The final update of BludgerTrack for the year comes off the back of strong results for the Coalition from both Essential Research and Roy Morgan, resulting in a slight movement of 0.3% on the two-party preferred aggregate, and a seat gain for the Coalition in New South Wales. Nothing new this week on leadership ratings.
Further:
• Labor’s Anna Burke has announced she will bow out at the next election, creating a vacancy in the eastern Melbourne seat of Chisholm, which she retained in 2013 with a margin of 1.6%. Rick Wallace of The Australian reports that the seat is reserved for Burke’s Right faction, but that this still leaves room for a turf war between the National Union of Workers and the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association, both of whom are credited with about 35% of the seat’s branch membership. Monash councillor Stefanie Perri is likely to be the candidate of the NUW, while the SDA is intriguingly linked with a possible candidacy for Dimity Paul, who has been central to Victorian Labor’s recent internal crises as the complainant in the bullying action against her then employer, Adem Somyurek. This led to the latter’s dismissal as Victorian Small Business Minister and a split within the SDA sub-faction. The NUW’s prospects may stand to be boosted by a rapprochement with the Shorten-Conroy forces of the Right, which would bring them back under the umbrella of its “stability pact” with the Socialist Left.
• The Liberal National Party’s state executive voted 14-12 on Monday to block Ian Macfarlane’s move from the Liberal to the Nationals, raising questions about his future in the Toowoomba-based seat of Groom. Macfarlane threatened to quit politics if the move was rejected, and there is some concern in the Coalition that he may do so in the new year. Given that the state executive vote followed a 102-35 vote in favour of the move from the party’s Groom divisional council, which would dominate any preselection ballot, there appears to be the potential for a turf war in the seat between the party’s Liberal and Nationals components. I had a piece in Crikey on the subject that was run shortly before the state executive vote on Monday.
• Labor’s preselection for the seat of Robertson on the New South Wales Central Coast has been won by Anne Charlton, the chief-of-staff to Deb O’Neill, who held the seat from 2010 until her defeat in 2013, and is now a Senator. Charlton, who has gained media attention for her admission that she was addicted to heroin at the age of 16, won a local preselection vote by 98 to 72 ahead of Belinda Neal, who had a rocky ride as the seat’s member from 2007 to 2010, when she lost preselection to O’Neill. The seat was won for the Liberals at the 2013 election by Lucy Wicks, who holds it on a margin of 3.0%, which the proposed redistribution would nudge up to 3.2%.
• Also preselected by Labor in New South Wales over the weekend were Emma Husar, a disability services advocate who ran in Penrith at the state election in March, to run against Fiona Scott in Lindsay; and Fiona Philips, a tutor at the University of Wollongong and TAFE who ran in South Coast, to run against Ann Sudmalis in Gilmore.
• Crikey has a Christmas offer of a discounted annual subscription for its daily email and subscriber content, at $180 rather than the usual $219, plus a bonus $125 in books, DVDs and a 30-day Inkl premium subscription providing access to the Sydney Morning Herald, The Guardian, The Atlantic and more.
[Labor supporters have an affliction that I call “moderation porn”.]
Both Hitler and Stalin despised moderates and murdered them in their millions. So did Pol Pot. If there is one thing worse than a corrupt leadership, it is a madly ideological one. Most of the genocidal murders in history have been carried out by absolutists who saw any departure from their ideology or beliefs as bad or worse than the total opposite of their position.
I spit on extremists.
[Rowan
Rowan – @FightingTories
Turnbull snubs Adler, makes strange speech http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/review/pms-literary-awards-turnbull-snubs-adler-makes-strange-speech/news-story/938a0c1f633a831a6843e221653c8ccb …]
2601
TPOF
The N has decayed into trolling; seemingly posting “scornography” for its own gratification, much like TBA.
I think it’s simplistic to generalize Greens, Labor or Libs as some homonegeous group. None of those groups are fully progressive, moderate or conservative.
2601
Moderation is good, in moderation.
When moderation is an ideology, as it seems to be to significant parts of the ALP, it can be taken to extremes.
[When moderation is an ideology, as it seems to be to significant parts of the ALP, it can be taken to extremes.]
Sounds very clever. Shame it means nothing. Perhaps it could be set to music and recorded by Coldplay.
