Newspoll’s surprise this week has caused a minor landslip in the BludgerTrack poll aggregate, which moves 0.8% to Labor on two-party preferred, while delivering only a modest gain of three on the seat projection (one each in New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia). The leadership results from the poll have also caused Malcolm Turnbull’s net approval rating to continue its downward trajectory, and given a very slight impression of Bill Shorten pulling out of his slump. Also in the mix this week were results from Roy Morgan and Essential Research, neither of which recorded much movement, although the former found Labor hanging on to a big gain the previous fortnight.
In other news, the big story at the moment is obviously the introduction this week of Senate reform legislation to the Senate, for which there is a dedicated thread here for you to comment on, together with my paywalled contribution to Crikey on Tuesday. Then there’s preselection news:
• Nominations for the hotly contested Liberal preselection in Mackellar closed on Friday, with seven challengers coming forward to take on Bronwyn Bishop. Joe Kelly of The Australian reports the field includes the widely touted Walter Villatora and Jason Falinksi (see this earlier post for further detail), along with Bill Calcraft, a former Wallabies player described by the Sydney Morning Herald as having “returned to Australia after a long career in business in Europe”. For what it may be worth in well-heeled Mackellar, Calcraft has the support of talk radio broadcaster Alan Jones, who coached him when he played for Manly in the 1980s. The other candidates are Campbell Welsh, a stockbroker; Vicky McGahey, a school teacher; and Alan Clarke, founder of Street Mission.
• Sarah Martin of The Australian reports that while Craig Kelly no longer faces opposition from Sutherland Shire mayor Kent Johns in the Liberal preselection for Hughes, two other local party members have nominated against him: Jeffrey Clarke, a barrister, and Michael Medway, noted only as the candidate for Werriwa in 2004.
• The Liberal preselection to replace Andrew Robb in Goldstein, which was covered here in detail last week, looms as a contest between Georgina Downer and Tim Wilson, after another highly rated candidate, local software entrepreneur Marcus Bastiaan, ruled himself out. Christian Kerr of The Australian reports on a move by locals to throw their weight behind Denis Dragovic, a “former hostage negotiator, academic and global development worker”. Also expected to nominate by Kerr’s Liberal sources are Jeremy Samuel, chairman of the party’s Caulfield electorate committee, and John Osborn, director of economics and industry policy for the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
• The Liberal preselection to replace Bruce Billson in the outer south-eastern Melbourne seat of Dunkley has been won by Chris Crewther, a Frankston-based business consultant. Steve Lillebuen of Fairfax reports that Crewther won in the final round over Donna Bauer, who held the state seat of Carrum for the Liberals from 2010 to 2014. Crewther unsuccessfully attempted to win the rural seat of Mallee for the Liberals when Nationals member John Forrest retired in 2013, but was defeated by Nationals candidate Andrew Broad.
• The retirement of Warren Truss creates a preselection vacancy in the Nationals stronghold of Wide Bay in central Queensland. Among those to express interest are Jeff Seeney, who entered state politics in 1998 and served as Opposition Leader from March 2011 to March 2012, and as Deputy Premier through the period of Campbell Newman’s government from March 2012 to February 2015. Also said to be in the mix is Tim Langmead, a former adviser to Truss.
• Also vacant is Ian Macfarlane’s Toowoomba-based seat of Groom, where the state member for Toowoomba South, John McVeigh, has confirmed he will seek Liberal National Party preselection.
• Sally Cripps of the North Queensland Register reports four candidates have nominated for Liberal National Party preselection in Bob Katter’s seat of Kennedy: Michael Trout, who held the state seat of Barron River from 2012 to 2015; Shane Meteyard, grazier and owner of Milray Contracting; Jonathan Pavetto, economic advisor for the Alliance of Electricity Consumers; and Karina Samperi, a Cairns management consultant. The narrowly unsuccessful candidate from 2013, Noeline Ikin, has withdrawn after being diagnosed with cancer.
We have the same problem all over Sydney. Developers encouraged to build more and more high rise towers onto already congested areas with inadequate infrastructure, not just schools.
