This week’s Essential Research shows no real change on voting intention, with the Coalition still leading 56-44 from primary votes of 32% for Labor (down one), 49% for the Coalition (steady) and 10% for the Greens (steady). Also featured are Essential’s monthly personal ratings, which likewise show little shift. Julia Gillard is down a point on both approval and disapproval, to 31% and 57%. Tony Abbott is respectively up one to 36% and down two to 51%, and his lead as preferred prime minister is up from 38-37 to 38-36 (I guess not too many people heard this then). A question on same-sex marriage finds 54% supportive and 33% opposed, respectively steady and down two on a year ago.
Preselection snippets:
• Phillip Coorey of the Sydney Morning Herald reports Gary “Angry” Anderson will seek Nationals preselection in Gilmore, the southern New South Wales seat which will be vacated at the election by the retirement of Liberal member Joanna Gash.
• In the neighbouring seat of Hume, where Liberal member Alby Schultz is retiring, Coorey further reports that state upper house MP Niall Blair is a further possibility as Nationals candidate, together with presumed front-runners Senator Fiona Nash and state government minister Katrina Hodgkinson. Leslie White of the Weekly Times recently reported both Nationals and Liberal internal polling had the Liberals ahead in the seat, but the Nationals remained confident they could win with Nash or Hodgkinson running.
• The Australian reports Matt Adamson, former Canberra, Penrith and national rugby league player, has been sounded out by the Liberals to run against Rob Oakeshott in Lyne. The Nationals have already endorsed David Gillespie, a local doctor who was best man at Tony Abbott’s wedding.
• The Victorian ALP has taken care of a whole bunch of preselection business, re-endorsing all sitting members and confirming Slater & Gordon lawyer Andrew Giles to succeed Harry Jenkins in Scullin, and United Voice official Lisa Chesters to succeed Steve Gibbons in Bendigo. The preselection for Melbourne will be held on August 26, with 2010 candidate Cath Bowtell considered the front-runner but Harvey Stern, president of Labor for Refugees Victoria, is also in the field.
• John Hogg, Queensland Labor Senator since 1996 and the chamber’s current President, has announced he will not re-contest the next election. Michael McKenna of The Australian reports Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Union state secretary Chris Ketter is “among the frontrunners” to replace him as a Labor Senate candidate – remembering that Labor won three Senate seats in Queensland in 2007, and the party fears it may only win one next year.
[You don’t see it because this is all a football team matter for you (just find some way to make any eventuality a good thing for the ALP).]
HA! What hypocrisy!
The only reason you think the Coalition has better economic policies is because you think the Coalition has better economic policies.
You’ve never explained what those policies are and / or why they are superior.
On the big economic reform of the day, the carbon price, you just admitted you don’t even understand how it works and why it was designed the way it was.
And YET, you want us to take you seriously when you say the Coalition has superior economic policies!
You are the ULTIMATE football team barracker in this forum!
Mod – excuse for Latham… yeah, i cant argue with that. But you would be into a second term of PM Costello by now if he had won. Maybe ALP guys can say the equivalent in the next few yrs if current polling holds
thank you puff,, i see mary as a great educater of the the poor
there was little schooling in the early 1800. marys work began in Penola
and spread throughout australia i think about 46 schools.
she rode of horse back to see the nuns at her schools and tend the sick.
surley a great australian.
also travelled to NZ where schools where set up there also
Expat Follower:
Pfft. Whatever.
You turn up here tonight for the first time in god knows how long, breathing fire and brimstone and wanting to judge. Go for it. I certainly couldn’t give a shit about your views. I ain’t religious sweetheart.
But lay off my say. And lay off the gender and disability assumptions. Make your case using evidence and non gendered, inclusive language.
OK Shows:
Tell me this.
If the rest of the world doesn’t follow suit to reduce carbon emissions, will we get the 2.5oC limit?
If we are not looking like meeting the trendline for the 2.5oC limit, does that mean the carbon tax is a failure?
