Essential Research released its fortnightly poll yesterday, the headline “2PP+” reading of which had Labor on 49% (steady), the Coalition on 44% (down one) and undecided 7% (down one). Labor’s marginal improvement was in fact down to better preference flows, since it was down three points on the primary vote to 35%, with the Coalition up one to 36%, the Greens up one to 10%, the United Australia Party is steady on 3%, One Nation down two to 3%, others steady on 4%, and undecided up one to 7%. Labor did notably less well on the Queensland breakdown than last time, their primary vote down ten points to 29% with the Coalition up six to 40%.
Further questions record no advantage for the government on handling of the Ukraine onflict, with the Coalition and Labor tied at 24% on best party to handle, and 33% reckoning there to be no difference. Fifty-eight per cent support Australian financial support to supply weapons to Ukraine, with only 15% opposed, and 68% support additional refugee and humanitarian places for arrivals from Ukraine, with 10% opposed.
An occasional question on whether the government deserves to be re-elected finds an ongoing trend against the government, with 32% holding that view, down two on November, and a three point increase to 48% for the alternative proposition that it’s “time to give someone else a go”. A series of questions on gender equality, presumably to tie in with International Women’s Day, finds 67% believe there is still a long way to go on gender equality, although it seems question wording weighs heavily on such findings, since 48% also agreed gender equality had come far enough already.
The regular questions on COVID-19 management find the federal government’s ratings little changed, with approval down one to 39% and disapproval up one to 35%. The small-sample state government results find the Western Australia government back up by seven points to 71%, ahead of South Australia on 58%, Queensland on 51%, New South Wales on 46% and Victoria on 42%. The poll was conducted Wednesday to Sunday from a sample of 1020.
“jellyfish 1. Nuclear aircraft carrier 0.”
AE, there are many people who will roll around in not inconsiderable mirth about this.
However, its actually not funny at all when you factor in some knowledge and reading on the links betwixt Climate Change / Jelly Fish Biology and possible scenarios related to that.
we are fucked.
All this factional brawling in the Victorian ALP needs to stop RIGHT NOW !
mikehilliard @ #1545 Friday, March 11th, 2022 – 9:47 pm
Thanks. 🙂
Do you want to listen to a fascinating tin tacks military discussion about the war?
https://www.thebulwark.com/podcast-episode/general-mark-hertling-why-the-russians-will-lose/
Herald Sun 11/03
But he said despite the election being imminent, the bosses led by retail workers’ union secretary Michael Donovan and Labor candidate for Hawke Sam Rae, had refused the offer — deciding instead to leave the decision to Labor’s national executive.
“They said it’s up to national executive and to the leader,” he said.
Mr Setches said of the bosses: “They’d just prefer to get people up in their Game of Thrones, instead of the real job of winning elections and representing working people.”
The accusation came as members of Labor’s Canberra caucus said the late senator had been bullied by the Labor Party leadership for the past two years.
_____________________
Why is the Labor candidate for Hawke so powerful ?
He hasn’t even been elected yet.
As for the bullying by the Labor Party leadership, that has got Marles fingerprints all over it.
Henry says:
Friday, March 11, 2022 at 9:19 pm
Thank you Henry, much appreciated. I’m too embarrassed to quote your post.
I enjoy recounting those things from the past that are triggered by references of other PB’ers and reflecting that I was extremely fortunate to have experienced them.
As my wife says, I’m in my “anecdotage”
Taylormade @ #1554 Friday, March 11th, 2022 – 10:56 pm
unread, by anybody at all
I do wonder why TaylorMade, a Liberal Party supporter, is so concerned about the (admittedly troubling) internal goings-on within Victorian Labor.
When I read about stuff like that happening inside the Liberal Party, like the recent almighty clusterfuck in the NSW branch, my usual reaction is to laugh.
Politics is a very stressful game. To blame Kitching’s passing on the pressures she may have been put into under by her factional opponents strikes me as little more than a disgusting attempt to use a person’s tragic death for political ends. Politicians are perpetually under pressure. Imagine if Scomo had a heart attack and people tried to blame the opposition or the media for it happening?
Boerwar says:
Friday, March 11, 2022 at 9:01 pm
‘Ray (UK) says:
Friday, March 11, 2022 at 8:08 pm
Boerwar and Briefly will enjoy this one
‘Green revolution’ rhetoric undermining support for climate action, report warns
Exclusive: Activists and politicians are largely ‘preaching to the converted’ on climate policies while jargon is alienating others, study shows’
‘Many climate activists and politicians are failing to persuade significant proportions of the population of the benefits of decarbonising the economy and may even be hindering environmental action, a new report has warned’
Cheers Ray (UK).
The polemics used by the Greens are intended to raise disaffection. This is their primary political/electoral goal. They “use” whatever issue comes to hand in the pursuit of that primary goal. Disaffection keeps them in business. The failure of climate change policies keeps them in business. The day that effective climate change policies are introduced and accepted by the electorate will be the day the Greens lose the use of that particular theme or polemical device. Consequently the Greens will always contend that action on climate change is inadequate. Their best interests are served by opposing actions unless they are also the authors of such actions.
They have no problem with inaction on climate policy. This gives them a permanent campaign theme that can be used again and again to assail their enemies. In Australia, their main enemy is Labor. Everything they do is tuned so they can assail Labor. Everything. Every last utterance.
It is no wonder at all that their campaigns on climate change have failed to deliver support; that they are counter-productive. They are not intended to change minds on climate policy. They are intended merely to provoke disaffection with Labor/Labour. And they most certainly do that!