It takes a special kind of stupid to fail to realise the consequences of such unsustainable development.
Powerful speech by ex NSW Labor Leader Robertson in NSW apology.
K17 @ 93. There is still time as the cock has not yet crowed!
Robertson got a standing ovation.
OPV will advantage voters. That is why Antony Green, Kevin Bonham, William Bowe, and everyone who cares about voter empowering reform regards it as better than the current system.
ratsak @ 98
Bullock has a political use by date of mid 2019. After that date he will be kicked out of the Senate if he is still there unless he supports Labor’s marriage equality policy. I suspect he is making homophobic hay while he can.
Nicholas @ 105
Then why haven’t the Greens supported OPV below the line if they really cared about empowering voters?
From the Fairfax blog:
[Mr Shorten also had some thoughts on voting reform and why the shadow cabinet decided to oppose the changes instead of supporting the position of the shadow minister actually responsible for the area (Gary Gray): “I am sceptical when I see the Liberals and the Greens announcing a deal which will favour Green party politicians and Liberal Party politicians.”]
Exactly. That’s not to say that Labor is any less interested in serving its own interests, but at least it is not quite as sanctimoniously and hypocritically crowing about its morality.
PennySharpemlc: @jrobertsonmp calling out the Federal Government for the safe schools “investigation”.”Schools are the place where we support anti bullying”
[I am sceptical when I see the Liberals and the Greens announcing a deal which will favour Green party politicians and Liberal Party politicians.”]
According to Wong, Conroy… the senate voting reforms will also advantage Labor.
TPOF,
Why was Gary Gray refused permission by his own party to negotiate with the Coalition on the senate voting reform bill?
[Labor’s decision to rule out negotiating about OPV for the Senate happened very quickly, didn’t it? You could call it rushed. Perhaps they need another two years to get their arses into gear.]
I know you aren’t a troll you lack the imagination and intellect, but this ‘look over there’ rather than defending your previous assertion is very troll like.
guytaur@65
So Fred Nile supported it???
Has Fred emerged from the closet or something? 👿
Pegasus – You’re a big fan of Gary Gray, are you? Few on PB are.
bemused
Good question. 😀
James Massola @jamesmassola · 27m27 minutes ago
Today’s leaked Coalition talking points: new lines on Defence white paper; less commentary on negative gearing pic.twitter.com/7wE0n1M4C7
K17,
Gary Gray is Labor’s shadow Special Minister of State, a role responsible for electoral matters.
He has advocated senate voting reform for years and was a member of the committee that inquired into this.
Why was Gary Gray refused permission by his own party to negotiate with the Coalition on the senate voting reform bill?
Calcraft a ‘special’ for Mackellar, I’d say.
[Bernard Keane @BernardKeane · 2m2 minutes ago
Not to forget that @andrewnikolic spends his time in JCIS hearings trying to slag off people on Twitter rather than doing his job.]
[106
TPOF
ratsak @ 98
Bullock has a political use by date of mid 2019. After that date he will be kicked out of the Senate if he is still there unless he supports Labor’s marriage equality policy. I suspect he is making homophobic hay while he can.]
The thing about Senator Bullock is that he does use his internal resources and union connections to support Labor candidates no matter their opinions on ME or other supposedly touchstone issues. He is not precious about these things. There are no purity tests.
There will be 16 candidates for House of Reps seats in WA this year. It’s safe to suppose that none of them – whether from the left or the right or if they are non-aligned – would agree with the Senator on all these issues. Nor will they necessarily agree with each other on every issue. But that won’t prevent them from supporting each other up to and beyond the election.
It seems it is in the DNA of the Greens to crave recognition from the Big Boys. Suck up to which ever party is in government then go for a bit of a walk on the wild side when the other major comes into power to show even handedness or something.
I gather this is something to do with deprivation of relevance or somesuch.
Also, isn’t it a bit rich criticising Labor for not allowing Gary Gray’s view being considered/debated by Labor, when, I understand, the Greens do all their in-house stuff behind closed doors?
