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.
MTBW@848
Certainly not the sharpest tool in the shed but my impression was he looked after his electorate.
Here we go, Rudd chucked a tantrum over a hairdryer, Rudd broke a pen and spilt ink all over the décor lol
What incompetence 😯
Interestingly, the plan to expand the business vote in City of Sydney elections — on which I had a paywalled piece in Crikey a few days ago — has caught the attention of Slate’s business and economics correspondent:
[In the United States, if the idea of letting corporations vote in elections gets talked about at all, it’s usually as the absurd logical end point of treating companies like people.
Not so in Australia. In many cities across the country, business owners and landlords have long enjoyed the right to participate in local elections, even if they live out of town. (Imagine if a pizza parlor owner from New Jersey could vote in the New York City mayor’s race because he had a location in Manhattan, and you’ve got the picture.)]
Just logged in, not happy with my pulled muscle and what do I see Gillard/Rudd wars over and over again. Just get over it , in the Past. They have both left Parliament We have a far greater threat in Tony Abbott and his LNP plus Murdoch to be squabbling amongst ourselves.
bemused
Yes he did but he also made some mistakes as well and put a lot of people off side after he was elected.
Oh right…so when Rudd was in power, any bad decision he made was someone else’s, whereas when Gillard was, any bad decision was made by her alone.
Rudd made good decisions and bad decisions. He was notorious for either not consulting with people or ignoring what they said when he did. The idea that he made all the good decisions all by himself but sat there helplessly wringing his hands whilst others forced bad decisions upon him is simply absurd.
Gillard also made good decisions and bad decisions. Despite this, she was doing quite well in the polls before Laurie Oakes started using leaked information to undermine her.
Now we know the source of the leaked information.
Ted Baillieu will not recontest his seat in November.
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/former-premier-ted-baillieu-resigns-20140822-1074a3.html
mari@854
Triggered by a piece in The Australian about Paul Kelly’s book quoting Stephen Smith.
Also, publicity about Swan’s book.
[Once you rule out senators, lefties, women and those who were very junior (lower third of the list) you are left with:]
Or they could borrow from Canada or Queensland and have appointed someone as leader from outside the Parliament. Radical, I know, but may as well throw it out there.
Personally, I see the advantages of electing leadership from amongst parliamentarians, but there are certain arguments in favour of widening the pool.
zoomster
Do you know either Gillard of Rudd personaly?
Benji
Just heard it mentioned on radio news break
[ mari
Posted Friday, August 22, 2014 at 12:41 pm | Permalink
Just logged in, not happy with my pulled muscle and what do I see Gillard/Rudd wars over and over again. Just get over it , in the Past. They have both left Parliament We have a far greater threat in Tony Abbott and his LNP plus Murdoch to be squabbling amongst ourselves.
]
—————————————
Beautiful day here in the Valley – just come in from a few hours of pulling out some winter weeds …..
Whose winning ???? – the Hatfields or the McCoys ?????
What was your view on the idea William? I don’t agree with it at any level. The idea of corporations voting is perverse to me.
Bemused
If any one beleves Paul Kelly(Editor at Large, BTW what does that mean I wonder?) they need their head read.
mtbw
I know Julia personally. She campaigned with me in 1996 and then went to work for Brumby as his CoS at a time when I was in contact with Brumby’s office on a weekly basis.
I’ve never met Rudd, but I would have regarded myself as a Ruddista until February 2012. I knew many people who worked with him, including some who considered themselves – at least at the time – as his friends.
mtbw
and I’m not sure why I need to know either of them personally to critique their leadership. Why aren’t you asking the same question of WWP, bemused or Centre?
[Here we go, Rudd chucked a tantrum over a hairdryer, Rudd broke a pen and spilt ink all over the décor lol
What incompetence 😯 ]
Rudd alienated everybody he couldn’t afford to alienate. You can level a measure of the blame for that at the alienated rather than the alienator, but ultimately the fact that it happened does indeed go to the question of his competence. When John Howard was down 59-41 a few months out from the 2007 election, most of the party room proved ready to stand beside him as the ship went down. Powerbrokers wanted him gone, but Howard had made the effort to win the loyalty and affection of the entire back bench. So might Rudd have, if he was better at his job.