You say we need the price to be $23 because thats what the report said we needed. Fine. If it is as painless and perfect as you suggest, why not have a higher price and use the funds to provide further compensation and cause an even greater reduction in emissions?
Could it be that it has a negative effect on the economy and jobs and that the rest of the world aint coming along for the ride?
[JULIA Gillard left her job as a partner with law firm Slater & Gordon as a direct result of a secret internal probe in 1995 into controversial work she had done for her then boyfriend, a union boss accused of corruption, The Weekend Australian can reveal.
Nick Styant-Browne, a former equity partner of the firm, broke a 17-year silence yesterday to reveal that the firm’s probe included a confidential formal interview with the Prime Minister – then an industrial lawyer – on September 11, 1995, which was “recorded and transcribed”.]
Well this could be nothing at all, or something juicy indeed or the beginning of a series of small revelations from the news on Gillard over the next week or so culminating in something. But don’t ‘sound’ too good for her already poor public trust/honesty perception.
Well I guess Windsor could release his tape message from Abbott who next to nobody would car about.
Bemused
Sainthood in the Catholic Church follows certain procedures and being Catholic and dead are two of them.
My Say really likes Julia Gillard, and for a woman of religious faith like My Say, it shows open-mindedness and a rejection of dogma, to not care a fig that Julia Gillard is an atheist. I wish more people of the church were like that.
Puff, i only used Mary McK to illustrate a point to mysay. she says i dont live in oz therefore am not entitled to comment, well the intellectual equivalent of that is to tell her ‘you werent around when MM was therefore you are not entitled to an opinion about her’. Its a stupid argument of course, and i pass no substantive opinion on MM whatsoever or mysay’s right to admire/detest her.
This in response to her deciding to respond to me with the foreigner argument, until then i had nothing to say to or about her whatsoever. Confessions leaping in there without reading or thinking just speaks for itself. “Wanting to judge” – what a larf, (s)/he took about 2 min to label someone a misoginyst Liberal. Hypocrisy personified.
[Hypocrisy personified.]
Bingo
Mod, all i trust is that you were making these same arguments to the Howard Government in 2007… I think not somehow!
PTMD @ 7157
Hahahahaha… Well I wasn’t wishing either of those conditions on JG.
Well fancy that!
I also don’t give a fig that my say is a Catholic.
Thomas Paine
That is a dry old bone indeed. The Fibs have often sniffed at it, rolled it over, and tried to find a smell or a hint of flesh there. What they fail to see is though it looks like a bone, and can appear enticing from a distance when there is nothing else to hunt, when you get up close you see it is one of those squeaky rubber doggy toys,
Oh Look…Rudd has surfaced this weekend …. this could be a very interesting few weeks.
[FORMER prime minister Kevin Rudd has defended his decision to abandon the Howard government’s Pacific Solution, saying his government had a mandate in 2007 to cease offshore processing of asylum-seekers.
Speaking at a function in Melbourne last night, Mr Rudd said he had been carrying out the will of the voters at the federal election in closing asylum-seeker processing centres in the Pacific.]
Common Rudd, jump ship from the Liberal Lites. 🙂 hehe
[Expat Follower
Posted Saturday, August 18, 2012 at 12:59 am | Permalink
Mod, all i trust is that you were making these same arguments to the Howard Government in 2007… I think not somehow!]
You only introduced me to this blog after then so there is no proof of anything I believed before 2007!
[ the intellectual equivalent of that is to tell her ‘you werent around when MM was therefore you are not entitled to an opinion about her’.]
What a stupid comment.
In 200, 400, 1000 years time people will be passing jugdement on Australian politics as it exists today.
Will they be entitled to do so given they weren’t around at the time present day events were unfolding?
Amazing. Please remain an expat. No, seriously, please.