After the cop out by the Greens when it came to CC legislation in R-G-R time, it is sensible to always be wary of Green motivation in anything. Just another small-time political party.
http://www.news.com.au/national/australia-under-the-spotlight-in-human-rights-watch-world-report-2015/news-story/8741e271b722360583b69d6a5d579a6f
[AUSTRALIA has been named and shamed on a list of the world’s worst human rights offenders — but it’s not just our treatment of indigenous people and asylum seekers that has landed us there.
Sharing the dubious honours with the likes of Syria, Nigeria and Egypt, we have made the cut for reasons you might not expect.
According to Human Rights Watch’s World Report 2015, our counterterrorism laws — hastily introduced by the Abbott government last year — have been slammed as “vague” and “over-broad” in the damning report, infringing on the basic rights of all Australians.
In response to the threat of home-grown terrorism, new laws extend to the use of control orders and preventive detention and also make it a criminal offence to travel to “declared areas’’ abroad, which overly restricts people’s freedom of movement, the report states.
The controversial proposal that would force telecommunications companies to retain metadata for use by intelligence organisations has also been slammed.
The laws would essentially give Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) unprecedented power to monitor the entire Australian web with only one warrant.
“Draconian counterterrorism laws undermining free speech are causing incalculable damage to Australia’s international standing as a rights-respecting country,” warns Australian director of HRW Elaine Pearson.
“The government rammed these measures through parliament despite their having lasting consequences on Australians’ civil liberties.”
“These are excessive restrictions on freedom of speech, so a whole range of peaceful conduct can be prosecuted under these laws — something that affects the civil liberties of all Australians.”]
TPOF
The Greens want OPV below the line as well. You’ve asked why this isn’t part of the current proposal. Kevin Bonham addressed this in the thread about Senate voting reform:
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2016/02/21/double-trouble/
The party that you support is watering down the proposal and then attacking the result.
Turnbull launching Defence White paper 24 now
sorry on News24 now. Not defence paper 24
[Does anyone think that the Greens would have supported this bill if it did not advantage them electorally? And evidence of that is the fact that the bill treats optional preferential voting differently above and below the line.]
Probably too late, and probably deliberately slow, but all the microparties should go overboard to get their names and as many candidates as they can on the ballot.
This would establish the obvious truth that deliberately disenfranchising minority party supporters, is not the solution to the real tablecloth ballot problem.
Then they should all run just vote 1 campaigns. If they could get, between them, a bigger vote than the greens it then gives them the obvious point that the greens deliberately disenfranchised more Australians than they have voters on their own. It is a disgrace.
I realise I have been a little on the fence on this, other than objecting to the process laziness and dishonesty.
I’ve come down off the fence.
I do not want us to be involved in any sort of “arms race”.
[Joining an Asian-region mini arms race, the White Paper promises 12 submarines to be built at a cost of more than $50 billion between 2018-2057.
Navy will scoop a quarter of all new spending on capability, with nine new anti-submarine warfare frigates and 12 offshore patrol vessels.
The RAAF will build up two fleets of drones while also bringing its eventual fleet of 75 Joint Strike Fighters online.
The Army will claim 18 per cent of all extra spending on equipment, buying armed drones, new protected vehicles to transport troops, helicopters for special forces and a long-range rocket system.
Underscoring a sense of urgency to the renewal of Australia’s defence power, the Government is aiming to build spending up to 2 per cent of GDP by 2020/21 — earlier than previously promised — representing an overall increase of $29.9 billion.]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-25/defence-white-paper-released-increased-spending/7198632
lizzie
[ Today’s leaked Coalition talking points: new lines on Defence white paper; less commentary on negative gearing pic.twitter.com/7wE0n1M4C7 ]
It think that’s what is called in defence terminology a “strategic withdrawal”. Also known as “advancing to the rear”. Or, in more colloquial terms “bugger, we’re losing! – let’s get the f#ck out of here!”
