Driven mostly by a dreadful result from top-tier pollster Galaxy, the Coalition suffers another substantial downturn in the BludgerTrack poll aggregate this week, to the extent of returning to the worst depths of the post-budget slump. The change compared with last week’s reading amounts to a clear 1% transfer on the primary vote from the Coalition to Labor, translating into a gain of five for Labor on the seat projection including two seats in Queensland and one each in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia. With new figures added from Ipsos and Essential Research, the leadership ratings show Tony Abbott continuing to plummet, while Bill Shorten matching his post-budget figures on both net approval and preferred prime minister. Abbott hasn’t quite reached his lowest ebb on net approval, but he’ll get there in very short order if the present trend continues.
[I don’t understand why all the hostility towards Credlin and calls for her to step down. She’s worked wonders with Abbott in the years she’s been with him.]
It’s because Credlin and Abbott don’t understand that running a country requires different skills to winning an election.
To a hammer, everything looks like a nail. To Credlin, everything looks like an election campaign.
In Abbott she found someone who was prepared to be a ruthless as her tactics required.
In Credlin Abbott found someone who was even more pathological than he was.
They need each other, and need no-one else. If you break up the partnership neither can survive. If you keep the partnership together, no-one else matters.
Which is all fine and dandy for winning elections, but government is real. It has real consequences and carries real responsibilities. Real people prosper or suffer as a result. Nations stand or fall.
A few, like Entsch get this. I believe he’s someone who is responsible and wants to do a good job (albeit in a different political direction to mine).
But, as long as Abbott relies primarily on Credlin having the final say, the country will be run on brainfarts and empty promises, pizazz and slogans… which do not put dinner on the table for the thousands who have lost their jobs and the thousands more to come.
Abbott is too busy destroying his enemies – who from time to time include a good swag of the Australian people – to worry about the greater good. Credlin never did worry about it.
BK you are not wrong about that article on the “banks survey”. What a joke. Pure self interest masquerading as news. Who thinks banking executives are economic experts anyway? These were the guys who ran scared the moment the GFC started until the Reserve Bank held their hands. Now they all parrot Hockey’s line about a budget emergency and say the Senate must pass a bunch of regressive savings measures as a result. Yet none of them say that the housing market is overheated, or that they ever lend recklessly.
Why do they say this? With the Murray inquiry handed down and sitting on Hockey’s desk they are probably all anxious to look supportive of team blue, lest the nastier bank regulations be adopted. Plus if interest rates do remain artificially low, their lending margins remain sky high.
Feeney
It is in Labor’s interest for Abbott to stay. It is in the national interest for Abbott to go. It depends on which of those things you rate higher.
Good post BB. Sums it up beautifully.
BB:
That is all highly depressing.
But if we accept the conventional wisdom that all this dissatisfied chitter chatter about Credlin is in fact code for publicly expressed dissatisfaction with Abbott, then replacing his CoS doesn’t improve much at all because Abbott will still be PM.
Feeney
A new leader will have to do the reset Abbott failed to do.
The problem for that leader is the whole fairness thing. How can a Liberal leader fix the fairness and make moves towards good economic management? I just do not see it happening.
So changing leaders will burn two for the LNP while they stick with their agenda.
Sprocket
I have actually done some sums and $100 Dr visits is now VERY likely.
In your standard NON bulk billing practice the current charge is about $65-$70 per visit but to stay revenue neutral it will need to go to $90. Alternatively the practices will start to charge full fee for EVERY visit, unlike current policy which is that they charge full fee for the first visit or complaint then bulk bill the rest, if it is follow up.
In a current bulk billing practice the charge will go to at least $40 up front for a visit. This will be unaffordable for many especially if it is the end of the pay period.
[It is in Labor’s interest for Abbott to stay. It is in the national interest for Abbott to go. It depends on which of those things you rate higher.]
Absolutely, and the country can’t afford much more of the regressive policies of this govt. But I’m starting to wonder if simply replacing Abbott won’t do anything more than simply tinker at the margins.
Socrates
Actually I am NOT sure that Abbott is responsible for many of the apalling decisions taken and therefore that the country will be better off with out him.
The budget fiasco is the work of Hockey and Cormann
The welfare cruelty is Andrews and Abetz
The Defence disaster is Johnson, Robb and the other dries
Climate change is Robb
In Opposition, everything is black or white. In Government, reality dictates that there are many shades of grey.
This Government fails because they have locked in to an ideological agenda and won’t alter course.
John Howard had the art of turning totally humiliating situations in to victories by being prepared to reverse his positions if he felt that the electoral winds were adverse to his then current position.