Tom
[When moderation is an ideology, as it seems to be to significant parts of the ALP, it can be taken to extremes.]
That looks deep, but I think it’s just silly.
Moderation or pragmatism?
“Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change”
The greens should be very proud of the emission trading scheme we don’t have and the moderate refugee policy we don’t have.
frednk@2609
Beautifully put frednk! 😆
The number of asylum seekers who reached Australia by boat in recent years when the policy was not as cruel as it is now was nowhere near a level that would have been unmanageable.
Supporters of offshore and onshore detention as a deterrent to migration need to be apprised of these facts.
Consigning people to torture and death in their own lands, conveniently outside our gaze, is not morally superior to non-custodial processing of asylum seekers in Australia.
Inflicting mental illness on asylum seekers is not the best way of keeping boat arrivals down.
Reducing the violence in the source countries is the most direct response to the problem. At a minimum we should not add to that violence by joining futile military adventures in those lands. Ideally we would play a creative middle power role of building capacity and confidence for nonviolent direct action to take root in those countries. Perpetuating the cycle of violence is a colossal failure of imagination and responsibility on our part.
Taking some of the load off the most burdened asylum countries is a must. Right now our contribution falls far short of what we could manage. Forty to fifty thousand refugees a year would not be beyond us. We could probably go higher but we should not assume that it would ever come to that. We should evaluate our capacities and policies on the basis of what happens, instead of invoking alarmist language like “floods” and “millions of refugees will reach Australia!” as a means of shirking our responsibility to be civilised and helpful.
The vast majority of refugees don’t want permanent resettlement. They want to return home. Refugee resettlement is a small niche in the response to displacement of people. We shouldn’t exaggerate the scale of resettlement. Australian rhetoric routinely exaggerates and panders to inchoate fears.
2606 & 2607
Moderation is correct much of the time but not always. Extremist moderates think moderation should be followed always because it is never wrong.
Nicholas
I agree with you 100% but the solution to this problem lies with the Liberals; they need a leader that is a statesman. The bogans need to be put back in their box. Labor can’t solve it and the Greens can do no more than makes noises on the side.
Nicholas
[The number of asylum seekers who reached Australia by boat in recent years when the policy was not as cruel as it is now was nowhere near a level that would have been unmanageable. ]
Who has been arguing the opposite?
[Supporters of offshore and onshore detention as a deterrent to migration need to be apprised of these facts. ]
I think most of those here are aware of them.
[Consigning people to torture and death in their own lands, conveniently outside our gaze, is not morally superior to non-custodial processing of asylum seekers in Australia. ]
Again, no one here is arguing the opposite.
[Inflicting mental illness on asylum seekers is not the best way of keeping boat arrivals down.]
I think everyone here agrees with that.
I’d also think most of us would be in agreement with the next three paragraphs.
You sound like someone looking for an argument whilst not really understanding what it is the rest of the group is talking about.
Tom
Give us a couple of concrete examples of what you mean, because I have no idea what you’re talking about and I suspect you don’t either.
Tom the first and best@2612
So what are you bothered about? Moderate extremists or extremist moderates?
TPOF @ 2606,
‘ Sounds very clever. Shame it means nothing. Perhaps it could be set to music and recorded by Coldplay.’
You win the internetz today! 😀
On the subject of asylum seekers, the Daily Telecrap is giving prominence to the following:
[“PEOPLE smugglers are exploiting the Christmas break to get desperate asylum seekers to risk their lives at sea by claiming border protection is “on holidays’’. Officials have revealed how many asylum seekers Australia has turned away…”]
It’s behind the paywall, so I haven’t read it, but it is billed as an ‘exclusive’, which either means ‘some crap we made up to fill blank space on a holiday and/or advance our political/commercial agenda’; or it’s a drop from the PM’s office. I’m guessing the latter. Turnbull – same old pig with nice new lipstick.
I think Malcolm Turnbull will regret not moving into Kiribilli House. Living alone in a manse at Point Piper might prove to be incredibly isolating. Instead of it keeping him in touch with the real world and real people I think it will have the opposite effect.
You need to dissociate yourself from your previous life when you become Prime Minister, I reckon.
Time will tell.
I say this apropos the story about the straange speech Turnbull gave at the Literary Awards.
I also think the strain of trying to play both ends against the middle in his own party might be getting to him.