We Want Paul
If Labor’s objection is that there hasn’t been enough talk about the details of Senate voting reform, why did Labor ban its point person on electoral matters from talking about the details of Senate voting reform with Coalition and Green parliamentarians?
[Why was Gary Gray refused permission by his own party to negotiate with the Coalition on the senate voting reform bill?]
I don’t know, but I can guess. In any case, that question is nothing more than an attempt to deflect from my point that the Greens support for a bill that did not allow OPV below the line is self-serving sanctimony.
TPOF
[ I am sick to death of the evangelical Greens camp that despises Labor more than the Coalition because Labor does not adopt all the Greens policies. ]
The Greens – especially those here on PB – are a good barometer of how the ALP is travelling: the better the ALP do, the louder the Greens whinge!
Nicholas @ 123
I went and looked at the links you provided. Apart from the fact that this is just a (hopeful) guess from Kevin I am none the wiser. In a situation where the Greens effectively held the whip hand – the legislation would not go through without their support, given that Labor had played itself out of negotiations – there is no reason why it could not have insisted on it.
Make no mistake. The people who are most desperate to achieve these changes are the Coalition. And that is because it is hopelessly incompetent at negotiating with individuals. So it thinks that the answer is to get rid of the problem, rather than skilling up. The Greens absolutely held the whip hand and could get what it wanted.
The PMO should just put the Gallery on the distribution list for the daily talking points and cut out the middleman.
I’m starting to really like the look of those trendlines on the right.
zoomster:
[are any of the Greens senators planning to call out people for homophobia? Or are they just leaving it to Shorten?]
Janet Rice went on a pretty lengthy tirade about Bernardi in the Senate yesterday, including calling him a “homophobic dinosaur.”
BK
[And in this one that appeared late yesterday.
]
The ‘Rolex’ clock is cute.
“Today’s leaked Coalition talking points: new lines on Defence white paper; less commentary on negative gearing”
Turnbull doesn’t want to talk about negative gearing? Some scare campaign!
[If Labor’s objection is that there hasn’t been enough talk about the details of Senate voting reform, why did Labor ban its point person on electoral matters from talking about the details of Senate voting reform with Coalition and Green parliamentarians?]
I have no idea what Labor’s objections are nor whether they have been involved in a few highlevel meetings on this or thousands of hours of negotiation.
I don’t really care what Labor’s position is. If the greens and Government have the numbers they are all that matters.
All my views, as they evolve, are mine. A large part of me instinctively agrees with the greens that anyone voting for these naughty little parties should be disenfranchised – but then my mind kicks in.
Doyley @75:
[However, I will dip my toe into the water once again and reflect that voters will not give a toss about senate reform.
…
I well may be wrong but I do not think it will be a major issue to the disengaged]
Agreed. I doubt the average voter is going to care one way or the other about this, or even know there’s been a change until they go into the polling booth
Bernardi a sook: Bill Shorten
The barbs continued into a third day as the opposition leader criticised the Liberal Party for spending so much time on the issue.
“You have a senator walking past acting like he is at the football yelling out free advice at a press conference and he has a sook about someone standing up to him,” Mr Shorten told reporters in Canberra.
“I did in five seconds what Malcolm Turnbull hasn’t done in five months.”
http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/labor-senator-slams-gay-school-program/news-story/360657c5b3253db13d915357246dafc3
Just to get my position on the appropriate voting system clear:
1. I believe that there should be a compulsory requirement to cast a vote. It ensures that every citizen remains even marginally engaged with our political system and democracy.
2. When I say ‘cast a vote’, I mean take action with a ballot paper. I see deliberately casting an informal vote (the equivalent of voting ‘none of the above’) or a partial vote where a vote is allowed to exhaust as just as valid as full allocation of preferences. Simply not turning up is not the same because that could be due to laziness or disinterest as much as actual rejection of all the candidates. It also opens the way, US style, for a party in power to discourage certain groups of voters from voting by making it much harder for them to cast their ballots.
