’s ALP National Conference:
• The recommendations made in the post-election review conducted by Steve Bracks, John Faulkner and Bob Carr were mostly scotched, wih largely cosmetic exceptions. Most importantly, a plan to have a component of the National Conference be directly elected by the rank-and-filed has been referred to an implementation committee which the Left complains is unlikely to seriously progress it. Most of the 400 conference delegates are at present chosen by the state branches, which are responsible to state conferences which consist of 50 per cent union and 50 per cent constituency party representatives. NSW general secretary and Right faction figure Sam Dastyari had proposed the direct election of an extra 150 delegates – one from each of the 150 federal electorates – but the Left favoured a model in which half would be directly elected by party members and the other half directly appointed by trade unions (a presentation of the Right’s proposals is available from The Age). The resulting strengthening of the unions’ arm was widely criticised, although the Right was accused of using this as a pretext to scotch reforms which, in the view of a Right source quoted by Phillip Coorey of the Sydney Morning Herald, “would have diminished the faction’s influence by diluting the factional balance among delegates”. Alternatively, VexNews presumably speaks for the Right in complaining that the postal voting proposed for election of Conference delegates would confer an advantage on the Left, while Graham Richardson in The Australian expresses alarm at the near-success of Left policy measures that would have “finished” Julia Gillard, and cautions against “the practical effects of electing conference delegates directly by the rank and file”.
• Also rejected were proposals to give the elected national president and vice-presidents voting rights on the 20-member national executive; for state and territory presidents and vice-presidents to be elected by the rank-and-file; for the party’s national appeals tribunal to be given greater independence of the national executive; and for national executive and state administrative committee interventions into preselections to occur “only as a last resort”. It will be left to state branches to decide whether to implement a proposal to have 20 per cent of the preselection vote in some seats to be determined by primaries open to those willing to register as Labor supporters. A Left’s-eye-view of the fate of the Bracks-Faulkner-Carr recommendations has been obtained by Andrew Crook of Crikey.
A solitary preselection nugget:
• The Weekend Courier Community newspaper reports the Liberals have again endorsed Rockingham real estate agent Donna Gordin as their candidate for the southern Perth seat of Brand, held for Labor by Gary Gray on a margin of 3.3 per cent.
Last but not least, the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters has published its report on the funding of political parties and election campaigns, the conduct of which was part of the minority government agreements reached between Labor, the Greens and the independents after the 2010 election. It reiterates a number of measures which featured both in the government’s reform attempts in the previous term, which were thwarted in the Senate by the Coalition and Steve Fielding, and in the terms of the minority government agreement:
• The threshold for public disclosure of donations to political parties and third parties to be cut from $11,900 and $1000, reversing a radical change made in 2006 by the Howard government, with different state branches of the same party to be treated as the same entity to prevent multiple undisclosed donations;
• Disclosures of donations to be reported six-monthly rather than yearly, with the new report further suggesting donations over $100,000 be disclosed within two weeks;
• Public funding of parties and candidates who poll over 4 per cent of the vote to be limited to reimbursement of proved spending;
• Foreign donations and anonymous donations of over $50 to be banned, and harsher penalties imposed for various offences.
The new report also recommends that:
• Money from fund-raising events be treated as donations and disclosed accordingly;
• Administrative penalties rather than rarely pursued criminal prosecutions apply for “straightforward” offences;
• Options be explored to cap spending by third parties for a period before an election;
• Registered political parties receive public funding to cope with the administrative burden of the changes (which I would be seizing on right now were I a tabloid hack).
What the report doesn’t recommend is donation and expenditure caps such as those which have been introduced at state level in New South Wales and Queensland, or the Greens-backed proposal for a ban on donations from tobacco companies (which the Greens successfully lobbied for in NSW). The terms of reference also did not require consideration of the “truth-in-advertising” requirement provided for by the minority government agreement. A dissenting report from the Coalition members again disapproved of higher disclosure thresholds on the unconvincing grounds that it would “significantly impact the ability of individuals to give donations to political parties without the potential for intimidation and harassment”. It also called for a dedicated electoral fraud squad in the Australian Electoral Commission, to deal with an issue the AEC itself does not recognise as a serious problem.
I thought there were whispers, whispers mind you that the leaks were coming from a female minister.
I think there is a bit of truth in the view that international conferences are a bit of a gravy train for the participants. However, they are all we have in order to forge agreements to benefit the international community, so I think we just have to put up with that.
