This week’s better-late-than-never BludgerTrack poll aggregate reading finds the MH17 effect boosting the Coalition by 1.1% on two-party preferred, and putting it two points clear of Labor on the primary vote. On the seat projection, the Coalition this week gains two in Queensland and one in every other mainland state, a net gain of six that nonetheless leaves Labor with an overall majority of 79 seats out of 150. The bigger effect is on the personal ratings, for which Newspoll contributes to a lift of nearly six points on the reading for Tony Abbott’s net approval, albeit from a dismally low base. Newspoll also causes the previously downward trend for Bill Shorten’s net approval rating to level off this week, although his lead as preferred prime minister continues to narrow.
Also on the better-late-than-never front, this week’s Essential Research, which I neglected to cover on Tuesday, had the Coalition gaining a point for the second week in a row to now trail 51-49, from primary votes of 41% for the Coalition (up two on a week ago), 38% for Labor (down one), 9% for the Greens (steady) and 5% for Palmer United (down one). Other questions found a very healthy 67% approving of Tony Abbott’s handling of the Malaysia Airlines disaster with only 13% disapproving; Malaysia Airlines, the Malaysian government and the United Nations also credited with handling the matter well, but the Russian government not so much; 49% believing Vladimir Putin should not be allowed to attend the G20 versus 29% for should be allowed; and 62% supporting trade sanctions against Russia, 46% supporting the withdrawal of diplomatic relations and 28% supporting support for the Ukrainian government against the rebels, with only 8% preferring that no action be taken.
The poll also finds 59% of respondents not expecting their electricity bill to decrease as a result of the carbon tax repeal, which includes 16% who actually expect it to go up, versus only 33% who expect it to fall. A question on actions on climate change policy has only 5% nominating the government’s direct action policy of the available options and only 19% going for an emissions trading scheme, with 43% insteading opting for “incentives for renewable energy”. Another question finds 51% favouring an increase in the childcare rebate over the government’s paid parental leave scheme, which is preferred by only 25%.
[There was likely to have been a cavalcade of lawyers who lost money trying to help the Chainas.]
No, no, all lawyers are evil money grubbing scum, haven’t you been paying attention to the comments here over the years?
Never mind that the school made a more generous offer than the outcome the parents obtained after years of litigation, with all of the associated costs and hardship for all concerned.
Of course, without people taking unreasonable positions, lawyers would be out of a job. But it’s obviously the lawyers’ fault…
(Disclaimer: I am a lawyer).
[This week’s better-late-than-never BludgerTrack poll aggregate reading finds the MH17 effect boosting the Coalition by 1.1% on two-party preferred]
That’s 0.028% roughly for every dead Australian.
All they need now is another 150 to equal the score.
You know it makes sense.
Patrick Bateman@49
I accept your concession.
[I see Tony Abbott has lost control of the media cycle and cans of worms are popping everywhere after 2 weeks of control via MH17.]
Presumably this is why they are wheeling out these disturbing fascist laws – get everyone focused on the real threat (the real threat being that people stop fearing the Islamofascist bogeyman and start focusing on the corrupt, incompetent, lying government).
[I accept your concession.]
Which part of my post is incorrect?
If it is not incorrect, how can you defend your statement that Labor opposes these types of laws?
Bemused – Many can criticise the legal profession, but if:
a. You have a good case;
b. You don’t have any money; and
c. The defendant does have money.
You can usually find a lawyer who will take the case on spec. Lots of lawyers are prepared to back their judgment on such things.
Shellbell sounds like he knows about this case (I don’t). But I suspect that quite a few lawyers went out on a limb and found the clients not prepared to be commercial and, as a consequence, did their dough (or at least time) as a result.
Bemused – in other words, lots of lawyers do involuntary pro bono.
Even reading the article about that case:
[“He had a fixed and almost delusional view about himself, his own abilities and expertise and about the success and reputation of his companies, in the face of strong evidence to the contrary,” Justice Davies said.]
[“I generally found Mr Chaina to be dishonest. He said whatever he believed would help him to win this case and obtain very substantial damages. This was at least partly motivated by his desire for vengeance.”]
The parents had a pumped up 10 million dollar claim based on the allegation that their grief caused them to run their business in an unprofitable way. And judges do not make findings like those set out above lightly.
[Interesting that a judge gets to decide when the grief of a lost child ‘had’ dissipated.]
In the Dunning v BHP case today, the judge was required to find when Mr Dunning will die.
(http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-31/bhp-ordered-to-make-record-asbestos-compensation-payout/5637862)
[Opportunity costs]
Could be real money if paying experts etc plus the wages and overheads for those working on the matter
[Interesting that a judge gets to decide when the grief of a lost child ‘had’ dissipated.]
The finding was actually a factual one based on evidence about when the parents were in fact back at work. The judge wasn’t determining that they no longer felt any grief. It related to their claim that they were unable to run their business properly.
At this time the mind turns to no fault compensation schemes but that are mostly the love child of the insurance industry.
Bemused@53
Still waiting for you to actually engage on the facts.
Patrick Bateman@55
Labor has on many occasions in the past taken a stand against oppressive legislation. The most notable was the Communist Party Dissolution Bill.
There have also been actions such as Sen Murphy’s raid on ASIO HQ.
But Labor also accepts the need for some security legislation with proper safeguards. It seems you don’t.
[Could be real money if paying experts etc plus the wages and overheads for those working on the matter]
Fair point.
Have these fools no appreciation of anything of value? (Don’t answer that).
Sky now as dark as twilight.
[At this time the mind turns to no fault compensation schemes but that are mostly the love child of the insurance industry.]
I don’t think you can ever have that type of thing for something like a claim for commercial losses flowing from a psychological injury.
What it really highlights to me is how the legal system is treated as a second class citizen compared to the medical system. People always notice what lawyers charge because the government doesn’t subsidise justice the way it subsidises medicine. In both cases something bad has happened (illness/legal dispute), in both cases you need highly trained professionals to sort it out (doctor/lawyer), yet society regards one as a saviour and one as a shark.
The Conversation @ConversationEDU 2h
Cuts to the National Film and Sound Archive are a double-edged sword and will effect long-term preservation @UWSNews http://theconversation.com/files-cant-wait-the-future-of-the-national-film-and-sound-archive-29479 …
Bemused.
So you tacitly admit that I am correct, that Labor kept Howard’s “disappearance” laws, and that Labor failed to investigate a foreign power spying on Australian citizens on Australian soil.
Your examples are of a Labor party which is long dead, unfortunately.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. You watch – Labor will pay lip service to due process and civil liberties concerns and then will meekly vote this law through to avoid being branded ‘soft on terror’.
Bemused – another interesting aspect of this case is the fact that the Courts will not turn away an impecunious plaintiff who is a natural person. If a plaintiff company doesn’t have any money then it (or those behind it) usually have to put up money. But it’s rare for the courts to bar the claim of an individual (who lives within the jurisdiction) on the grounds of impecuniousness.
Tramps like us, baby we were born to Swan
http://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/events/events_talks/events/wayne_swan.html
Patrick B. why attack the ALP over Brandis’s policy. I suspect the ALP will do the only effective thing that can be done. Change the law when it is in a position to do so.
[The poll also finds 59% of respondents not expecting their electricity bill to decrease as a result of the carbon tax repeal, which includes 16% who actually expect it to go up, versus only 33% who expect it to fall.]
That “electricity bill going up” business is no joke, William. Mine has, definitely.
Tariffs have gone up due to “Poles & Wires” more than the Carbon Tax brought them down (nett +0.3c per kWh), plus discounts on metered usage have been lowered from 23% (if paid on time) to 13%.
