BludgerTrack: 51.6-48.4 to Labor

Another placid week for the BludgerTrack poll aggregate, suggesting a new equilibrium has been struck between the government’s budget disaster and MH17 recovery.

The only national poll this week was the regular weekly Essential Research, which is joined in the BludgerTrack poll aggregate by Galaxy’s result from Queensland. That adds up to no change whatsoever on two-party preferred, but the Greens are up on the primary vote at Labor’s expense. There’s some shifting of the deckchairs on the seat projection, with Labor down one in New South Wales and Victoria and up one in Queensland and Western Australia, but it cancels out on the total score. Nothing new this week for leadership ratings, which serves as a sad reminder that in the past we would have expected Nielsen to come due this week.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,032 comments on “BludgerTrack: 51.6-48.4 to Labor”

  1. [The manipulation of evidence by the DPP, the missing transcripts, and the totality of the gun and residue evidence available but not adduced makes the whole sorry saga smell to high heaven.

    I’ll be surprised if Eastman gets reconvicted.]

    Agreed, but Winchester was shot. Was it organised crime as suspected at the time? Maybe we will never know. But some people should be outed for incompetence bordering on criminality.

  2. Zoomster

    When I was young, many moons ago, Australian media NEVER published sexual gossip. in part this was due to the sexist nature of society and damages for “damaging a lady’s reputation” which were considerable.

    I wonder if perhaps we need to legislate some clear statutory provisions, such that a newspaper would be subject to damages if they published scuttlebut needlessly. For example publishing details about sexual liaisons (legal) of politicians (and other celebrities) would incur damages if found to be unrelated to the public interest.

    For example a politician having an affair with a celebrity would not be relevant to the public interest but having an affair with a staff member, another colleague or senior public servant,or journalist, may be relevant because it impacts upon their job.

    A footballer should be able to bonk whoever in private unless it is another footballer/coach/c AND it affects team dynamics.

    In this current Shorten issue, publishing if a court case may be justified but once the case is over, damages would apply if the matter is further discussed in the media.

  3. Like Franny, I too strive to be my best. But unlike Franny I hardly ever fall short 😀

    So here we go. I’m backing Parramatta. I think Manly are close to a necessary loss to spark them back to their best 😎

    Unless someone can talk me out of it – I’m on 😛

  4. Rua

    I have had the “pleasure” of an extended phone conversation with Eastman – about 2 hrs from memory. Although he was a bit of a nutter he did not seem to me like a gun toting murderer.

    Organised crime, especially the drug trade was big time in the area at the time and it always seemed to me that Eastman was just a convenient patsy, serial nuisance used to cover a much more serious crime. I always suspected police corruption and still do.

  5. Zoomster

    [If someone is smeared unfairly, their only recourse is to sue. It doesn’t make the smear go away, or undo the damage – though if Shorten could prove that the allegation stopped him becoming PM he might really be able to clean up!]

    You’d have to be confident the defendant had the pockets to match the judgement. If you could show malice you might get punitive damages, but that’s all moot unless the defendant has assets against which to recover the award.

  6. 350
    Darren Laver
    Posted Thursday, August 21, 2014 at 4:31 pm

    @J0HNMcTERNAN 7m
    Sexual assult claims about Bill Shorten were made on Kevin Rudd’s FaceBook page. #AusPol pic -> pic.twitter.com/X4LsuDqdXp

    I don’t understand. If Rudd was privy to these allegations, he should pass them to the relevant authorities and not publish them in his Facebook page.

    I saw this posted more than 24 hours ago, and I apologise if someone has already addressed this, but I couldn’t find any conclusive response.

    I believe from the link, it was someone else posting a comment on a post that had nothing whatsoever to do with the comment. It was timed around the time Shorten was appointed leader of the party.

    In the comment, it was written, “I don’t expect you to read this and you probably get crazy messages all the time but, I need help.”