Zoomster
No, I have acknowledged that Rudd made some bad decisions such as the pink batts scheme. He also had to shoulder the blame for listening to poor advice to abandon the CPRS (from Gillard) and implement a mining tax (from Swan which needed to be renegotiated).
All PM’s have not always consulted and ignored advice.
[
If any one beleves Paul Kelly(Editor at Large, BTW what does that mean I wonder?) they need their head read.
]
His article is full of direct quotes from Labor people such as Stephen Smith who did “exclusive interviews” with him.
Centre
Given the utter panic Rudd’s office demonstrated when I said something they thought was off message about the mining tax, it was definitely Rudd’s baby.
And I would argue the only thing wrong with the pink batts scheme was Rudd’s appalling handling of the fall out.
Peter Garrett was dealing with the issues very competently. Rudd panicked and failed to back his Minister. His lack of trust and loyalty in that situation was one of the reasons MPs decided he didn’t deserve either himself.
$57.6 billion debt according to TheKouk, that’s nearly double that of UK debt under Tories.
Yes William @ 867, you do make a valid point that Rudd should have won the loyalty of the party instead of alienating the ones that mattered.
ltep@859
And the mechanism exists to do it!
Get pre-selection, win a seat, prove your merit in Parliament, serve as a Minister or Shadow Minister and then get the top job.
[What was your view on the idea William? I don’t agree with it at any level. The idea of corporations voting is perverse to me.]
My article was critical of the move, but mostly due to the impurity of its motive. The Sydney proposal copies most of its features from the City of Melbourne, which seems not to excite too much controversy. As the Slate article gets around to acknowledging, votes for businesses are at the very least less perverse in Australian local government when they would be in the US, where it’s the municipal authorities who are empowered with such responsibilities as murdering unarmed civilians and stoking civil unrest for weeks on end (observe that even without a business vote, the black majority City of Ferguson has overwhelmingly white councillors and police chiefs).
Once you do allow the vote to businesses, you’re left making pretty arbitrary judgements about where the line gets drawn. The motivation of granting two votes to each business, and indeed the automatic and compulsory voting provisions, is very clearly to drown out the residential vote to the precise extent required to achieve the bill’s political objectives.
[If any one beleves Paul Kelly(Editor at Large, BTW what does that mean I wonder?) they need their head read.
]
“At large” usually means escaped from an institution, usually prison.
In Kelly’s case, perhaps he is “at large” following escape from a twilight facility of some sort?
Nick Ross @NickRossTech 3m
Dont mention the ping. Or ubiquity/cost/reliability MT @TurnbullMalcolm: Speedtest connected w NBN FTTN in Umina…
This from Mark Textor always stayed with me:
[John Howard would always make a genuine inquiry about someone’s interests or the health of their family. In doing so he was demonstrating that he was not self-centered, that he was genuinely interested in what was going on outside his prime ministerial cocoon. In doing so he was also signalling that his time with them was an important investment for him, earning loyalty and respect. In fact on one occasion a colleague brought his two young boys in for a quick snap with the then PM, but ended up leaving 45 minutes later after Howard had given the boys a personal tour of his office, shared tea and biscuits and discussed the rugby and sports with them. Given that this happened the afternoon before a state reception for the Queen, the effort was pretty extraordinary, and importantly, never forgotten by the colleague.]
newmatilda @newmatilda 1m
Morrison Defends Detention Delays During Appearance At HRC Inquiry: Minister for Immigration Scott Morrison th… http://bit.ly/1ngUZMG
874
The compulsory voting, with 2 votes, for business in the City of Melbourne is exactly the same kind of stack as in Sydney. It works even better in Melbourne because of the lower residential population. The City of Melbourne would be further to the left if it was not legislatively stacked like it is. For example, it would likely be thoroughly opposing the East-West link.