I’d say Abbott has a couple of months to turn it around or else there’ll be a box and dice clean out by his “supporters”.
Socrates
[It is in Labor’s interest for Abbott to stay. It is in the national interest for Abbott to go. It depends on which of those things you rate higher.]
I’m not sure that’s correct. Knocking off a first-term PM is considered success for an opposition — especially if it occurs within 18 months. The new PM now has to explain why the old PM was no good as there is a strong recent precedent (more than one in fact). The new PM will have to explain which election promises are off the table and of course as the last campaign was based largely on why a dysfunctional and divided party had to be replaced by ‘adult government’ the new PM will be between a rock and a hard place.
Unless the new regime utterly repudiates the behaviour of the old regime, their bump won’t last, and yet if it does, it will engender major serious cultural and interpersonal dissent. We will have Rudd v Gillard within the LNP. Let’s also keep in mind that PC is the catspaw of the organisational wing of the party. Unlike Rudd, PC has a base. Bishop probably doesn’t.
This ought to be far harder for the LNP than Rudd was for the ALP.
dtt,
The complaint from the back bench is Government and Ministers are being micro managed by the PMO and that Members of the Governement are finding out about policy only through the media.
So specifically, Abbott and his Ministers are simply sock puppets for Credlin”s evil influence.
I’m indifferent – to an extent – as to whether Abbott stays or goes.
As I’ve said before, he isn’t the problem.
The problem is that the whole of the Liberal party, collectively, are currently in the grip of Tea Party style thinking on a whole range of issues.
Thinking that changing the leader will change that is simplistic. At the most, changing the leader will see a few deck chairs rearranged.
Yes, a new leader will get – initially – enthusiastic backing from the righter members of the media. Abbott had that for six years, and burnt it in six months.
A new leader might decide the only way out is to replace 90% of the existing Cabinet with unknowns from the backbench. There’s nothing I’ve read, heard or seen to suggest that there are vast wells of untapped talent there, however.
The only positive a new leader might bring is the realisation that the Liberal party itself is the problem.
That might lead to a genuine revitalisation of that party, which would be good for the national polity as a whole, but I doubt it.
Sticking with Abbott, on the other hand, and continuing to blame him for the party’s woes, will just see the Liberal party continue with business as usual if they lose the next election.
Dtt
True, the Liberals are like an entire cabinet full of Stephen Conroys. Still. I can always hope for their departure too. Just because Abbott going will not solve the entire problem, does not mean Abbott going would not be a good start.
How do you fix an entirely incompetent government? One ministerial sacking at a time, starting from the top. Have a good day all.
An election :P.
[The problem is that the whole of the Liberal party, collectively, are currently in the grip of Tea Party style thinking on a whole range of issues.
Thinking that changing the leader will change that is simplistic. At the most, changing the leader will see a few deck chairs rearranged.]
Yep, that’s the story in 2 sentences.
If they change a few chairs around, and the media play a new riff on the same old tune, it will not disguise the essential nastiness of the COALition for long.
The only thing that can save them medium-long term is a new set of policies, ones that are realistic and actually have the welfare of the public as a goal.
And then, of course, they wouldn’t be the COALition any more would they?
I was just reading up on Macbeth (and yes, it’s Wikipedia, but the analysis seemed apt):
This (to me) unknown Aussie comedian has a well aimed crack at the American gun culture. WARNING – Coarse language.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnF9D-JxM1k&feature=youtu.be
It is an article about the situation in the UK but it doesn’t sound a million miles from here.
[Suppose for a moment that you faced an upcoming General Election in which the governing Conservatives were pretty unpopular, having presided over a Parliament of economic crisis, domestic confrontation and ideological polarisation.
But presume also that, during that contest, the Government was faced with a relatively unpopular Labour Party tainted by its past handling of economic failures that refused to go away.]
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2014/11/26/british-politics-is-heading-back-to-1974/
One more quote on Macbeth, from Wikipedia:
fredex
They won’t, which means they’ll try to convince people they’re right, instead. Though it looks like they’re having trouble growing out of playing stupid games, e.g. the so called copayment backflip.
[But as concerns about preference “gaming” intensified, former premier Denis Napthine revealed last week that he had sought bipartisan support to reform the rules so that candidates could be elected only if they won at least 5 per cent of the vote. Andrews, however, had rejected the idea before the election.]
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/house-of-mayhem-micro-parties-to-flex-their-muscle-on-spring-street-20141213-126h5a.html
Will Andrews regret his decision?
OK
If they remove Abbott they would need to remove the other ministers who have obviously failed.
Johnson obviously
Hockey -idiot
Cormann – or they gain nothing because he is the driver of the bad policies
Abetz ditto
Andrews ditto
Pyne – failed
Dutton – ditto
Brandis – ditto
That is nine of the front bench who would need top go because their credibility is shot.
@ABCNews24: Federal Treasurer @JoeHockey to speak on the Federal Budget shortly. #ABCNews24 will bring you this live #MYEFO #auspol
Hockey on now
[1603
Socrates
It is in Labor’s interest for Abbott to stay. It is in the national interest for Abbott to go. It depends on which of those things you rate higher.]
It’s a question of timing.
I want Abbott to stay on long enough to destroy himself and do serious long term damage to his side of politics and their anti-fair go agenda and ‘philosophy’.
But not so long he does major irreparable damage to Australia.
The tipping point is getting close.
Shorter Hockey. If it wasn’t for us things would be a lot worse!
As others above have noted, the main problem with the Government is Liberal Party policy, especially those aspects that were hidden before the last election. Changing Abbott won’t fix that. On balance, I’d prefer that he stay rather than be replaced by someone who might prove more competent in the political sense. I regard Abbott and his team as a bunch of thugs and wreckers who need to be contained until they can be booted out.
Today’s Mumble:
[THEY were Tony Abbott’s Praetorian Guard. They cheered and cooed the prime minister’s every action and syllable and sneered and chortled at the ALP and “the Left” who had underestimated him for four years and looked set to keep underestimating him.
Their side was back in power after a relatively short six years on the outer, and they celebrated the moment. Abbott was a sublime politician: an Everyman, adored around the country.
Australians instinctively supported his strong stand on climate change. After the MH17 tragedy he was the nation’s mourner-in-chief, he “stood up to Putin!”
It was Coalition supporters’ time in the sun. They urged and pulled the leader (always a malleable commodity) further towards the ideological fringes, insisting that, having won the electoral war, he prosecute the culture ones.
But now, rather suddenly, it is the season to explain where it all went wrong, and why. In many many words, with lots of throat-clearing, in endless columns across the media. It turns out Tony has been doing it all wrong, from the beginning. Well, the politics if not always the policy.]
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/mumble/index.php/theaustralian/comments/guards_now_singing_different_tune/
DTT
I suspect that the key to any leadership challenge might involve wooing the ministry by letting most of them keep their jobs.
“@KJBar: Hockey on Hockey: ‘Joe Hockey has taken a more conservative approach to revenue estimates and been thankfully accurate in that regard.’”
Hockey:
[We will use the Budget as a shock absorber to compensate for the drop in terms of trade.]
We’ve already been receiving shocks all year. This does not bode well for us.
That was presumably meant to be a “softening up” press conference.
Hockey didn’t seem to be the slightest bit convinced by the words he was reading out. He looked like he’d have rather been at the dentist!
He was lucky that the C-team of journos were there. He was able to get away with his comment that he never predicted the date by which they would return to surplus (somebody correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t he promise a return to surplus in the first term?). Not about his statement that they got rid of the expenditure that the carbon tax paid for (??!!??)
Also notice the softening of criticism re Swan. His big mistake, according to revisionist Hockey, was not so much to fail to deliver a surplus as to make empty promises about doing so.
Oh dear, life’s tough when the magic pixie dust doesn’t work.
PS. When you are telling everyone that tough times are ahead, it’s not a great look to show up with a deep sun tan.
dtt
the interesting question is then who you replace them with – and who you promote off the back bench to fill the gaps created.
So let’s play this game:
Johnson – Morrison, leaving Immigration open
Hockey – Turnbull, leaving Communications.
Cormann – Christian Porter.
Abetz – Luke Hartsukker (because he’s the present Assistant Minister)
Andrews – promote Marise Payne, leaving Human Services open
Pyne – Sussan Ley, leaving Assistant Ministry open
Dutton – Fiona Nash. She’s the Assistant Minister.
Brandis – Josh Frydenberg
Okay, that’s step one, and I’ve already improved the gender mix!
The vacancies created —
Immigration – Stuart Robert. (I’m tempted to put Hockey there….)
Communication – Paul Fletcher (no brainer, that one).
Assistant Minister for Education – Kelly O’Dwyer (either this of Ass Min for Health)
Assistant Minister for Health – Sharman Stone
Malcolm Turnbull may be the only one who can float the life boats for the LNP.
He would be pretty pissed at being told to stand up and say the cuts to ABC were efficiency dividends when even the most casual political observer knows the budget was cut. Abbott subsequently said about the cuts WTTE “yes but the situation has changed” after having various ministers spruik the “efficiency dividend” rot, basically admitting they were cuts.