    It looked like it was written as a message, but posted as a public comment. Why would this be so?

    If it was my page and someone did that, I would have moderated it out too.

    Whether the moderator of the page or Ruddy himself was to approach Shorten with this information after seeing this, who knows?

  7. And this is a huge surprise to no one —

    [TIM McCurdy (MLA, Murray Valley) concedes Big Buffalo dam is unlikely to come to fruition…]

    http://wangarattachronicle.com.au/2014/08/22/idea-dead-in-the-water/

    This was one of the hundred dams Abbott committed to.

    For years, sensible conversations about water resources in this area were stymied because the local Coalition MPs (including our own dear Sophie) would not rule out the expansion of the dam – even though they knew it could never happen.

    In the meantime, investment opportunities have gone missing, and the Myrtleford community have clung to the false hope that the dam would be expanded as soon as there were Coalition governments in place.

    http://wangarattachronicle.com.au/2014/08/22/idea-dead-in-the-water/

    Here we go —

    [ONE of two North East lakes could be turned into a super dam under proposals to water and feed the nation.

    Expanding either Lake Buffalo, near Myrtleford, or Lake William Hovell was highlighted in the federal ]Coalition’s draft discussion paper for water management…

    The idea was highlighted during a visit to Lake Buffalo in October, 2011, by the Coalition’s dams taskforce chairman, Andrew Robb…

    …Mrs Mirabella, who invited Mr Robb and the taskforce to the region, said she had always advocated Big Buffalo.]

    http://www.bordermail.com.au/story/1305384/lakes-on-libs-dam-list/

  8. If a trucking company found that drivers were picking up young hitchikers and abusing them, it probably wouldn’t protect them, transfer them to another depot or give them a job at head office.

  9. Very long one.

    How Eastman was legally (un)represented at his murder trial:

    [Before proceeding to a consideration of the grounds of appeal it is necessary to say something about the appellant’s legal representation during the course of the trial. It would not be an exaggeration to describe it as chaotic.
    On the first day of the trial, 2 May 1995, Mr Williams QC appeared but only to announce that his instructions and those of his junior and his instructing solicitors had been withdrawn. The appellant sought an adjournment of the trial because he was unrepresented, saying that if the adjournment was not granted he would not take part in the proceedings. The appellant informed his Honour of his reasons for withdrawing those instructions. He said that police intimidation had been ‘condoned’ by the Court; he claimed that the Court had refused to take contempt proceedings at his request against certain police officers and he claimed that Mr Williams had refused to conduct the defence in accordance with his instructions. The application for an adjournment was refused and the matter proceeded.

    On 15 May 1995, the fifth day of the trial, Mr Williams QC appeared, informing the Court that he had, once again, been instructed to act on behalf of the appellant. He unsuccessfully sought an adjournment of the trial and a permanent stay of the proceedings. On the next day, shortly after the jury had been empanelled, Mr Williams’ instructions were again terminated and the appellant was, once more, without legal representation.

    On 18 May 1995, the eighth day of the trial, Mr O’Donnell announced his appearance for the appellant but on 22 May (which was the next day of the trial), he advised the Court that he had withdrawn from the case. The appellant, however, made it clear that he had terminated Mr O’Donnell’s instructions because he had allegedly walked out of a conference.

    On 22 May, Mr Peter Baird appeared for the appellant but on the same day he sought leave to withdraw.

    On 31 May 1995, the 15th day of the trial, Mr O’Loughlin announced his appearance for the appellant, informing the Court that he would be led by Mr Terracini. He sought an adjournment until 12 June to enable him and Mr Terracini to read the brief and prepare the defence. His Honour refused that application, stating that it was his opinion that the appellant had become unrepresented through his own fault. His Honour’s rulings on this aspect of the trial have not been challenged on appeal.

    The matter proceeded with Mr O’Loughlin appearing for the defence until 5 June when he was joined by Mr Terracini. From that date until 29 June, the 30th day of the trial, the appellant was represented by both counsel.

