Return of the frack

A contentious preference recommendation by the Greens brings a Northern Territory by-election to life, while the closure of nominations yields only a small field of candidates for the Queensland seat of Currumbin.

No Newspoll this week, owing to The Australian’s enthusiasm for unleashing them at the start of parliamentary sitting weeks, requiring a three week break rather than the usual two. However, we do have a extensive new poll on the bushfire crisis from the Australian National University’s Centre for Social Research and Methods and the Social Research Centre. It finds that fully 78.6% of the population reports being affected by the fires in one way or another, 14.4% severely or directly. Half the sample of 3000 respondents was asked how Scott Morrison had handled the bushfires, of whom 64.5% disapproved; for the other half the question was framed in terms of the government, with 59.4% disapproving.

Beyond that, there’s the two state/territory by-election campaigns currently in progress:

• I have posted a guide to next Saturday’s by-election in the Northern Territory seat of Johnston, which has suddenly became of more than marginal interest owing to the Greens decision to put Labor last on their how-to-vote cards (albeit that local electoral laws prevent these being distributed within close proximity of polling booths). This has been done to protest the decision by Michael Gunner’s Labor government to lift a moratorium on gas fracking exploration. The party has not taken such a step in any jurisdiction since the Queensland state election of July 1995, when it sought to punish Wayne Goss’s government in the seat of Springwood over a planned motorway through a koala habitat. This made a minor contribution to its loss of the seat, and hence to its eventual removal from office after a by-election defeat the following February. There’s acres of useful information on all this on Antony Green’s new blog, which he is publishing independently due to the ABC’s cavalier treatment of the invaluable blog he had there in happier times. There will also be a piece by me on the Greens’ decision in Crikey today, God willing.

• The other by-election in progress at the moment is for the Queensland seat of Currumbin on March 28, for which my guide can be found guide can be found here. With the closure of nominations last week, only two candidates emerged additional to Laura Gerber of the Liberal National Party and Kaylee Campradt of Labor: Sally Spain of the Greens, a perennial candidate for the party in federal and state Gold Coast seats; and Nicholas Bettany of One Nation, about whom the only thing I can tell you is that he recently deleted his Twitter account (what’s preserved of it on the Google cache reveals nothing particularly outrageous).

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,591 comments on “Return of the frack”

Comments Page 16 of 32
1 … 15 16 17 … 32

  2. Politcal Nightwatchman @ #737 Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 – 1:54 pm

    “Which is all Labor cares about. They care about maintaining power for themselves, not protecting the planet, and will sacrifice anything to achieve that goal.

    And for the 500,000,000,000,000th time, voting down the woeful CPRS was a very good thing. We forced Labor to introduce the far more effective ETS/Carbon Price.”

    Which Tony Abbott was able to wound back in two seconds when he won the election. Labor failure to getting anything done on the original legislation also gave Abbott time to wedge Labor on the issue and frame the debate ‘as a great big tax’.

    As for Labor caring about being in power. Well, yeah, what’s the alternative an LNP government that will completely show no regard to the environment and completely wind back Labor’s vegetation management laws. A Bob Brown convoy may make you feel good but it hasn’t done anything to improve the environment.

    Abso-bleeding-lutely!

    But the Pure as the driven snow Greens will never concede that plain as the nose on your face, point.

    Frankly, I’m over trying to make them see sense. I have come to the conclusion that they are as delusional as any Anti Vaxxer, Climate Change Denialist or Flat Earther. Why waste your time speaking to a brick wall?

  4. It would be terrible for democracy in the US if a Billionaire were to buy his way into the White House, wouldn’t it?
    I believe that the Democrats used to support Campaign Finance Reform – not now. Apparently.

  5. “Mayor Pete out-Bernies Bernie.

    Support for a carbon tax:

    Buttigieg – Yes.
    Sanders – No, not anymore.”

    ***

    Sanders supports the Green New Deal, just as the Aus Greens do too.