Because non-custodial processing of asylum-seekers is tantamount to genocide?
Catmomma
I have to take serious issue with you over afghanistan. We invaded because we wanted to encircle enemy No 1 who at that time was Iran. We also hoped to get an oil pipeline to Pakistan but that was a lesser issue. Thir issue was keeping Russia in check.
It had nothing to do with women’s rights (if it did we would have invaded Saudi). It had nothing to do with 9/11 either (if it did we would have invaded Saudi, and it had nothing whatever to do with destruction of ancient artefacts (if it did we would have protected those of Iraq). I am with Bemused, please stop parroting Neocon idiocy.
The reality is that most Afghans actually welcomed the Taleban, simply because they provided stability. Mrs Hassan preferred the Taleban to the previous warlords, simply because she could safely travel the roads to visit her mum and dad without fear of her son or daughter being kidnapped by warlords/drug barons, the girls for marriage and the boys for “dancing boys.” Sure they are fundamentalist nutters but rather an honest bigot that a cruel drug baron.
We helped to break Iraq and Afghanistan and as such we are responsible for their refugees. If we did not want responsibility we should have kept our troops at home.
2619
C@tmomma
Turnbull has already forgotten the cardinal rule of political office. It is only ever really about the people and almost never about the personal preferences, whims and conjectures of the elected. He may think that as PM he may indulge himself. The opposite is true. The public citizen has no such rights at all.
2621
daretotread
This is almost pure invention. Australia had a very minor supporting role in the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, a deployment that concluded in 2002.
[Following this date until 2005 Australia’s total contribution to efforts in Afghanistan were two officers attached to the United Nations and the Coalition land mine clearing force.]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Slipper#First_phase
Bemused
Not sure what you are trying to say about not caring for the Rohinga who would not get a chance to reach Australia.
Sure we can care but the issues are more legal and public perception. If WE send an 11 year old child to Malyasia, who was at one time safe within our borders, then we accept moral responsibility for the welfare of that child. I do not think that an arguemt that says that it is sad the girl was sold to prostituion but look we educated 3 Rohinga girls as compensation really quite addresses the moral issue.
My probelm with the Malaysian solution was that it might work really well for 5 years say during the term of the current Australian and Malaysian PMs but 10 or 15 years from now without some sort of guarantee from Malaysia about non refoulment or working rights it was a “deal” that had a risk of tragic failure. Problem is that the children and young adults we sent in 2011 would still be severely affected after 10 or 15 years.
daretotread@2621
It had plenty to do with 9/11 as the planners of 9/11 were Osama Bin-Laden and other Al-Queda leaders in Afghanistan and the US wanted them.
daretotread@2624
I have said nothing about Rohinga. I haven’t mentioned them.
I disagree. Labor has a responsibility to change the framing of this issue – a responsibility that it chronically fails to fulfill. Labor invokes the rhetoric of bogans and panders to bogan fears. It doesn’t have to do that.
If Labor stopped pretending that we are in danger of being swamped by brown people unless we detain asylum seekers we could make some progress.
Briefly
We talked big and carried on about Afghanistan, although I will agree that our moral corruption in detroying a relativley stable country was limited. I think our airforce was also fairly careful who we bombed.
At the UN we gave support to the US in the stupid invasion. Sorry we bear a moral burden, although not as large as the US.
Bemused
I nthought it woas to be Rohinga in Malaysia we were to trade for our AS.
Bemused
Twaddle about Osama Bin Laden
Jesus if they had wanted Bin Laden they need only have arrested is brothers and their failies in the US and maybe confiscated some assets. The Saudis would have delivered Bin Laden on a platter if there was any serious financial penalty.
In any case the Aghans were ready to hand him over. But they wanted to do it politiely without breaking the sacred “guest right” conditions.
The bogans need to be raised up, not told it’s alright to be a bogan.
daretotread@2629
I managed to translate that and I believe you are entirely wrong.
[“Facts once again prove you wrong. 2014-15 Immigration Budget $5.95bn
2015-16 budget $6.4 bn”]
Immigration spending like all government spending increases every year.
However it was actually reduced from forward estimates from the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years because we stopped the boats.
$2.5 Billion was saved in the 2014-15 Financial year and another $0.5 Billion this financial year.