I believe that the Greens want to get rid of it in the City of Melbourne.
zoomster@870
Can’t comment on your first paragraph as I have no knowledge, but agree with the last 2.
He stupidly tried ‘a Beatie’ which probably only works north of the Tweed and then only if you are Peter Beatie.
zoomster
I have never met either of them and for that reason I have no idea of their real characteristics so I cannot judge their personalities or their character.
I look at politics as from a passionate view of whom I think is the best to lead and deny the Libs in gaining power.
For mine Rudd was it in 2007 – I thought that the coup in 2010 was both a shock and a disaster.
With the likes of Howes announcing on television that we would have a new leader by the following morning was atrocious – and where is he with all his Labor values now – hanging out with Michael Kroger et al.
ALP my ar*e! Opportunistic – definitely!
The 2010 coup was the plaything of opportunists and it shocked the nation.
Gillard should not have allowed herself to take any part in that rotten move.
It damaged the ALP and sent a message to the public that the leadership challenge was not about them but was about the bloody factions.
Gillard should never have allowed herself to have been drawn into the AWU power play. She paid a very heavy price in credibility for allowing that to happen.
The public at large did not like it at all.
When the return to Rudd happened the public voted for the ALP in numbers that saved us a further fifteen seats on polling and I would bet that the Labor Members who didn’t lose their seats were thrilled to bits that Rudd was back.
As I say I have never met Rudd nor Gillard but I was very pleased that Labor was still in Government.
We all need to thank Rudd rather than criiticise him.
And then start dealing the bastard LNP.
[John Howard would always make a genuine inquiry about someone’s interests or the health of their family. In doing so he was demonstrating that he was not self-centered, that he was genuinely interested in what was going on outside his prime ministerial cocoon. In doing so he was also signalling that his time with them was an important investment for him, earning loyalty and respect. In fact on one occasion a colleague brought his two young boys in for a quick snap with the then PM, but ended up leaving 45 minutes later after Howard had given the boys a personal tour of his office, shared tea and biscuits and discussed the rugby and sports with them. Given that this happened the afternoon before a state reception for the Queen, the effort was pretty extraordinary, and importantly, never forgotten by the colleague.]
Yes, while I might have disagreed with Howard’s policies, I never heard a bad report of a personal interaction with him. In fact, quite the opposite.
Contrast with Rudd, he would verbally abuse not only backbenchers, but Royal Australian Airforce personnel. Politics is about winning people over, first and last your colleagues and in between the wider electorate. Rudd never got this and always claimed power from some higher authority (quasi religiously) and saw winning over individuals as somehow beneath him. A failure of Politics 101.
a href=”http://andrewelder.blogspot.com.au/2014/08/a-modest-proposal-for-newscorp.html”>A fantastic, caustic piece by Andrew Elder on Newscorp. It’s a thing of beauty.
Dale to rren Laver
That is my definition of “at Large: too and I think pretty applicable, after he worked for the “institution” Newscorpse, specifically The Australia 😀
WILLIAM – You seem to be saying that if Rudd had built up more personal affection among Govt MPs he might not have been dumped. That is a truly damning indictment of Government MPs. Are they really that childish?
Woops
Sorry Darren for mis spelling your name
[Rudd alienated everybody he couldn’t afford to alienate. You can level a measure of the blame for that at the alienated rather than the alienator, but ultimately the fact that it happened does indeed go to the question of his competence]
Agree completely, although there was almost certainly a level of institutional weakness in cabinet, the personal weakness is easy to explain why would you enrage the power brokers to defend the guy. He was at best an average PM – he was a dreadful party leader. But they were watching the wrong game (the internal game not the governing the country well game).
[ Triggered by a piece in The Australian about Paul Kelly’s book quoting Stephen Smith. Also, publicity about Swan’s book. ]
And these have had the intended effect … at least here in PB land, where far too many people are far to ready to jump back on the bandwagon at the slightest opportunity.