    But yes, you’re right, Mayor Pete has a better climate policy than the ALP.

  8. Buce

    Bloomberg at least uses his own money. Not like Morrison’s nest of thieves:

    A billion or so dropping swimming pools on the unwary and $200 million of taxpayer’s funds extolling the virtues of Scotty from Marketing.

  9. The AFP;
    “determined it is unlikely further investigation will result in obtaining sufficient evidence to substantiate a commonwealth offence”
    No doubt, considering the way the AFP ‘investigate’ Liberal MPs and their staff.

    “The AFP assessment of this matter identified there is no evidence to indicate the minister for energy and emissions reduction was involved in falsifying information,”
    Well, if you dont look, you dont see. One would have thought that as he used the document he could at least have given a starting point to where it came from.

    “The low level of harm and the apology made by the [minister] to the Lord Mayor of Sydney, along with the significant level of resources required to investigate were also factored into the decision not to pursue this matter”
    I think we understand now that the word and ‘significant’ has different meanings for the AFP depending on who they are investigating.

    I have bitten my tongue previously regarding the AFP. Aware of my own bias and the need to let an independent arm do their job without overzealous complaints. But fairsuck – this stinks.

  11. “It would be terrible for democracy in the US if a Billionaire were to buy his way into the White House, wouldn’t it?”

    ***

    Your elitist mate Trump has already done that (spent over 60 million to influence the 2016 election). The only difference is that Bloomberg is much richer. And yes, it is terrible for democracy.

  12. The thing many of our Greens posters seem to ignore is that we not only live in a Democracy here in Australia, but one where voting is compulsory. That means that if you want to get anything done, you need to pull together a majority of the population to prefer you to the other side. That means bringing along voters from different backgrounds, city outer suburban and regional, different incomes etc. Ten percent of the population doesn’t cut it. Being pure might give you a warm and fuzzy feeling inside, but it doesn’t get anything done.

    This leads me to the endless discussion about the CPRS vs the carbon price agreed between Labor, the Greens and cross bench. Some of our Greens posters try to pretend that agreeing to that policy did not, and isn’t still, hurting Labor. They do this by focussing entirely on the Rudd Gillard situation. The thing is, nobody, regardless what view one takes of the Rudd Gillard debacle, denys it hurt Labor. But what is denied by Greens supporters is how much the carbon price hurt the Gillard government. Forget the pathetic debate on whether it was a tax or not, but Labor did not go to the 2010 election with a policy that went even close to resembling what was agreed. That policy went a long way further than the majority of the electorate were prepared to go, and the Coalition were able to ruthlessly exploit this for all it was worth. Those who put everything down to the Rudd Gillard debacle conveniently forget that Labor’s poll numbers tanked spectacularly on announcement of the carbon price agreement, and that Julia Gillard was never able to recover despite being up against a very unpopular opposition leader. That whole situation continues to hurt Labor to this very day, because every time Labor tries to move towards taking more action on climate change, the Coalition and their fellow travellers immediately link Labor with the Greens and remind voters of 2010, and the reality is, it works. The result is climate inaction and deadlock; so what did the Greens achieve?

    Same goes for the Malaysia solution. The majority of the electorate wanted the boats stopped; this was shown in poll after poll after poll. Certainly, there was little support in the electorate for the Greens policy of allowing anyone who came here by boat to live in the community and apply for asylum here. What the Greens did by helping to block the Malaysia solution was to ensure that the boats kept coming, again allowing the Coalition to ruthlessly exploit an issue on which they knew they had the backing of the majority of the electorate. What did that mean for the asylum seekers who continued to come here? Years of detention and limbo as the Coalition gave the electorate what they wanted, an end to boat arrivals. Once again, what did the Greens achieve?

  16. Bu
    “It would be terrible for democracy in the US if a Billionaire were to buy his way into the White House, wouldn’t it?”

    Unlike Trump, Bloomberg is actually a billionaire – not a recidivist bankrupt and conman masquerading as a billionaire.