They often, however, actually do come up with ideas that in time morph into initiatives of general benefit and hopefully Durban will be in that category. I think it was actually quite good that high profile leaders kept away from Durban. They are not confined by positions they might have taken at the conference and have made a bit of space to quietly sign on to things that might have been too politically costly for them if they had bet too much on the outcome (refer Rudd and Copenhagen).
MTBW
That makes two of us. Feeney. Help us please!
Ctar – OK what has Carr done to upset people – serious question. i know little of him except he is passionate about Australian manufacturing.
daretoread @1312,
I agree with you re the name of ministers with potential.
However, I think there needs to be a distinction made between those with potential for future leadership positions and challengers.
The first is healthy , the second nothing more than navel gazing.
[It started last shuffle, but when the dim sims in the press demanded a minister for schools, the ideological change got lost and Dept Heads stayed in the same trough.]
good point, I do recall the ‘who is the minsiter for education’ bleating. Maybe a bridge too far, and we are more likely to see some of the Hawke style ‘super ministries’ with a strong communicator in charge (Shorten, Combet, Bowen, Plibersek). Ones based on Education/Innovation and IR/Industry could be the go.
daretoread @1312,
I agree with you re the name of ministers with potential.
However, I think there needs to be a distinction made between those with potential for future leadership positions and challengers.
The first is healthy and normal , the second nothing more than navel gazing.
With all due respect, of course.
Cheers
Dee
Wow!!!!!
There are not many female ministers so it narrows the field a bit. Macklin, Roxon, Wong???????????????
Dee
Have patience (I hope!)
Thefinnigans TheFinnigans天地有道人无道
Yay, Australia wins the Hockey World Championship.
now
MTBW those comments attributed to Rudd are probably, at least, third hand .They have then been cooked up into a nasty little brew to destabilise the government, as News always does, and continues their special pleading for a financial payout.
Boerwar runs with bullshit, if its has Rudd angle, as regularly as the Murdoch clockheads post it.
I hear yvette d ‘ath is happy to have recieved a call from the PM.
joe2
[Boerwar runs with bullshit, if its has Rudd angle, as regularly as the Murdoch clockheads post it.]
No arguement from me!
And I am a bit surprised BB has let a maiden get through his guard.
ajm
[I think there is a bit of truth in the view that international conferences are a bit of a gravy train for the participants. However, they are all we have in order to forge agreements to benefit the international community, so I think we just have to put up with that.]
About 4 years back I started being sent to carbon conferences and such like. Wow was I amazed. However after three or four conferences something struck me. Same people same speeches………everytime.Ended up totally depressed that nothing will happem until the shit hits the fan. 🙁 Nothing much changed my mind so far. Double 🙁 🙁 . This gives hope though.
[Big emitters vow action on climate change
The world’s major greenhouse gas emitters have agreed on a roadmap that – if followed – would lead to a global pact to tackle climate change with “legal force” by 2015.
Reached after a bruising 14-day conference in the South African city of Durban, it is the first time China, the US and India have said they were prepared to make commitments to combat global warming under a single legal agreement.
The deal was struck nearly 36 hours after conference was scheduled to finish amid concerns it could collapse without a deal on whether work should start on a legal treaty.
Advertisement: Story continues below
If reached, the legal deal would not start until 2020]
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/big-emitters-vow-action-on-climate-change-20111211-1opgw.html#ixzz1gD8Fviu0
@mtbw and daretotread – as requested genuine answer: I’d back him in a world class dummy spitting contest (and would find it hard to get a bet). He’s passionate alright but also a complete ars$ho^e.
Hey, but that’s just my opinion.
[I hear yvette d ‘ath is happy to have recieved a call from the PM.]
Commenting on her new hair color? Gotta keep those Queenslanders happy!
Anyone who knows of a reliable treatment for OCD should post it here.
[Commenting on her new hair color? Gotta keep those Queenslanders happy!]
AWU sprocket.
Best two things to happen to labor and the PM today are the article by Sam M and Abbotts call for Rudd to be dropped.
The PM will keep Kev in his current position and will be out there defending him tomorrow or whenever the changes are announced.
I think she will use the opportunity well to express her confidence in Kev.
Bit of a win win for her especially as todays article was obviously not a leak from anyone in government.
Anyway, I still think overall no one out there really gives a ratz.
PS Seems the MSM are getting a bit antzy about not being in the loop re the announcement of changes. They do not like being shown up as dills.
