Easter has meant that only the regular weekly pollsters have reported this week, which means Essential Research and Morgan. The latter polls weekly but reports fortnightly, which I deal with by dividing each fortnightly result into two data points, each with half the published sample size. Neither Essential nor Morgan is radically off beam, so this week’s movements involve a correction after last week’s Greens outlier from Nielsen. This is not to say that Nielsen’s Greens surge was measuring nothing at all, the 17% result perhaps having been partly a reflection of it being the poll most proximate to the WA Senate election. In fact, both of the new results this week find the Greens at their highest level since at least the last election, and probably a good while earlier. Their 11% rating in Essential may not appear too spectacular, but it comes from what is the worst polling series for them by some distance – indeed, the only one the BludgerTrack model does not deem to be biased in their favour. Nonetheless, their rating in BludgerTrack this week comes off 1.8% on last week’s Nielsen-driven peak.
The dividend from the Greens’ loss has been divided between other parties in such a way as to produce essentially no change on two-party preferred. However, state relativities have changed in such a way as to cost Labor three seats and its projected majority, illustrating once again the sensitivity of Queensland, where a 0.8% shift has made two seats’ worth of difference. The New South Wales result has also shifted 0.6% to the Coalition, moving a third seat back into their column. Another change worth noting is a 2.4% move to Labor in Tasmania, which is down to a methodological change – namely the inclusion, for Tasmania only, of the state-level two-party preferred results that Morgan has taken to publishing. I had not been putting this data to use thus far, as the BludgerTrack model runs off primary votes and the figures in question are presumably respondent-allocated preferences besides. However, the paucity of data for Tasmania is such that I’ve decided it’s worth my while to extract modelled primary votes from Morgan’s figures, imperfect though they may be. The change has not made any difference to the seat projection, this week at least.
Finally, I’ve amused myself by producing primary vote and two-party preferred trendlines for each of the five mainland states, which you can see below. These suggest that not too much has separated New South Wales and Victoria in the changes recorded over the current term, leaving aside their very different starting points. However, whereas the Coalition has had a very gentle upward trend this year in Victoria and perhaps also New South Wales, their decline looks to have resumed lately in Queensland. Last week I noted that six successive data points I was aware of had Labor ahead on two-party preferred in Queensland, including five which are in the model and a Morgan result which is not. That’s now extended to eight with the availability of two further data points this week. The other eye-catching result in the charts below is of course from Western Australia, which clearly shows the effects of the Senate election with respect to both the Greens and Palmer United. The current gap between Labor and the Greens is such that the latter could well win lower house seats at Labor’s expense on these numbers – not that I recommend holding my breath waiting for that to happen.
My favourite headline has always been “Blow jobs for 200”, apparently it was supposed to be “Jobs blow for 200”.
Could be apocryphal though…
Will James Bond be here to save us?
Retweeted by Josh Taylor
Scott @scottsues 10m
James Bond will return in THE WORLD IS FUKT
“@trendinaliaAU: 4 verified accounts helped to turn ‘World is Fukt’ into a Trending Topic. Some of them: @mumbrella, @nicchristensen & @bronwen — #trndnl”
347
There are currently 10 Greens, 9 (2 elected in 2007, 1 to fill the remainder of Bob Brown`s term for which he was elected in 2007 and 6 elected in 2010) in the Senate, with a further Senator elected in 2013 to bring the numbers to 10 in the Senate and 11 in total.
Bob Ellis on his site”Table Talk”
Looks at the folly of the buying of this new” Dud” US aircraft
He sees it a a vast waste od mney in the lack of any discernable threat to Australia and mocks the whole Defence cligue and their liking for very expensive toys
what nonsense ..what deception haa brought this mad scheme to fruition
and where is there a threat…NZ ? PNG ? surely not the Indons ?
If the Greens oppose the purchase ,good on them for commonsense and having the courage to defy our own war mongers
Tom the first and best@354
… and I’ll bet none of them can explain what their own “Peace and Security” policy actually means!
With Russia vs Ukraine+China supporting Russia, China vs Japan/USA+South Korea.
I don’t think we need to be visiting to increase our Defenses anytime soon, we should stay out of it (apart from AID response).
Read Ellis on the US plane folly…and he’s no Green
_________________________
What a shame there is nobody in the ALP with the courage to say “Stop”
http://www.ellistabletalk.com/2014/04/24/that-is-the-question-6/
“You are contradicting yourself. On the one hand you say the policies were “fully investigated”. On the other, you say the policies cannot be expected to be detailed enough to be costed at all.
Which is it?
Anyway, I am not asking for costings, and I am beginning to understand Boerwar’s frustration – why can’t the Green’s ever answer a simple question:
Will you support new defence spending if it is required to adequately defend Australia?
And if so, doesn’t that contradict your own “Peace and Security” policy”
No, I didn’t contradict myself. In one statement I said ‘Policies’ and in the other I said ‘Spending commitments’
Your question
“Will you support new defence spending if it is required to adequately defend Australia?”
Is actually impossible to answer. You have to define what is ‘adequately defend’ – and if it is what I think it is; I would expect the the Greens to answer “Yes”
And this was never a question asked by Boerwar… So not sure why you are talking about him.
For interest, bludgers may enjoy reading this report
https://www.google.com.au/search?q=co2+abatement+-+reforestation&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&gfe_rd=cr&ei=yMRYU6uaDMuN8QeWmYG4Ag
published as a pdf by Reputex and done for the WWF.
UNLOCKING LAND SECTOR ABATEMENT: OUTLOOK FOR THE EMISSIONS REDUCTION FUND
Prepared for WWF-Australia
This report compared the abatement available from
Savannah burning
Landfill diversion
Reforestation
Reducing deforestation
Reducing cropland soil emissions
Landfill and wastewater gas
Generally described as the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI). At $5.00/tonne, they estimate about 2mt CO2-e of abatement would be supplied. This compared with more than10 mt CO2-e with a carbon price @ $20.00/tonne.
The report continues…
[It is well understood that the land sector has the potential to play a significant role in Australia’s transition to a low-carbon economy by protecting existing carbon stores, boosting rates of carbon sequestration and implementing new, low-carbon, farming practices.
Analysis suggests that the full potential of the land sector, however, may not be realised either under the CPM or the ERF, even if prices under the ERF are higher than anticipated. Modelling of the ERF presented here suggests that only 2 to 15 per cent of Australia’s total 2020 abatement challenge will be delivered through the CFI….
Providing long-term price certainty
While a high price is required to drive carbon sequestration projects under the CFI, high prices alone are not sufficient to incentivise more investment. The long-term nature of sequestration projects means that developers also require long-term price certainty. Most land-use projects require an income stream of at least 10 years to be viable, whereas the ERF contracts are currently proposed to be guaranteed for only five years. At a minimum, business or government entities would need to sign abatement delivery contracts for several years in order for carbon farmers to obtain the necessary financing for developing large-scale projects. This is analogous to the way renewable energy developers secure long-term power purchase agreements before securing the financing to build large-scale generation projects.]
The ERF is designed to fail.
deblonay@358
Isn’t there an “Ellis’s Law” on PB that says if you ever quote Bob Ellis as a source you lose the argument?
If there isn’t, then I am claiming copyright!
I notice that the Australian Transport Safety Bureau is saying that the debris washed up on a beach near Augusta in Western Australia is unlikely to have come from Flight MH370.
In a report I read, it says that “Malaysia and Australia have vowed to plough on with the search for the plane”.
http://www.todayonline.com/world/asia/beach-debris-unlikely-mh370-australian-transport-safety-bureau
Does this mean the search area is being expanded to include the WA Wheatbelt?
Will we have footage on the evening news of Tony Abbott visiting the area, wearing a Stetson and crooning a country and western song?
[ Your question
“Will you support new defence spending if it is required to adequately defend Australia?”
Is actually impossible to answer. You have to define what is ‘adequately defend’ – and if it is what I think it is; I would expect the the Greens to answer “Yes” ]
Ok! Now we’re getting somewhere! So clause 4 of “Peace and Security” is null and void.
Let’s move on to clause 17:
[ An end to training and joint exercises by the ADF with armed forces known to have committed human rights abuses. ]
So, presumably this includes … well, just about everyone … but most especially the US. Yes?
briefly
Direct action tree planting is utter unalloyed bullshit. The only regions it will work are in Australia’s prime agricultural land.
Trubble at mill.
[Veterans warn changes to military pension would be ‘an act of bastardry’]
Of course, one of the biggest threats Defence is likely to face in the immediate future is an influx of climate refugees. I’m told they’re planning for it.
[The real point is that, had effective action been taken to address the mental illness Greg Anderson suffered from, his son, Luke Batty may still be alive and Rosie Batty spared terrible grief and suffering.]
Excuse me, who is this Rose Batty woman who is trading off the death of her son, and claiming it’s all about her.
I find it very strange that a woman whose son has just been brutally murdered fronts up to the press to proclaim the father’s innocence because he’s suffering.
And that it’s really she who has been hurt, but does not offer a scrap of evidence of grief about the son was was hurt beyond repair, and is now in the media daily beating her own drum in the name of domestic violence.
She wasn’t a kid when she had her child. And I have sympathy for women who get caught up in relationships they don’t feel able to leave. But she wasn’t a young kid. She wasn’t in the throes of a first love. She could have left at any time.
And she could have supervised the contact with her son if she thought he was any threat whatsoever to her . At all times.
Hey Boarwar.
How many Greens took trips to Iraq or Afghanistan to visit the troops?
kezza
apart from the fact that that whole post of yours is repulsive —
[And she could have supervised the contact with her son if she thought he was any threat whatsoever to her . At all times.]
She did. She was there.
Surely you – of all people – understand that you can be a witness to violence but helpless in front of it…and that leaving isn’t always possible.
zoomster@366
Yes. I didn’t want to confuse the Greens by throwing this one into the mix, but this is in fact the biggest credible threat to our national security likely to occur in the next 20-50 years.
Odd little conversation on Twitter.
[Viewpoint/FridayLive @chriskkenny Apr 23
#Lateline and @albericie want science run like #theirABC – by consensus.]
[ Emma Alberici @albericie 4h
@chriskkenny Actually Chris, as a journalist, I ask questions rather than tell guests what I “want”. You should try it.]
My son, currently job searching, sent me this link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HB3xM93rXbY
I think you’ll all find it illuminating.
Drawing on bludgertrack’s state breakdowns, if a DD were to be held and the above votes held up, we might expect results along these lines:
LNP 33
(NSW 6; Vic 5; Qld 5; SA 5; Tas 5; WA 5; NT/ACT 2)
Labor 30
(NSW 5; Vic 5; Qld 5; SA 5; Tas 5; WA 3; NT/ACT 2)
Green 9
(NSW 1; Vic 2; Qld 1; SA 1; Tas 1; WA 3)
PUP 3
(Qld 1; Tas 1; WA 1)
Xenophon 1 (SA)
It’s possible the Greens could win just 2 seats in WA, the additional seat being retained by the LNP, who would hold on to 6.
Either result would leave the LNP worse off compared with the make up of the Senate from July, as Labor and the Greens acting together would at least be able to block legislation.
Considering the risk the LNP may also lose its majority in the House – or see it greatly reduced – and the prospect that it would strengthen its opponents in the Senate, a DD is probably a very remote contingency.
[364
poroti
briefly
Direct action tree planting is utter unalloyed bullshit. The only regions it will work are in Australia’s prime agricultural land.]
Sure, though there are other things classed within CFI. Interestingly, while the LNP want to scrap most of Labor’s carbon policies, this is one area they want to retain.
briefly
But Abbott assured us he would go to a DD, surely he wouldn’t tell fibs. 😆
PLayerone
“Yes. I didn’t want to confuse the Greens by throwing this one into the mix, but this is in fact the biggest credible threat to our national security likely to occur in the next 20-50 years.”
Well, if you look at transcripts from Senate Estimates, Scott Ludlum talks about this at length… It is his focus.
So no, you wouldn’t confuse the Greens in this regard.
Astro
which raises the question of how the Greens propose to deal with climate change refugees (absolutely serious question, not having a go).
Does the ‘we’ll take anyone who gets here by boat’ approach allow for millions on the move?
I thought Chris Kenny had given twitter away?
All those nasty lefty trolls and all that.
Like a moth to the flame…
Astrobleme@376
Good. So you would increase defence spending (and no, I don’t just mean buying planes to bomb people) if it was required to help Australia cope with a collapsing world economy, and rehousing millions of displaced people?
zoomster@377
Snap!
Player One@363
So … apparently no-one wants to try and defend clause 17 either. Another “null and void” clause then.
Let’s have a look at clause 16:
[ A voluntary Australian Defence Force where personnel have the right to conscientiously object to illegal military actions, where personnel are not used in strikebreaking or policing activities, and that has a military justice system and culture that is transparent and reduces discrimination and harassment amongst ADF members. ]
Seriously? When the government defines what is “legal” and “illegal”? So what does this clause even mean?
Anyone?
Zoomster
That’s a particularly awful question!
But yes, I think we would try and accept as many as we could.
The aim, though is to act now and avoid it… Although it may be too late.
I think you’d need to make it a more specific question too. My own belief is that many would die; most wouldn’t make it here. Let’s say we have a massive drought through southeast Asia; so from Pakistan to Indonesia the monsoons fail (this has precedent I think 1871 and 1872 there was a failure of the monsoon). I think the Greens would attempt to help as many as we could. Sadly I think as in most famines, most would die.
zoomster
[She did. She was there.]
She didn’t supervise her son. Or else he wouldn’t be dead.
Sorry if you think that’s repulsive.
I find her demeanour to be repulsive, and her subsequent behaviour to deflect from her own culpability.
If I really thought a man was a threat to me, in any way shape or form, I would certainly not put one of my kids in his way.
It’s not as if we haven’t seen what has happened in Victoria – prior to this.
The bloke running his kids into the dam, and the other fellow who threw his kid off West Gate Bridge. They’re there. They’re documented.
They ran on the front pages of most newspapers. It was all over the media.
It wasn’t all about her.
[‘$1.5 trillion … for the plane that doesn’t work’
‘you will be lucky if you can fly it every other day….’]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJoGDpRQBOw
You wonder why America has been a war mongering country, looking to have perpetual defence spending somewhere…..one of the corporate masters of the paid for US congressmen getting what they want… no matter how many civilians they kill to justify spending billions somewhere…
sortius @sortius 2m
Australia falling behind on digital access: AIG http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-24/australia-digital-performance-is-declining-economists-say/5407986 … about to fall further behind too #NBN
poroti@364
Armidale has an area known as ‘the Pine Forest’.
It was planted a long time ago, in the interests of wood and forestry, with the only problem being that they were the wrong species for our area, and they never did very well. They needed more rain than we get, about 800 mm if we ever had an average year.
Now the area is mostly used by picnickers and a medieval festival once a year. All thought of harvesting them has long gone.
I get the distinct feeling with the direct action plan that the people organising it (if it is indeed being organised!) may not have the requisite skills to select the right species.
And yes, if you want to grow trees, well watered prime agricultural land is the go.
zoomster
[Surely you – of all people – understand that you can be a witness to violence but helpless in front of it…and that leaving isn’t always possible.]
Yes, as a child, not as an adult.
poroti
Posted Thursday, April 24, 2014 at 6:36 pm | Permalink
briefly
Direct action tree planting is utter unalloyed bullshit. The only regions it will work are in Australia’s prime agricultural land.
I’ve been arguing this pint ever since Abbott had the “brain fart>
The alternatives are people’s backyards and areas where even mother nature gave up.
There is no consideration given to the effect on water, be that run-off or ground water.
And then there is the cost. When was the last time you went to the nursery and thought “WOW, those native trees are cheap!!!!”
kezza
No, that wasn’t the bit I found repulsive. I found the whole of your post repulsive.
[The bloke running his kids into the dam, and the other fellow who threw his kid off West Gate Bridge. They’re there. They’re documented]
And kids get killed riding their bikes to school, too. That’s real, that’s documented. Should I drive the car alongside mine when they do, just in case? And – if I don’t, and one of mine is knocked off their bike and killed – would you accuse me of negligence? And, if I decided that I would use my child’s death to highlight a problem in society, would you say that meant I didn’t care?
Rosie Batty did supervise her child. No parent can supervise their child to the extent that they can guarantee nothing bad will happen to them – and if they tried, the kid themself would be the first to tell them not to.
Astro
my understanding is the greatest threat isn’t drought, but flooding – with whole populations from low lying countries like Bangladesh on the move.
I haven’t even begun to get my head around how we, as a nation or a global community, will deal with migrations of that scale, but I suspect there are few ‘good’ options.
Zoomster
Kezza has either a warped view about the Batty case or she just doesn’t know the facts.
I suspect both.