    I say good luck to Bloomberg against Trump. Fight fire with fire.

  18. Matt31 @ #762 Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 – 11:27 am

    The majority of the electorate wanted the boats stopped; this was shown in poll after poll after poll.

    The majority of the electorate want capital punishment reinstated; this has been shown in poll after poll after poll.

    Just because a majority of people want something doesn’t make it the right thing to do. It also illustrates how one should never chase the lowest common denominator.

  20. The only surprising feature of the resignation of the Head of St. Kevin’s (Toorak) is it took two days from the time “Four Corners” exposed the grooming of a student. Russell would’ve been privy to the evidence supporting the defendant’s charge – principally, lewd text messages. Without anything else, they were highly probative. Yet high profile defence counsel Richter QC was briefed in an unsuccessful attempt to discredit the complainant via cross-examination, which lasted for two days, the number one priority being the reputation of St. Kevin’s. And what made it worse is that the young (as he then was) complainant received no support whatsoever from the school. On that basis alone, Russell stands condemned. And then if that wasn’t enough, he showed more disregard for the complainant by furnishing the defendant with a
    reference, as did the Dean of Sport. The Victorian Registration and Qualifications Authority should undertake a full audit of St. Kevins. Again, a Bravo Zulu to the complainant, who has spent time in a physciatic ward, and to the boys who silently protested against Russell at assembly on Tuesday.

  21. As Bloomberg continues to suck the life out of the centrist candidates some surprisingly unbiased analysis from CNN, the MSM gradually being forced to address reality:

    “Still, Sanders is very well liked nationwide. His favorable rating among potential Democratic primary voters was 76% in a Quinnipiac University poll taken after Iowa voted, and Sanders was the second choice of 11% of voters. His combined first and second choice support was higher than it was for any other candidate in the poll. In other words, there is clearly the opportunity for Sanders to continue to gain ground.”
    https://edition.cnn.com/2020/02/18/politics/democratic-primary-favorite-analysis/index.html

  23. Amy comes across to me as more seasoned than Mayor Pete.

    A Bernie-Amy ticket is the way to go for the Dems. They’ll convince the people to bury Trumpism.

  24. Only skimming PB at the moment – COVID-19 has given me a lot of unexpected work.

    My thoughts on the Greens preferencing the right-wing candidates over Labor is that it is a trial run for the Queensland state election in September this year.

    It is a high-risk strategy for the Greens, but in only one seat the consequences of a drop in vote because of their decision will not cause them many problems.

    If this move increases the Greens vote, I expect them to preference against Labor in Qld because of “Adani”. although they may limit themselves too preferencing against sitting members, as they sometimes did in Bob Brown’s day.

  25. The reason why the left lost the boat debate was because it could not offer a solution for dealing with the rejected applicants. The question has been asked a million times yet has never been answered and that is how to handle the rejected but the left thinks its a trick question.

  26. Matt, the Greens were responsible for the ETS/Carbon Price. Labor allowed it to be trashed by gifting power to Abbott. The Greens loyally stood by Labor during that time while they were stuffing around fighting among themselves.

    I don’t care how many racists want to abuse innocent asylum seekers, that doesn’t make it right. Does the reality that the Nazis in Germany received the highest percent of the vote make what they did ok? No. Not at all. You cling on to those polls though if they help you sleep better at night.

  27. After the failure of the Malaysian solution, which could have been made perfectly legal with only a tweak of the law (the UNHCR, remember, thought MS was worth a try), Labor appointed a panel of experts.

    I don’t recall there being much criticism from the Greens at the time about this panel. From memory, their recommendations were welcomed.

    These recommendations led directly to the opening of Nauru/Manus.

    If the Greens had seen Nauru/Manus as a bad outcome, they were free to come back to Labor to renegotiate – if not the Malaysian solution, then something similar.

    They showed no interest in doing so.

    They bear some responsibility for the reopening of Nauru/Manus, just as they do for the derailment of the CPRS.