You are entitled to your own opinions but not your own reality or facts:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/asylum-seekers-government-to-reveal-budget-saving-from-detention-centre-closures/story-fni0cx12-1227333486734
daretotread@2630
Last paragraph is correct so why spoil it with all the other rubbish?
2628
daretotread
….yet more fiction…
As it happens, I recall very clearly the US invasion of Afghanistan and, in particular, the bombing of Kabul. I was working with several Afghans at the time. One lost a relative during the bombardment. Having been driven from their country by the Taliban, they were greatly pleased to see the end of that regime despite the losses they also felt.
The assault was carried out almost entirely by the US, who pursued Al Qaeda and the fleeing Taliban leadership into Pakistan. The occupation was also led and carried out by the US, later with the support of NATO forces.
TrueBlueAussie@2633
Oh that’s hilarious. ‘Facts’ in the Daily Telegraph????
😆
Wild Oats XI and Comanche have both retired from the Sydney/Hobart..
[2627
Nicholas
….Labor has a responsibility to change the framing of this issue….]
You’re liberal with your injunctions to Labor. Instead of proffering unsolicited and irrelevant advice to your antagonists, why don’t you follow it yourself. Go forth. Argue your case with the public. Inflict yourself on them instead of on those for whom you show nothing but contempt.
TBA
2013-14 budget was 5,188,080
2014-15 higher
2015-16 higher
The immigration budget has done nothing but increase….
Plus this year 2015 – The cost of Australia’s immigration detention system has blown out by more than $1 billion as the Turnbull government forks out for charter flights, accommodating asylum seekers and funding the governments of Nauru and Papua New Guinea.
TBA
still doing everything you can to deflect and raise anything except an answer to the $13 million per refugee.
The difference between your b/s figure and mine…I got mine from the budget papers not a deceptive and misleading press release
TBA
FACTS from the budget papers
Facts once again prove you wrong.
2013-14 budget was 5,188,080
2014-15 Immigration Budget $5.95bn
2015-16 budget $6.4 bn
Notice the numbers are going up, not down which would prove a saving
[“2013-14 budget was 5,188,080
2014-15 higher
2015-16 higher”]
LIAR.
https://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/budget/2014-15-paes-sec1-agency-overview-resources.pdf
Page 23. Total net resourcing for agency DIBP:
Actual: 2013-14: $6.056 Billion
Don’t forget this outcome as well as saving money:
http://www.minister.border.gov.au/peterdutton/2015/Pages/government-closes-bladin-detention-facility.aspx
Eleven… yes… thats 11 of Labors razor wire camps closed by the Coalition.
So these “savings” are like the $80 billion in health cuts that don’t exist because the money was promised over forward estimates and wasn’t actual money
[Eleven… yes… thats 11 of Labors razor wire camps closed by the Coalition.]
and still the budget increases not reducing
$13 million plus for every refugee sent to Cambodia
$13 million plus for every refugee sent to Cambodia
$13 million plus for every refugee sent to Cambodia
$13 million plus for every refugee sent to Cambodia
four refugees
Bemused
You are aware that heaps of Bin Laden family were living/studying in the US on 11/9. I have little doubt that if Bin Laden was really the object for invading Afghanistan there were probably 30 options that might have been tried first. The easiest would have been to arrest his immediate family and put on a bit of pressure.
Second option would have been to do it indirectly vioa the Saudi royal family (Bin Laden family friends)
Third option was perhaps special forces in the mountains and not bombing Kabul.
daretotread@2647
Yes.
So what makes you think Bin Laden would have cared a toss?
What makes you think the Saudis would have cared a toss about the Bin Ladens?
Briefly
It is remarkably stupid to believe what one Afghani you may know, without question just as it is stupid to make judgements about Australian politics based on some random Aussie you meet in London.
Obviously the educated, westernised Afghanis from Kabul would hate the Taleban, but that is not the same as assuming that the poor regional farmers would feel the same. It is sort of like assuming that a Green from Brunswick speaks for all Australia including North Qld.
bemused
The Bin-Ladens were a family closely allied to the Saudi Royal family, with many friendship and commercail links. A bit of assett seizing/pressure would no doubt have yielded quite a bit even if only information on Bin Laden wherabouts, friends, finances etc.
Remember that most of the hijackers were Saudi as was Bin Laden