    On 29 June the appellant terminated his counsel’s instructions. Thereafter, Mr Terracini and Mr O’Loughlin moved in and out of the trial as their instructions were first withdrawn and then reinstated. It cannot be said that the appellant acted with justification in so frequently dismissing his lawyers. If he were justified in terminating their instructions, why then would he have re-engaged them on so many occasions? Any suggestion that the answer to that question rests in an acknowledgment of fault by counsel would be ridiculed by the number of times their supposed incompetence or refusal to accept instructions allegedly justified their dismissal. This is apparent from the following timetable:

    Day 33 10 July 1995 Re-instructed

    Day 33 10 July 1995 Instructions Terminated

    Day 34 11 July 1995 Re-instructed

    Day 36 13 July 1995 Instructions Terminated

    Day 37 14 July 1995 Re-instructed

    Day 39 18 July 1995 Instructions Terminated

    Day 39 18 July 1995 Re-instructed

    Day 39 18 July 1995 Instructions Terminated

    Day 41 20 July 1995 Re-instructed

    Day 46 27 July 1995 Instructions Terminated

    Day 48 31 July 1995 Re-instructed

    Day 50 2 August 1995 Instructions Terminated

    Day 52 8 August 1995 Re-instructed

    – 11 August 1995 Instructions Terminated

    Day 65 31 August 1995 Re-instructed

    Day 78 25 September 1995 Instructions Terminated

    Day 80 3 October 1995 Re-instructed

    Day 84 10 October 1995 Instructions Terminated

    The circumstances under which Mr Terracini’s instructions were terminated for the last time on 10 October were quite astonishing. The appellant claimed (in the absence of the jury) that he had heard Mr Terracini have a verbal altercation with a person in the Courtroom shortly before the commencement of proceedings. He claimed that he heard Mr Terracini say ‘Don’t you stare at me like that you flea’. It would seem that this assertion was made by the appellant in the absence of counsel after Mr Terracini had informed the Court that all instructions had been terminated, although the transcript does not record the withdrawal of counsel. The appellant told the Court that when he inquired of him, Mr Terracini said that the other person was a police officer but that he refused to disclose his identity to the appellant. The appellant, when addressing his Honour, said that ‘… if my counsel is distracted by a police officer in this court moments before addressing the jury it becomes of interest to me against the background of numerous such incident [sic] going on over the last six years’.

    Later the appellant said to his Honour that he was ‘determined to make an issue of it’. So it was that when Mr Terracini subsequently refused to name the officer, his instructions were terminated. It was for Mr Terracini – not for the appellant – to make an assessment of the situation; he was the person who had been involved in the altercation; he was the one best able to decide what (if any) action should be taken. As his Honour said, Mr Terracini was ‘an experienced, responsible member of the bar’ who was ‘well aware of his duties to his client’. In an expression of confidence in counsel, his Honour added that he had no doubt that Mr Terracini would have been satisfied that the incident did not in any way operate to the prejudice of the appellant. Regrettably, the appellant would not accept the views of his Honour; he was prepared to see his murder trial proceed without the benefit of counsel if his counsel would not submit to his unreasonable demands.

    As from 10 October, the appellant remained without legal representation for the balance of the trial. This summary, which has not included his many changes of lawyers during the period preceding the trial, is indicative of the appellant’s inability to work in harmony with his lawyers.]

  10. [It’s an offer you can’t refuse: rustic abodes in a picturesque hilltop village on the island of Sicily, once home to Italian peasants and their donkeys, are up for sale for just one euro.