    But, as I have said before, whilst Greens posters here are perfectly happy to demand Labor fronts up to past mistakes, you rarely see a Green owning to any.

  29. Simon Katich:

    I was shocked by your admission that you may’ve frequented the Taxi Club in your Uni days – a den of iniquity if ever there was one. Not that I have any personal experience thereof(?).

  30. mb

    ‘The reason why the left lost the boat debate was because it could not offer a solution for dealing with the rejected applicants..’

    But applicants have been rejected since the asylum policy was put in place in the 1950s. There have always been people whose claims for asylum have been rejected, and the solution remains the same – they stay in detention or are returned to their home country.

    One assumes that, if their fear of death on return is genuine (even if the courts have found it isn’t, after usually pretty exhaustive investigations), that the rejectee prefers incarceration.

    I’m not saying this is a ‘nice’ solution – as I’ve often said, there aren’t any – but the record shows that the numbers rejected are fairly small.

  32. Rex Douglas:

    [‘A Bernie-Amy ticket is the way to go for the Dems.’]

    Why do you think that the Dems have scrapped the need for nominees to reach a threshold of donations?
    To save you the trouble: it’s to permit Bloomberg to partake in the televised debates. Please join the dots.

  33. Oh dear; in desperation, instead of addressing real world politics, Firefox brings in the Nazis! What the Greens would like to, but can’t, run away from is that their opposition to the Malaysia solution led to a worse outcome for asylum seekers than would otherwise have been the case. Instead, they used their numbers to try and force Labor in to a policy position that was not only unrealistic, but also completely unacceptable electorally; that is, to put no cap on the amount of people who could arrive here. So again, instead of acknowledging political and electoral reality, the Greens actually managed to achieve an outcome worse than would otherwise have been the case. Same with climate change action.

  34. Zoomster
    I understand that but the reactionaries will say to pro-refugees types well okay so how many refugees will you take and what will you do with those you wont. At this point the pro-refugee types struggle to answer it which allows the reactionaries to start on about open borders. There is some justification for the question because if Australia said it would take 10000 refugees then how does it manage the 10001 person who turned up seeking entry.

  35. “Bucephalus says:
    Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 2:21 pm
    It would be terrible for democracy in the US if a Billionaire were to buy his way into the White House, wouldn’t it?
    I believe that the Democrats used to support Campaign Finance Reform – not now. Apparently.”

    Think of it as getting rid of the present incumbent who belongs in prison.

  36. lizzie @ #750 Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 – 2:17 pm

    Mal Peters
    @peters_malcolm
    ·
    2m
    Drought ‘diabolical’ despite rain.
    Governments grossly under calculate the loss rural income. The average gross farm production will be halved or better in many areas with billions in loss. The piddly little amount Gov put in barely touches side.

    I have almost made this point a couple of times. But I decided not to, because (given our own situation) it sounded a bit self-serving.

    But I have to agree. The drought is not over. Not for a lot of people, and despite what you may have read in the Government Gazette recently about “drought scare-mongering”.

    Like the bushfire recovery money, very little of the drought money actually seems to be getting where it is needed. And the drought does not just affect farmers. It affects everyone in the region, and it was causing a decline in our income even before the bushfires came along and wiped our income out completely.

    The regions will not forget this.

  37. “Such loyalty”

    ***

    Oh please. We still supported confidence and supply even after that and never let the Gillard government fall. The article you linked to makes that point quite clearly.

    The Greens’ announcement has added to the air of instability surrounding the minority government, but is unlikely to have any significant impact given Senator Milne’s promise to guarantee confidence in the Government and the passage of budget legislation.

    https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-20/gillard-distances-herself-from-greens-after-split/4530216?pfmredir=sm

  38. Mexicanbeemer @ #784 Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 – 12:06 pm

    Zoomster
    I understand that but the reactionaries will say to pro-refugees types well okay so how many refugees will you take and what will you do with those you wont. At this point the pro-refugee types struggle to answer it which allows the reactionaries to start on about open borders.