Doyley
You obviously understand real politics.
My view is that there are ALWAYS challengers waiting in the wings. Probably the whole Cabinet if truth be told, other than the senators, and those who are old or still too young.
Rudd obviously given the way he went is a potential challenger, as are Crean and Smith and Shorten and Combet and Albo and Roxon and even Swan. Each will make the call depending on the specific circumstances but each is ready and waiting. The key factors each considers are:
Factional support
Other support
The strengths and weaknesses of rivals
Long term probabilities of rivals
Right now Rudd is the main challenger because his star fades rapidly with time so he has no option of delay. Shorten can look longer term BUT has rivals in Combet and Albo. Similarly Combet and Albo if they wish to make a run must counter Shorten.
Smith rivals Shorten and also needs to make his move early if ever. So just NOW Smith and Rudd are Gillard’s two dangers. 6 months from now different story
The
I seem to remember the whispers were about the minister who talks in one monotonous tone.
Good news for Earth:
[UN climate talks have closed with an agreement that the chair said had “saved tomorrow, today”.
The European Union will place its current emission-cutting pledges inside the legally-binding Kyoto Protocol, a key demand of developing countries.
Talks on a new legal deal covering all countries will begin next year and end by 2015, coming into effect by 2020.
Management of a fund for climate aid to poor countries has also been agreed, though how to raise the money has not.
Talks ran nearly 36 hours beyond their scheduled close, with many delegates saying the host government lacked urgency and strategy.
Nevertheless, there was applause in the main conference hall when South Africa’s International Relations Minister, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, brought down the long-awaited final gavel.
“We came here with plan A, and we have concluded this meeting with plan A to save one planet for the future of our children and our grandchildren to come,” she said.
“We have made history.”]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16124670
This little black duck
[Anyone who knows of a reliable treatment for OCD should post it here.]
Would that enquiry be motivated by the PB Rudd vs Gillard thang ? As a masters thesis there could be a study of the relationship (if any) between being a Hilary booster and a Rudd booster during a comparison between the Rudd v Gillard and Hilary vs Obamageddon “debate.
@tlbd – If you’re feeling anxious about if your car doors are locked properly or things like that please seek help from a qualified doctor. (short term a drink may help).
[AWU]
hmmm, its all about balance – which is hard to maintain north of the Tweed.
Someone is giving JG some good advice about how to use the benefits of incumbency – and one of the benefits of being PM is that you allocate ministries.
Diogs,
See my earlier post re betting. I see resisting betting on political issues as a sign of maturity.
You made more predictions about Rann’s demise over two years than I’ve had hot breakfasts. Like all terrorists, you only have to be lucky once.
I distinctly remember you posting that Rann would be gone by September 13. I posted that if he was still Premier on September 13, Rann would be Premier on September 14. I think I was correct and you were wRong.
Ctar
Not helpful
You must have a reason to hate him so. Please hope it is NOT a factional squabble (or a personal one ie partners, jobs etc).
ruawake
[Commenting on her new hair color? Gotta keep those Queenslanders happy!
AWU sprocket.]
As an ex BLF I can only say “Death to the AWU”. They who sold out the workers in the Pilbara. Bastards.
Well, just been talking to my sister (who is a very savvy, VERY senior ex-federal public servant), and she believes the whole Ruddstoration thing is a complete crock of shit drummed up by antagonistic journos (mostly News Ltd) to destabilize the government.
She pointed out that no-one here on PB is ever likely to be an eye witness to the full context of any of the Rudd “scandals”. Seeing edited versions on TV and reading articles by “shocked” journos writing about a night at the pub doesn’t count as “reliable”.
So, until a major, undeniable move by Rudd occurs, and is admitted by Rudd as such, Sister Dear is not for turning. She believes the whole thing is a beat up, just as the “Godwin-Grech” emails were beat ups (and counterfeit to boot), just as the recent “Rudd move by end-November {insert month of choice here}” was a beat up, just as most of what you read in the crappy News rags is either a beat up , a bootstrap, or just an outright fabrication. Citing Abbott, in turn citing News Ltd stories, in turn citing “anonymous sources” also does not qualify as “evidence”.
When I think about it, she has a point.
I hestitate to say this, because it’s only circumstantial proof, not logical argument, but Sister Dear (Big Sister Dear, so I’m the “Little Brother”) is rarely wrong on these matters. She has a mind like a steel trap, which is what allowed her to prosper so well under Howard and Costello, running a -sub-department of nearly 4,000 staff, when in fact she hated every inch of their living guts, and always will.