[Once you rule out senators, lefties, women and those who were very junior (lower third of the list) you are left with:
Swan
Crean
Smith
Rudd
Burke
Maclelland
Bevis]
With the benefit of hindsight, and assuming he had no serious skeletons in the closet, then the only one that fits the bill for me was Smith, with Gillard as deputy.
Burke is also good value, but was too junior then and still developing his political skills.
[WILLIAM – You seem to be saying that if Rudd had built up more personal affection among Govt MPs he might not have been dumped. That is a truly damning indictment of Government MPs. Are they really that childish?]
Childish?
Perhaps they are human beings.
There is only so much abuse you will cop before you start to dislike a boss and then it will take little convincing when the time comes for that boss to be moved on.
You catch more flies with honey than vinegar (as the saying goes, I think). This is as old as time.
[Woops
Sorry Darren for mis spelling your name]
No worries!
Hope you are well.
All the best,
Darren
William Bowe@877
I met Howard once fleetingly when he was LOTO in a queue at Melbourne Airport.
He was courteous to a fault and was genuinely interested in the conference I was attending as it was relevant to a matter he had been approached about by constituents.
It really was something every politician could well emulate.
I am acquainted (wouldn’t put it stronger than that) with Bill Shorten and, true to his reputation, on every occasion we have crossed paths he has greeted me by name. This is an amazing skill he has developed and serves him well.
While I did not vote for Shorten for the leadership, I am more than satisfied with his performance to date and wish him well.
MTBW
being even handed, I believe we should thank both leaders for their achievements but also learn the lessons from both about leadership.
To recognise only the faults of one whilst only accepting the virtues of the other doesn’t help anyone.
Both were flawed leaders – all leaders are, after all.
But, I repeat – the level of vindictive behaviour and betrayal of his own party to advance his own interests Rudd demonstrated was unprecedented.
Once I realised – during the lead up to the 2012 challenge – the lengths Rudd would go to to undermine the Labor party in order to regain the leadership, he lost me.
Indigenous is being left out again by Coalition Government:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/22/ndis-lacks-service-providers-in-indigenous-areas-advocate-warns
“Indigenous Australians face being signed up to national disability insurance scheme (NDIS) plans with no services to purchase, an advocate has said after visiting the Northern Territory trial site.”
Speaking of shorten, he has addressed a rally in Melbourne with the ambulance workers
Breaking:
Fairfax and Channel 9 to form joint venture for TV on the internet.
[John Howard would always make a genuine inquiry about someone’s interests or the health of their family. In doing so he was demonstrating that he was not self-centered, that he was genuinely interested in what was going on outside his prime ministerial cocoon. In doing so he was also signalling that his time with them was an important investment for him, earning loyalty and respect. In fact on one occasion a colleague brought his two young boys in for a quick snap with the then PM, but ended up leaving 45 minutes later after Howard had given the boys a personal tour of his office, shared tea and biscuits and discussed the rugby and sports with them. Given that this happened the afternoon before a state reception for the Queen, the effort was pretty extraordinary, and importantly, never forgotten by the colleague.]
Also, I think Psephos famously referred to them as “Howard’s pot plants” — backbenchers who were never going to go anywhere that felt indebted to Howard for maintaining them in their marginal seats.
zoomster
[Once I realised – during the lead up to the 2012 challenge – the lengths Rudd would go to to undermine the Labor party in order to regain the leadership, he lost me.[
And your realised that by listening to whom?
DTT – 😆 Melham gone and forgotten, TG.
For once I’ve taken notice of one of your ‘lists’. In total retrospect the best I think would have been to make Smith leader with Gillard deputy.
He’s steady, a good thinker (but slow to decide), steadfast and photogenic. He would have required a gentle prod, at times, so that he knew the ‘cameras were rolling’.
That you end up with McClelland in the final list of ‘possibles’ puts a grin on my face. A real WTF to do situation!
Have a good day!
Since we had a comment, last night I think it was, from bk that Reachtel were in the field, when do they usually release?