    There is some justification for the question because if Australia said it would take 10000 refugees then how does it manage the 10001 person who turned up seeking entry.

    Also what if applicant #10001 turns out to be more deserving than applicant #4911? Does #4911 then get deported back to their home, or have to endure mandatory detention on Manus?

    It’s a conundrum, and I don’t have any answers to it. Still valid questions though.

  39. Bloomberg would be a disaster. He’s had a dream run from the media until now, and naturally his spend is starting to bring him results. But the more his record and previous comments are exposed, the more voters will stay home if he’s nominated. Not only Stop and Frisk, which is bad enough, but some of his comments about blacks and latinos in the not so distant past are pretty appalling. These are important parts of the population needed for a Democrat to win the Presidency; they stay home, Trump wins easily. I think Sanders is the only Democrat who stands a realistic chance of beating Trump.

  41. Boerwar @ #753 Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 – 2:21 pm

    Mal Peters appears to have little interest in anything like the statistical reality:

    https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/research-topics/agricultural-commodities/sep-2019/agriculture-overview

    My reading of that article seems to support his contention:

    In 2019–20 the volume of farm production and agricultural exports are expected to fall below long term averages, mainly due to ongoing drought in large areas of south-eastern Australia.

    …

    If drought conditions across south-eastern Australia were to extend into 2020–21, national crop production and exports are likely to continue to decline, as they have done for the past 3 years. Analysis of historical rainfall records indicates that 3 consecutive failed crops in New South Wales would be unprecedented.

    Not all farm production is down, of course – some types of produce are up. But overall the value of production is down by 5%, or about $3 billion.

  42. lizzie,

    I inferred from your surprise that Greens didn’t support Malaysian Solution that you haven’t voted Greens in the last two decades.

    Most of the growth in Greens vote in the early 2000’s came from what are known as Tampa Greens. These were voters who abandoned Labor and Liberal over their border policies and treatment of refugees. Greens can thank C@tmomma for her tireless efforts in ensuring those voters don’t drift back to Labor.

    Greens HOR grew by 4.5% between 1998 and 2004, and Senate by 5% over the same period. In 1998 Greens HOR vote was around 2.6% and Senate vote was 2.17%. This means that around 2/3rds of Greens voters at 2007 election would have been likely to be Tampa Greens. Greens policy – which was decided by rank and file – calls for onshore processing of asylum seekers.

    Supporting the Malaysian Solution would have been a bigger betrayal than the Democrats voting for the GST – it would have electoral suicide.

  43. lizzie says: Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 3:20 pm

    Rather ironic, isn’t it, that we now have – is it 10,000? – visa overstayers who came by plane.

    ****************************************************

    Malaysians top ‘plane people’ seeking asylum in Australia

    About one-fourth of asylum-seekers who flew in to Australia last month were Malaysians, amid a debate over Canberra’s border control effiencies as tens of thousands of foreigners choose to remain in the country despite their asylum applications being rejected.

    The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) cited figures tabled in the Australia parliament, which showed a total of 546 Malaysians among 1,931 “plane people”, or asylum seekers who arrived by air.

    Chinese nationals came in second (309 asylum seekers), followed by India (255), Fiji (83) and the Philippines (61).

    SMH reported that nearly 50,000 “plane people” whose asylum claims were rejected were still in Australia awaiting deportation.

    https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2020/02/17/malaysians-top-plane-people-seeking-asylum-in-australia/

  44. To investigate how the western diet affects humans, the scientists recruited 110 lean and healthy students, aged 20 to 23, who generally ate a good diet. Half were randomly assigned to a control group who ate their normal diet for a week. The other half were put on a high energy western-style diet, which featured a generous intake of Belgian waffles and fast food.

    At the start and end of the week, the volunteers ate breakfast in the lab. Before and after the meal, they completed word memory tests and scored a range of high-sugar foods, such as Coco Pops, Frosties and Froot Loops, according to how much they wanted and then liked the foods on eating them.