Leroy
Posted Sunday, December 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm | Permalink
Greens response
http://www.greensmps.org.au/content/media-release/durban-agreement-leaves-gaping-gaps-emissions-finance-and-legal-form
Durban agreement leaves gaping gaps on emissions, finance and legal form
Media Release | Spokesperson Christine Milne
Sunday 11th December 2011, 5:04pm
Re also BB lambasting ALP, I sometimes wonder if these outbursts from either side(but usually the Greens) are to show the general public that they arn’t in “bed together” and make TA and Noalition looks stupid(which isn’t hard to do) on their comments re PM Bob Brown etc
[
Someone is giving JG some good advice about how to use the benefits of incumbency – and one of the benefits of being PM is that you allocate ministries.
]
As Sir Humphrey Appleby once said
[
The Prime Minister giveth and the Prime Minister taketh away, blessed be the name Prime Minister.
]
Dee
None of the three really use the full vocal range but I would not describe any of them and mono tonal
Hy on earth would mr, albanese want to be pm
Not every one want to be surely
Mr smith. Very unlikely,
Daretotread have u ever thought of writing g tv scripts
I think u would of been good writing spooks for the bbc
@daretotread – I don’t hate the guy at all. His behavior sets him apart. Nothing factional or personal.
[Well, just been talking to my sister (who is a very savvy, VERY senior ex-federal public servant), and she believes the whole Ruddstoration thing is a complete crock of shit drummed up by antagonistic journos (mostly News Ltd) to destabilize the government.]
There you go ….
DareToTread
[None of the three really use the full vocal range but I would not describe any of them and mono tonal]
Then you have not been listening. 😉 😀
[joe2
Posted Sunday, December 11, 2011 at 6:59 pm | Permalink
MTBW those comments attributed to Rudd are probably, at least, third hand.]
Ten journos were in a bar – Friday night a week ago.
All witnessed Rudd saying “F*ck the future and flipping the bird.
And nothing was reported, tweeted, whispered even, until 9 days later??
Believable?
Why wait till today????
[They have then been cooked up into a nasty little brew to destabilise the government, as News always does,]
Looks like it. Especially as whichever way it’s painted it’s a kick in the pants for Gillard and Rudd.
[and continues their special pleading for a financial payout.]
As in, Hey Gillard, we’ll give Rudd a kick in the googlies for you in return for $2 million.
How can we tell if it’s made up or not?
Last Sunday, Maiden’s piece spoke of airbrushing:
[Gillard and Wayne Swan’s bids to airbrush Kevin at the ALP conference at the weekend were clumsy.]
and
[The Foreign Minister was being airbrushed out as he sat with a forced smile in the front row.]
This week,
[he Foreign Minister needed little encouragement, openly accusing the Prime Minister of “airbrushing” him from history and making jokes about her “Toys R Us” speech (which we already knew he’d said at the conference itself)]
and
[Laughing that he was just back from visiting the heavily armed border to the dictatorship of North Korea, Rudd joked that over there leaders were literally airbrushed out of photographs.]
Something smells very fishy here.
GG
I said he wouldn’t last to the next election and won in a canter. I still can’t understand why you thought he’d last.
@my say – agree with you on Smith and Albanese. I don’t think either of them want to be PM at the moment.
kezza
[Ten journos were in a bar – Friday night a week ago.
All witnessed Rudd saying “F*ck the future and flipping the bird.
And nothing was reported, tweeted, whispered even, until 9 days later??
Believable?
Why wait till today????]
Because there had to be the inevitable Sunday Rudd story.
[Something smells very fishy here.]
Maybe the Sunday Tele was being put to good use, wrapping fish?
[daretotread
Posted Sunday, December 11, 2011 at 6:11 pm | Permalink
GG
And if Shorten challenges, will he too be a disloyal rat/vermin.
BW
Get over yourself you paranoid bore]
My emphasis.
I’ve said this before, and feel it’s necessary to repeat it, but it’s telling that the Rudd Cult are a) incapable of tolerating views which are contrary to their own, and b) are incapable of responding to the well-articulated points Boerwar makes about Rudd’s clear destabilising efforts without personal invective.
It says an awful lot about those commenters. And not in a positive way.
madcyril @1381,
I think the PM is playing it very well.