[confessions
Posted Saturday, August 18, 2012 at 1:02 am | Permalink
the intellectual equivalent of that is to tell her ‘you werent around when MM was therefore you are not entitled to an opinion about her’.
What a stupid comment.]
Confessions:
Have you worked out yet that that is the exact accusation mysay levelled against expat?
The mysay you defend so vigorously and the expat to condemn so vehemently….
Its just delicious 🙂
[OK Shows:
Tell me this.
If the rest of the world doesn’t follow suit to reduce carbon emissions, will we get the 2.5oC limit?]
Your use of the word “follow” is misleading because there are many countries that are already doing MORE than Australia. Australia is doing about the same as the U.S. when you take into account that California and New York will start two of the world’s biggest carbon trading schemes on January 1 of next year.
[If we are not looking like meeting the trendline for the 2.5oC limit, does that mean the carbon tax is a failure?]
No, because Australia alone can’t solve global warming. And remember, this isn’t a competition between the carbon price mechanism and doing NOTHING, the alternative is the Coalition’s policy of paying polluters massive subsidies to encourage them to reduce their pollution. The Coalition’s policy may achieve the same objective, but over a few decades it will cost hundreds of billions of dollars more which means it is much more likely to be a FAILURE.
[You say we need the price to be $23 because thats what the report said we needed. Fine. If it is as painless and perfect as you suggest, why not have a higher price and use the funds to provide further compensation and cause an even greater reduction in emissions?]
Because a higher price initially means higher flow on costs throughout the economy. The idea is for the price to increase slowly over time. This means businesses can choose whether they just buy permits, or if they should invest in technologies to reduce their emissions. Of course the businesses know that in the longer term, the cost of permits will be higher, so they may get away with just buying permits for a few years, but they know that down the track cutting emissions will be more cost effective.
[Could it be that it has a negative effect on the economy and jobs and that the rest of the world aint coming along for the ride?]
Again you seem to be completely basing your opinion of the policy on a TOTAL MYTH that other countries aren’t doing ANYTHING, but this is untrue!
There is an entire Productivity Commission report comparing Australia’s action with action in other parts of the world:
http://www.pc.gov.au/projects/study/carbon-prices/report/
If you are actually interested in this issue, why not read the report to see where Australia’s actions fit in with the rest of the world?
Now Australia has had a range of carbon abatement policies for about 13 years, but the Grattan Institute, an NGO, did a report that found that these 200 odd policies have actually been very expensive. The average abatement cost is over $100 a tonne. The BEST policy was the NSW carbon trading scheme, the FIRST carbon trading scheme in the world which abated carbon at about $40 per tonne.
If you think cutting emissions is important, shouldn’t we adopt a policy that will do it as cheaply as possible with as little damage to the policy as possible?
This is not a debate between carbon pricing and NOTHING, it is between the carbon pricing policy that started on July 1, and a range of ad hoc direct intervention policies that have simply cost more money and achieved less abatement.
Confessions – thank you, you have just made my argument for me.
Again, if only you read before you reflex speak/act/whatever it is you are prone to do, then the world will be a better place. And you might come across as a remotely intelligent human being.
[Make your case using evidence]
at 7154 above is now followed by
[Please remain an expat. No, seriously, please]
you are taking the piss, am chagrined to have taken the bait and taken u seriously!
Mod, yeah we all know you were Barrie Unsworth’s staffer back in the day
Shows:
So you admit it is a drag on the economy so it is important where the price is set then. That is the point I was making, is $23 the right balance between the loss of Australian economic growth and Australian jobs versus a reduction in global temperatures.
Perhaps $23 is perfect. I don’t know. What worries me is that I have absolutely no confidence that those, like you, who confidently espouse that you DO KNOW, are actually right in your projections of what is going to happen over then next century!
Now I have to give warning that I must head off to bed soon…..hard week at work.
Never fear, you know I will be back, so you can take up the cudgels again soon enough 🙂
[Expat Follower
Posted Saturday, August 18, 2012 at 1:14 am | Permalink
Mod, yeah we all know you were Barrie Unsworth’s staffer back in the day]
Don’t knock Bazza!