In this country it helps to also look at the train of polemics on asylum seekers/boat arrivals. When the ingress of boats was greatest, the Greens could make the greatest noise: noise that was aimed at Labor. The boats were stopped by Rudd and Abbott. The Greens have lost the use of a Labor-phobic polemical weapon. In this respect, Abbott did a favour for Labor. The Greens can no longer so easily attack Labor on this issue. The single best thing that could happen for the Greens would be the revival of the traffic in seaborne human cargoes. They angle for that still.
The discussion re the Antarctic brought back memories of a previous life where my ex wintered over , climbed Mt Erebus and did the mid winter skinny dip. Still used huskies and was ecstatic about the wildlife.
New thread.
Asha
I agree entirely about Ali France, very impressive and very decent. She would make a great local MP.
Imacca replying to Socrates:
“In my view Australia would be better off going with the UK Astute option because it is cheaper, a better fit to RAN operations, and ties Australia less to the US military.”
Soc, appreciate your position but on an operational level, hate the idea of the HEU reactor in the Astute or Virginia Classes.
Maybe Astute, but with a French LEU reatcor???”
1. The switching of technologies would inevitably blow out costs, surely. Especially as it would likely require two provide contractors – BAE marine and Naval group – to work together on the design, and also together in training up the workforce and providing pliant and equipment.
2. The Astute bias been a very troubled program. Socrates seems to like it, inter alia, because it does 90 days endurance. Whereas the barracuda baseline allegedly does only 70 days. Ive tried to explain this to him: the 70 days endurance only reflects the contract minimum specification AND the cold storage capacity of the boats single large ship. It does not include any allowance for ‘dry tack’ to supplement could storage. As a matter of practice, dry stored food gets stowed in every nook and spare cranny of a submarine. If and when the French boat stow dry food in that way (and there is a spare 16 man special forces cabin for example) then the endurance of the barracuda design can go over 100 days. The Astute – despite its massive external size has an extremely uncomfortable and small internally living space. A very small cold storage capacity refrigerator for the size of its crew, with most of the food served up to the crew being reconstituted dry stored hard tack. There are You Tube videos detailing the living conditions on both the Astute and – recently the Suffren.
3. In my view, based on open source information, the Barracuda/Suffren is a superior and more modern design. The Astute is so large because it has to fit that GE HEF reactor in the back. It doesn’t offer much more capacity for capability (ok, it does have more weapons, but the barracuda has a large multipurpose modular space behind the sail that permits for deployment of a large number of special forces, or navy divers, or drones, with a wet/dry lock and the ability to dock mini subs etc. It is a design that is also suitable for adding VL tubes. In fact the French pitched a variant of the Attack class (ie. conventionally powered) sub to the Indian government that had – in addition to the standard 24 heavy weapons load a 12 cell VLS.
4. Right now we have lost a decade in the Sea 100 future submarines program. In my view the best way to claw that back with the urgentcy that is required – not just to deliver capability by 2040 but this decade and next is as follows:
1. An Albanese Labor Government immediately re-contracts – a de novo process – with the French Government and Naval Group for FIVE seperate contracts (so that some basic line item accountability can be obtained and hence appropriate levels of scrutiny). These FIVE separate contracts would be as follows:
(i) At the end of their intended service life later this decade the French Governemnt commission Naval Group to refurbish the remaining Rubis class SSNs, each for a single 7 year deployment to be based at HMAS Stirling, Perth. Initially these boats would be commanded and crewed by the French navy, and would always stay under direct command of the French, but over time increasing number of Australian sailors and officers would serve on them in anticipation for us boating a sovereign nuclear sub capability the following decade. One boat coming onto station every 2 years from 2026 would see 10 boats (6 collins and 4 Rubis) available to the Australian submarine service by 2032.
(ii) We contract to build 4 (ultimately up to 6) Attack class submarines at Osborne from 2026 (we have lost 2 years becuase of what happened last September, but we should be able to get on track by 2026). These boats would replace the Collins class when its finally time to decommission them. The would be based at HMAS Sterling, by ioperate out of Darwin on rotating 10 month deployments. With the proactive/predictive maintenance systems the French have developed the boats should be capable of doing 240 days at sea each year between the annual 75 deep maintenance cycle.
(iii) We contract with the French to build 4 ‘Aussie suffrens’ in Cherbourg – off the shelf (save for the incorporation of Americans combat and weapons systems) with two laid down this decade (2026 and 2028 seem to be available slots in that yard) and two laid down in the mid 2030s. These boats would ultimately replace the Rubis class boats based as an interim measure in Stirling, BUT would be commissioned RAN boats, crewed by Aussie sailors and under RAN command.
(iv) We contract to build 6 Aussie Suffrens at Osborne, to be laid down from about 2035 in Adelaide, to follow on immediately after the first 4 Attack class subs. One hull every 4 years (so we can take our time learning) with the final two attack class subs laid down between times (if thought necessary).
The contracts for (ii) to (iv) should be expressed in unit costs and we should demand a fixed cost price (I suggest 2.5 billion per Attack class and $3 billion for Sufferns) with any ‘extras’ – the provision of plan and equipment, the training of workforce, the profit for technology transfer etc being put into the fifth and last contract. This way we can keep on top of the contracting process, scrutinise and hence ensure we get value for money.
This approach would ensure that we have at least 12 boats in service – and available to RAN submarine command by 2034 at the latest. It’s the only way i can see us marinating capability in the medium thermal nd actually expanding it in the short term as we seem to now require.