Calculating the bill (yes, I have a spreadsheet set up to do this) based on the old tariffs, discounts and “taxes” versus the same bill calculated on the new charges and lowered discounts presents me with a $30 increase on what I would have paid before.
QED. Count me in as one of the 16%.
Most people don’t do the maths in the way I do them, burrowing down into the detail, because frankly most people don’t understand how electricity bills are calculated. I’ve been told by “someone in the know” that this over-complexity in billing by electricity retailers is deliberate, similar to that of telcos, who also make their bills so difficult to understand – what with discounts on and off, add-backs from last month, add-ins for next month, delayed charges, penalties for late payment, and confusing layout etc., that most people just pay up if these bills sort-of look kinda in the ballpark.
There is no way known that anyone at all short of a person with forensic accounting skills could possibly fathom how electricity bills are actually calculated, and just what the hidden charges might be, versus the supposedly up-front charges that are there mostly to confuse you.
Patrick Bateman@69
As a lawyer you seem to follow the situation re legislation much more than I do as a non-lawyer.
You perceive problems so what are you doing about them apart from ranting on PB and casting aspersions on Labor?
[Change the law when it is in a position to do so.]
That’s sort of my point – they didn’t do it last time, there’s no reason to think they will this time.
This is the regime Labor heartily endorsed once it came to power:
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/law-letting-asio-detain-in-secret-belongs-in-a-police-state-20121022-281h9.html
[Soon after the Bali attack in 2002, ASIO was granted ”special powers” to seek two types of warrants. A questioning warrant compels someone to appear for up to 24 hours of questioning where this may ”substantially assist the collection of intelligence that is important in relation to a terrorism offence”.]
[This can be issued against any person, not just terrorist suspects. For example, ASIO can question someone about the activities of a family member, a journalist about a source or a priest about what they have heard in the confession box. The person has no right to silence and failing to answer is punishable by five years in jail.]
[ASIO can also apply for a detention warrant. This allows someone to be held in secret and questioned for up to a week. This could be applied to a journalist who might destroy their notes to protect a source, or a person who might not turn up for questioning so as to avoid talking about a relative.]
[In detention, a person cannot contact their family, friends or employer. They simply disappear for up to a week. They have the right to a lawyer but their choice can be vetoed on national security grounds and questioning can start before their lawyer arrives.]
[The person is kept in the dark as to why they are being held. They are not told why the warrant has been issued against them and their lawyer cannot ask questions or intervene in questioning, except to request clarification of an ambiguous question. All contact between the person and their lawyer must also occur in a way that can be monitored.]
[This whole process is cloaked in secrecy. While a warrant is on foot, and for two years afterwards, it is an offence to disclose ”operational information” about a person’s questioning or detention. The penalty is five years’ imprisonment.]
[The ”operational information” that cannot be revealed is extremely broad and also vague. Cryptically, it includes any ”information that the organisation has or had”. A journalist might be imprisoned for reporting on a person’s questioning or detention even when the story shows that ASIO has misused its powers.]
[You perceive problems so what are you doing about them apart from ranting on PB and casting aspersions on Labor?]
But those are my hobbies!
I find the situation in Australia at the moment very depressing in relation to these types of issues. We have a far right party in power (which IMHO meets the classical definition of fascist in numerous respects, most particularly an emphasis on militarising civilian life, an intolerance of dissent, and a close nexus with monopoly corporate interests). And the reason they are there in the first place is because the party which ought to be the party of ordinary Australians went utterly mad with power/factionalism and imploded. But even before they did, Labor showed a real knack for talking the talk on many important issues and then quietly behaving exactly like the Liberals. Neither major party gives a shit about civil liberties or acknowledges the dangers associated with these types of extreme security laws.
And sadly the average Aussie doesn’t give a crap either – my theory is that most Australians have grown up fat and happy in a relatively democratic environment where the police don’t take people away in the middle of the night, and they think this is how the world always was and always will be. We are not, on the whole, a nation of people who have fought a revolution for our freedoms, or survived a dictatorship or totalitarian state.