    Hewn into the Madonie mountains and dotted throughout the town of Gangi, the houses were left empty after their owners emigrated in the 1920s.]

    https://au.pfinance.yahoo.com/money-manager/real-estate/article/-/24784847/hilltop-houses-on-sale-for-one-euro-great-view-included/

  11. DDT

    Of course. Erratic and disruptive behaviour in front of a jury to the extent of not being able to be present at your own trial is unhelpful

  12. [I wonder if perhaps we need to legislate some clear statutory provisions, such that a newspaper would be subject to damages if they published scuttlebut needlessly. For example publishing details about sexual liaisons (legal) of politicians (and other celebrities) would incur damages if found to be unrelated to the public interest.]

    Why should the famous receive protections not available to the rest of us? Why not a general tort of privacy?

  13. [The obvious fact that Eastman is a is a “difficult” personality does not make him guilty of murder.]

    Such stupidity is certainly worthy of jail but perhaps 10 years rather than 20 – leaving aside the question of the actual murder.

  14. Retweeted by Richard Chirgwin
    Tarah Welsh ‏@Tarahwelsh 6m

    Filming #tubestrike outside station (public property) and @TfLOfficial staff have called the police on us!!

  15. Winchester was playing a dangerous game with Operation Seville. Allowing criminals to grow marijuana at Bungendore in an attempt to infiltrate the “mafia” was always going to end in strife.

  16. Retweeted by Stephen Koukoulas
    OECD ‏@OECD 2m

    “What is the point of economic policy if not to build more inclusive, more harmonious societies” – Angel Gurría

  17. Jack Waterford sums up my feelings.

    [Jack Waterford, editor at large for the Canberra Times, who has closely followed the case since the murder, told Guardian Australia there was a missed opportunity in the inquiry earlier this year for police to reopen the investigation as a cold case.

    “Police chose not to do it. What that means is that the police case and prosecution cases, such as it is, is 19 years old,” said Waterford.

    In the 19 years since Eastman was convicted, some of the evidence has been thoroughly discredited and witnesses from the trial have died.

    “I’ve never asserted positively that Eastman is innocent, but I’ve always been disturbed about two things,” said Waterford.

    “First of all whether whether he really is guilty, because there’s some nagging doubts about that, and secondly whether he was proved to be guilty, and in my opinion he was not.”

    Waterford said the trial was a “travesty, actuated by considerable bias, but also aggravated by what you might call police and prosecution tunnel vision – they fixed on Eastman very early and then engaged on a search to find evidence that tended to prove his guilt”.

    “I’m not saying they framed him or set him up or anything like that,” he said, “but it leads to a psychological situation where you tend to dismiss anything that doesn’t confirm your prejudice.”

    “This was not a very good or very competent, though it was a very expensive, investigation.”]

  18. The threat from Islam will only be controlled when the Islamic nations of this world choose to end it. West cannot.

    While Abbott carries on about the threat from the Middle East, more Brits are now fighting as Jihadists than there are Muslims in the British Army.

    Perhaps we should fear Abbott’s birth place more than the Middle East

  19. ICAC revenge?

    [The New South Wales Central Coast is set to become the first region in Australia to experience a roll-out of the Federal Government’s fast broadband network using fibre-to-the-node technology.

    The Communications Minister, Malcolm Turnbull has announced the NBN’s existing pilot project at Umina will now be expanded to 54-thousand homes and businesses in surrounding suburbs, including Saratoga, Killcare and Kincumber over the next 12 months.]

  20. Under the Abbott Government changes to university degrees.

    If you earn $40,000 a year you will end repaying $105,000. This is very likely for women who leave the workforce to raise a family.

    If you earn $75,000 a year your degree will cost $87,000

  21. [ The appellant claimed (in the absence of the jury) that he had heard Mr Terracini have a verbal altercation with a person in the Courtroom shortly before the commencement of proceedings. He claimed that he heard Mr Terracini say ‘Don’t you stare at me like that you flea’. It would seem that this assertion was made by the appellant in the absence of counsel after Mr Terracini had informed the Court that all instructions had been terminated, although the transcript does not record the withdrawal of counsel.]

    Anyone who complains that the silks don’t earn their money has not sat in a courtroom 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *