Today’s Sunday Mail in Queensland publishes federal voting intention figures from the Galaxy poll that produced the state results you can read about in the post immediately below this one. The federal results are broadly similar to the state ones, and likewise in alignment with the current Queensland reading of BludgerTrack, in crediting Labor with a two-party lead of 51-49, which represents an 8% swing compared with the 2013 election result. The primary votes are 41% for the Coalition (compared with 45.7% in 2013), 37% for Labor (29.8%), 10% for the Greens (6.2%) and 3% for Palmer United (11.0%). The poll also provides a second encouraging personal result for Bill Shorten following his improved rating in last weekend’s Ipsos poll, with 40% rating him the federal leader with the “best plan for Queensland” compared with 34% for Tony Abbott – a question that produced a 42-40 split in favour of Abbott when last posed in the wake of the budget in May. The poll had a sample of 800 respondents, and was presumably conducted late in the week.
davidwh
I agree with you!
[I heard part of that interview with Dyson Heydon on the ABC a couple if days ago (originally recorded early last year I think). Indications are that Mr Heydon will produce a lengthy, detailed, well researched and extensively annotated document setting out the reasons and precedents in support his his decision, whether it is to recuse or not to recuse. It will be gramatically perfect and free of split infinitives and dangling participles.]
Or he may simply say “I resign” 🙂
pedant
I don’t know if it will be long or short.
The original decision in Laurie v British American Tobacco which gave rise to a 2-1 decision in the Court of Appeal and 3-2 splict in the High Court was only 21 paragraphs.
From Morgan (Aug 24):
“In mid-August L-NP support has jumped to 45.5% (up 2.5%) cf. ALP 54.5% (down 2.5%) following extensive union attacks on the credibility of Trade Union Royal Commission head Justice Dyson Heydon and following key Government announcements on policies involving climate change and same-sex marriage. However, if a Federal Election were held now the ALP would still win easily.”
I’m not sure I buy the cause-and-effect argument offered by Morgan. Just natural jumpyness in polling.
CPA lays into Joe over tax:
[But Certified Practicing Accountants (CPA) Australia’s Alex Malley has lashed the Government for what he called pre-election “fiscal giveaways”.
“The Treasurer appears to be caught in a cycle of restating the problems rather than rethinking the solutions,” Mr Malley said.
“The issue of income tax, GST, super {annuation}, company tax, land tax is yet to be discussed … it really is being deferred and deferred and deferred.
“To actually start forcing a conversation around just personal income tax says to me that we’re in a downhill slide to an election and that’s not good for Australia, we need to make some tough decisions.]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-24/hockey-to-argue-case-for-income-tax-cuts/6718968
[A treat for you, my dears. How slippery will Malcolm get tonight?]
No need for him to get slippery as it’s unlikely that Sales will ask any pertinent questions.
The 57/43 Morgan always looked a little overcooked.
Saw a TURC attack ad on TV last night from the ACTU. Not sure that’s exactly a high margin return on their advertising dollar…
The points I want to correct on TBA’s mention of NZ’s single chamber parliament vs Australia 2 houses.
1) NZ abolished the upper house in 1922
2) NZ voted in the MMP system in 1993 by referendum, which almost guarantee a coalition government ever since then. NZ has seen every government a coalition one since 1996. The one in 2014 was nearly a majority in its own right by the Conservatives, but they ended up being short by 1 seat.
3) The Queensland upper house was abolished in 1922 by an act of parliament.
4) If I am not mistaken, the Constitution Act Amendment Act 1977 prevents any more of such acts without a referendum. I believe there was a Commonwealth act which saw all states come into line with this, where Australia is no longer effected by acts of parliament in the UK. Can’t remember the name of the act.
Remember, Heydon is only looking at a purely objective question (whether a lay observer might have a reasonable apprehension of bias). He doesn’t have to describe how he had a man-crush on Bill Shorten in the witness box, etc etc. So whatever he says won’t cut a lot of ice on appeal. They’ll get to make their own assessment.
Steve777 – Bet that, as usual, Heydon will cite lots and lots of cases and duck the real issues.
The delay by Heydon in giving his decision rather suggests (in a tea leaves way) he will disqualify himself. Usually a judge asked to recuse themselves for apprehended bias does not need to take long to decide there is nothing in the application.
The application to recuse is based on “2 mights” (that is, a reasonable observer “might” think that the judge “might” be biased). The longer it is thought about the bigger the “mights” become.
Further, the situation will be much more complicated if Heydon were to recuse himself. What happens to previous work? Are there aspects of the TURC that could be continued in any event? This would obviously take more time to consider than a dismissal of the application.
Here are some pictures of another tornado in NSW, this time near Dubb: https://www.facebook.com/HigginsStormChasing/posts/884079285021193
K17
Heydon’s High Court judgments were not lengthy or full of references. He did create good pictures with his summary of the facts.
Here from the James Hardie directors’ case:
[At 7.28pm on 14 February 2001 a significant event took place.
A draft announcement was prepared. In it, the Chief Executive Officer said, for the first time, that the foundation would have sufficient funding for all future asbestos claims. That was a fateful and dangerous statement. It turned out to be false to a very considerable degree.
On 14 February 2001 senior counsel supplied a written opinion.
It contained dismal tidings: that despite James Hardie & Co Pty Ltd v Hall, James Hardie Industries Ltd could be liable for asbestos liabilities after 1980 if it were found to be directing the affairs of the subsidiaries. This opinion confirmed one of the warnings in the 17 January 2001 board papers. The opinion was tabled at the 15 February 2001 meeting.
By the time the directors assembled on the morning of 15 February 2001, it was clear that the sands in the glass were running down. The moment of truth had arrived. Management had poured the wine. Would the directors drink it?]
A genuine question to whomever may be interested in answering. Hockey says he will cut expenditure to to pay for his $25b tax cuts, what expenditure can he realistically cut (sounds like pie in the sky)?
shellbell @ 863: Quite nice, but not in the class of the pen-pictures painted by Lord Denning MR.
[Labor and members of the public asked the AFP to investigate Mrs Bishop’s helicopter ride in July at the height of the furore over the former speaker’s lavish spending habits. Mrs Bishop eventually resigned.
But the AFP refused to investigate – citing the so-called ‘Minchin Protocol’ – and referred the complaints to the Department of Finance.
The protocol was introduced by former Liberal senator Nick Minchin in 1998. It lets bureaucrats decide whether allegations of wrongdoing are credible and MPs are usually allowed to quietly repay funds they were not entitled to access.
A letter from the Ombudsman’s office to a member of the public unhappy with the AFP’s actions show there are grounds for an investigation into the AFP’s general use of the Minchin Protocol, as well as its explanation for refusing to investigate Mrs Bishop’s spending.
The Ombudsman’s operations director, Anne-Maree Harrison, has been assigned the investigation.]
via SMH. Good on the member of the public whoever it was!
confessions @ 866: That should also concentrate the minds of the Secretaries of the Department of Finance and of the Attorney-General’s Department as they perform the functions required of them under the Minchin protocol.
lizzie @ 800
A treat for you, my dears. How slippery will Malcolm get tonight
No need get slippery at all, Leigh will give him a foot rub.
Heaven forbid asking him how the NBN Co. won’t put up fees & charges by “taking on more debt” … without passing it on, reducing profit or paying intrest on that debt.. Just call me Magic Pudding Malcolm
pedant:
Indeed.
sceptic
I might even watch. It’ll be quite a night, with 4C on Shorten and then Peter Reith (boo, hiss) and Tony Windsor (hooray) competing on Q&A.
STOP PRESS
Reports are coming in from the cemetery at Murray Island of strange voices that emanated from the grave of Eddie Mabo. These voices are said to have come from the grave as the PM touched the headstone.
The first voice is reported to have reminded the PM of the time when he was full of good cheer having defeated Malcolm Turnbull by just one vote.
The second voice is said to have reminded him of his retorts when informed of the high rates of indigenous disadvantage: “Are there no prisons? Are there no WorkChoices?”
And, as a third voice warned him of impending electoral doom, the PM is reported to have chided, “there’s no way I’m going to be the prize turkey!”
And then the three voices are said to have chorused a portentous three-word slogan:
“Shit happens, mate…”
Fess at 866
[ Good on the member of the public whoever it was!]
According to the SMH article
[The original complaint to the Ombudsman was made by Tony Yegles, the co-publisher of the No Fibs citizen journalism website.]
BiilBo on my ABC TV now
William Bowe just interviewed on ABC news!
What was our mein host and overlord speaking about ?
Scenes reminiscent of Beatlemania.
I am amazed that Heyden hasn’t stepped down, in criminal cases it is usual practice for a judge with a conflict to step down, surely the same practices extend across the legal system
Newspoll is “interesting” apparently
Lizzie
Joe has a point about not everything government does brings actual benefit, there is plenty that does but government undergo a major restructure starting with working out which level is responsible for what.
WB
Were you Paul or John ?
“William Bowe just interviewed on ABC news!” Which State, Boerwar (and William)? Didn’t appear in the Queen’s Land, unless I nodded off.
JAR
Seven o’clock news re Canning by-election.
Turnbull given a nice run here.
Leigh Sales … allows world record monologue from Mal
Jeff Kitsonjulk – probably a move back to the govt then, from 54-46 a fortnight ago. The Bronwyn/expenses blowout is over.
I was right. Leigh Sales is absolutely hopeless. Even I could come up with at least half a dozen worthwhile questions that she completely missed or avoided.
It was shown in Queensland (unless Hervey Bay gets a different bulletin)
Do a few ABC/media types get around these pages anonymously?
Totally saw Willie Bowe on Television!! Screams then faints then screams again and faints once more for good measure – yay Willie!
Is there a link for ABC News? Iview isn’t being particularly cooperative.
Is that a New Zealand accent I noticed, William?
Mr Bowe on ABC 730 in Sabra Lane’s otherwise long and rambling boost of Liberal triumphs from Cape York to HoJo promising nothing through to a Vox Pop in Canning where everyone they found praised Abbott as visionary….
Until William comes on and adroitly implies that HastieGate was a stitch up and gave the Liberals a free media kick.
Probably William went on to say something about the other candidates, but sadly, theirABC left this on the cutting room floor
Just in. Fellow Sandgroper PvO tweets re Bilbo’s appearance “WOW” .
Who was that man?
I wouldn’t have thought so, Happiness. The one time I visited New Zealand, a hotel proprietor provided me unbidden with a specific form that required filling out, since I was obviously from overseas.
nvm here we go:
http://iview.abc.net.au/collection/458
[Peter van Onselen @vanOnselenP 37m37 minutes ago
Reading tea leaves I know, but taking more time to decide sounds like he’s trying to firm up his reasons for staying. http://m.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/dyson-heydon-postpones-decision-on-disqualifying-himself-from-inquiry/story-fn59niix-1227496807492 … ]
Or riding out the storm until the media crowds around the next scandal. How else could Heydon’s prevaricating be possibly interpreted?
trand
[ Do a few ABC/media types get around these pages anonymously? ]
No. Reading PB would definitely burst their bubble.
I’m betting Heydon will stay. If there is a market on it, I’m in big.
[I’m betting Heydon will stay]
Its either that or admit he was wrong.
I suspect if he did that, it would be a first.
I should be more pedantic trand – I don’t think there was anything about the by-election in *Brisbane* (unless I faded away for the duration of a whole story!). Which newsreader do you get in H Bay? We had Jess van Vond here – you possibly get a feed from News 24 with a Sydney reader?