The folks sitting in the chairs behind the front bench seem to become slightly more lively when Malcolm takes the floor in Parliament.
[Shorter Hockey. If it wasn’t for us things would be a lot worse!]
Still negative. still making excuses.
But not really a surprise.
They canned the revenue-producing Carbon Tax. They borrowed 8 billion to give to the Reserve Bank. They spent a billion combined on Iraq and MH-370 (and God knows how much on MH-17). They lost the tax revenues from the profitable Alternative Energy sector. They’re happy to lose dividends from the Clean Energy Development Bank. They laughed when GM and Ford closed their doors, putting thousands out of work as well as destroying manufacturing in automotive support industries.
In the meantime, coal and iron ore prices have tanked, so digging up dirt, which they prefer to cleaner profitable industries of the future, isn’t producing nearly as much revenue as they assumed it would. They pissed the NBN up against the wall. It’s going to cost as much as Labor’s NBN for about 20% of the efficiency. You could get 2 lots of 5 years’ worth of ABC cuts for 1 year of boots on the ground – 6 planes and a reinforced company of SAS soldiers – in the Middle East.
I’m sure you all have your favourite pet projects of Abbott’s and Hockey’s that have wasted money merely on ideological grounds or in a vain attempt to make the Prime Minister into a an international hero (he’s big in Ukrania, you know) or just to please Andrew Bolt, Rupert Murdoch, bogan tradies, the shock jocks or the IPA.
And they blame Labor for this shit?
They really thought it would be a golden era, just because they got elected. They did the worst thing a bullshit pusher can ever do: they swallowed their own product.
They want the punters up in arms because the Senate is stopping a few of their more egregious anti-Australian scams from operating. They want the voters clamouring in the streets, against their own interests – the interests of pensioners, sick people, students, workers, scientists, communicators and innovators – because they’re either too dumb or too stubborn (probably both) to admit their government is a crock of shit and their half-baked brainfart ideas are even worse.
And they blame Labor for this shit?
No surprises. No excuses. No f*cking idea.
Joe using terms of trade as an excuse to push ideology harder.
..I’m tempted to put Sharman Stone into Cabinet, instead of Luke H.
[confessions
Posted Sunday, December 14, 2014 at 8:52 am | PERMALINK
GG:
This is true. But I cannot see things improving if Abbott is cast adrift from the one person who’s been able to rein in his runaway mouth and keep him focused. In fact things may even get worse!]
Fess
If things get worse for the Liberals that’s just fine by me. It’s exactly what they deserve.
As for Credlin, when it comes to turd polishing there’s no doubt she has been absolutely brilliant. I’m not sure though whether that is something we should be admiring.
The key message that came through from Hockey’s otherwise content-free press conference (why doesn’t a journalist one day ask something like “why can’t you tell us what MYEFO is now and, if you can’t, why waste our time inviting us here?) was that the projected and forecast deficits in MYEFO are going to be huge.
The statement today will make the financial markets go a bit awry tomorrow morning, so that the direct impact of the release of MYEFO won’t be quite so dramatic. I assume that was the main point of the press conference.
Joe’s shock absorbers are not going to protect the mug punters. The mug punters will be the shock absorbers for the spivs.
@TheAviator1992: BUSTED! Hockey said he never promised a surplus.
Here he is on video saying he will! #auspol #myefo https://t.co/XNHaoriidZ
[somebody correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t he promise a return to surplus in the first term?]
In their first year in office, no less.
[Stephen Koukoulas @TheKouk · 18h 18 hours ago
Joe Hockey 2012: “we will achieve a surplus in our first year in office and we will achieve a surplus for every year of our first term.”]
Just a btw — why has Sarah Hansen Young vanished from our TV screens? Time was, scarcely a day went by without her bursting into tears on the nightly news, deploring the fate of asylum seekers.
Has she been sat on?
I don’t think anyone can argue that the conditions for AS have improved…
Fran Barlow @ 1587
[One of the agencies abolished was about Diabetes awareness … hmmm]
Well, how else is he going to pay for the Cadburys $16 million federal funding!
Belated morning all
confessions
So mumbles reckons all this bloviating is for nought. Abbott will still be leader in 2016 and they will be relected?
Bushfire
Joe’s self-congratulation over getting rid of income from the Alternative Energy sector makes me burn with anger. It’s foolish on so many levels.
I note also that tomorrow’s pseudo-budget will include a “family package” targeted at women who want to work and need child care. It will be interesting to find out what devilment is hidden in this phrase.
zoomster:
I for one am very happy we aren’t being hectored daily by SHY. A highly annoying individual IMO.
Lyndal Curtis highlighting the surplus promise.
victoria:
Looks like it.