He is starting to look really good after the slosh we have had in the NSW ALP since then!
& while to Oz is digging around in Gillard’s past, let’s hope for the sake of balance they revisit Abbott’s sexual assault charges – an interview with the woman he groped and witnesses other than his mates. then they can delve into some of this student politics antics. I also want a jounro to ask him what he meant by ‘no specific knowledge’ of the Ashby -Brough collusion against Slipper. if abbott uses a weasel word qualifier such as ‘specific’, my sense is he had considerable knowledge of what was going ion,
ahhh, u pine for Barry Unsworth and me for the days of Greiner/Fahey. Poor John Fahey, the most undeserving of electoral losses i can think of (apart from Keneally of course) 🙂
Abbott plots closely to Latham on the deranged lunatic scale… australians have to pick up on this eventually? to stick with him really means they must detest Julia Gilliard… even a tribalist like Mod Lib doesnt go that far
[even a tribalist like Mod Lib doesnt go that far]
R U one of these “tribalists”?
If one can buy it or it is shown in Oz, the HBO tv series The Newsroom is a must watch. Veteren news presenter and a young news team set out to report news authentically in the USA. The show dramarises the current probems with infotainment and politicised news channels.
i would definitely vote Labour over Abbott & co. Turnbull (if he could execute his personal platform) would make me look v closely, and i would probably have voted for Ron Paul against Keneally and Bligh
[Shows:
So you admit it is a drag on the economy so it is important where the price is set then.]
Of course the price is important, but saying it is a “drag” is a complete exaggeration. The economy is still growing, jobs are being created, inflation is very low.
Is their an economic cost associated with the carbon price? YES, but guess what, there is actually an even bigger economic cost caused by NOT having a carbon price, because non-market mechanisms end up costing an enormous amount of money, such as over $100 per tonne of carbon abated!!!
Can you please tell me how much the Coalition’s carbon abatement policy will drag on the economy in, say, 2040 when the federal government could well be spending $100 billion a year just on carbon abatement?
[That is the point I was making, is $23 the right balance between the loss of Australian economic growth and Australian jobs versus a reduction in global temperatures.]
The difference between Australia’s GDP with or without the carbon price between now and 2020 is basically imperceptible. Here is the chart from the Treasury modelling:
HOWEVER, keep this in mind. That modelling is based on the assumption that the effects of climate change DON’T effect the economy.
Let’s say that in 2040 we are starting to get some bad effects from climate change, like more frequent droughts.
Do you think that may have an effect on GDP?
My point is that there are very definite costs associated with Australia and the world not acting on climate change.
[Perhaps $23 is perfect. I don’t know. What worries me is that I have absolutely no confidence that those, like you, who confidently espouse that you DO KNOW, are actually right in your projections of what is going to happen over then next century!]
Well If you are talking about a 100 year time scale, why are you crapping on about $23? There is no way the carbon price will be $23 in 100 years from now.
[Now I have to give warning that I must head off to bed soon…..hard week at work.]
Why should I have any confidence that you actually need to go to bed and aren’t just slinking away because you’ve lost another debate? Why should I be so certain that you actually need to go to bed?
Agreed with Confessions, piss off ex pat with your faux empathy.
Where do you live?
yeah Mod, get your hand off it, we know its only 7pm on Planet Bronnie (in 1954)
[Why should I be so certain that you actually need to go to bed?]
Because I am old, not quite as old as you, but old, and its 1:30 in the morning!
It has been a very fun night though….particularly since my old friend Expat was here!
But for now, alas, it is good night all!
😉
whoa, Henry’s meds have worn off… time to dash
[Because I am old, not quite as old as you, but old, and its 1:30 in the morning!]
I note that you didn’t bother commenting on that GDP chart that shows your entire argument that the carbon price is a drag on the economy is a sham.
How much of a drag will the Coalition’s climate change policy be on the economy when they are paying for abatement at a cost of $100 a tonne?
Please do ex pat.
OK, I have to come back for that one!!!!
Shows:
Is that Treasury projecting impacts out for a century the same Treasury that was 10 Billion out on a 10 Billion mining tax in a matter of just a few weeks?
LOL 🙂
I would have expected more from someone who was apparently quoted in Hansard!
[OK, I have to come back for that one!!!!
Shows:
Is that Treasury projecting impacts out for a century the same Treasury that was 10 Billion out on a 10 Billion mining tax in a matter of just a few weeks?]
How can you say how accurate the Treasury’s modelling of the Resource Rent Tax is when it only started operation this financial year? How do YOU know what the final outcome will be when this financial year has only been going for 1.5 months!?
LOL!
I’m somewhat surprised that you would shift your attention to attacking the treasury, because it would be that very same treasury that would model the coalition’s policy if they were elected!
But more to the point, if you honestly think the Treasury’s modelling of the carbon price is wrong, please provide for all of us your alternative modelling so we can see the exact areas where you think they made mistakes.
Mod lib, you don’t have an economic leg to stand on with the coalitions nonsense.
Do you really think the libs have a clue re: the economy? Think the coalitions direct action plan stands up?
[Do you really think the libs have a clue re: the economy? Think the coalitions direct action plan stands up?]
Apparently a market mechanism that achieves abatement at least cost would be a “drag” on the economy, but the coalition’s plan that would probably achieve abatement at triple or quadruple the cost (just look at the Grattan institute report that found most subsidy schemes have abatement costs of over $100 per tonne) wouldn’t be a drag on the economy.
That’s how economics works in Mod Lib world.
Shame, Henry, Mod has gone to sleep. Would you like some faux empathy?
You are not worthy of my empathy ex pat.
some comprehension issues in amongst the other ones, i see
A lot of respect shown on PB last night – Long Tan, Malaysia, rummel’s cause.
Very, very nice.
Oh dear, Mod Lib demonstrating why abject failure to reason or to challenge ones own assumptions or even to curiously seek out the truth tends to go hand in hand with voting Liberal.. the Party you choose when all you have left is base emotions and misguided selfishness.
Whatever happened to Truthy? Did he get banned here? He’s been spewing his usual bullshit in Whirlpool late, and getting his ass scorched – which is kinda fun.
New thread.
Anyone still naive enough to believe that the land of the free and the home of the brave is not going after Julian Assange with a noose hanging from its saddle should read Philip Dorling in Fairfax this morning.
Australia, the UK and Sweden are obviously in thrawl to the very angry bullies in the US government by allowing the extradition process to proceed apace via trumped up sexual assault allegations in Sweden, and a threatened “storming” of the Ecuadorean embassy in London. Australia has not lifted a finger to assist Assange, despite all the platitudinous bulldust.
(great word “thrawl”, comes from Macbeth I think).
And it now looks like the UK has poked a hornet’s nest in Latin America. None of these countries, after a century of violent political interference from the USA, take well to being patronised or threatened by the First World.
How uncharacteristically undiplomatic of the UK. Was everyone in the Foreign Office on holiday after the Olympics the day they decided to write that stupid letter to Ecuador? Geeze Louise, the next games are in Rio de Janiero.
Meanwhile, the Gillard Government continues the sad pretence of “I know nothing”, and Bob Carr might think he is getting away with stonewalling the querulous probing of our pea-brained press gallery, but he is not.
Yesterday, during a freezing snowfall in Canberra, about 12 brave souls stood outside the British High Commission holding placards and being rude to the British. Lots of cars driving past, in the Peoples’ Republic of the ACT, honked. I emailed the Ecuadorean Embassy, thanking them for protecting one of our citzens.
Not happy, Julia.
Has Mod Lib presented his alternate carbon price modelling yet?