Because Rosie Batty was being appropriately kind to her son (allowing him to talk to his father while she sat quite close by supervising) Kezza sees her as being stupidly kind to the father.
Note that the attack on the boy by the father had no precedent, and came out of the blue.
As the father is a man (and therefore is a jerk even had he not killed his son) and Rosie is not “up him for the rent”, then Rosie vicariously also is no better than a man, so she too is shite.
I think that’s the Kezza paradigm. It always relates to men being crap.
As for me, since I simultaneously have no balls and desiccated balls, I await with impatience the next retaliatory reflection on some other part of my mind or body
zoomster
As usual you take the low road, move the goal posts, and come up with a strawman.
I don’t care if you found the whole lot of my post repulsive, what I find repulsive is people excusing the bloke, and the woman, for the death of a child/ren.
Oh sure, you accidentally ran over a child, and we have a child safety campaign. How on earth could we not support that?
Rose Batty didn’t supervise her child.
[No parent can supervise their child to the extent that they can guarantee nothing bad will happen to them]
They could in this case. Sure, she may have been leaning over the fence*, watching them do batting practice in the nets, and thought all was well. But, it didn’t sound as if she was actually watching them, did it? Hence, no supervision in the first place.
Then, to say, oh okay, off you go, and just trust that – when she knows he’s not all there.
That would have run alarm bells for me. And I would have said no. And had I said yes, I would have accompanied my child back to the nets. And watched.
And intervened, even at my own peril. *By the way, you can’t hang over the fence watching your kid in the nets.
[– and if they tried, the kid themself would be the first to tell them not to.]
Yeah, and you always listen to a child about their safety, don’t you. He was only 11 years of age. Sure you would. Not.
kezza2@383
As usual, you don’t surprise with your capacity to be repulsive.
Are you on a unity ticket with Player One?
haha Pierre Sprey, designer of the F-16 and A-10 reckons the F35 is crap.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQB4W8C0rZI
We found all this stuff out before Howard/Nelson/Cheney were inking their deal. Great way to sell a country’s defence down the drain. But don’t worry the US will save us when we need it most….wont they?
z
The Greens have as a policy redefining climate affected people as ‘refugees’ under the relevant UN Conventions.
Come one, come all, I believe.
zoomster@389
Well said.
Rosie Batty is performing a public service by trying to get some good out of her son’s tragic death by highlighting the problems of domestic violence.
I wish her well.
Can we please have a separate Rose Batty thread?
Jeff Sparrow: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/24/theres-zero-public-demand-for-fighter-planes-but-well-spend-12bn-anyway?CMP=ema_632
[[….The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter acquisition would allow Australia to participate in future military coalitions alongside the US – the main basis, one would guess, for this extraordinary expenditure.
It’s common today to attack politicians as entirely poll-driven, devoid of principles and taking their direction from the latest focus group results. But that’s not quite an accurate description of how the polity functions, for there’s zero public demand for more fighter planes. “I want Australia to spend billions, ensuring we’re in the front rank of wars like Iraq and Afghanistan” … said no normal person ever.
A pledge of an additional $12bn to health or education or infrastructure would have been wildly popular, yet that didn’t happen. On the contrary, those areas are all slated for cuts in Joe Hockey’s coming austerity budget – and, rather than condemn the defense spending, Shorten’s Labor party has thrown itself behind the Joint Strike Fighter.
The bipartisan commitment for the F-35 illustrates how political priorities are shaped by a narrow elite consensus at odds with public sentiment. Ordinary Australians might not care about the F-35, but the Very Important People do – and that’s what matters.
…..
In other words, it’s increasingly apparent that genuine action on climate will necessarily have an anti-capitalist edge – and no Serious Person wants even to discuss that.
The Iraq war killed thousands of people, and reduced that country to an authoritarian ruin. But spending billions preparing for the next pre-emptive invasion or overseas adventure is Very Serious in a way that preventing the ruination of the planet is not, simply because the latter threatens profits, and the former does not.]
We are not really spending $12bn for these planes…it is a way to make a donation on behalf of US Govt to US defence contractors. Payment in the hope they might come help defend us, if we need it one day…..
kezza
oh, right. She should have gone to the urinals with him. And into the changerooms (full of men, inherently dangerous). And stood beside him in the field while he batted.
Can’t be too careful. There are men everywhere.