So what do I do about it? At the moment, mostly I despair.
Patrick Bateman@76
Well all is not lost as you still have a sense of humour.
My suggestion is to join the ALP and put your shoulder to the wheel pushing your concerns.
As Max Weber said, ‘Politics is a slow boring of hard boards.’ It requires persistence and resolve. Are you up to the challenge?
FMD!
Israel deploying another 16,000 soldiers……bringing the total to 86,000.
[My suggestion is to join the ALP and put your shoulder to the wheel pushing your concerns.]
I was a member of the ALP once. Never again.
Unfortunately I don’t think I have the constitution to be a member of a party (or any club that would have me as a member, as they say). My heroes are people like Hunter S. Thompson, Thomas Pynchon and Kurt Vonnegut.
[Israel deploying another 16,000 soldiers……bringing the total to 86,000.]
They’ll be deliberately murdering children so fast that the US will have to put on extra shipments to get enough ammo over to them.
bemused
There are far too many pitfalls in politics for anyone with a sense of humour.
lizzie@81
Oh I don’t know about that. I have retained mine all these years.
[ Patrick Bateman
Posted Thursday, July 31, 2014 at 4:23 pm | Permalink
So what do I do about it? At the moment, mostly I despair. ]
————————————————–
CHANGE will happen Patrick – even the dumbest aussie will eventually see through this malicious charlatan and his bunch of spivs, shrews, shonks and shysters we have at the moment
Words from the next US President :
It is often when night looks darkest, it is often before the fever breaks that one senses the gathering momentum for change, when one feels that resurrection of hope in the midst of despair and apathy.
Hillary Clinton
From Paddy to Paddy Bateman @76- As Combet said -“when they do bad things – you got to fight them”. Talk to people, share, research, educate or form your own micro-party. Now is not the time for despair- the stakes are too high.
Patrick B
I am always disappointed when Labor appears to fall in behind the Coalition. Sometimes it’s the wise thing to do, but sometimes it only serves to confirm the opinion of those who say “politicians are all the same”.
These are the first two picked up from Adelaide I think?
[Two people have escaped from the Wickham Point Alternative Place of Detention in Darwin, the Immigration Department has confirmed.
The ABC understands the two are unaccompanied Vietnamese teenagers who were recently moved to Darwin from Adelaide.
“Where someone no longer has matters before the department steps are taken to remove them from the Australian community,” a spokesperson for the Minister for Immigration said.]
Don’t worry folks, I haven’t given up – just fighting my own little fights in relation to things that I can actually control to some degree and in situations I can tolerate (i.e. not inside an Australian political party).
[I am always disappointed when Labor appears to fall in behind the Coalition. Sometimes it’s the wise thing to do, but sometimes it only serves to confirm the opinion of those who say “politicians are all the same”.]
To me it says, the system is broken. The two party system, the factional system within Labor, the near monopoly in our media, and the 24 hour news cycle mean that on very important issues it is almost impossible for anyone in power who actually cares to take a principled position on anything.
If the system actually worked people like Combet and Faulkner would be calling the shots. Hell, if the system worked Beazley would still be PM and the last 15 years would be a bad dream.
Patrick B @ 87
In this situation, a “protest party” is likely to rise. I don’t think PUP will cut it, though.
Patrick Bateman
[But those are my hobbies!]
😆
Patrick Bateman@87
Both factional players.
So what really is your point?
By reporting this, the ABC is of course showing bias against the government. 😛
Obviously these Christians are not the Morrison type.
[In a report titled Protecting The Lonely Children, the Australian Churches Refugee Taskforce says Australia’s treatment of unaccompanied child asylum seekers is a “sick joke”.
Immigration Minister Scott Morrison has flatly rejected the claims, with a spokesperson for the minister describing them as “shocking and offensive”.