She has the authority.
daretoread @1370,
I doubt I have any knowledge of real politics. I just do not think at the moment the PM has any real ” now is the time, I have the numbers ” challengers.
But geeze, I enjoy the political game very much.
Lightly catching up on the days’ posts:
[“Julia Gillard has a problem in this area. She said before the election there’d be no carbon tax under the government I lead. She’s done the opposite. Now, she said before the election there’d be no gay marriage under the government I lead, and plainly she is permitting or she is planning to permit the Parliament to debate this issue.]
Did Gillard really say “there’d be no gay marriage under the government I lead”.
Or is that just yet another Abbott lie?
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/no-free-vote-on-gay-marriage-abbott/story-e6frea73-1226219188117
And the photo of Rudd with the two bar staff.
Looks like it landed on Maiden’s desk – and away the little muppet went.
Inserting her own hairbrushing into a non-story.
btw, Rudd doesn’t look pissed in the photo
And it looks suspiciously like the type of photo from a camera phone.
Rummel
as I say – you are clueless on AGW and you have proved it. You are so clueless you don’t realise how clueless you are. For a swathe of empirical evidence (i.e. measurements showing warming and changes in weather patterns consistent with predictions) see the links I provided and the many scientific research and papers behind them. There is not a single definitive 100% ‘proof’ just a mountain of work all pointing one way. You may as well ask “show me the proof of continental drift” or “show me the proof of evolution” or even “show me 100% proof that smoking causes cancer”.
As for you uninformed comments on models – why haven’t the very well funded anti-action lobby been able to come up with credible models showing no warming if they’re so easy to fake? In fact, the opposite has happened with Koch brothers funded scientists concluding that warming is real and human caused. Many former ‘no warming’ scientists are now conceding ‘some’ warming is human caused (even ‘Lord’ Monckton says “‘Only’ 1 degree warming” without the decency to add “but you may want to take that with a grain of salt because for the past decade I had been saying the world was cooling and humans did not contribute at all”.
It is true that current and ‘locked-in’ warming from emissions to date will be not be reversed for 1,000 years, but what we are talking about is keeping emissions below potentially dangerous and even catastrophic levels. The palaeo-geographic record suggests were will hit this if we don’t act to reduce emissions. Our choice is, live with manageable levels of warming or risk catastrophe. If you don’t understand this, then you do not understand the issue and should be embarrassed to show your ignorance.
You show levels of scientific illiteracy here (and yes I am a scientist with economics qualifications) that should embarrass you and provoke some humility (you argue from a position of “I don’t understand the science; therefore the science is wrong”). But given the general level of ignorance and arrogance in your posts on a wide range of issues, I suspect your are one of the Bolt/Kennett “so-egocentric-and-arrogant-they-don’t-understand-how-dumb-they-are” types that seem to dominate conservative politics.
kezza
ltd news is a barrel of rotting fisheads
[Ten journos were in a bar – Friday night a week ago.
All witnessed Rudd saying “F*ck the future and flipping the bird.]
Fuacked if I know the context but if I was KR and had bloody journos asking about my “future” for the brazillionth time (as he has been ) I’d say “Fuack the Future ” too.
‘Ten journos in a bar”
Is the collective for journos an “Adultery”?
Oh, this is good. Hilarious even:
[ Young Liberals to debate policies
BY MICHAEL INMAN
DUMPING our biggest trading partner, prohibiting abortion and increasing the age of pornography consumption to 21 will be debated at the ACT Young Liberals policy meeting this week.
Nuclear power, opposing cuts to the public service and privatising tertiary education are also on the agenda when the political leaders of tomorrow meet at Menzies House on Thursday.
The meetings’ agenda, leaked to the Sunday Canberra Times, contains 14 motions that, if successful, would become the ACT’s contribution to the Young Liberals Federal Convention on the Gold Coast in January.
But the conservative nature of some of the motions does not sit well with all party members, especially the intention to rescind existing policies and replace them with policies abandoned by the modern senior liberal party.
Disgruntled members are particularly incensed that the normally pro-free market party would discuss a policy to halt trade with countries which do not have democratically-elected governments, including China.
As Australia’s largest trading partner, such a move would forego almost $100billion in business.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/young-liberals-to-debate-policies/2388447.aspx ]
Yep, privatise tertiary education because they can afford it, but let’s get rid of those public service cuts which would affect their parents. And let’s stop all trade with China just for good measure.
This is the future of the Liberal Party? Yikes!