3. Beyond that, every voter should be able to see precisely what is happening with their vote and be able to direct their vote based on what is on the ballot paper in front of them. No having to find out where GTV preferences are distributed. Under the new ATL proposal a voter can see the order of preference for a party list on the ballot paper in front of them and vote BTL if they disagree or do not want to preference someone in the list at all.
4. No voter should be force to indicate a preference for someone they do not wish to. If you in SA and want to vote Liberal, but detest Bernardi, you should be able to vote below the line without having to indicate a preference for him (even last) or for others you don’t want. Ditto for Bullock in WA (Labor voters) or Rhiannon in NSW (Greens voters).
5. There is no practical reason that I can see that OPV cannot operate below the line. Indeed, it could only be easier for counting as AEC resources would not be taken up to the same extent determining whether a ballot is formal or informal because of a numbering error.
The only truly fair system would have been OPV above AND below the line. This would maximise the opportunity for the voter to:
A. Exactly indicate their wishes with as little difficulty as possible.
B. Minimise the risk of an intentionally informal vote.
C. Ensure that the voting process is as simple on all parties as possible.
[I’m starting to really like the look of those trendlines on the right.]
Labor needs to pick up 4+% on their primaries I think. That’s tough, but not impossible when you see that putting Turnbull in created a movement of about 5 points to the Libs and from Labor. That was the fools that thought Mal was different. If they become disillusioned there’s no reason to think a good lot of them won’t come home.
I’m also wondering at the ‘others’. Obviously some of the PUP vote is there, but I’d like to think there is a good proportion of ex Labor voters who aren’t buyin the Libs, but aren’t yet ready to go back to Labor after R-G-R.
If Labor + Greens primaries can get >50% Labor wins the election. (Newspoll’s 50-50 was off a combined Green/Labor vote of 47%)
Bernardi calls Shorten Napoleonic, inadequate, vacuous and unhinged. Isn’t that name calling? He also says;
“The Greens, too, are getting in on the act. They are so incensed that 9,499 concerned Australians signed my petition (in only a few days) calling for the withdrawal of funding for the SSC propaganda that they have launched one of their own, aiming to double our numbers.”
That is a thoroughly dishonest attempt to make it look as though the Greens are supporting his stance. I was in school from the mid sixties through to the late seventies – a time when homophobia was the norm. I grew out of it – it’s called education. But I guess that not everyone is intelligent enough to get the message, especially the ight wing nut jobs like Bernardi that, not only being born to rule, but also want to control people’s sexuality. What’s next for these people – thought police?
Tom
http://www.corybernardi.com/shorten_s_latham_handshake_moment
& Player One – I think there is some selection bias there.
I would say the Greens that criticise Labor more than the Liberals get labelled as Greens supporters.
The Greens that criticise Liberals more than Labor are thought to be Labor supporters.
So selection bias means all the people you think are Greens voters, criticise Labor more than the Liberals.
That said at 141, I agree that only psephologists and political strategists will give a damn on election day.
[Turnbull doesn’t want to talk about negative gearing? Some scare campaign!]
Turnbull doesn’t want to talk about tax full stop. It’s been nothing but a disaster for him. That’s why I hope Labor drops another tax policy ASAP. Doesn’t have to be more than a tweak somewhere, but it then becomes a tweak Turnbull can’t use (because he’s locked himself into Dr No II), and it gets the agenda off whatever Turnbull wants to talk about and back onto Tax where he is copping a pasting.
@ Tom – I think the link you should have included there was
http://campaigns.greens.org.au/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=1792&ea.campaign.id=48027
For reference, 21k have signed.
So, doubling Bernadi’s numbers not so much of a challenge.
World Economic Forum @wef 4h4 hours ago
Sea levels are rising at the fastest rate for 28 centuries – what does this mean for cities? http://wef.ch/1TyT0Gz
[Bernardi calls Shorten Napoleonic, inadequate, vacuous and unhinged. Isn’t that name calling?]
Ha! Ha! That is totally consistent for someone who decries attempts to stop bullying as bullying the bullies!
Scott at 147
Thanks for the link. Signed. Although I didn’t sign up to be inundated with Greens propaganda.