But the taskforce is calling for him to be stripped of his guardianship role of children in immigration detention.
The report’s author, Reverend Dr Peter Catt, says the treatment of children in places like Christmas Island amounts to child abuse.
“The Government knows that it’s detrimental to the health and wellbeing of the children and is doing nothing about it,” he said.]
Bolt announced today that Abbott has after all, ahem, not succeeded so he needs to return to domestic affairs.
Will Stutchbury resile from Abbott being ‘near brilliant’?
Will the MSM come to its belated senses on what Abbott and Bishop have really achieved at Grabovo?
I reckon nyetski.
Plus, shorter Bolt, if you are saying outraged things about the nasty things Israel is doing in Gaza, you are indulging in anti-semitism and he can prove it.
His logic appears to be (I was not concentrating all that hard):
There are millions and millions of muslims in european countries and some of these muslims demonstrated against what is happening in Gaza.
There have been anti-semitic activities ranging from stone-throwing to murder of jews in europe.
Lots of rallies in europe and elsewhere in relation to Gaza included groups who said anti-semitic things.
If you say outraged things about Israel in Gaza but do not say outraged things about muslims who do outrageous things to other muslims that proves you must be anti-semitic because you are doing selective outrage.
The Qld ALP has just released a draft policy document with its policies for the next election and onward.
This policy had the input of 30,000 members and affiliates and is open for more review.
If the likes of Patrick would like a sneak peak, join the ALP and get a password to the documents. 😛
The pressure is increasing. The boil must burst soon.
[That a minister will hide behind the nonsense of ”no comment, these are operational matters” fools no one. It is self-serving. It benefits only the government, not the public; nor does it inform the public of what a government is doing in its name.
It also raises the question of how this hard-nosed approach is deemed to serve the greater good. Which good is the greater: a government keeping its ”stop the boats” record intact, or treating the vulnerable with a duty of care enshrined in international treaties to which this country is a signatory?]
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-age-editorial/humanity-overboard-in-asylum-seeker-policy-20140730-3cu9z.html#ixzz391ifYK1h
[If you say outraged things about Israel in Gaza but do not say outraged things about muslims who do outrageous things to other muslims that proves you must be anti-semitic because you are doing selective outrage.]
Bolt can get well and truly stuffed!
ruawake@93
I enjoy your regular updates on what is happening in the ALP in Qld.
[Both factional players.]
Yep, but (as I perceive them) both playing the factional game as a means to an end, which is making the world a better place via the implementation of fair and progressive policy. Unlike many of their colleagues, who play the factional game as an end in itself, seeking power for power’s sake and not to pursue any positive or principled agenda.
The switch has been flicked to comedy.
[Prime Minister Tony Abbott has lashed out at what he says are “crass political” attacks on his prized $5.5 billion paid parental leave policy and vowed to proceed with the scheme declaring he does not break his promises.]
:Belly Laugh emoticon:
Re Patrick Bateman @75: those laws always seemed to be well in excess of what was required to meet any increase in the terrorist threat, if indeed there had been one.
Murder and sabotage, or conspiring to do either, were highly illegal after all. The change in circumstances highlighted by 9/11 might have required a bit of a tweak to laws and policing (e.g. making it illegal to fight overseas with terrorist organisations), but not the winding back of centuries of common law rights such as habeas corpus, presumption of innocence, freedom from arbitrary detention, surveillance without an appropriate legal / judicial authority and so forth (I am not a lawyer so Apologies if I’ve got those terms wrong).
I would say the same of any threat posed by, for example, bikies (not that I have any love of them) or indeed asylum seekers.
I suspect that Australian democracy is not as secure as we think it is.
BW at 92:
Did Bolt apply his (for him) unusually balanced approach to the Gaza conflict and actually condemn Israel for doing outrageous things to muslims (having apparently stated that muslims do outrageous things to muslims)?