    “The more desirable people find the palatable food when full, following the western-style diet, the more impaired they were on the test of hippocampal function,” Stevenson said. The finding suggests that disruption of the hippocampus may underpin both, he added.

    Stevenson believes that in time governments will come under pressure to impose restrictions on processed food, much as they did to deter smoking. “Demonstrating that processed foods can lead to subtle cognitive impairments that affect appetite and serve to promote overeating in otherwise healthy young people should be a worrying finding for everyone,” he said. The work is published in Royal Society Open Science.

    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/feb/19/researchers-find-a-western-style-diet-can-impair-brain-function

  45. Matt, the Nazis were a part of the real world, unfortunately. Still are in many respects.

    Instead of repeating right wing talking points, why don’t you find out what the Greens’ policy really is. https://greens.org.au/policies/immigration-and-refugees

    The Malaysian Solution was illegal. It was also a policy designed to appease far-right racists. The Greens’ policies on asylum seekers were never implemented. We strongly opposed Labor’s abuse and still do.

    Labor and the Coalition own the horrific things they’ve done to innocent asylum seekers 100%. It’s hardly a surprise that Labor supporters would try and blame it on the Greens somehow – so ashamed they are of their work that they dare not admit the truth to themselves.

    I’ve said all I need to say on the dud CPRS. Many, many times. No. Just no lol

  46. “Supporting the Malaysian Solution would have been a bigger betrayal than the Democrats voting for the GST – it would have electoral suicide.”

    ***

    Indeed.

  47. bakunin @ #744 Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 – 12:33 pm

    lizzie,

    I still remember an overwhelming sense of disappointment and disgust when Gillard uttered the words “Malaysian Solution”. That is why you vote Labor and I vote Greens.

    The shitty reality is that there are no solutions on offer to this policy issue that are humane (by Greens’ standard), and work, and are acceptable to the voters.

    Furthermore, the already locked-in level of climate change alone is only going to make it much much worse. Australia will be bloody lucky indeed if there are not several million desperate climate refugees a year heading our way within 2 decades, and there will be precisely zero we can do to stop them.

    And we will thoroughly deserve that fate.

    bakunin @ #792 Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 – 1:55 pm

    Supporting the Malaysian Solution would have been a bigger betrayal than the Democrats voting for the GST – it would have electoral suicide.

    But would it have worked?

    If the Greens’ reason for not voting for the Malaysian option is that it would have caused their demise, then they are no more principled or moral than all other political parties. Same-same, you might say.

  48. lizzie @ #772 Wednesday, February 19th, 2020 – 2:39 pm

    Tom Kompas Univ of Melbourne/ANU
    @Tom_Kompas
    · Feb 18
    The damages from climate change in Australia to 2050 compared to the costs of emissions reduction are now more than 20 to 1. Rapid falls in renewable prices will continue to increase this ratio. There is no excuse. Reducing emissions is a no-brainer!

    https://sustainable.unimelb.edu.au/news/what-are-the-full-economic-costs-to-australia-from-climate-change

    Another excellent article. So the cost of effective action on climate change would be around $122 billion dollars over the next 30 years …

    The modelling here, although still under further development, is already clear. We can think of the cost of meeting a Paris Accord Target for Australia for 2050 (roughly 1.8C warming or slightly less, and more aggressive than a 45% reduction in emissions by 2030 compared to 2005), assuming the rest of the world also complies. That cost is $122 billion, accounting for the loss in net exports., land-use change, deadweight (welfare) losses and limited negative emissions technology.

    That’s around 4 billion per year.

    Peanuts, in other words 🙁

  50. bakunin

    a) I have no idea what Labor’s intentions are for that bill.

    b) I certainly hope they don’t vote for it.

    c) WTF does it have to do with policy on refugees or climate change?

Comments Page 16 of 32
1 … 15 16 17 … 32

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *