Comments thread chat informs us that the headline result of an ACNielsen poll to be published in tomorrow’s Fairfax broadsheets has been revealed by Laurie Oakes on the Channel Nine news. This has Labor’s lead two-party lead at 57-43 compared with 55-45 last month. More details as they come to hand. There is also reason to believe tomorrow’s edition of The West Australian will feature one of its small-sample Westpoll surveys of voting intention at the Poll Bludger’s end of the continent; if so, you will read about it here in the small hours of the morning EST.
UPDATE: Sydney Morning Herald report here, though no detail yet beyond that provided by Oakes.
UPDATE 2: Primary vote figures at the Sydney Morning Herald: Labor up from 44 per cent to 49 per cent, Coalition down from 41 per cent to 39 per cent. Kevin Rudd’s approval rating is up 8 per cent to equal its March high of 67 per cent, “pushing him ahead of the pre-election ratings achieved by Malcolm Fraser in 1975 and Bob Hawke in 1983”. Remarkably, the Prime Minister’s approval rating remains steady at a more than respectable 50 per cent.
386 Comments
I hope now Michelle Grattan now says that Howard is out of the game to match her last piece.
SMH article: http://www.smh.com.au/news/apec/howards-poll-plunge/2007/09/09/1189276524682.html
Hugo says:
On theme music, I’m surprised that no one has mentioned Howard’s favourite singer Bob Dylan (lyrics notwithstanding), and his classic, “The Times They Are A’Changin’â€.
I did on the last thread at 205
They are all in now – Galaxy, Newspoll, Morgan and Neilsen. And it’s all bad for the Howard government. It seems that there really has been a move toward Labor over the last fortnight. Election speculation is getting intense (not only here). It seems crazy to call an election so far behind, but the act of calling the election is the government’s last hope of changing the dynamic. I’m guessing that the election will be called by next weekend and we’ll be having the best election night of our lives (well, some of us) on either 27 October or 3 November. I’m guessing Howard will go for a longish campaign, to try and wear Rudd down.
But it’s hard not to feel that the actual campaign will not just be the coup de grace of the coming meltdown.
An interesting poll for the next cabinet meeting to discuss, 2 points ahead of the last one from this pollster.
Noted also that Howard, Costello, Abbott, Downer, Hockey and Ruddock all came out today making clear statements that Mr Howard will definitely walk the plank as Leader for the election and he is their best chance of victory.
So much for the ongoing speculation that Mr Howard will be tapped on the shoulder-guess they all realise it is too late for change now- but it sells newspapers and gives television news editors something to talk about.
These figures are tragic for the Libs. Howard fall from grace is now the sort of thing Shakespeare used to write plays about.
How long before we see Govt. members in marginal seats start to distance themselves from John Howard?
The train wreck is gaining momentum, its every man and woman for themselves now.
Having maintained my rage for so very long, I am going to enjoy parliament next week.
I think Rudd is a Nambour Crusher’s supported, very apt.
I notice in the SMH report that howard refused to answer whether he WOULD lead the coalition, but later said he INTENDED to.
does this mean he doesn’t know whether a challenge is on, but if it is he means to fight it ( as Laurie oakes[I think] suggested)?
Or am I too experienced to take anything he says at face value?
Sorry Molotov (3) – was offline for a couple of days and there was a lot to get through. Must’ve missed yours. And yours was funnier – it’s all about the timing!
Personally, I think this is exactly where we stand.
ACN won’t make the government happy and Howards posturing on the APEC climate “deal” won’t cut it either with the electorate. Howards climate deal is bombing on the world stage, read the following. {And if the international world can see through his shenanigans, you can bet the Aussie electorate is smart enough to see through them too}
(Sunday main editorial of the LA Times, the main newspaper in southern California)
“Howard, who is fighting for his political life against a much greener opposition party leader, has the most at stake. Australia is suffering severe droughts and wildfires, and polls show that the environment is among Australians’ top concerns. His goal is to persuade the U.S., China and Russia — the world’s three biggest polluters — to sign an “aspirational” agreement for reducing greenhouse gases. For aspirational, read: voluntary, vague and useless for anything but padding a fading prime minister’s environmental resume. The heads of state are expected to sign the agreement today”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-sydney8sep08,0,649699.story?coll=la-opinion-leftrail
Wildfires!!!!
O maybe that’s a reference to the polls
So this poll is in the lower range for the ALP for a change.
The Chinster Says:
September 9th, 2007 at 10:20 am
Swampy @ 122 – I’m not sure whether you’re a constituent in Mayo, but Mary Brewerton is fast gaining a profile (and already has one in the northern end of the electorate where she is related to the local doctor). She is campaigning hard and I am going to stand with her at a street corner meeting this morning at the Gumeracha Town Hall – I’ll get back to you later on how she went. I’ve only met her a few times, but she comes across as smart, genuine and intelligent person. On top of that she has a very personable manner and I understand from others that the reception she receives at these meetings is always really good. She certainly comes across as a stark contrast, personality-wise, to Downer and that in itself might be a very positive thing for the Labor Party. Time will tell, as they say, but from what I hear others say, Mayo may be still be a seat of interest on election night.
I am from mayo and my point is this: if Shuman couldn’t do it and Deegan couldn’t do it what chance has Brewerton got? I’ve seen her differently: nice but a poor public speaker and when i quized her on something she stared blanck. On the other hand i have been very impressed with the Greens candidate Lynton Vonow he’s very knowledgable and has been getting some publicity. Also history shows how unwilling Mayo is to vote Labor. The Chinster, she’s not the horse to back.
Another point about Mary is she’s quite attractive. Labor seems to be doing this in a big way in SA, the Grey candidate is another pretty one as is kingston, Adelaide etc. They must have some polling that it helps alot here.
I shall watch parliament with great interest this week.
This Thursday could very well be Howard’s (and many Government MPs/Ministers) last ever Question Time.
Regardless of the polls I don’t see Mayo falling, I think the only SA seats that will change are Kingston, Makin, Kingston with Boothsy and Stuart looking close maybe if all hell breaks out Grey but Lord Monsieur Alex de Downer of Mayo looks safe (merci)
From the SMH article:
Does he always have to bloody demonise people? And blame shift? That’s perhaps the biggest thing I’ll be glad about when this guy is gone from our media. That and all of his crap policies and right wing agenda.
It’s as if he has to create this mental image of some “bad people” out there trying to ruin it for the rest of us. I can’t stand it. Well at least it’ll be over in a few months, if not weeks. Can’t wait for that moment.
Amidst speculating an October poll, Shanahan quotes Downer making it very clear he thinks Howard will and should remain leader to the election, here.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22382270-601,00.html
Wouldn’t you love to be a fly on the wall at the Cabinet meeting though.
Ah yes Paul K @ 6,
To Rudd or not to Rudd?
That is the question.
Slogan
If you want a Negative Govt vote Lib, for a positive Govt vote ALP.
Scotty,
That is what I hate about Howard too! Moral high ground, no responsibility, no vision, no inclusion.
I pray these are the last of his days and I look forward to watching him suffer greatly in defeat!
Maybe then I can feel proud to be Australian.
Yes James J (15) – I think we all might start to get a sense of fin de siecle. If the election pans out in the way it now seems certain to, we will be witnessing one of those perioditic clean-outs. Suddenly, all the faces will be new, and even staunch Labor supporters won’t be familiar with many ministers. We’ve seen the same faces in the big three roles (PM, Treasurer & Foreign Affairs) for over a decade, so I for one am looking forward to this change!
But it will go further than that. A victory of the magnitude suggested by the polls would repudiate much of the Howard “vision” for Australia. That might seem harsh, but that’s what happened to Keating, who had noted that when you “change the government, you change the country”. I believe that was true – Australia is a different country today to the one I left uni (early 90s) into (some good, some bad). And if we, as appears possible, get, say 7-10 years of a Rudd government, the nation will be changed as a result. No doubt some good, some bad.
Be prepared after the election for statements about how ungrateful we all are and how “bad people” in the media sabotaged Howard’s chances.
Paul K makes me think back to 2004, when all the Lefties used terrible landuage towards their fellow Australians for voting Liberal, I for one will be in here on Election night looking for the “SORRY” word from all Lefties whom went on like spolit little siht
But it will go further than that. A victory of the magnitude suggested by the polls would repudiate much of the Howard “vision†for Australia.
Hugo 22
Yes, I am kinda of torn between my natural dislike of huge parliamentary majorities, and wanting a clear rejection of the Howard thang.
Just testing whether the hack of bmwofoz is as easy as using his yahoo account which was on his blog page. This comment – 24 – doesn’t seem like him. John Rocket.
yeah, it was that easy – back to John Rocket now.
Whoever was asking their is certainly a Harold Holt Memorial Swimming Pool in Melbourne.
Foir those looking for a suitable monument to Howard when he expires, How about, The John Howard Global Warming Centre, previously known as the crematorium.
sorry about that bmwofoz but yeah – a funny little liberal fellow just did the simplest, most pointless thing …. Why do they bother?
Alexander Downer gives his reasons why people should vote Liberal:
“What are Liberal Party Pollies made of?
Sugar and spice and all things nice,
That’s what Liberal Party Pollies are made of.
What are Ruddites made of?
Slugs and snails and puppy-dogs’ tails,
That’s what Ruddites are made of.”
Scotty at 17.
It is not only blame shifting by Howard to say that APEC security was due to the protestors, it is truly pathetic.
Pathetic of Howard to think that Australians believe that the APEC security is because of protestors and pathetic to try and avoid and shift in that manner.
Even Downer got in on the act.
Downer had challenged Rice to a game at Sydney’s Rose Bay Golf Club, but said “It’s a pity, but the risk of protesters rushing out and assaulting her on the golf course is something that the police worry about so we’ll spare them the concern,” he added.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=293715
So poor Alex didn’t get a game of golf with Rice because of the risk from protestors.
1. I don’t think Rice wanted to spend 5 hours on the golf course with Alex.
2. Shouldn’t Alex have been trying to do something constructive at APEC.
Don’t Howard and Downer realise the damage they are doing to our tourism image with their comments.
APEC was to be about showcasing Sydney as a tourist and convention destination, but Howard and Downer have said that protestors are so scary we need 3 metre fencing 3,500 troops, 1,500 police, fighter planes circuling 24/7 and even this is not enough to gaurantee you an undisturbed round of golf.
Very funny Johnny Rocket,
First you say your a Liberal, well you have just ost the Liberal Party any hope what so ever of me voting for them. I’m curious to know how you did it!
So which one of Costello’s supporters leaked the AC Nielsen results to to Oakes?
From the SMH article, Howard said that after hearing Australian artists at the Opera House, he was ’stoked’ . Who’s feeding him these lines, Costello? I guess the artist wasn’t Midnight Oil.
Another good poll result for the ALP. I still have a sinking feeling that the Coalition will be returned with a slim majority, but that’s just the pessimism in me. Still, I must say polls this side of 55% give me a lot more comfort than they would if they moved the other way.
In other news, saw a terrible interview with Janet Albrechtsen on Sky yesterday (memo to Janet: ease up on the botox) where she was crowing on about how her concerns weren’t for John Howard but for the good of the Liberal Party.
At that point I nearly threw a shoe at the tv. Here I was thinking that as a journalist what Janet must be after was what’s good for the country… but instead she wants what’s best for the Liberal Party?
Don’t these people want any credibility at all?
She’s fromt aht warrior class who say, “She who smirks and runs away. lives to write more columns for Rupert”.
Janet Albrechtsen considers herself a “commentator” bye bye ABC board.
She is about to become irrelevant.
I reckon the image on my website sums up poor Johnny. No shots have hit yet, but they are getting closer and closer
Yeah, that’s cool joni – I hadn’t even thought of the Howard the Duck analogy – despite all of the dead-lame-ducky talk this last week.
Pardon my confusion here: is John Rocket suggesting that this bmwofoz is not the “real” bmwofoz?
I hated Janet’s column previous to the “Howard has to go” one. She railed against musicians and actors having a political voice and exercising it. They are all drug addicts who haven’t worked an honest day in there life and have low IQ’s. Where does she get this stuff from? She’s not a journalist. A journalist reports the facts to a reader and forms an opinion based on them. Janet just makes sweeping generalisations based on her opinion and then gives more opinion on top of it. She’s not a journalist. She’s a Liberal party stooge. As if nobody knew anyway.
Rant over.
William, John Rockett is claiming to have hacked my yahoo account and I think he is claiming number 24 wasn’t posted by me.
while 26 and 27 were posted by him, I’m looking forward to him explaining how he allegally hacked yahoo or bigblog.
“Maybe then I can feel proud to be Australian.”
Indeed, Oldtimer. With an Oz foreign policy that is US foreign policy, just to take one issue, I’ve taken the view that in recent times to be a proud Aussie is to be a New Zealander in spirit. Now there’s a country with no terrorist threats on the agenda.
Hopefully on foreign policy we can revert to, (like NZ almost always), non interference and no more neocon inspired invasions.
hmm 57, bloody weird thinking this as a boring expected result.. hehehe
Yeah, that comment at 24 was unlike any comment that bmwofoz had ever made (that I’ve read)… inverted political stance – plus – very bad spelling (not that I’m a pedant!). So I followed the link to bmwofoz’ blogspot – it had a email address – I used ‘bmwofoz’ and his email address and voila! I could make comments as bmwofoz – at 26 and 27. What great fun! (sarcastic) When the real bmwofoz comes back – he’ll probably be able to confirm that 24 was not him. The real bmwofoz should probably use a different email address to log on to pollbludger. Sorry if this has confused anyone in anyway. I tried to be transparent in the 26-27 and 29 postings.
(Just think of it as a favour for a fellow bombers supporter – next year huh?)
I wonder how the commentators will analyse the results of the election. Will they say that Labor’s victory was clear from the start of the year – and do so with a straight face? If you listen to prominent Liberals, they do not seem to know what is happening. Peter Costello felt it necessary to remind voters that once they voted they could not wake up Sunday and change their minds. Liberal supporters on the blogs don’t know anyone who has changed from Liberal to Labor and have no idea why such a “successful†government could be in danger, putting it down to opinion polls that can’t be right, the evil media and the socialist Marxist trendy teachers. They are about to start blaming the people for voting against them, which is what numbers on the Left have been doing for the last eleven years and which never gets the public back on side. Perhaps the Liberal Party’s backroom operators are mort realistic.
I can’t see John Howard stepping down. Peter Costello is not that popular. There are some who would switch to him in preference to Mr Howard, but there are others who would switch to Mr Howard in preference to him. John Howard will fight to the end, as he has always done, and while the Liberals will treat him like they now treat Malcolm Fraser, he can look back on significant achievements, irrespective of whether you agree or not; e.g., the GST cemented in and IR changes which Labor is hardly going to touch,
If John Howard can win from this far behind, it would be the greatest miracle ever in Australian politics.
I think it was May when I first predicted a Labor win, but I thought it would involve a gain of 22 seats. It looks like I was being pessimistic, which is always a good approach because hope leads only to disappointment.
Generic oracle,
There are 27 countries in the world with a population below 21 million people and above 10 million people. Every one of those countries has at least three tiers of government. I have not looked at countries below 10 million to find the first one, in descending order of population, that does not have at least three tiers of government. Nor have I gone down the list of countries below one million square kilometres to find the first one that does not have at least three tiers of government. I may do so one day. Then again, I may take the dogs for a walk instead and see if those advocating abolishing a tier of government in Australia can come up with some examples.
Tiny countries, like Singapore and Monaco do not. But the differences in size between us and them are extreme.
That isn’t hacking that’s cut and paste,
=========================
Paul K makes me think back to 2004, when all the Lefties used terrible language towards their fellow Australians for voting Liberal, I for one will be in here on Election night looking for the “SORRY†word from all Lefties whom went on like spoilt little shit
=========================
There were three, I spelt Shit wrong to get around any swear filter.
Does anyone here think that John Howard will not lead the Liberal Party into the next election? And if so, why?
Another good poll for Labor. So it’s now:
ACN 57-43
Galaxy 57-43
Newspoll 59-41
Morgan f2f 60-40
Mean: 58.25-41.75 LABOR LANDSLIDE!!!!!!!!
Ah this is silly! make up your own minds – I don’t care – I’m out of here for the evening! All the best to everyone!
so loopy westpoll..any punts…
back to 50:50
El Rodente to media after APEC song and dance night:
“I was stoked.”
Stone the crows, he’s a bonzer bloke afterall.
But Dolly can say it in French.
Ruddy can say it in Orange or Mandarine or whatever language he can speak.
Unless an alternative bmwofoz wants to step forward, I don’t have any reason to think s/he is being impersonated.
Bmwofoz, if you don’t want a comment to go into moderation, don’t swear. If you DO want to go into moderation, keep trying to “get around” my filters, and you will be put there for good.
Not only polls, but sport’s been good lately, with Melbourne Storm into home prelim final with 40-0 smashing of Broncos!!!
51
John Rocket Says:
September 9th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Ah this is silly! make up your own minds – I don’t care – I’m out of here for the evening! All the best to everyone!
Yes and take that other John with you!!
Well I’m sorry, Scotty, but responsibility for the high security in Sydney DOES rest with the anarcho-trot-ferals who notoriously try to stage violent incidents at international conferences so that they can cry “repression” and recruit more naive and silly students to their cause. Have we forgotten Genoa, where someone was actually killed when he threw a fire extinguisher at a cop? You can hate Bush and Howard all you like (as I do), but the tactics of the extreme left do nothing to advance opposition to their policies, but rather play right into their hands.
Back to local politics – all four polls have now shown that there was a swing back to Labor in August, wiping out the Liberal gains of the May-July period. I don’t think anyone can dispute the reality of that.
i think we need to factor in that we’ll be facing the dirtiest most negative campaign in Australia’s history, the scare meter is going to go off the dial, it’s sure to send some wavering voters back to the coalition’s security blanket, thats a bit of a worry, i know the dirt/smear campaigns this year hav’nt gained traction but i know dammed well just how rotten Howards dirt unit can be and surely they would have saved the worst till the election campaign, in all of my years ive never seen anything like this nasty, spiteful set {i cant think of words bad enough} governing us now, i feel guilty and dirty myself for voting for them in 1996 and i’ll regret it till my dying day, i couldnt come at Lathan in 04 so i went democrat, swampy lets out a miserable sigh at that confession.
CBet tonight:
Team Rodent $2.90
Team Ruddster $1.42
Where are you Glen, it’s medication time?
Still think Howard will ( on balance) cut and run. The old formula, ” for as long as my party wants me I stay” will be the excuse. A hypothetical Party Room secret ballot for the leadership between Howard and Costello would produce a convincing Costello win. The ballot won’t happen – but the sentiment remains. Costello won’t declare his public support for Howard – as Downer and Nelson have ( sort of). Why should he? He will be asked, of course. Howard will be talking with Minchin, Downer, Heffernan, Morris tonight and tomorrow. Party Room sentiment will be conveyed to him – and he will be reminded of his own formula.
If he doesn’t quit – and make the generational change – the Government will look even more disfunctional, divided because the leadership stories will not stop. If he stays, he names the election date instead – and leads his Party to political irrelevancy. It will be wiped off the floor and the Liberal Party condemned to three terms in Opposition. So, the only real option, he saves some face – and quits.
Where’s Glen?
swampy Don’t be so pessimistic. Howard has been in election mode for six months. Nothing has worked. Unless he changes his modus operandi (and there’s nothing to suggest he will) it will be more of the same. Most people have already turned off. Fear and smear isn’t going to start working when if it hasn’t worked so far.
Call the election please @ 35:
“Another good poll result for the ALP. I still have a sinking feeling that the Coalition will be returned with a slim majority, but that’s just the pessimism in me”
Mate, you’ve go nothing to worry about. As each week goes past, this situation reminds me more and more of the lead up to the 1997 UK election. Despite improving “economic indicators” (compared with the previous election) a long-running right-wing government suffered a record (post WW2) landslide loss.
Like UK Labour in 1997, the ALP for the first time in more than a decade has a leader and party organisation who’ll swing marginal (and not so marginal) government seats into the ALP column.
From the few published polls I’ve seen in marginal seats (especially Bennelong!) this election will not look like a repeat of 1998 where the ALP got smaller then average swings in the crucial marginal Coalition seats and bigger than average swings in it’s own seats. I think Possum did an excellent analysis a month ago from relatively detailed Newspoll quarterly polling in marginal and safe ALP and Coalition seats, showing the bigger than average swings to be in the safe and marginal Coalition
seats!
Seems clear the Coalition is down from the 45 or so it seemed to have settled at in June/July/early August. Still reckon the 59-41 in Newspoll looks a bit wacky, but we’ll see. 57-43 headline usually means 48-39 or so with ACN.
Scratching my head a tad as to why – is a 0.25% rate rise really that big a negative?
A minor bonus of changing to Costello this week: the Coalition is odds on to see improvement in the next Newspoll whoever is the leader, so he’d get a ‘leadership bounce’ for sure.
Swampy a week of self flagellation should cover your sins
Adam,
Two points about Howard’s statement concerning security: first, I am not convinced that the responsibility for high security in Sydney only rests with those you describe as anarcho-trot-ferals. Some security measures were no doubt aimed at them. But others, such as the flyovers, increased security at the airports, and the extraordinary surveillance on the harbour, suggests that your explanation is incomplete [any suggestion that these measures were mere shock and awe to discourage action by these groups does not stack up as they are the last group to be shocked into inaction by such tactics]. I suspect that the measures were meant to address at least two other issues: the prospect of a terrorist attack; and enforcing the notion that a terrorist attack was a seriously prospect.
Second, it is always important to pay attention to what a master wordsmith like Howard says: “it’s the fault of those people who resort to violence in order disrupt gatherings of this kindâ€. That may mean protesters; it may mean terrorists; it may mean both. By such studied ambiguity Howard invites reaction and, in the face of an accusation he was referring to protesters, allows himself enough wriggle room to say – I did not say that at all.
Leopold says
the Coalition is odds on to see improvement in the next Newspoll whoever is the leader
Would you care to nominate the “odds on”?
i reckon Galaxy is your better bet, but so what? The interesting thing will be the primary votes!
it doesn’t seem so long ago that 40% ALP was a dream!
swampy… forgive me for being so bold, but I think the scare campaign that is currently being developed in brightly lit rooms, with colourful posters by the liberal party, is going to be as successful as their smear campaigns have to-date.
If I can point back to the time that it all went bad for them, it was downers sneering smear… If that had happened one or two weeks out from the end of the campaign, this hysteria would have been intense, and would have shifted some voters. Now, that type of negative campaigning is going to be seen for what it is, and it’s all thanks to downer.
I expect the polls to stay similar to what they are now until the election, or even worse for the government. It’s at times like this that some liberals should start consider what happened to the canadian conservatives in 1993.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election%2C_1993
There is one way out of this for the conservatives in Australia, and that is through policy. And not just any policy, but bold policy in an area that is not already owned by the ALP. The IR debate is OVER… and is well and truly controlled by the ALP, not just amongst rusted-on ALP voters, but by almost all swing, and a good portion of rusted-on liberal voters as well. They’ve completely lost the middle ground.
The only thing they have left is the fear-driven xenophobic policies of Pauline Hanson. As far as I can see it, it’s the only thing left that will at least stop the bleed of some of their voters to the ALP.
Re (46)’
John Rocket Says:
September 9th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Just think of it as a favour for a fellow bombers supporter – next year huh?
Except for your #1 ticket holder. There won’t be a next year for him lol (Costello for those who don’t know this piece of trivia)
Adam (58) – my frustrated comment was not directed at the need for security, it was directed at the man who said those words. I’m tired of his rehtoric and the way he has to point things out that don’t need to be pointed out.
What would I rather he’d done? I’d rather he’d just apologised for the inconvenience to Sydneysiders, thanked his police and defence force and then, even, thanked the protesters for being largely peaceful. Instead, he picks a rogue element somewhere, and deliberately makes them the focus. His style is to constantly point out the negatives, and that irks me no end.
“Fear and smear isn’t going to start working when if it hasn’t worked so far.”
Exactly Rob, the Strippergate smear was shooting the last bolt and look what good that did Downer. As for fear, what have they got left that hasn’t been tried?
Leo, I guarantee the bounce back is a result of the Labor IR policy. It has been well received in middle Australia as striking the balance between workers and small business. It also is seen as many times over better than Workchoices.
Swampy @ 59,
There’s no need for self-flagellation – not now with all the recent polls showing the 2PP support now no less than 57 – 43 in the ALP’s favour, and with the betting markets shortening the ALP’s odds to below $1.50 and lengthening the Coalition’s odds closer to $3.00.
The Libs are self-flagellating so much on the leadership of their party, that whoever leads it will feel the almighty backlash of the voters come election night (whenever that is). Of course any nasty, negative campaigning against the ALP from the panicked Libs will make the voter backlash even greater!
The IR debate may be all but over, but an election against Howard is not about policy debates. For the last 3 years the ABCC has been collecting a huge volume of evidence against union members and their representatives in the building industry: witness Kevin Harkins and Joe McDonald. They have secretly recorded 100’s of hours of tapes and are poised to steadily release poisonous material during the election campaign.
Get ready to see over the next 2 months the following headlines:
“ALP candidate accused of duress”
“ALP National Executive member charge with assault”
“Key ALP backer [read any major union] accused of thuggery” etc etc etc
“Howard says ALP must rid itself of thugs”
“Rudd accused of protecting union bullies”
“Rudd expels accused….”
“Unions attack Rudd for weakness…”
I agree with Grooski. WorkChoices is poison for the Coalition in the marginals, and all that was needed was a reassurance that Labor would not swing too far in the other direction for the punters to desert Howard in droves. Labor’s finely balanced policy, and the vocal attacks on it by union dinosaurs like Dean Mighell, did the trick. I’ve been saying it all year, and maybe people will now believe me: the Ruddster is an extraordinarily smart guy, and he will not be outsmarted, out-manoeuvred or wedged by anyone.
Molotov,
I reckon Howard’s Dylan inspiration is (or should be) “It’s all over now baby blue.”
As for you Essendon supporters fantasising about next year, Daryl Kerrigan got it right: “tell ‘em they’re dreamin’.”
I think Glen must be busy renovating the bungalow for John and Janette. I suspect there won’t be a spare bed at the Costello’s.
I think Glen’s head imploded
What if Howard’s statement, that he intends to led the Liberal Party to the next election, is actually a lie?
I think this week Howard should announce the precise date he intends to retire if re-elected. Say, Australia Day 2009, he has to tell voters exactly what they are going to get if they vote for the coalition.
Geez Adam,
I’m not sure who you think didn’t believe that Rudd was a “smart guy”: 60% of the population appear to have the same feeling.
Antonio don’t you mean non core promise?
Adam, the Greens promise forcing Rudd “Back to the Future” (or past) on IR if they get the balance of power in the Senate. Is that their paelo-left element talking?
This is good
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/opinion/animations/0,25199,32,00.html
Sorry Brian, you’re right. At least he won’t introduce a GST next term.
And have a look at this:
“The federal government has signed a funding deal worth nearly $1 billion for the Opel consortium to provide broadband internet to the bush despite an unresolved legal challenge from Telstra”.
They snuck this one through as APEC closed.
I’m not an expert on this stuff. Does this mean Labor would not be prevented from implementing its fibre-to-the-node broadband pledge? I presume the documents have been written so labor can’t renege on the Optus deal.
I reckon this is a bit rough. On such an important issue as broadband, I would have like to have given the electorate the choice of two policies.
The Greens are getting ACTU support for the senate and labour preferences so they are looking good.
jen, I don’t know. Maybe it’s just that 60% of the population think Rudd is a safe pair of hands. Being a ’smart guy’ can actually work against you. I think aussies are just looking for a half-way decent alternative to Howard.
Our Right Wing regulars are curiously absent. However, it must be hard for them. It’s hard for us on the Left to subdue our euphoria over these polls that have repeatedly pointed to a Labor landslide, and I know when the situation has been reversed, I haven’t liked it. Hats off to Glen (and others) for continuing to stick his head up, as rantish as is posts can be at times. No doubt he’ll pop up again before too long.
But it’s reaching the point where there’s no positive spin in anything anymore for the government. The tide has run out for them quickly in the end. This time last year they were on course for a fifth triumph, now they are on the verge of an ignominious defeat. Such are the fortunes of politics.
I am believer that in politics, as in life, things seem to change very slowly, then everything chages in a rush. Such seems to be the situation here. But in actual fact, the government (as does any government) has built up a lot of baggage over the years, all of which seems to be coalescing into a dark reckoning for Howard. A Perfect Storm, as one blogger put it earlier the year.
And there’s nothing anyone can do now to change things.
Despite Jen’s sarcasm, I think Adam is right: “the Ruddster is an extraordinarily smart guy”. Witness the statement yesterday that that “Mr Howard should be able to conduct (APEC) without the distraction of Costello supporters kicking up the leadership debate in the middle of a conference of world leaders.” The political virtues of that statement include:
it kicks along the non-existent but destabilising leadership story;
it allows Rudd to kick it along, but assigns the blame to Costello supporters;
Rudd is telling Costello how to act when the world is watching: subtext -Rudd is a serious leader – he is the father to Costello’s petulant child;
Neither Costello’s nor the PM’s supporters cannot respond by denying the story, as this would only fuel the story.
Savvy political move all ’round.
sorry “not” should read “now” in 7th line of my last post.
I think Rudd is a smart guy Ichor. Just making the point to adam that he wasn’t the lone ranger.
If Howard does as Shanahan suggests, announces the election date on Wednesday, but doesn’t visit the G.G. until Friday, I hope Rudd at least gets a chance to censure Howard one last time on the Thursday. You know, just for old time’s sake.
Ichor at 67 and Antonio at 80, my thoughts exactly. Also, remember that Howards intention maybe somewhat different than that of his party “…I will lead the party as long as they want me…”
Tom
At 58.25% TPP for Labor would mean my seat of Kooyong would end up Labor (based on Oz Politics calculator). For those who don’t know, Kooyong is Peacock’s and more importantly Menzie’s old seat. If there was ever ‘heartland’ it would be a seat like Kooyong. I doubt Labor would get it, as I bet the swing in Kooyong won’t be anywhere near the national average due to so much rusted on voters here, but it’s interesting to see. Mind you, I’ve never hear from Petro Georgiou, so Labor should have been putting up a big name person, as that would help their chances.
BxTom John coward is not a legacy he can live with
If there is an announcement on Wednesday, but Parliament sits until Friday, any predictions on what bombshell will hit during the final days of the Parliament?
My question is this – even with the polls the way they are – is 16 seats just too much? Isn’t even a landslide to labor still only a just past the post win? Curious to know what more experienced folk think.
Maybe we should start predicting what the 2pp vote will be at the end of election night? I think 58 is out of this world, it won’t happen.
I think the AC Nielsen poll is accurate, I think the vote is currently 57 / 43, but I just can’t imagine that being sustained until election day. I guess I’m just pesimistic.
I think it will be 54.3, which is still huge given that Labor usually gets around 53 when it forms government.
Brian, what are you saying?
Cheers,
Tom.
I think the ALP will try to move a censure motion against Howard during Question Time. But the government will probably oppose it because it would result in a heap of bad TV coverage during that night.
I think the more likely scenario is Howard going to the G.G. on Friday. I think he must call the election this week not as a “circuit breaker” (god I hate that term) but because the longer he wants the more the public the back bench sniping will become.
Howard stepping down won’t help. It will just look like a cut and run and voters will punish the Libs. Libs may do better with a new leader but that person has to take the leadership. He(?) has to stand up a roll Howard. But who is going to? (rhetorical question) So it has to be an election called soon – yes, probably this week.
If he calls the election Wednesday he avoids a challenge. The insiders suggested why not wait till Firiday?
If Howard does stay, the worst he could do is just to coast towards defeat. He should make some drastic policy announcement that at least polarises voters, and gives them something to vote for. It probably won’t be enough to win the election, but surely there comes a point when he must simply try to minimise the loss. After September 11 and Tampa I always felt Beazley just didn’t think he could win, but felt he could stop a huge slide against the ALP. I wonder if Howard has the skills to do the same?
BxTom, Howard can’t be lying about wanting to lead, because “Howard the Coward” would be the headline in the papers if he quit!!
It is a tough situation, he could TELL the party room on Tuesday “I’m calling the election on Friday”, but the trouble is it would get leaked, and thus Rudd / Gillard would have a field day “We all know you are going to call an election, but why haven’t you done it!”
I just don’t think he will be challenged. His autocratic approach has caused the backbenchers to lose their ability to revolt or force a change. The only way Howard will go is if he chooses to resign, if he is to be challenged then he can shift blame onto others.
BTW, anyone read the piece by Lenore Taylor in Saturday’s AFR? According to research done for ACTU the key issues are Workchoices and Howard himself (note: not Rudd). And most people who have changed their vote think Howard is “past his use-by date”. Can’t see how the Libs are going to get them back.
I don’t think the ALP will move a censure motion for three reasons.
First, it’s star is in the ascendancy. A censure motion would be lost, if not killed before it is lost. Why adopt a strategy that robs you of your political momentum?
Second, when you want to rally the troops, move a censure motion – but this is a battle that has moved into a different stage. The tactics will be largely played out beyond the walls of the two houses, supplemented by the theatre inside those walls. A censure motion focuses attention on a forum where Labour has no control, rather than the press pack where Rudd is in control.
Third, if a scene has to be played by the news from parliament, it won’t be a censure motion: it will be someone (probably a retiring member or Bill Heffernan) taking one last chance to use the protection of parliamentary privilege to propagate some scandalous attention grabber.
I’m disappointed – only 57% What happened to the rest!
Howard resigning would be counterproductive. In the increasingly unlikely event that the Coalition win the election, the win would be on the back of them getting traction on their only two real strengths – experience and economic management.
To that end, if Howard quits and Costello takes his place and a new Treasurer is sworn in, both the economic management and experience arguments are significantly weakened. These two areas are the Coalition’s only hope. They can’t afford to weaken either of them.
If the libs have been such great economic managers how come our trade deficit continues month after month year after year? Net foreign debt and personal debt have tripled in ten years. As for the press gallery reread The Latham Diaries, we need a cleanout there too.
On Insiders today Andrew Bolt said the only option is to change to Costello. He said that even if Howard stays, that doesn’t actually resolve the leadership issue because people know he has become such a liability.
In a way it is kind of like the Adelaide Crows’ captain Mark Riccuito playing his last game yesterday. After they lost, the coach conceeded that he wasn’t fully fit, but out of loyalty and respect he was selected in the side because dropping the captain after 300+ games was deemed to be unfair.
blindoptimist
they are trying to unravel the wool over their eyes
Censure motions are always lost. It gives the leader of the opposition 6 minutes to say things that grab a TV news headline, that’s the only real practical reason for it these days. If the opposition does it then it could make any leadership speculation worse.
It won’t happen Tuesday because the Canadian P.M. but Wednesday and Thursday are possibilities, especially if leadership speculation is STILL going on. Surely Rudd would make reference to that in his speech, which makes it easy for the media to package it together.
I think this poll is more on the money than the other recent ones, Morgan suggesting that Nats were at 1.5% was too wacky.
I think the scare campaign will be
“Do you want Labor in every government in Australia….who will control the bully unions?”
I think that sort of scare campaign is worth several percent, its sort of a new twist on keeping the bastards honest.
I’m betting the Labor line for the last 3 elections about a vote for Howard is a vote for Costello won’t be used again.
Simon, if you’re right, I’ll dip me lid to ya; if you are wrong, I’ll dip me lid to Rudd’s advisers.
Will, I don’t think Labor is going to win Kooyong, although we have a very good candidate in Dr Ken Harvey, but I think we might run old Petro very close. This area is trending steadily to Labor, as are older wealthy suburban areas across Australia, driven by issues like climate change and refugees. Kooyong, Wentworth, Ryan, Boothby, North Sydney – seats like this, Liberal for generations, are increasingly soft for them, just as “aspirational” seats like Aston and Casey, once marginal, have got increasingly safe for them. Labor very nearly won the old East Yarra Province in the Victorian upper house, which had similar boundaries, in 2002. Petro’s reputation as a backbench rebel on the refugee issue will stand him in good stead now, although he has a reputation as a lazy MP. Andrew Robb in Goldstein might also get a shock. The Ruddster was campaigning in Brighton, of all places, a couple of weeks ago with Julia Mason – another excellent candidate. A pity our candidates in the Victorian marginals aren’t quite as outstanding, although Rodney Cocks in La Trobe is an exception.
Hey Simon, don’t know if this is possible with this forum client or not, but if you opened straight into the last page when selecting the thread from the main page, you’d probably save a fair amount of bandwidth.
Simon? Sorry… meant to say William.
That’s pretty good ifonly
I also think the Libs will focus on the Costello vs Swan match-up, rather than Howard v Rudd.
Costello gave a good rehearsal the other day:
“Do you want to hand over your job, your mortgage, your future to this inexperienced group”.
Any extreme move is a very high risk for the coalition. This includes changing leaders, big policy changes or major smear efforts. There is a tiny probability they will succeed with the most likely result being a precipitous dive in their vote. Their best chance by far of containing the rout is by sticking with the existing leader and policies and playing it pretty straight on the smear front.
It will be a real test of their discipline – if they can hold course they may be left with a workable number in the House to provide some sort of effective opposition. if not, the votes only have to move by a few more percent to put all but a handful of seats in play.
Adam, thanks for that, as I said I don’t think Kooyong is likely. If there is a nationwide swing, Kooyong will be one ‘lowering the average’. I did read a bit about Dr Ken Harvey, sounds very impressive. I’m thinking I might offer some help for handing out how to votes, that way I can do my part. Petro is useless, almost to the point that the Libs were wanting to dump him. I prefer deadwood, since it makes it easier to campaign against.
“Yes, Peter. I do.”
I agree. I think the real state of play is around 56 – 57. The last Newspoll at 59 was too high, likewise Morgan.
The Libs could offer “stability, security and certainty” as their election slogan.
It certainly works for Kim Jong-il.
Hope the election is announced on a Sunday rather than a weekday. It’s a bit of a rush (if you love politics) to watch the big white car roll into the GG’s live on Sky News.
And if Howard stays their campaign can be “ANYONE BUT HOWARD”
winston (106)….
Yes, I read it with interest. It confirms that Howard has done himself a lot of harm during this so-called phoney campaign. If this is phoney, then he must be dreading the real one.
I’m feeling sorry (in a purely insincere way) for John Howard – the bar has been raised impossibly high for him now. Unless he can be really clever, no-one will take any notice of him. And if by chance he does do something clever, well that proves nothing: he will be dismissed for being too clever. What a mind-twisting experience it must be for him. And that’s not the half of it: in a not-at-all subtle way, Rudd publicly warned Howard this was going to happen. Howard, strung up with his own rhetoric: glorious.
I wonder whether we will have some debates this year between H and R? Should be good fun.
it looks like the government is rushing bills through post haste, theyve signed the broadband contract today even though theres a court case over it pending from Telstra.
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=63307
ifonly – I wouldn’t get too hung up on % vote for Nationals in the polls. Many voters don’t differentiate. If you polled in a National seat where there hadn’t been a Liberal candidate for years, people would still say they are going to vote Liberal. Some pollsters will compensate fo this in polls immediately preceding the election by only alllowing relevant responses. However, best to take coalition vote in toto.
cycnic (113)
lol
Greg,
I don’t think the Costello line works; that is, “Do you want to hand over your job, your mortgage, your future to this inexperienced groupâ€. Is not the rhetorical answer:
my job is insecure and labour will make it more secure;
my mortgage is getting worse when the Libs promised to make sure it didn’t get worse;
my future is uncertain (although any future is always uncertain).
57/43 well that’s a near complete set of poll showing the ALP in the upper regions of the 50’s – remarkable this close to an election – is there any precident?
Before the killer newspoll I feared it was going to play out:
- 54:46 newspoll
- APEC provids a boost to Howard
- Election called
- Mother of all scare campains
- ALP wins 51:49 but fails to get a majority due to intense pork in the marginals.
But, oh how quickly perceptions change. The head says biggest post WWII labor victory. The heart says – it aint safe yet.
This poll was probably influenced by Rudd’s performance at APEC. Even Andrew Bolt was impressed http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22373556-2,00.html
Howard did it to Keating:
Howard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwKgt3lbsG4
Keating’s reply http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKN4qWo7×1Y
Ichor,
Not saying it will win them the election by any means. Rather, merely repeating what Costello outlined. People will respond to such a question in different ways.
Anyway, lot long to go now!
I pitty anyone that doesn’t have SkyNews. In my opinion, it’s a magnificent political coverage and very unbiased. Looking forward to the campaign.
Antonio are you thinking ‘The Democratic People’s Republic of Howardistan’?
Another election campaign launch song for Howard could be ‘Where is the Love?’ by Black Eyed Peas.
Leopold comment 65
Scratching my head a tad as to why – is a 0.25% rate rise really that big a negative?
I tried to explain to you last year before bryan at ozpolitics shut down his comments – Yes 0.25% is a BIG deal. It’s $80.00 a month on my mortgage. That’s $400.00 a month since the last election. That’s the last pay rise I got and some more gone! I now have a child and my wife is off work until Feburary. If we can just get through till then we might be okay.
Now people on the right are going to point fingers and say I just borrowed more than I could afford. I borrowed the average amount of a loan for a Sydney house which is $400,000.00 and it was well within my range 7 interest rate rises ago. Now it’s starting to get to be a real worry and we are looking at more rate rises ahead. Each interest rate rise is a BIG deal no matter how small because houses cost a great deal more these days.
You obviously haven’t read about all the people losing their houses in mortgagee sales lately. And this was after the lie that the coalition would keep interest rates low. Well yes they are low but I would have been better off paying 17% interest and being able to buy my house for what it cost under the keating government!
as someone else said wheres glenn and the mod squad?
Or Long John Baldry’s “You’ve Lost That Lovin Feeling”
There’ll be funding promises for mass gymnastic displays and ribbon waving.
Of course, Labor can argue “it’s time for a change”. That worked for Mao in the Cultural Revolution.
Or more apt, his 1968 hit “Let THe Heartaches Begin”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_K5qu5nkoFY
Hubris warning:
Richard Marles, ACTU assistant secretary and candidate for Corio, is no fool. This is him in May 2001…
“This year we will have a federal election. Labor is probably going to win it. Let me just take you through that a little bit. Labor needs about 7 seats in order to win government. If the Queensland election were replicated in a federal context then upwards of 10 seats would be won in Queensland alone. On current polling it is expected that 3 or 4 seats will be picked up by Labor in West Australia and South Australia. On current polling 9 or 10 seats are expected to be picked up in Victoria but I think a more realistic estimate there is 4 or 5 seats. So just amongst those states alone you have twice the number of seats required in order for Labor to win government and we haven’t even considered NSW which many regard as the place where Labor is best positioned to gain seats and is of course the largest state. So it’s on that basis that I say that Labor is likely to win the election.”
http://workers.labor.net.au/95/c_historicalfeature_awas.html
Be warned.
Simon,
Latham’s last word was on a matter of public importance: 15 minutes uninterrupted:
http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/view_document.aspx?ID=2273365&TABLE=HANSARDR
Beazley adopted the same technique in 2001:
http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/Repository/Chamber/Hansardr/Linked/1564-3.PDF
Adam Mumbles lemmings have not picked a boofhead this time around.
Adam,
Perhaps that posting could have been headed: “Marles warning” rather than “Hubris warning”.
Intersting, I hiope Rudd does the same. When Rudd censured Howard over Obama comments, hardly anyone on the government side stayed in the chamber, it looked very bad. Howard was there with Julie Bishop and that was it.
Perhaps “You Just Keep Me Hanging On” might work as a theme tune for Howard…
“Why don’t you be a man about it
And set me free
You don’t care a thing about me
You’re just using me
Go on
Get out
Get out of my life
And let me sleep at night
Please
‘Cause you don’t really love me
You just keep me hangin’ on” (background singers wail “woo-oo-oo”).
Kevin Rudd may prefer Monty Python’s “I Like Chinese”.
Why would it ever have been said that Howard could equal or better Menzies’ period in office. Would Howard not need another two or three years in office?
Does anyone know (as I do not) enough of Menzies’ history to know if he perpetrated one or more of the types of outrages John Howard has? Was Menzies seen as benign/autocratic? Why was he in power for so long? Electoral vagaries of the period? Lack of opposition?
Okay, maybe I should read something.
I was born in 1948, one of twelve. Dad medium level public servant. Mum took on work only in her forties. Financially, not always relaxed and comfortable. Chooks, vegie garden, bulk buyers. Academic, some. Trade school others. Happy. Kids attended both public and private schools. Good, rounded base.
Very politically interested, as a family. Cannot remember Menzies, as any kind of influence. Young people of today may similarly regard John Howard. Who? I cared about what was actually happening, politically, work wise, optimism, hope.
Vietnam mattered, as a focus.
I went with Whitlam, looked good to me.
Adam
pessimism does not become you
though no-one here seems to be boasting
it seems to myself more like hopeful expectation as opposed to an outright certainty in peoples minds
One reason was he red scare, Howard has Islamic Terrorism to play up, Menzies had Communism. Which leads into why he was in power, the ALP split into two parties. the anti-communist Democratic Labor Party, and the resgular ALP. The DLP preferenced the Liberals ahead of the ALP, thus keeping it in power.
Having said that, it is kind of a misnomer saying that the DLP was anti-communist, becuase that seems to imply the ALP was pro-communist, when it wasn’t.
Adam
if the ALP win, it will be prescience, not hubris. Still, I also have suffer from the superstition that cockiness will be punished. I’ve got a budget of $300 for the election night party. I’m waiting for the odds against the coalition to get to $3.00. Then my $100 bet will cover me if Howard gets up. Of , not, who cares!
Off topic….but did anyone see President Hu yawning while the fireworks display was on? I bet he was thinking “this nota firawoks cum Olympics we showa firawoks”
Labor probably would have won an election held in May 2001.
By November, the Coalition had turned it around.
To repeat the feat in 2007, the Coalition has to make up a lot more ground in a lot less time. I can’t see that happening.
I hope the polls close in to 55 / 45, and stay that way and that is the final result on election day. If the polls stay out in the 55 – 59 range, then some people will switch their votes on election day just because they don’t want a landslide. Which could make it even closer than 55 / 45.
Having said that, if Rudd wins by 1 seat I’ll be happy!
But Menzies almost got rolled in 1961, winning by just one seat over a Labor Party that got a majority of the 2PP vote and had a pretty lacklustre leader (Calwell). There was a credit squeeze at the time.
I do see some parallels with today’s interest rate rises and high housing costs. I spoke to a young teacher today, who told me that she is unable to afford even a one-bedroom flat anywhere in Melbourne. Tha wouldn’t be a problem, except that rents are outrageous and hard to get as well. She is still living with her parents, and is frustrated by that.
While I acknowledge that WorkChoices is a big issue, I still think interest rates/housing costs is the issue that’s affecting more people directly. And while I think the Federal Government doesn’t deserve all the blame, the electorate wants to take revenge on someone.
What promise will the government make on interest rates this election? Will they stick to the line that they’ll always keep them lower than Labor?
I don’t think they will make that mistake. More likely they will promise to cut the GST on houses either to 0 or 5%. If the states complain, then that would be good, becuase it would be hard for the states to say cutting a tax is bad.
My choices for John Howard
The Tide is Turning Roger Waters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvTvWJWeQ2g
A brilliant Anthem
and Go Johnny Go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEZXn8FC214
Hey I went looking for it on You Tube and found a film clip about John Howard set to the music. Have a look at it guys.
And just a further observation on the 1961 election…Labor achieved a swing of more than five per cent, and got almost 48 per cent of the primary vote…and still lost! They must have gotten buggerall preferences, no leakage from the DLP. And back then, there were no Greens, and not many independents either. Times have changed.
thats the 4 major polls with shifts of 2-4 % away from the Coalition when they were hoping for a shrinking of the gap or at least the status quo.
the real challenge I think is how can Howard make up such a huge gap? Even with a scare campaign? Rudd is a great media performer so he wont crash and burn anyway.
I dont think Howard will quit. I do love seeing him squirm as the polls nosedive and the commentators desert him though!!
just had a brainwave for the libs
make christopher pyne leader
at least everyone will have a chuckle
It will be very interesting to see exaclty what he does. When was the last time he was in this sort of position? When he was going up against Hawke in 1987?
We know that he is actually a complete opportunist, he actually doesn’t have much of a plan for the country, he never has. His first thought has been to do whatever it was to win. But what does he do know when he is too conservative to change his entire career? How does he reinvent himself in 7 weeks?
Antonio,
Perhaps your “frustrated” young teacher was not so much reflecting on the housing costs as saying: your place, not mine.
Chris B,
See – Howard the Duck even makes an appearance.
BTW – love the song. Radio Kaos is one of my fav CD’s (yeah – a floyd freak here)
Ichor…no, not true.
Another awful poll for the Rodent, but he ain’t going anywhere, he’ll fight it out until the end, and if that means taking half the Coalition members with him, so what, as long as he socks it to Captain Smirky.
My most optimistic prediction for Labor: a majority of 10.
OK. Sticking-neck-out time (or Haftenansatz-heraus Zeit as our teutonic cousins would have it)
Howard will call the election this week after Stephen Harper’s address. The election will be called for 3 November. Howard will run the union bosses fear and the Rudd shredder-gate smear. The front bench will focus on the inexperience and union ties of the Rudd front bench. They will also push the who-do-you-trust-with-the-economy line.
Rudd has been fairly quiet so far, but will start to roll out a raft of policies aimed at families, women, security and the economy while highlighting the ALP’s strengths on IR and the environment. They will run ads about WorkChoices impact on families and stressing Howard’s links to nuclear energy, including the greenpeace anti-nuclear ad.
Despite the mud-raking, Rudd’s popularity will not be hurt. The final result will be 53/47 TPP. Howard will hang on in Bennelong by a whisker, but stand down as leader of the party in favour of Costello. Turnbull will lose Wentworth.
My ‘Don’s Party’ will cost $300 and be worth every cent!
This would be because he is thinking of the history books. If he gets rolled, then he wants there to be blood on someone elses hands so he can blame them for showing disunity, and bringing down the government.
But I think it is all getting kind of sad. Surely the first thing politicians should learn is when it is time to go.
# 167 Rob Says: My ‘Don’s Party’ will cost $300 and be worth every cent!
Remember… in Don’s Party, the ALP lost. There is still SUCH a long way to go…
Listening to the music.
My favourite for months I am still keeping secret for election night.
Meanwhile, ‘In the Mood’ will do.
Pi said
OK, Rob’s party then
And yes, there is a long way to go, and yes, my neck is stuck out!
Simon Howson,
Of course the DLP was anti-communist. That is the whole reason it came into existence.
All those complaining about housing prices,
I am certain a Labor victory won’t put a dent in them. Hubris or not: are we already at the stage of deflating expectations?
Um, yeah, my point was that didn’t mean the ALP was pro-communist, even though Menzies tried to say they were.
I didn’t read this in any of the papers, but Rudd’s Com-Car was stopped from entering the secure zone because it wasn’t part of a motorcade!
To make it to lunch with Vladmir Putin, Rudd had to approach a police officer, and get escorted in a police car!
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=294355
Howard will not resign. There is no one that can do any better than he is. He will talk up in the party room…what if the polls are wrong, what if we can crawl our way back?
I will believe the win on the night when the votes are in. It will be a tough campaign and I do not trust the Liberal Party to not play dirty,
But I am really enjoying these polls.
Chris
You are a champion! Finding all those stats on populations of countries and tiers of government, I had no idea it was so common! We certainly do have a large country and a small population, which does stretch resources more than most on that list, though I might have thought that this could provide more reasons for rationalising government layers not fewer? We can’t afford the infrastructure, let alone the overlapping bureaucracy to administer it.
One advantage we have over (probably) all of the other countries on that list is urbanisation at around 93%, which means that regions could mostly be manageable in size, if we were to rationalise to regions of perhaps 300 000 – 500 000.
I do think it is necessary to have competitive tension in at least two levels of government to run well, but doubt whether local councils are efficient on service delivery on this front. It is also harder to get quality leaders in with very small populations and pretty ordinary councillor salaries (Heck! Look how hard it was to get a great leader even Federally for Labor and in every state for the Coalition!!)
from memory, the changes to leadership scenarios that have been plyaed out in the past where there is a “tap on the shoulder” have historicaly taken about 6 months to effect change. Hawke >>keating, beazley& Crean etc, these sorts of things don’t happen quickly enough to fit into the timelines left for Mr Bolte’s aggitations to come true
As it is, the only circuit breaker that is already locked and loaded is the 20 Septmebr changes to Cetnrelink assets test exemtption that I mentioned months ago on this site.
There are some seriously benficial changes for senior citezens rolling out over the next few weeks, whereby people who have missed out on the entire “eceominic mirable” argument from the coaliation get to join the party for the first time
An AC neilson of 57/43 will help Howard lock himself in for the next election. It may even help him delay until early december….if straws need to be clutched then this poll is a staw that floated within reach
Simon Howson, thanks for that insight. Reds under Beds, I suppose. The landscape is so different these days. I do tend to think that Howard as media star has outlived his welcome. Too much exposure.
John Hewson said the only way you’ll get Howard out of Kirribilli House is in a box. And don’t discount the influence of Janette, who obviously enjoys being Mrs Prime Minister. The Australian people will have to do the deed, otherwise the rodent will stay in the job until he’s 80.
House Prices
Still convinced Aussies’ll whinge either way, whether they go up or down!! If they go up, people are buying them and people obviously think they can afford them (usually confidence in their earning potential). If they go flat or down, it is usually a lack of confidence in this. Either way, to be really honest, no one says you HAVE to own a house NOW.
Anyone who follows real estate (particularly somewhere like Sydney!!) will see the cycles, which run predictably 8-9 years apart. So don’t buy on peaks, rent. Or commute! Or get a new job! If you are working for a house you can’t afford, there is no part of that equation that is “living”!!
This is why I cannot believe that governments are blamed for housing affordability. If anything, our financial institutions should be made accountable for lowering the bar on mortgages and taking advantage of the public with the (previous) gravy of credit flowing, knowing full well that it couldn’t hold forever!!
Re Rudd’s Car being blocked by the Keystone Cops, I’m absolutely amazed that the Chasers could get through with obvious fake passes, while Rudd with proper ones couldn’t.
Honestly, the NSW Police couldn’t organise a root in a brothel.
The odds of the ALP winning the next election are strangly similar to NZ winning the world cup.
NZ is clearly the best team by a healty – but there is a lot to happen between now and the final.
In other words – enjoy the good polls its not over.
Apparently during the 1983 election Malcolm Fraser said under Labor people would be afraid to bank their money for fear Labor would lose / steal it. Fraser said people would put their money under their beds, to which Hawke replied “But that’s where all the Reds are!”.
I thought they regularly did this before I.C.A.C.?
There’s only way Howard can go: negative! But, it’ll backfire on them, the same way it has all year when they’ve tried to smear Rudd.
180
Generic Oracle Says:
September 9th, 2007 at 11:13 pm
House Prices
But there things governments can do to improve the availability and affordabilty of housing. They should do them – for lots of reasons.
Good design of tax policies in particular can change the dynamics of the market on the supply side, while there are equally smart things that can be done to help new entrants into the market. Access to housing is a key policy area. Hopefully, it will soon get some attention.
Saw Kevin on the telly tonight. I think he has a soft spot for me..
What surprised me is that in the Crosby-Textor report I read on Friday, giving a clear analysis of who “owned” which topics in terms of perception, I thought economic management was still weakly a plus for the government.
This ad, however, gave assurances from Kevin Rudd that he would keep budgets in surplus, on average and that he would keep interest rates under control. I like the guy, but I found this a bit logically flawed on the basis of recent press statements by the ALP:
1. If Rudd/Swan backed the current budget and agreed to Costello’s books and,
2. If they are, indeed, Economic Conservatives and,
3. Howard has faced 9 (possibly now 10) rate rises since 2004
then… pray tell, how has the ALP shown how they will manage better??
Further to this:
1. If Kevin is committed to budget surplus and,
2. Mr Swan has fired a volley at Peter Costello for “Overtaxing, then overspending” and
3. The ALP is reluctant to rid from its image the spectre of being financially irresponsible with debt,
then, … pray tell, how will the ALP promise surpluses without knowing the future economic figures ahead of time, without over-taxing as they have accused the coalition of doing??
I tend to think anything greater than 57/43 is a bit optimistic.
While poll after poll is indicating that the ALP is likely to win this election, I tend to think about 53:47 is the most likely end outcome at this stage.
There were a lot of polls saying around ALP 57+ at the NSW election, although the actual result was a little bit lower than that in the end. I don’t think the ALP vote will get into the high 50s on election day unless we start seeing some polls showing their vote into the 60s.
The simple fact of the matter is if workchoices is the only thing negative about the Government…that seems rather a small reason to peg this 10 percent rise 2PP in Labor’s vote…
Least you Rudd supporters forget about the ‘Kinnock factor’…hubris is deadly the left riles about Howard being full of hubris in putting workchoices in place but the Liberal Party simply has to have election ads out with Rudd with his May Day declaration that the ALP would win the next election…if anybody has displayed more hubris than Kevin Rudd i wouldnt know the fact is his media scripted lines about it being a close election are a mere facade with which to placate the people of Australia into thinking he’s taking them seriously…
But while we ’sleep walk’ into a Rudd Government and with the media so dazzled and in love with Kevin 07 we have seen zero to none scrutiny of any of Labor’s policies which for the most part have been a ramshackle and a pure load of rubbish that have as many holes as swiss cheese…
Labor’s Broadband policy (takes money out of the locked box of the Future Fund when business should fit the bill)
Peter Garrett’s solar power rebate was (even confusing for Garrett who thought in Parliament they were doubling it when they were merely extending it)
Labor’s IR policy Mark I and Mark II (still a dogs breakfast no detail and hardly any sector of Australia is satisfied about the plans)
Now this is not to safe Labor doesnt have any decent policies im sure they may but while every television news outlet spends more time talking about Howard’s future and not on scrutiny of each sides policies…Labor’s untested policies could be disastrous for our country the simple fact is that unless the media scrutinises the ALP’s policies adequately as they most surely do with the Government’s the country will be worse off if Rudd wins…
In the end i still think the devil you know will win, simply because the economy is doing so well and i dont think when it comes down to it they’ll vote for inexperience rather than experience…that being said at this stage the ALP are clear favourites and the Government is still barely in touch with them in the polls…anybody can win from here…let’s not forget the Irish elections where Bertie Ahern’s Government was returned despite being down in the polls for months and months….
I for one think it would extremely naive for so many of you all do be planning election victory celebrations and since many of you have carried on for so long about how this election ‘will be the sweetest victory of them all’ i for one will have a chuckle at your expense if Labor does not win later this year.
Blind
Well what is wrong with offering tax deductibility on first home owner’s loans for the first five years? This could save about $100 a week that some on this site have been concerned about since 2004 with the rate rises… First Home buyers are most sensitive to rises, after all.
I believe a party has raised this, that it has been hi-jacked by Mr Joyce and that it is now doing the rounds of the “mainstream” parties..
Sensible, no?
Simon says:
Yep, if i remember correctly Fraser said that “if labor wins people would be better of putting their money under their beds”. Hawke’s reply was the feature item of news that night and introduced laughter into an otherwise grim campain.
I think it was also the point where it was clear Fraser was going to loose.
I do hope Rudd has a similar moment in the 07 election. He does have the wit to acheive it.
from the grapevine:
ALP is up 3 to 49% Primary
Coalition is down 2 to 39%
On PPM Rudd is up 4% at 52% to Howard 39% down 2%
Rudd soars to 67% approval rating, a massive 8% jump after APEC and back to the record high.
The times no longer suit Howard. His famous luck has deserted him and everything he touches turns to Krudd. The irony is delicious. This is going to be a fascinating week to see if Howard survives as leader only to lead the Libs to an electoral rout and the dark ages. History is being written as we speak and it ain’t gonna be kind to the man of rust.
Hey oracle… can you some up your concerns in a sentence?
Hey glen… can you sum up your concerns in a sentence?
David,
The reason why the NSW polls overstated the Labor vote was because they all seemed to forget that in NSW State Elections, you can exhaust your preferences. As such, the polls were assuming that most Green voters would preferences Labor, whilst in reality, most Green votes would have exhausted.
Generic Oracle,
Rudd promised to keep the budget in surplus ON AVERAGE. That allows for it to fall into deficit when there is an economic downturn and government spending increases (through the form of welfare payments) and revenue decreases (through lower taxation revenue).
I hope we never have a government stupid enough to “promise” to keep the budget in surplus forever – that would rank up there with Latham’s “pledge” to keep interest rates low.
Glen,
I think most people here are cautiously optimistic about Labor winning (I know I am), but it would be a bit rash to call this far our – I’ll definitely be reassessing after the first debate tho…
Got the spelling right this time.
Glen! Long time, no see. Labor does have policies. Have you not looked? Devils we do know. Think not.
There’s only one script Glen reads… so there’s no time for actually determining whether he’s telling the truth or not.
I can still remember Howard saying to Keating during a 1996 TV debate “The people don’t believe you anymore”. To me that’s the closest thing I’ve seen to a knock out blow in a TV debate. It was sad, but after 13 years it was at least partly true.
I hope Rudd uses the same line on Howard.
Pi
Good point. I’ll sum them up:
Kevin is bold pushing the economic line when there are logical flaws in support, guaranteeing surpluses without economic data sounds like a commitment to overtax and a great way to help homeowners is through honeymoon tax deductibility.
OuCh!! That REALLLLLY hurt, Pi. Don’t make me do that too often, would ya???! I think I have indigestion!!
I wish we had optional preferential at the federal level. Previously I was in Mayo and there was always a candidate from the Citizens Electoral Council, and for one election One Nation. I know my vote would never end up with them, but why should I even have to put a number near them?
As someone was suggesting earlier (Nostra?) pollies should really learn when it`s time to go. Sadly, so few of them seem to. 2 recent examples (bracks, carr) of state leaders bowing out while on top. Can anyone remember the last PM (or even opposition leader) to do so?
Welcome back Glen – I have to admire your courage. In the same way I will admire Howards concession speech. It take guts and shows conviction.
Guys & Gals, it’s perceptions, not policies that non-politicals vote on!
Right now the perception is that Rudd is a quiet, reasonable Guy who can be trusted not to embarass us internationally, not to wreck the economy, to restore a little balance to IR, and maybe get us going on the environment (but not too quickly).
The Libs might be able to change this, but I don’t think so.
Prognosis?
Election 3Rd Nov
ALP 56% TPP
Seat majority 25+
#182 Albert, thank God the ALP don`t have to play a semi-final against the Wallabies.
Yeah good work Glen. Is there any truth to the rumour, recently started by myself, that William is paying you to comment now – to stop this site becoming a completely left-wing love-in? Cash for comments scandal hits Pollbludger!
Swing
I know he said “average”, i stated that previously. I also understand that this is a pretty ordinary promise and viewers may think “So? The coalition does now anyway”
It still doesn’t answer the accusation by Swan that Costello has overtaxed then overspent. By ensuring an AVERAGE surplus, you are still expecting that, over the long haul, there will be money left at the end of each tax year, where possible. The only way to guarantee this, ahead of time, is to go long on revenue estimates… colloquially called “overtaxing”.
You cannot have your cake and eat it.
Either:
1. What the coalition is doing is OK (because we intend to do the same thing) OR
2. The coalition is overtaxing, we won’t but we assure you the economy will be good enough for surpluses
Point 2 will bite them, if used, because not 6 months ago, Kevin & Wayne shared the mantra that the economic boom won’t last forever, in reference to the government’s IR laws.
There is contradictory economic logic in these statements that cannot easily be resolved. Just as well the electorate have goldfish-like memories!!
Boll,
How does an Opposition Leader bow out whilst on top?
The last PM to do so was Menzies in 1966.
GLEN, the claim that Rudd said he’d already won the election came from Downer, now very few people give any credence to anything Downer says, especially after the french/mandarin tanty, nobody, but nobody, is going to listen to ANYTHING he says after that, he was backed up by Howard, well theres the man who has been labled a lying rodent by his own side, everyone will just shrug on that one and think– well of course he’d say that.
theres not one person come forward to verify that statement, if as they claim Rudd was spouting it to journos, editors and businessmen then we’d have heard about it loud and long by now.
Swampy
Good point. I think Rudd knows exactly how challenging this is, though he is probably sleeping better every night polls like this keep trending in..
Will I see AC Neilson on line before I go to bed?
186
Generic Oracle Says:
September 9th, 2007 at 11:24 pm
Saw Kevin on the telly tonight. I think he has a soft spot for me..
What surprised me is that in the Crosby-Textor report I read on Friday, giving a clear analysis of who “owned†which topics in terms of perception, I thought economic management was still weakly a plus for the government.
This ad, however, gave assurances from Kevin Rudd that he would keep budgets in surplus, on average and that he would keep interest rates under control….
Generic, this is part of the process that Rudd has used all year to poach supporters from Howard: where there is a positive, Rudd positions himself alongside Howard. This may not win immediate support for Rudd, but gives him an aura of safety, creating pathways for the future migration of support.
Where Howard has a high negative ranking, Rudd establishes ‘politico-visual’ and ‘rhetorical’ distance between himself and Howard. The result is voters detach themselves from Howard and re-attach themselves to Rudd. In an elementary way, Rudd now “stands for” things voters like, while more and more, Howard “stands for” things they dislike.
When Howard has tried to move away from established value patterns, Rudd has sometimes followed him – to Howard’s annoyance, like a damned shadow – and sometimes just made a superior offer. The Tasmanian Hospital takeover is a good example of the latter: Howard made an unorthodox offer that doesn’t address the whole health story, and Rudd devalued it by offering a possible total health remake. Howard appears like he is offering a sunday carboot sale while Rudd appears like he is willing to build a chain of carparks…Who looks better?
This is why His Excellency The Foreign Minister is so pissed off with Rudd: he is running rings around them. No wonder the Liberals don’t know what to do now either, because Rudd is the front-runner and has all the high positives while Howard has the high negatives AND the high expectations. The Liberals gambled that time would be their ally, but it’s turned out to be their worst enemy….very funny really…oh the woe, the woe!
The really funny thing, to my mind, was Tony Abbott declaring that he and Howard and company were the First Eleven of Australian politics and therefore should be allowed to run everything. What a farce!
Generic Oracle,
From what I have heard from Labor so far, when they say “overtaxed then overspent”, they’re saying that they’ve taxed too much (which admittedly is slightly iffy economics, but the argument could be made that a $17 bn surplus is evidence of overtaxing) and that they’ve spent too much in a boom period for the economy (which is an economically sound argument – you’re supposed to save in boom periods).
What Labor seems to be suggesting is that they will lower the overall tax revenue (though I have no idea what they’re plans are about this) and will then find spending cuts by cutting pork. Well, that’s my interpretation at least…
The problem with Howard stepping down is that it wont help them win, may help them save a little, and could just as easily cause a hemorrhage of votes against them. There are no doubt many Howard faithful voting Liberal only because of him. There are also many that detest Costello and will jump if he takes over. Therefore their is great risk in Howard leaving the fray.
Similarly if Howard and Co or anyone for that matter [it will be assumed to have come from the Govt] start smearing Labor then the result could be the same – an increase in Labor’s vote.
From the beginning of the year the Govt and their sycophant press supporters failed to pick up until too late that attacking Labor increased its vote. Beautiful!
The Govt is in quick sand – the more it struggles the deeper and quicker it sinks. Its only safe bet is to try and limit the damage by going to the polls quickly and acting like gentlemen.
You seemed to imply that you think Costello has the best chance of minimising the loss. I feel that Howard has the best chance of minimising the loss. If Rudd wins I still think he is more likely to win by 10 or 20 than 1 – 9.
Swing
I understand your clarification about overtaxing but do you see what I mean about having it both ways?? In truth, they will do the same thing.
Swan has complained about the spending, but intends not to rollback on government commitments to date. How important is the issue to him then??
I also take your point about the boom and Howard has presided over a larger bureaucracy and greater welfare spends in areas like family payments and childcare subsidies. However, I think the numbers fixate in the electorate’s mind: Valid or not, they remember “17%” (”Keating’s” interest rates), “96 Billion AUD” (the “inherited debt” from Labor) and the fact that the Coalition has perpetuity funds set up to finance Govt Super, Universities and now other ones coming online.
Older voters will have the “financial prudence” perception of the coalition, which will be hard to shake. I think it is suicidal to attempt to paint the coalition as spenders and Labor as thrifty. History has not shown this and, to make matters worse, all Australian voters have a closer Labor model, in the state Labor government, which does not paint the “financial prudence” claim. It may backfire BADLY.
If an election is called this week, I hope the old tradition of announcing the date to the house is restored. I think the last time was in 1977 but I still remember Gough’s Austerlitz speech in 1972 – one of his very best.
ruawake says at post 37:
“Janet Albrechtsen considers herself a “commentator†bye bye ABC board.
She is about to become irrelevant.”
I dunno mate, I reckon she can still get a gig at Guns & Ammo Quarterly as their political correspondent.
#214 Generic Oracle Says:I think it is suicidal to attempt to paint the coalition as spenders and Labor as thrifty. History has not shown this and,
Actually, I think they’re going to be able to do it pointing at the facts, and with good reason. This is the largest taxing government in history, and spending that money in pork-barrelling tax-cuts is going to lead to inflation and higher interest rates.
Are you going to cut taxes and raise interest rates, or spend money on education an infrastructure, and compete with the ALP on its own turf?
Reverse-wedge.
Generic O,
I agree – it would probably be suicidal for Labor to attempt to paint themselves with the “financial prudence” claim. What Swan is really doing is trying to defuse the issue completely – agree with what the government is saying so they can’t attack Labor over it. That way, Labor can concentrate on its stronger areas of attack (eg, broadband, climate change, Howard being “mean and tricky”, etc)
Not sure about the Coalition perpetuity funds being a political positive for them, though. People seem to want the money to be spent NOW rather than locked up in a fund to be spent in the future.
If the Liberals win from here then God truelly is a right-wing nut job coz they’ll need some miracle, Tampa or something. But God won’t get old testament on us. Jesus was a good old Christian Socialist, certainly not an economic rationalist fear mungerer.
Acts of the Apostles at chapter 2 and verses 42, 44, and 45:
42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and in fellowship … 44 And all that believed were together, and had all things in common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. (King James Version)
The theme is reiterated in Acts 4:32-37:
32 And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. 33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. 36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, 37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet. (King James Version)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism
Prosperity Doctrine is rubbish, whatever happened to “the love of money is the ruit of all evils”.
Strange then how its the right-wingers who so often turn to religion for justification (of their bigotry against gays, etc.) whilest lefties are more likely to be secular (and when they do get religious tend to avoid the smighting bits).
Pi
Look, even the State Labor governments have bought into the whole “surplus” shine. Peter Beattie boasted about his surplus BUT increased Queensland’s debt load. He drew ire from the press and scepticism from the public by doing this. With State Labor examples like this, it leaves Federal Labor WIDE open.
By contrast, the coalition managed surpluses without resorting to debt. Now it is always good politics to attack either taxation or book balancing. You always have an argument on hand. Too many surpluses? You are taking too much tax! Too many deficits? You can’t handle the budget!
You are right about the Coalition and tax take. Dead right. Again, the numbers resonate. Many voters will be recalling 48% top tax rates under Labor and lower rates all the way down now. The fact that they have more of their income exposed to the moderate bands alludes most voters (who don’t even understand scaled taxation anyway!).
Again, I’d just worry that this line of attack is too greasy and too hard to form a sincere perception out of in the voter’s mind.
I wonder what Antonio Gramsci would have to say about the “Howard Battlers”.
Molotov
Wow, interesting post. I think this is the main reason why the “Religious Right” tag doesn’t wash as well in Australia.
As the learned Chris Curtis has informed us here, the roots are very different and the DLP and FFP experience has shown a real dedication to social justice and compassion. Even Kevin Rudd has written on the same principle, in a bid to win support from the Christian Community.
He wouldn’t get the support if there weren’t socially responsible Christians out there, I’d imagine.
As a result of this site, I have begun supporting FFP, mostly from a policy platform and, actually, Bryan Palmer’s Political Inclinations Test here:
http://www.ozpolitics.info/guide/fun/politics-test/
Now, I understand that Steve Fielding is a Christian and he has certainly caught the coalition off guard with some votes, particularly the offshore detention issue. Apparently, Steve was the perplexed one and wondered what people expected of him. Compassion to the poor and politically downtrodden was one of the key attributes of Christ, as I understand it. Anyway, I was also impressed at his stand.
He has also been vitriolic about Howard’s Workchoices from the start, believing, rightly, that those least able to negotiate their own way are the ones that need the most protection, usually the “poor”. Sharyn Burrows applauded Fielding in the senate, apparently, and holds him in very high regard. Now if that ain’t strange bedfellows, I don’t know what is.
Whatever that “prosperity thing” is you mentioned, I doubt that this guy buys into it!!
My point was that Howard stepping down could just as easily cause more damage. Also I get the feeling [and it has been this way all year] that if the Govt and its mates produce a negative campaign it might end up costing them more votes.
I believe they should go to the polls quick and act like gentlmen. The fact that Labor seem to actually be increasing their vote should be a warning to the Govt to not assume any return of votes by waiting longer. Rudd is starting to focus on some safer Liberal seats so obviously he thinks given time they could do better.
It seems like Rudd has been working out his plan for years.
Generic Oracle
It is remarkable that when history is examined that those examples that support ones argument are the examples that are brought forward. The examples that do not support us are ignored.
I can remember a top marginal rate under the conservatives of 60%.
I am not old enough to know who brought it in or when it was brought in but in I think the Hawke Government lowered it but I could be mistaken.
The same thing has occurred with interest rates. All say that Labor is the hight interest rates party but Frazer/Howard had higher interest rates. So why are not the Liberal tagged with this negative rather then Labor.
One thing that is ignored is not the high and lows that occur in the economic cycle but how a Government handles these fluctuations that always occur. Maybe a high interest rate or a high tax rate is the medication that the economy requires.
Now The Oz is reporting that Howard is going to wait a couple of weeks:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22390609-601,00.html
“government sources said the Prime Minister might wait another two weeks to call the election to attack the Opposition Leader during the two-week parliamentary session starting tomorrow.”
Generic Oracle
If you think that projects like the Snowy Mountain scheme were financed without debt, you’re not as smart as I think you are.
If you think Australia isn’t sinking further into debt with every monthly trade deficit, you’re not as smart as I think you are.
If you think that the debt is now corporate, rather than governmental, you’d be right.
If you think that the debt is being used to finance urgently needed infrastructure, IMO you’re blind.
In my view, the foreign debt is being used to push housing prices beyond the reach of Australians.
But, Generic Oracle, I don’t think the voters are doing to give a rats about our learned (?) debate. They see unaffordable housing, Hospitals and Transport in crisis, no action on the environment, no job security,. They’re going to kick backside!
Sydney Morning Herald
‘Despite Mr Howard’s moment on the world’s stage, the poll, taken from Thursday to Saturday, shows Labor leading the Coalition on a two-party-preferred basis by 57 per cent to 43 per cent.
This is a four-point widening of the gap for Labor over the past month, enough to annihilate the Government if an election were held now. The election is due to be called within weeks.
Labor has increased its primary vote lead by 5 percentage points and is now besting the Coalition by 49 per cent to 39 per cent.
More than 60 per cent of voters believe Labor will win the election. Fewer than 30 per cent are backing the Government.
Mr Rudd has equalled the record he set in March as the most popular opposition leader in the poll’s 35-year history.
His approval rating shot up 8 points to 67 per cent, pushing him ahead of the pre-election ratings achieved by Malcolm Fraser in 1975 and Bob Hawke in 1983.’
Hhhahahaha Shanahan is funny, this is how he starts his article today:
“Howard’s not stepping down and he’s not rushing to an election this week, despite rumours and febrile fears within the Coalition.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22390623-17301,00.html
HE was the one that started the rumours on Saturday that the election was going to be called this Wednesday.
Who gives a rats,
The top marginal rate of income tax was reduced from 66% to 47% by Hawke (Keating as treasurer). At the same time a specific capital gains tax was introduced, and the double taxation of dividends (company tax plus tax on dividends in the hands of shareholders) was abolished.
So modern Labor certainly has a claim as a major player in tax reform.
Frank Calabrese,
If the current NSW cops couldn’t organise a root in a brothel, their (probably more corrupt) predecessors were certainly particularly adept at that task, and could also be relied upon to organise a piss-up in a brewery.
The declining efficiency to which you allude is a disgrace.
This says it all I think…
“All impressions of Howard as yesterday’s man, and Rudd as tomorrow’s, were reinforced.â€
http://www.smh.com.au/news/apec/analysis/2007/09/09/1189276546444.html
Probably the Govt plans to try some smear in parliament. We know they are able to lie, tell half truths and create faked documentation [aka Kirby] and certainly there are a few sick sycophant journos who would be willing to make the sacrifice of making up stories.
Remember this govt orchestrated the SAS raid on the Tampa, lied over and over on Children Overboard was willing to bribe a dictator under sanctions to sell wheat, happy to keep Hicks locked up for years to keep Bush happy and willing to see Habib tortured for no good reason, and willing to force the feds to bring charges against Haneef.
And who knows maybe the Bush Administration is happy to create a terrorist attack. The USA govt has never been too shy to install the govts they want in other places so a littel shennanigans in Aust would be simple for them – if they had the will and reason.
I wouldn’t underestimate just how desperate to win this govt is.
On a more positive note the longer the govt waits the more votes it might end up losing.
The main reasons for Rudd’s popularity is simply that…
A – the media love him and hardly lift a finger to question him or scrutinise his actions or his policies to the same degree they do to the Coalition.
B – he has very little record and thus we dont know anything about him nothing positive, nothing negative.
C – he’s never had to make a tough decision as leader of the Opposition, he hasnt been tested in the heat of the moment and from what we’ve seen he turns into a mumbling wreck when trying to explain himself…
D – no non right wing media press gallery journo is willing to come down hard on his or his team’s inexperience.
E – the media have long called the election reinforcing that Howard is a goner has just made it ‘popular’ to jump on the Ruddwagon.
Howard wont resign and i dont think he’ll call an election next week either…he would have to be a fool to call an election being around 10 points down by the recent polls…the election if it is forced out of Howard will look worse than him deciding by his terms when it will be…
If Rudd wins he’ll have rewritten the history books for several reasons….
A – Governments dont lose when the economy is very strong.
B – Opposition’s dont win with a leader whose been in for less than 1 year…Hawke had adequate leadership experience being head of the ACTU for years beforehand.
C – the most inexperienced front bench whom even Labor supporters would struggle to name more than half a dozen….would be the first in many many years…
Why wont Mr Rudd give us a tax policy…if Labor are fair dinkum about running the country why wont they tell us Swan wont because he’s gutless and so is Rudd they wont tell us because they must have something unpopular in store…if we had 9 consecutive interest rate rises how is someone so inexperienced as Swan going to make things any better he’ll probably make them much much worse…neither do i sense a hatred at this government by average Australians like they did with Keating…
But in point of fact Labor should have lost in 1993 they got out of jail and Keating knew it…so perhaps 10 years is the true life span of a Government and Labor just go lucky…the question is will Howard be as lucky as Keating?
Peter Fuller @#229
Thanks Peter. I could not remember the details and at this time of the night I was too lazy to go looking for it.
Dennis Shanahan September 10, 2007 Howard is not a man in a hurry
‘This doesn’t mean there isn’t still concern about the sudden lurch to Labor in last week’s Newspoll or that there wasn’t some serious consideration given to whether it would be better for Howard to go, it just means the Liberal hierarchy has decided it’s best for him to stay.
That’s even after the AC Nielsen poll published in the Fairfax press today confirmed the Newspoll trend to the ALP’
Would spoil the fun to reproduce the whole of his article.
Re comment 228 – it’s hard to know whether it’s Shanahan or his sources in the Government who are most out of touch. He says:
For a start, December 2 is a Sunday – not a possible election day. And secondly, if the Government explicitly mentions economic management credentials, then unfortunately the voters will instantly think ‘interest rates’. That’s why they’ve shut up about it lately.
And over at the SMH, Philip Coorey has a better explanation about why an election won’t be called this week: “Sources said there was no chance of the election being called this week, if only because the Liberal Party had not yet organised postal voting arrangements and, in NSW, was yet to select candidates for about nine Labor-held seats.”
Why worry about finding candidates for Labor held seats? Just throwing money away they could use elsewhere.
230
WhoGivesaRats Says:
September 10th, 2007 at 1:01 am
This says it all I think…
“All impressions of Howard as yesterday’s man, and Rudd as tomorrow’s, were reinforced.â€
http://www.smh.com.au/news/apec/analysis/2007/09/09/1189276546444.html
Yes, WGR, Howard is the Liberal’s strongest card, but also the source of their weakness. It is a paradox, but they cannot compete without Howard and – most likely – they cannot win with him.
It is well to remember too, that Howard has not always been a winner….
Canberra Boy: Perhaps they don’t have the money to campaign in those seats, especially after losing the NSW elections. The NSW branch should of known there was going to be an election this year. I wouldn’t doubt that latter today or by Tuesday the state exec will have apointed candidates.
I wouldn’t doubt Rudd going on the offense with attacking Howard for not dealing with the Lib MPs that are under investigation. This will be a liability for them should an election be called, and the ALP will only have to campaign saying something along the lines of ‘If you elect them, and they’re charge by the AFP then a bielection will be needed, so just vote for us’.
Phil Coorey in the SMH is saying that there definately won’t be an election called this week:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/damned-if-he-does-damned-if-he-doesnt/2007/09/09/1189276542059.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
“The only certainty yesterday was that there would be no election called this week.”
And on Howard:
“”There’s a fair chance he might be going. He’s seriously thinking about it,” said one confidant. “My expectation is he won’t but I wouldn’t be surprised if he does.”
“Should Howard go, the “deal” was for Peter Costello to become leader and Downer his deputy. Costello, we were being told, does not want the leadership now but would have to take it if offered.”
But then the article says that Liberal polling has them ahead in most seats!
“The Government believes is has a good message to sell. There are some who still think it can beat Labor. The internal polling shows it ahead of Labor in a majority of seats.”
I just can’t believe that!
re westpoll
“The variation in support for the major parties over recent months seems incredible. The August ’07 results represented a dramatic fall in support for the Coalition, and this seemed to be the low point for the trend that had been building since the June result. An examination of the “History of voting intent†graph elsewhere on this site shows that the data has not jumped around erratically, but has followed longer term trends in support for the major parties. (Our September data will be posted after the West Australian has published the results).
The August and September results are very different in character. So much so that the data has been examined very closely. We are confident that the results are an accurate reflection of voter sentiment. The survey method has been consistent. The sampling has been consistent. Moreover, the preferred Prime Minister data is exactly the same from August to September. If there had been a sample error to the effect that we had over sampled Labor voters in August and / or over sampled Coalition voters in September, the preferred PM data would surely have changed. The fact that the two surveys showed the preferred PM at exactly the same figure strongly supports the proposition that the survey has shown an important shift in voter sentiment. The results to the IR questions addressed in the September survey support this assessment. See the West Australian for details of the September results. ”
thats from patterson.
sounds like 50:50 maybe back to 52:48 libs way
Kina 231
‘And who knows maybe the Bush Administration is happy to create a terrorist attack. The USA govt has never been too shy to install the govts they want in other places so a littel shennanigans in Aust would be simple for them – if they had the will and reason’.
Yeeks, Kina! Don’t start fomenting stuff in my head. Was the Bush love in with Howard a prelude. I have to sleep!!
Glenn Milne jumps on the “Howard probably should go bandwagon.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22389300-7583,00.html
“Should Howard stay on – and if he’s the problem and not the Government itself, as many ministers argue – then the voters’ final verdict is likely to be even more savage than it is now.
Seen this way, Howard’s staying risks being perceived as a repudiation of the electorate.
He also risks the Liberal Party’s collective future. Younger ministers who entered politics for a long-term future around the cabinet table – Malcolm Turnbull, Andrew Robb, Christopher Pyne, Mal Brough, George Brandis and Julie Bishop – will be consigned to the long darkness of Opposition. A high price to pay for Howard to get a crack at what will surely be only one more year as Prime Minister.
So the sands are moving through the Liberal Party hourglass. But they cannot afford to move too slowly, a fact recognised by all those quietly increasing the pressure for leadership change.”
Well if the Westpoll does shows a Liberal lead it means the Labor lead in other states must be higher than 57/43. AND it is hard to imagine Labor doing any worse in WA than they did in 2001. Regardless of the poll it is a little hard to believe there isnt a swing of some sort against the Govt.
I received this warning from a friend: What do you think?
“The polls due out this week and next will probably determine when he calls the election. If there is no improvement he will go for it and try to break the cycle that way. I am sure Howard will pull a few things out of the hat during the campaign – how about something like dropping the top marginal tax rate down to the company rate of 30% – we’d all see it as a bribe but it would probably get enough people across the line and he just needs to hold the swing down to less than 17 seats (apparently the Libs are confident of holding all their seats in WA and winning one so the swing required is now 17 seats in the other states).”
Never trust a cornered rodent!
Tell your friend that Labor needs a gain of 16 seats to form majority government. And a gain 15 would almost certainly give Labor minority govt.
As for the Liberal Party’s confidence in WA – see the thread above this one.
Ah I see now. Your friend was including a WA Lib gain (presumably Cowan or Swan) and upping Labor’s non-WA gains to 17.
Still, pretty presumptive.
The early August Westpoll showed 54/46 with a margin of error 4% I believe. I wonder how good their sampling is?
For anyone who hasn’t noticed, see the new post on Westpoll.
Glen and fellow tories-there is a swelling wave of vengance coming to break upon you all. The denial of the polling numbers you are all exhibiting is so breathtaking…
SMH noted on Monday morning in their APEC wrap that it was unlikely that he would call the election this week if only because there were 9 federal safe labor seats in the country for which the Libs hadn’t yet picked candidates. Doesn’t that seem like a sorry excuse to delay an election because they are dragging their feet on which candidates to send walking the plank in 9 seats? The rest of them are walking the plank as it is.
Two things hurting the Coalition: Howard’s age vs Rudd’s youth, & Workchoices.
I doubt the Rodent is going to retire in the next week, so my bet is that there will be some move to further soften Workchoices. Maybe Barbara Bennett will be dragged out for a new lot of ads.
It really does make me so happy that the one thing Howard ever really cared about – IR “reform” (because I think that reform actually implies positive change) – has been the thing that has cost him any credibility and popularity that he might once have held. I think it is proof that his was always a hollow prime ministership. Given the power to do whatever he wanted, he destroyed himself and his government with poor policy that pandered to his rich mates.
Remember, when someone says the election won’t be called “this week” that means that next Sunday is a very good chance. He called the election in 2004 on the Sunday.
Maybe Howard could follow Rudd’s lead, and have someone leak details of his own illicit affair with Pru Goward. That should show that there’s some life in the old rodent yet.
My take on the poll figures is that a large proportion of the electorate has stopped listening to Howard. If that’s true, then rolling out new policy initiatives, fear and smear, and ‘working harder’ won’t make a scrap of difference.
The ALP can still shoot itself in the foot, but they’re looking good so far. They need to avoid looking overly confident. If the polls continue to forecast a landslide, there may be a drift away as voters decide to take a bit of the wind out of Rudd’s sails.
The other factor is that the election may act as a circuit breaker, and the real voting intentions are not locked in.
I’m most concerned with the last one.
Rats/Gipps
Yes, all valid points about the coalition, debt and the trade deficit. I worry too. Infrastructure needs an overhaul and we had higher productivity with Keating in the late 90s in the midst of “that recession”. I’ll grant you all that and my point was not to show that the legend of economic management was correct, just to show that it doesn’t matter.
The public remember the numbers. They also know the basic idea of “government debt” and probably liken it to a mortgage. The Australian people think the government has “paid off the house” and is now saving for retirement. Those that remember Keating, remember “going into debt” for the deck out the back that needs a coat of paint now.
I’m just saying that I understand why Rudd is on the front foot with economics, since the perception is that it is still the government’s strongest suit, but I think it is dangerous territory and you can’t get away with outright contradiction in your statements, the Libs will maul you.
Again, you can’t say the government can’t control rate rises, spends too much and taxes too much and then say “me too” on the same economic policy. It will blow Swan & Rudd out of the water. Be sure it will feature in any debate held.
I doubt Rudd is too overconfident, at least publicly. He keeps repeating the line that 16 seats is a lot to win, and it’s historically difficult for an incumbant Australian government to be tossed out.
We won’t know until election day whether the polls are overestimating Labor’s support.
On AM this morning Howard made this statement:
“I don’t regard it as a perfect government as I certainly don’t regard myself as being without failings as a prime minister. I’ve made my share of mistakes.”
If I was the reporter on AM interviewing John Howard I would’ve asked him on the spot what mistakes he’s made… I just don’t believe he considers himself to have made any mistakes. John Howard’s false modesty is one of the most infuriating things about him.
re Ichor @ 75
If I were a Coalition supporter I would be hoping that the ‘dirt machine’ have more than some secret tapes about the behaviour of Union thugs to throw at Rudd.
In my opinion, most in the electorate are wary of unionism and it has worked for the Coalition before to attack Labor’s connection with unionism and point out how many Labor MPs and candidates have been preselected from Unions.
However, with the Workchoices debate some might be starting to wish they had strong union representation and support at their workplace. The unions are considered ‘extreme’, pitting labour against capital, painting capital as the ‘evil enemy’.
But now Workchoices has gone too far the other way, grossly favouring capital interests over Labor, the other extreme, and now Howard and Hockey are trying to win an election on the back of an ‘evil unions’ dirt campaign ?
I don’t think that will do them much good, in fact it might even reinforce the negatives of Workchoices the Government has kindly been advertising for Labor for the past three months.
That is, remind the electorate that Work Choices is putting people’s income and security at serious risk- it serves to legitimate unionism more than it serves to condemn it to irrelevance.
Nobody likes thuggery and stand over tactics-recall Latham’s assault on Mr. Howard at that radio station ‘handshake’-not a good look.
No doubt they will trot out videos of union people being nasty and intimidating, even criminal {assault} in their behaviour. But I think (a) it may serve to remind people of Work Choices and (b) Rudd has been smart enough not to distance himself from unionism but at the time given the impression that he can and will stand up to unionism where required.
The softening of his IR approach to gradual removal of AWAs and retaining restrictions on union access to work sites are substantial examples which some union people are very angry about.
The Coalition ‘dirt machine’ will need more than ‘union thuggery’ to win this election or damage Rudd’s appeal to the electorate in this campaign.
Labor has started the week in announcing policies, such as increasing the pension for veterans, they’re also having a roundtable with the manufacturing industry about the ideas they have in increasing productivity (which has dropped in the 11 years of the Howard government).
Meanwhile the Coalition is still trying to defend itself from the bad polls and the media that goes with it.
I might have to watch Question Time this week, it will be fun no doubt.
That primary swing is very very pretty as well and Westpoll (which I normally ignore) if it shows Kalgoorlie likely to fall (and that would put a hole in that whole WA loves AWA theory if it did occur) but surely if Kalgoorlie is in the mix my pet seat of Canning comes into play?
Say it is so Arbie?
I’d be glad to have a few chats with ALP insiders to see what their internal polling is showing. I’ve talked with a Coalition insider who insists their internal polling shows them hanging on in most seats.
252 Dogford: I think you’re right that IR destroyed Howard’s credibility, but I’m not sure how much he really cared about IR.
Sure, he built up his reputation for consistency over the years by constantly banging on about the need for IR reform. But I don’t think he established any serious knowledge of the subject, despite the Libs always making him IR spokesman when he wasn’t leader or contesting the same. Look at the costly mess he and Reith made at the attempt to smash the MUA.
Workchoices, of course, was a response to the fluke of Senate control. But it was only incidentally related to his business mates and the HR Nichols fanatics. His real aim, as an electioneering nerd, was to destroy the union movement and thus the financial base of Labor.
Ironically, even this has failed. Union membership may not have increased, but public respect for unions has. The public wants them there as a sort of protection, even if they don’t especially want to join themselves. The unions had already won a lot of sympathy by being the only ones, originally, to go in to bat for the James Hardie asbestosis victims after their nasty little corporate fiddle. That continued with Workchoices victims.
Howard’s loss of credibility has spread from IR to just about all issues now. It is as though a veil has been lifted from the public’s perception of him.
Glen, what planet are you on? #188
Labor owns four issues. They are all negatives for the government. Even when they run ads for them it reminds people of the issues.
They are (not necessarily in order):
No Nuclear Power stations.
Iraq
IR Laws
Global Warming
The Liberals keep saying what are we doing wrong, yet they can’t see the problem. They just don’t get it.
Regarding the issue which Rob in post 255 raised: the voters getting ’serious’ when an election is called and changing their votes. I’m hearing alot about this from the libs especially – is there any historical reason for thinking such a shift could occur? Has there been a situation -in fed or state politics – where there has been a massive shift in voting intention as soon as an election has been called?
Labor internal polling is kept very tight in WA.
Don Wigan: I read a great article from the US, where there is now over 50% of the population that would like the opportunity to vote at their workplace for union representation. I think union representation is down to like 12% of the workforce over there, and like over here have taken a battering from the conservatives. In the US the respect of what the unions have done over the last century is gaining traction. I think the same thing is probably happening here. It’s one of those things, you don’t notice it until it’s gone or basically been neutered.
If i can find the article, I will post a link here.
Malcolm Turnbull was asked by Fran Kelly on ABC this morning about whether he thought John Howard was the best person to lead the Coalition at the next election. He didn’t say yes. He equivocated about John Howard being the leader. That old phrase. He danced around all questions about John Howard’ leadership.
We are getting two streams of opinions in the media. Dennis Shanahan has evidently spoken to John Howard and is firmly of the view that John Howard should battle it out.
Others have spoken to the plotters, unnamed “senior ministers”.
Soundings are being made as to whether the coup could be bloodless or whether there would be an almighty mess.
It appears that there are roadblocks in the way of calling the election in the next few days.
The longer John Howard waits to call the election the worse it will be for him and his party.
The plotters say it has to be this week and they are probably right.
It’s a very small window of opportunity.
The longer this drags on the worse the opinion polls will get and the more difficult it will be for the Coalition to rescue seats and therefore the longer they will be in opposition.
It’s not so much about winning the election as to how many seats can be saved.
Malcolm Turnbull would probably not put up a great deal of resistance to Peter Costello being installed in a bloodless coup as long as he was to get the next shot at the top job, which would probably be in about a year.
Peter will be off to greener pastures then.
Malcolm doesn’t need to get another job! This is now his job. He has enough wherewithal to live comfortably for ever.
What would be interesting is to see if Peter Costello, poor guy, being drafted into an eight week job, would shuffle the ministries around, ie give Malcolm a more senior position as part of a deal not to cause a fuss right now.
If Peter says “no way” then the mob may have to turn to Malcolm instead
and he would absolutely revel in the new job.
Just watch him go.
There would be a series of announcements including the republic.
He would want to put a chasm between him and the old John Howard between then and the election.
He would most likely shuffle off those old Howard loyalists (keeping Alexander Downer) and promote new young faces, including several women (at last!).
The question is: who will move the motion in the party room?
Heard Howard on AM this morning sounded very flat, unenthusiastic and lacked motivation. This maybe spreading to all ministers. After all it is contagious.
There’s no circuit breaker, it’s just broken.
http://www.ozelection2007.info/forums/viewtopic.php?pid=8385#p8385
Aristotle, it’s likely that a greater percentage of preferences will go to the ALP this time. Family First would happily preference Kevin Rudd or at least split fifty fifty. Probably more likely 66% preferences to ALP which gives them an even greater margin.
One would have thought, judging by past elections, that the gap would have shown something of a closing by now but this election is not one of these “normal” ones.
It’s a seismic shift.
I think we are going to see seats being by by Labor which we hadn’t imagined.
sorry, was interrupted …”being won by Labor”
If JH wins the election from this position, the first act of the new government will be to pass legislation allowing human cloning, at least for the Liberal Party.
A: Except for the last time, when the economy was booming in 96.
B: This never happens except for the exceptions. ‘Inexpereinced’ opposition leaders rarely get the opportunity to win or lose elections because they rarely get selected; you can’t discern any clear paterns in the ones that have.
C: Except for the last change of government, otr the one before that, or the one before that…
Please Glen, in order of preference
A: Give it a rest.
B: Address some fo the arguments above that have been pointed out to you many, many times.
C: Provide some actual evidence (you know, facts that are actually true) to back your claims.
I wonder if people will start feeling sorry for John Howard? Will that affect their vote? Or will they just say “time to turn over a new leaf”?
My feeling is that yes they may feel sorry for him but that won’t mean they will vote for him. People value their votes a lot.
The Howard era is rapidly passing.
In regards to Liberal candidates not being found in NSW seats, there is still no Liberal candidate in the supposedly marginal Labor seat of Lowe (3.1% margin).
They had a candidate willing to run (Nick Adams, who I went to school with coincidentally), but the party machinery pulled him out for fear that his statements would be too controversial and direct attention from the rest of the campaign. That was about 3 months ago – haven’t heard anything since then.
Just shows the disarray of the NSW Liberal Party at the moment…
Re 276:
What sort of statements was he making?
Swing Lowe, it’s amazing they haven’t found a candidate for Lowe yet.
They must have completely written off that seat already. That’s one of those seats they can’t defend. They should be looking at saving seats with margins of seven, eight and nine per cent.
If Liberal internal polling shows them ahead in a majority of seats, why then are senior cabinet ministers agitating for a handover to Costello?
Good question Howard Hater. Let’s see the internal polling! They are probably quoting from internal polling from a year or more ago!
Maybe that Liberal party internal polling is still from 2004…
Generic Oracle
I cannot imagine the ALP getting into the type of debate you are proposing. Rudd’s sucess has been in avoiding wedge issues.
The answer to questions like “what would you have done with the economy?” is to point out the infrastructure and service improvements
that should have been made using the massive taxes that the Libs have garnered. This paints the Libs as the big taxers, and the ALP as the prudent spenders.
There is much merit in what you say about the possible corner the ALP could paint itself into. I don’t think that’s the way it’ll pan out.
In 1996 Keating requested 2 debates during the campaign, one with Howard… and one with the Treasurer, Foreign Minister and Prime Minister against their shadow-counterparts.
The second debate was rejected, understandably. It would’ve been a slaughter of a debate. I won’t be surprised if we get a similar request at this election.
Well, as a Councillor for Ashfield, he said that the citizenship test should include a test for Australian slang:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,20440830-5009120,00.html
He’s also opposed to multiculturalism (absolute suicide in Lowe) and ethnic ghettos forming in Marrickville and Leichardt:
http://www.villagevoice.com.au/article/20070814/NWS10/708140317/-1/nws10/Lowe+down+and+dirty+for+Libs
And finally, as a Councillor, he’s called for banning lawn mowing on weekends and eradicating pigeons in Ashfield:
http://www.villagevoice.com.au/article/20070807/NWS10/708070319/-1/nws10/Liberal+state+committee+to+decide+Adams++fate
Just realised this will probably get stuck in moderation, but so be it…
Why would the Liberals waste resources on Lowe, a seat they’ve got no chance of winning? They’ll be concentrating more on trying to hold Bennelong, Parramatta, Lindsay and Macquarie.
CTEP at 258.
I heard the interview and the only thing missing was Howard bursting into song singing the classical Frank Sinatra hit “My Way”.
And now the end is near…
Regrets I’ve had a few…..
etc.
If memory serves me correctly, in 1996 Keating tried to set the agenda on ‘leadership’ and about how experienced Labor was and how the opposition lacked leadership and experience. Once a government has lost all its steam, they say ‘the opposition is untested, so don’t vote for them’. Also given a link earlier in this thread to a YouTube where Howard tried a censure motion against Keating, he went on about how if all the government can do is bag the opposition for what they did 13 years before, then they’re admitting failure that they haven’t done anything, seems to be the same now that the coalition is telling people to remember the Keating years and what they did. At least Labor has come back at them and saying that at least in the 13 years of Labor they did heaps of reform (even though it cost them some supporters). The Libs complain about Fraser’s wasted years, well Howard has wasted years too.
Surely history is repeating itself.
HH at 279
If the Libs had polling like that they would not only have leaked it to every media organisation in the country, they’d be handing it out as leaflets on street corners!
There seems to be alot of strategic stock placed on “win expectations” in Coalition re-election bunker.If there was something solid and tangible that could lift that win expectation, it wouldn’t be peddled through Alan Jones and ilk…. unless of course the latest OzTrack shows a surge of wavering Coalition support in the 55+ demographic and this is just an exercise in trying to shore up that support.The oldies are the difference between a defeat and massacre in a great very many seats
Possum: correct! The over 55s are the only demographic Howard has left in his corner(with the exception of my parents and family members, who all hate his guts!).
Possum and HH: But Rudd is trying to get some support from the veterans (and hence war widows) by saying he would increase their pension. Howard has been dragging his feet on this one, no doubt the Libs will have to match it or feel the wrath of the RSL.
Rudd needs to narrow Howard’s lead amongst the over 55s. I assume he’ll have some policy announcements for both pensioners and self funded retirees.
Interestingly, I saw a news report some weeks ago that suggested one age group concerned about work choices(its impact on their children and grand children) and climate change is those aged over 60 in marginal seats.
Howard has to call the election this week. Not as a circuit breaker for the electorate, but to put the leadership speculation to rest. This quote from Milne’s article
I think Rudd knows this, and that’s why he’s been pressuring Howard to call the election. So now Howard will look like he’s reacting to the polls and Rudd is calling the shots. So he won’t want to call it for those reasons. But there is murmuring in the ranks, and time is running out as Milne points out.
Will he roll the dice? I say yes.
I don’t think Howard will call the election this weekend… but I sure hope the media keep up with the election date speculation as it’ll definately put pressure on Howard to call it.
I remember there was speculation for weeks and weeks before he called it in 2004 and he has a lot more to worry about this time.
1 December poll – I’m still sticking with that prediction.
My wife’s parents are retired (working class people who did OK), non-political, swinging voters who have voted Liberal throughout the Howard years but both are now voting Labor this time because they are so impressed with Rudd.
This couple liked Beazely but couldn’t vote for him. They thought Crean was ordinary and didn’t trust Latham. I asked my father-in-law why he’s switching and he said that in his view, Rudd was one of those leaders who is both smart and sensible that comes along once a generation. He drew a parallel between Rudd and Hawke, not on personality but on intelligence and connecting with ordinary Australians.
On another issue, another front has opened up against Howard. I notice on the SMH website lately that the NSW Teachers Federation are running online ads getting stuck into Howard about giving taxpayers money to private schools.
“Richard Jones Says:
September 10th, 2007 at 10:14 am
Aristotle, it’s likely that a greater percentage of preferences will go to the ALP this time. Family First would happily preference Kevin Rudd or at least split fifty fifty. Probably more likely 66% preferences to ALP which gives them an even greater margin.”
Richard, it’s primary votes that really matter when looking at polls, and two party projections are helpful as an estimate of what is likely to happen. I use a 58% flow to the ALP, which is more conservative than the pollsters, some of whom allocate as high as 70%.
Tha actual flow may be higher than 58%, but it probably won’t be much more.
The flows to the ALP in past elections were:
61% in 2004, 58.6% in 2001, 53.4% in 1998, 53.8% in 1996, 60.2% in 1993, 61% in 1990, and 61.7% in 1987.
The fact that the NSW Teachers Federation is running ads against JWH isn’t a surprise – they ran ads against the NSW Liberals and Debnam in the State Election this year, which were fairly effective.
I’d also expect the Nurses Federation to launch their own ads attacking the Libs and Workchoices once the campaign proper begins – they seemed pretty effective against Debnam in the State Election
Does anyone here know of the processes that take place in the Liberal party meeting room and whether any member can move a leadership spill?
The leadership issue will obviously be the number one topic at the next meeting. Can Wilson Tuckey for example move a motion for a spill or are the processes not that formal? And, if he or another does, does that motion need seconder and must it be debated and voted on? Or are the party meeting much less formal?
I would think it highly likely that one or more backbenchers at the very least and very likely one or more ministers would want such a debate and a vote.
John Howard won’t be able to ignore the proverbial elephant.
SMH is running an online poll (which mean nothing really) asking if APEC would help Howard’s popularity. Results are surprising. Check out http://www.smh.com.au/polls/politics/form.html
Hi William,
Pedant’s point: On your pendulum you have Lyne listed as a Southern Suburban seat – in the analysis you list it correctly as a north coast seat.
Swing Lowe,
I saw the nurses add running for the last two nights in the Hunter. Quite effective, nurses saying they cant continue to work with the Liberal IR laws, and asking people to consider this at the election.
Now the private school lame duck is trolled out every election, with the usual gist of the argument going: “Why should the government fork out money for private schooling when there is perfectly good public schooling! Let them pay for it themselves!!”
On the surface, it always sounds like a very rational argument. There are, of course, glaring flaws:
1. State Schools are nowhere near as efficient in terms of manpower. With a State School, you not only get the school, but its local regional unit of admin, state level admin, support services (like Psychologists, Speech therapists, behaviour mod units, professional development units etc) as well as government sourced building and maintenance. This costs, dollar for dollar, more than government investment for that same student in a private school.
Most independent schools operate as a single school, rather than a cooperative, with on site governance, so the layers of admin aren’t there.
2. Private Schools manage the capital and financial risk of buildings and development, maintenance, recruiting costs and administration and their inclusion in regional clusters shares professional development and skill-sharing with broader perspectives.
3. Governments in places like Queensland have recognised the value of private/public partnerships in new planned master estates like Forest Lake, Springfield and Northlakes. The model works and uses shared facilities and collaboration of staff and gives choice but also strong educational outcomes. This kind of “Competitive Collaboration” allows both schools to aspire to excellence by being in very close proximity to each other and sharing some core beliefs about standards.
I used to really wonder why any government gives money to private education, now I see real value economically, educationally and in terms of building diverse communities to do this.
Of course, old-school state school diehards would cremate me for this post, excuse me as I slip on a fire-retardant suit…
Aristotle, there are a couple of differences between those years and these years. The Chippocrats, or former Liberal-supporting Democrats, directed their preferences back to the Liberals. The Greens will still go heavily to Labor notwithstanding those who are disillusioned with Peter Garrett’s me-too policies on forests and the pulp mill. The Family First, obviously very conservative, can safely preference Saint Kevin.
If you have 12% non major party votes the difference in those preference trends could end up with an extra 1% for Labor. Imagine 56-44 versus 55-45. How many extra seats is that?
I also saw the first ALP funded ad for Jim Arneman in Paterson last night. Rudd introduces Jim, lots of images of Jim working as an ambo, helping people etc. Again quite effective and a sign that the ALP thinks the election must be imminent.
Generic Oracle [302],
That isn’t the NSW Teachers Federation’s argument at all.
Their argument is simply this:
Public schools teach 67% of Australia’s students yet only receive 35% of Federal funding for education. If the Howard government is serious about investing in education for the nation’s future then the share of Federal funding for public schools should be substantially increased to reflect the share of students that public schools service.
Please tell me that the ALP will run a positive campaign that focuses on its policies. Of course there needs to be some negative side like showing 5 interest rate rises, and WorkChoices, but being out there having a vision for the future will only help them out.
According to Senator Bartlett’s blog, there are already amendments being made to the Northern Territory Emergency Response legislation… as he says, I’m sure there’ll be explanations about why there’s no time to consult on the amendments.
I suspect there are many still to come. That’s what happens when you hurriedly draft and ram through legislation that’s 300-400 pages long.
BenC [304],
What it also shows is that NSW Labor is loaded up with cash, if it’s running those sorts of specific campaign ads before the election has been called.
From what I’ve read on this blog before, the previous Labor candidate for Paterson barely got any advertising DURING the 2004 campaign, let alone before it started…
John Howard assumes that his campaign can claw back votes but it may well be that the ALP which really has heaps of “ammunition” will widen the gap. So far their campaign has been really professional.
Many commentators automatically assume a closing of the gap. I certainly did. It may be that any gap closing already occurred in the earlier phoney campaign.
Also Kevin Rudd is in the position to announce initiatives in a whole swag of areas and if John Howard does this, people will be inclined to say “you’ve had nearly twelve years to do that, why didn’t you do it before?” Fresh face wins.
To Generic Oracle
Its not about being old state school diehards…in most countries of the world, with the big exceptions of America and Australia, most countries integrated their private and public schools 30 years ago, like all of Europe and New Zealand. Public and private schools are integrated, teachers get same salaries, some funding but on the provisio that all school are charging similar fees – to ensure equity of access. The Government’s of most western countries make this provisio so as to not create a 2 tiered system – one for have’s and one for have not’s. If you fall outside of this, you normally get a little or no govt funding. This is what separates australia and US – they get buckets of money regardless of how much money they charge.
The Federal Government’s own recent evidence is that private schools, despite their increasing subsidies, are pulling more than ever from the top half of the socio economic ladder….so, as you can see because capitalism is winner takes all, it sucks the upwardly mobile middle classes into the private school system and leaves the public for the bottom half – so 2 tiers!!
Betfair is now offering $3 for a coalition win. Thats almost, but not quite, put down yer glasses odds.
Portlandbet has Bennelong odds back up:
Libs $1.70/Lab $2.00
It’s now the equal second closest seat to “fall” to Labor on the betting markets. Only Herbert is ahead and it is tied with Page.
Swing Lowe [308]
Exactly right. The 2004 candidate (I’ve even forgotten her name), had no support, no TV adds that I can recall, all I heard were a couple of radio spots.
Even though I am in Hunter, I live very close to the Paterson border and areas like Metford, Tenambit and other East Maitland booths have been brought back in, which should help a fair bit for Arneman. Although Baldwin is favourite it looks like he has a big fight to retain, and the betting markets seem to agree, with a slight shortening in the ALP odds over the past week to $2.40 from $2.75
gee, SWing Lowe,you’ve got to be quick
The nervous nellies at Portland have indeed got over their vapours, and re entered the lists at Bennelong..and what a macho call! Maxine is now ar 45%+ to win the seat(up from about 37% now), while the incumbent is at 53%+.
my contention is that it is the direction of the market that is important in the early stages, and it looks like the punters are hopping on the McKew Bandwagon
Swing Lowe, I’d be happy to bet on Page. Visited there yesterday and the feeling was “anyone but Howard”.
Sideline Eye
Yes I understand about the NSW teachers’ Fed argument and it is the issue of perceived equity but figures like this based out gross outlays of funding tend to ignore several key factors:
1. Independent Schooling is growing at a much faster rate than state education in Australia, this means strong periods of capital growth to accommodate this change. This is not new. This trend existed in the previous Labor government as well. Much of this is attributable to block capital grants, which swamp amounts spent on ongoing expenditure/smaller periodic grants.
2. State governments are primarily responsible for education. States give a much higher proportion to state schools than the Feds do (though it is still high in the private sector, as a proportion of students, due to factor 1 above).
Of course, the Labor party is having a harder time these days maintaining what is colloquially called “class envy”. Latham made several glaring political blunders in 2004, one of the biggest being the “private school hit list”. A simple glance over demographic data in marginal seats (particularly high growth “family” seats like Bonner in QLD) would have shown him that many Labor voters are now choosing low-fee independent schooling for their children. The construction boom gave tradies nice utes and blazers for their kids!
A smarter operator by half, Kevin absolutely knows this and will not give himself an atomic wedgie with this. Vote Labor, we’ll look after your kid’s schooling. The day of the Labor state school loyalist is gone. Ask MPs/Senators where they send their kids to school!!
Generic Oracle (176),
I have now checked every country of more than 500,000 square kilometres. There are 51 of them, and every one has at least three tiers of government.
One point I am trying to make is that removing a tier of government does not reduce bureaucracy. It simply removes a democratically elected level of supervision from it.
But I really think we ought not to divert every thread into the subject of federalism, not that all three-tier systems are federal.
You may be worried about the dog. He still got his walk through our pleasant town, its pleasantness protected by the Labor Government’s urban growth boundary. This morning we went past the brand new Labor Government-built CFA station, past the brand new Labor Government-built primary school, with its classes for prep to grade 2 capped at 21 pupils each and with its teachers free once again to debate educational issues, to the brand new Labor Government-built police station. It’s ugly, but at least it’s there – like all the other supposedly non-existent infrastructure in the State of Victoria.
I am disappointed that the swing to Labor is so strong because, if it is maintained, it will prevent my prediction of a further swing to Labor in the following election coming true, just as the infrastructure on the ground helped state Labor gain a further swing in its second election victory.
Richard Jones,
I’ve already put my money where my mouth is on Page – $10 invested on Labor at Sportingbet ($2.10 for ALP there). It’s good to hear that my money seems to be well invested…
I think the election will be called soon, it will provide a useful circuit breaker and a long 6 week campaign would give the government a chance of winning the election on little as 48% of the two party vote, although that would mean Labor and Coalition tied on the primary vote.
The Coalition’s Primary vote has been stuck around the 40% mark for sometime, means it is achievable.
Generic Oracle,
Swan’s argument goes something like this;
The reason that the current Government is overtaxing is because it has a surplus of $17 billion that it is just sticking under the bed.
The reason that this government is spending too much is that the economy is hitting its head against production constraints. This is causing inflation to stick up its ugly head for the first time in 15 years. The Government is fuelling this inflation by its spending.
To raise the production constraints (and reduce the risk of inflation) one has to spend money on infrastructure. Things like broadband coal loaders etc. Remember that one of labours key economic plans is to develop infrastructure projects.
In simple terms it is not the spending that is the problem it is what the money is being spent on.
Your argument might work with someone who has no understanding of economics but a bare smattering of economic knowledge, obtained from the papers, makes these statements understandable.
Swing Lowe, I base this not just on a few visits but also knowing the Labor candidate Janelle Saffin. She is well known and performed excellently in the NSW Upper House. Also I have known Ian Causley for many years, when he was in the State parliament. He had his faithful followers and was obviously also extremely well known. He must have been worth a few per cent in his own right. Also Page is battlers territory, but no longer Howard’s battlers. A leading Lib up here told me he thought Janelle would win and he also knows her very well – and respects her.
Tristan Jones it really would be a miracle of biblical proportions if the Coalition were able to lift its vote 8% in 8 weeks. John Howard better do some praying but maybe Saint Kevin has a more direct line.
GENERIC ORACLE
Its not about class envy or labelling anyone worried about what happened during thatcher’s years where the public becomes a 2nd class system for the poor, its just about not creating a 2 tiered system – and who are you referring to when you say ’sideline eye’. My address is bird.
Any way my argument is not from the NSW Teachers Federation – its from listening to education specialists.
Everyone is aware that most funding for state’s comes from state government so my argument is directed towards them as much as Federal govt, its a wholistic argument. Anyway, that is the way its done in Holland, all Europe and really most western countries. Its not about whether a building is private or public – its about allowing the government to stipulate certain social outcomes for the population. I think that is a good thing…
Call the election please says@#262
“I’d be glad to have a few chats with ALP insiders to see what their internal polling is showing. I’ve talked with a Coalition insider who insists their internal polling shows them hanging on in most seats.
If you insider is correct one must assume the all the polls are incorrect
If the polls are correct and you insider is correct there must be some seats with massive swings.
Sounds more like hope more than fact from you friendly insider.
I have definitely been spending too much time reading and listening to commentary about federal politics. I dreamed the other night that we were watching the election on tv and it seemed labor was going to win. Then I had to go away and do something and when I got back to the party an old movie was on telly and people were saying it’s all over, yes labor won, but it didn’t seem to be a big deal.
My analysis of this dream is that, while I’m obsessed with the latest opinion poll, normal people (everyone else I know) is not.
But what keeps me hanging on to every moment of what I hope is the last days of a rotten government is the thought that labor is elected to government from opposition less than once every twenty years. If it does happen in a month or two then it might happen only once or twice again in my lifetime.
I think Workchoices is really bad for the Libs. At my work we had a union meeting recently (our first for about six months) and a colleague came along who is quite anti-union and who has never come to a meeting before. At the end of the meeting she offered to put up union notices on the noticeboard! I’m sure lots of non-union people know enough about work-choices to know that it stinks and they are especially concerned for their children and grandchildren.
I hope the government spend more and more of my money trying to tell us that workchoices is great. It only reminds people of how bad it is, whose fault it is and how much of our money they are wasting on it.
More Labor policies: Labor to help reduce cost of transporting a car from Vic to Tas with it’s $10m package. http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Labor-offers-Spirit-traveller-cost-cuts/2007/09/10/1189276597198.html
Meanwhile, we have Howard still working out when to call the election. Labor is taking the initiative and isn’t waiting.
I believe that the TTP vote on Election Day will be basically where it is today Lab 57 – 59.
Changing leaders; Naming the Date; Or prolonging the Agony may cause slight variations but the electorate has made up it’s mind and just want to get on with it and cast their vote.
A Good song to play in the background on Election Day as the coalition seats fall is Queen – Another one bites the dust
The first question Rudd should ask in Question Time is, will Howard sack ABC board member Janet Albrechtsen for calling on the Prime Minister to stand down.Such partisan political interference should not be tolerated from a taxpayer funded body.What will Helen Coonon say about this? If only Santo Santoro had not resigned, he would have known what to do with with this clear breach of ABC guidelines.
I wonder how all those stacks on the ABC board are feeling right now
Rats
Well-thought out reply, thanks. Yes, I agree with you that the infrastructure argument is paramount. However, we have a “Zero Sum Game” here. If you want more money on infrastructure, you either:
a) Keep everything as is (Coalition budget and promises) OR
b) You get into debt/borrow savings (future fund etc) to fund it
The problem with b, I think is that it plays into that whole “Here we go again, Labor frittering the money away again” picture that the electorate has very clear in their minds (which is why Liberal Party Ads do so well with this premise in elections).
Watch the palpable shockwaves in the retired/nearly retired when Rudd suggested “borrowing” from the future fund for Broadband. Poor move politically and wrong choice of infrastructure tactically (Broadband!) if this demographic is to be won (and won they need to be in this election!).
No, I stand by it fully. There are serious holes in this approach tactically and Labor must be careful that it is not another political time bomb. Economic credibility is the Coalition’s “Alamo”. Don’t think they won’t defend it to the hilt. Costello will cream Swan on this. He just will.
“Kevalanche!”
This education stuff is really annoying. Chris will have a good answer I just have
GO is effectively arguing, and quite well if you stick to his paradigm, not the ‘liberal’ position that government should interfere as little as is possible in the free choices of individuals, but that Government should subside the free choices of people.
Soon as you recognise the ridiculous right then it becomes an economic question and they want equal funding (or greater than equal funding) to recognise the massive saving their chosing to reject the Government alternative has. You argue that they should be damn happy the Government is giving them anything at all and it is class welfare and you just have to shutup and sit down because class warfare is so 1850’s.
Stupid stuff. And the teachers are much too honest they should run the funding numbers as ‘Funding to Private Islamic schools has increased x% while as the sametime your ordinary Australian students are being ripped off’. Nasty racist stuff by all means, but Adam says we in the Labor party have to be aware of that and as Maxwell Smart says, “if only we could use the nasty racist stuff for good rather than evil.”
“…how will the ALP promise surpluses…without over-taxing as they have accused the coalition of doing??”
Generic Oracle, you need to understand that the charge of being “overtaxing” is a subjective and relative to the spending plans of a government.
The government has failed miserably in investing taxpayers money in areas that will help to sustain economic growth into the future. They don’t seem to know what to do with all the money that they are taking from taxpayers pockets, which is why they are creating big savings accounts and simply throwing money all over the place in often wasted attempts to try to win elections, such as giving away bonuses to senior citizens just before election time.
From this viewpoint, if the government doesn’t know what to actually do with all the tax that they are collecting, then they should stop collecting so much in the first place. In this sense, they can be accused of overtaxing because they are taking much more tax than they reasonably plan to spend.
Labor, on the other hand, are proposing to spend money much more effectively than the government. They have some very clear ideas about investing funds into areas of the economy that will generate clear returns for the future, such as broadband, education, renewable energy, and so on.
They are planning to tax either the same as the government or less (depending on the tax policy that they plan to release just prior to the election) but they are much less open to a charge of overtaxing simply by planning to put that tax to much better and productive use.
It is the wastefulness of the Howard government than leaves it open to the charge of taking more tax than it needs.
The claim that the Latham private school hit list was a disaster is one on the great myths of the 2004 election.There is/was no research evidence to back this up – quite the reverse. Labor pollies got the wobblies when the private schools screamed. In fact, most people are horrified that the Federal Government gives millions to the elite wealthy schools. These schools have enjoyed a building boom over the past few years because of government funding. But I’ll admit that it was sold poorly – Labor should have focussed on the additional funds going to needy schools.
In the story: Dumping PM would be ‘panic, betrayal’ (at http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22392300-29277,00.html) Tony Abbot says that:
“It would be very, very foolish of us to do anything that would possibly make a bad situation significantly worse.
Is this a Howard Minister actually admitting they’re in a ‘bad situation’? He obviously hasn’t been reading the script. Tony tony tony… you can say they’re ‘bad polls’ but they definately don’t reflect reality.
“The last thing you want to do when things are looking difficult is to jump out of the frying pan into the fire.”
Is Tony Abbott suggesting making Costello the leader of the party akin to setting yourself on fire?
Howard is trying to work out what a year’s worth of bad opinion polling is telling him. This is what he came up with today:
“What they’re telling us is that although they believe we’ve done a good job with the economy, it’s simply not good enough to propound the strengths of the economic status quo.â€
Hmm… I guess he is starting to get on the right track, but his lack of real insight is actually quite alarming. I don’t think he really understands what is going on, which has been evidenced by running a politically counterproductive strategy all year. He has been way off-target with just about everything this year.
Howard obviously has a lot of learning to do over the next few weeks…
PM can call the election anytime after the party room rallies around him and worships him as the victor of the fourth coming poll. Anytime before that he’d be taking a divided team to the election which popular wisdom says is political death.
I think the party room would be wise to suggest “soon” & “quick” in the kind of this internal rubbish will keep coming if you don’t blackmail tradition.
And now GO has his fire retardant suit on lets test the whole ‘layers’ of beauracracy thing. Firstly these schools can pick and chose new places to setup. Government schools must go where the demand is. Do these schools, so ‘economically efficient’ have no courses, not sit state exams, have no teacher accreditation etc and accept that their students are just not going to be able to go to university? No of course not. Far from being the inefficient layers of public servants GO would have us believe, they are providing services to the private sector as well as the public sector. I go back to my foundation liberal small government point, and ask why the hell should Govt fund private choice.
Swing Lowe [312]
At Portlandbet Deakin has now come in to $1.95 for the ALP
BenC,
That’s true. When I wrote that post, Deakin was at $1.70/$2.05.
Since I wrote that post (2 hours ago), I’ve notice that in Herbert, Labor has fallen from $1.95 to $1.90, the Liberals in Melbourne Ports have moved out from $9 to $10 and I’m sure a few other seats have moved around as well (Canning for example…)
I’ve been wondering why Portlandbet haven’t released their weekly Market Movers posting on their blog – I understand now – the market is moving all over the place today and its continue to move. Either those markets are incredibly thin (which is likely) or there has been an avalanche of betting on Labor in a variety of seats (which also is likely, considering how many seats have shifted odds in the last 24 hours).
Re Education & the Howard Government, Trevor Cobbald (a former economist with Productivity Commission) sums it up perfectly:
1. The Howard Government has transformed the delivery of school education in Australia by increasing:
• The role of markets in education on a national basis;
• Privatization of schooling; and
• Federal control over curriculum, teaching, assessment and reporting.
2. The transformation in school education has been assisted by three great frauds perpetrated by the Howard Government.
• Fraud no. 1 is that there is a crisis in Australian education;
• Fraud no. 2 is that markets in education will improve student achievement;
• Fraud no. 3 is that increased school choice will help low income families.
3. There is no crisis in school outcomes in Australia.
• Government claims that over 30 per cent of students do not achieve adequate literacy standards are rebutted by international and national test data.
• Australia has amongst the best average school outcomes in the world.
4. The weight of major international research studies shows that privatization, choice and competition between schools does not improve student achievement.
• Student outcomes in Australia have not increased since 1999.
5. Research studies show that markets and privatization in education generally:
• Fail to increase innovation and diversity in curriculum and pedagogy;
• Reduce collaboration between schools;
• Increase effective choice largely only for the middle class;
• Contribute to socio-economic and racial segregation in schooling;
• Increase disparities in performance between schools; and
• Exacerbate social inequalities in student achievement.
6. The Howard Government is increasing the social divide in school education.
• The Independent private school sector and the most wealthy private schools have received the largest increases in Federal funding;
• Socio-economic inequality in reading achievement in Australia is amongst the highest for the high-income OECD countries;
• The large gap in Year 12 completion rates between high and low SES students has increased since 1996, especially in recent years;
7. The Howard Government’s school education policies are beset by two major contradictions:
• The Government supports the role of markets and limited government, but has increased private school dependence on government funding;
• The Government supports the federal system and states’ rights, but has vastly increased federal control over school education.
If you want to read how Cobbald demolishes the pro-private school propaganda espoused by Generic Oracle and others then please see The Great School Fraud (PDF).
Generic Oracle: I understand the political strategy argument you are putting across here; that Rudd should play it safe on schools funding to avoid a wedge and a fight he doesn’t need to have.
But my view here is that the Federal funding of private schools (at the expense of public schools) is so grossly unfair and so against our national interest (ie education investment = productivity growth) that there is plenty of room for Rudd to be a little bit more brave on this issue and put in place a policy that at least starts to redress this funding imbalance.
I am smiling now – I got on Maxine at $3.25 (and a large bet too!)
And in respect to Howard the Duck (see link) getting support from the other cabinet ministers, remember that to stab someone in the back you have to be 100% behind them.
And interesting (and fun) week ahead I think.
Swing Lowe,
Yes Canning is now $2.65 fro ALP.
A few other notable movements.
Solomon: ALP$1.77/$1.95 to $1.57/2.20
Boothby: ALP$3.50/1.26 to $2.65/1.4
Dickson: ALP$3.20/1.32 to $2.40/1.48
Longman: ALP$3.35/1.28 to $2.30/1.52
Peter Beattie about to stand down, breaking news, will address the media at 2:30
Yes, BenC, by my count, in the last 24 hours, approximately 30 seats have moved towards Labor on Portlandbet.
As I said before, this is probably a combination of thin markets and the AC Nielsen (and perhaps the Westpoll) encouraging a plunge on Labor.
Interestingly, there’s a report in the Daily Terror about the latest punter plunge on Labor. I’m not sure who the unnamed betting agency is, but it shouldn’t be too hard to find out:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22392394-5001021,00.html
It appears that the punters are coming into the market, and it all looks good for the ALP. Maybe we’ve had our “circuit breaker”?
Has anybody got some ideas about Wentworth?
ABC news has a piece about General Petraeus’ impending report on Iraq.
Are there any bloggers old enough to notice the eerie similarity to General Westmoreland’s reports from Vietnam?
Generic Oracle,
Thanks for you comment.
Maybe I am wrong but I don’t think you get the drift of my argument.
What makes the $17B an over taxation is how it is treated. $17B just salted away under the bed is over taxation. The same $17B spent on broadband and such is not over taxation.
It is the same with overspending. Any amount spent to increase production capacity is not overspending. However, the very same $ spent on “pork†is an overspend for the simple reason that it fuels inflation.
I think most would agree that the general trust of the Liberals budget is quite acceptable. This does not mean that we agree with every line of the budget but that it is (to use a current popular phrase) heading in the right direction. Sure we want more spent on infrastructures and hospitals and educations and less on Government advertising and advisors/contractors but in the terms of the budget it is minor.
In respect of treatment of the “Future Fund†I cannot see what is the difference between Labor’s treatment of the $6B invested on broadband or the treatment by the Liberal Government of the entire amount.
The sort of argument proffered by the Liberals in respect of Labor’s policy is misleading. I think it says more about the Liberals and those who believe it then it does about the Labor Party.
I understand you argument and the reason you wish to standby it however I think it is catering to the lowest common denominator and underestimates the great bulk of the community. It also reduces the argument to the lever of someone in early high school. I would think that those who worry about such things would have an understanding of the argument and those arguments to the contrary are generally mischievous.
Brilliant work sideline eye.
If Beattie does go how many comments like:
“In politics it is important to know when your time is up, when you aren’t focusing well on the ball and get out for the benefit of the team.”
“9 years is a long long time in a very demanding job. I owe it to my family, to myself and to the people of Queensland to hand over the reins to a younger fresher pair of hands.”
“I have been privledged to lead Queensland for so long, but it is time to move on, people can become stale in these kinds of jobs.”
Anna (assuming she gets up) could dump the amalgamations in favor of doing them later.
Note this line in this story (http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22392717-952,00.html) which I thought was a bit out of place:
Mr Beattie has also had long running battle with his weight.
Huh? What relevance does that have?
Centrebet has just put up WA prices. Confirms Portlandbet. AlP favoured to retain Swan and Cowan and pick up Hasluck and Stirling.
beattie “It’s time. its time for renewal”.
Sideline
Useful document, thanks for posting it. My background is predominantly in Science and Education so the whole “education in crisis” is a subjective thing. In some areas like numeracy, we are genuinely falling through the cracks. In English/History, there is much politicising which determines the extent of the issue (and is not relevant here). We do some things well, but there is a lot more necessary to remain competitive with Asia, in particular.
Thanks for understanding my main point: it is not beneficial for Rudd’s election to dredge up an issue which will divide his own party, let alone the voters.
Noocat
Yeah, I understand that “your guy is strong, like King Kong, their guy is weak, chuck ‘em in the creek”, which is the depth of this argument about overtaxing. Honestly.
Of course you think you are right, they are your values and ideology. My point was about Jeremy Q Voter and his perception of both government and the alternative, Mr Rudd.
Regardless of opinion about where the money is better spent: It is a zero sum game. You CAN’T fund current promises (tell me where they have ditched enough promises to fund the Broadband, for example??) AND invest in (necessary) infrastructure without either ditching some saved funds (future fund) or going back into government debt. Neither of these are very palatable with the electorate and BOTH will reinforce entrenched (and somewhat substantiated) beliefs that they have trouble containing budgets.
You just can’t say “Me too” and then expect the voters to believe that you can keep rates down, fund future obligations, keep productivity up and debt managed. This is real Pinocchio stuff and will bite Kevin on the bum for years if all those balls don’t stay perfectly in the air. A political recipe for disaster.
The big problem selling infrastructure is like selling highly trained teachers. Essential but hard to quantify, even if you do manage to get it right!
Yes it was there …. if Governement’s don’t renew they die … there will be a new government.
Winston
“In fact, most people are horrified that the Federal Government gives millions to the elite wealthy schools. ”
Briefly, Winston, if you have a monopoly on what “most people” know, then Morgan might be interested in a penny for your thoughts.
Jas
Jas, I know you ideology, you are a true believer and I respect that. It just doesn’t work. If you follow your logic through (and the most sincere do), then we have no place in Australia for Private Hospitals, Health Insurance, Utilities and even banks. I happen to think that in a Western Democracy like Australia, there is room for them.
The old “paying for choice” argument doesn’t wash. We fund all sorts of things as taxpayers that we will rarely or never use. Indeed, even in Queensland, like some other places in Australia, students can choose the state school they would like to attend. If we follow your argument, should these state schools lose funding because “this is funding choice”?
Choice isn’t the issue, it stems from an old state mentality of systematising thought and politics. It is a very good way to keep a socialist state committed to socialism. Worked for North Korea, don’t you think? It is far less appropriate here in 21st Century Australia.
I have no problem with some of my tax take going to fund as Islamic school any more than an isolated Aboriginal school, an Anglican church school or a state school in Marrickville… because we are all Australians and diversity is a good thing. All these students are being educated and I support that as a citizen and taxpayer.
Generic I take it you agree that the public school system needs a huge injection in funding.
As far as I see it, there should be a level of education that is available to all students before we begin rewarding schools with funding that already have a standard above this.
This means that low funded private schools, some receiving less than some public schools, should receive a greater portion of the funding. The resources of many public schools, particularly in regional areas, is criminal. This should be the priority of all governments.
The top private schools hardly require the additional funding. I just don’t see the reason to provide it to them, apart from an ideological stance.
“You CAN’T fund current promises (tell me where they have ditched enough promises to fund the Broadband, for example??) AND invest in (necessary) infrastructure without either ditching some saved funds (future fund) or going back into government debt.”
Generic Oracle, you are over-complicating matters. It really is very simple. At this very moment, there is a huge budget surplus, much of which is currently UNSPENT. When Labor promise to commit funds for infrastructure, they do not need to ditch previous promises or go into debt. They are simply making plans based on the vast amount of cash that the government has currently stockpiled.
You seem to be trying to create an issue where there is none.
The question of whether such institutions are permitted is quite a different question as to whether, and under what conditions, such institutions should be publicly funded.
This discussion, however, is not especially relevant to this site.
Peter Beatie resigning is another blow to Howard. I’m sure Beatie was in the cross-hairs of the coalitions negative campain. Now he’s left in a dignified manner highlighting that all leaders have a limited political life.
Any Q’ldrs here have a view on Anna Bligh – will she get much of a honeymoon period?
Re the debate on fiscal policy…
Do we need to mention that there are different types of spending which have different impacts on inflation and future returns for government:
1. The type that doesn’t fuel inflation and provides a long-term return for the nation (eg investment in infrastructure; the stuff Howard hasn’t been doing much of considering the massive surpluses at his disposal ) and;
2. The type that does fuel inflation (eg the middle class welfare handouts and blatant pork-barrelling; the stuff that Howard has been doing recklessly for the last 4 years).
Anna Bligh is a very sharp operator, Beattie has groomed her for the position.
She is a great media performer and runs rings around the opposition.
A reckon a good long “honeymoon”.
One of the most common things said after the ALP’s wins at state elections is that a loss would’ve created more of a ‘momentum for change’ that could flow onto the Federal Parliament.
Does anyone think it’s possible the resignations of state premiers could be creating an artificial momentum for change? I think it’s definately possible… a creation of a sense of generational change and handover.
I’m sure the upcoming Federal election and the dynamics of Howard’s blame game on the states was a factor in Beattie’s resignation decision here.
With Beattie now gone it opens the way for Anna Bligh to make any necessary policy changes to neutralise issues that Labor would be exposed on in QLD.
Sideline Eye,
I wouldn’t be surprised if the council amalgamations are “postponed to a more appropriate time” by the new Bligh government. That would almost certainly kill the issue in this Federal Election’s context.
If they do this, it puts seats like Flynn, Hinkler and Petrie back in play (well, they already were, but Labor will have a better shot).
The Council amalgamations will NOT be postponed.
They are already a non issue, Anna Bligh will just say that the independent umpire set the boundaries. End of story.
Peter Beattie when asked if his resignation sent a message to Howard:
“All I can say to you is that renewal is important. This is nothing new, I’m not trying to pick on John … but renewal is important. Those parties that renew, survive. You’ve got to remember that government is more important than any individual… “
With Bracks and Beattie leaving, if Howard loses, history will be very unkind to the old man who stubbornly refused to go and took his party down with him.
Thanks GO; good to be accused of having ideology, in this day and age that is a great compliment. Now while I don’t think your logic works, it isn’t an attack on you, and you actually have done the work on presenting it in an intelligent framework. Don’t want to sound partonsing either, I call you honey when I do that
.
I don’t think I express enough ideology to justify your socialist / brainwashing discussion; and much as a walk down memory lane to the 20 or so years leading up to my birth might have been enjoyable for you it adds nothing to the funding mix debate, nor the suggestion it is politically bad for Rudd. I think I agree with you. If I were Rudd, speak not of school funding, but when on the right side of the house commission a report that says how bad Howard’s mix was and change the mix cause the report says you have to.
Last I listened to one of the old fella’s in a red shirt who called me comrade paying for choice wasn’t a socialist idea. Has more to do with market forces and that magic hand and stuff right wingers believe in, so long as all the money flows to the right hands, which are always hands that are already full, and we can’t complain because that would be dated class warfare. You say paying for choice argument doesn’t wash, notwithstanding it is at the core of capitalism. Nothing you’ve said backs up this claim.
I am glad you are happy to pay for the religious education of those who the right wing wish to demonise, very civilised.
Choice is the issue, you need to establish why the State should divert resources from other priorities into the hands of those deliberately deciding not to use state programs. It is a really really silly idea, it is bad economics and only has got up in relation to education and ’semi-private’ health insurance for crass political reasons.
But there are losers so politically it is not a good one to tackle. I will be grumpy if suddenly I have to pay 3x as much fees for my kids to go to the same school.
But as my darlings are doing laps in their indoor heated swimming pool, do explain to the kids down the road why the state school doesn’t have functioning heating, without resorting to the ridiculous claims State Government does not do a fantastic job with the ever decreasing share of GDP they have to do an ever increasing amount of service delivery. If that is the only argument you have I just think you are completely wrong.
“I saw a news report some weeks ago that suggested one age group concerned about work choices(its impact on their children and grand children) and climate change is those aged over 60 in marginal seats.”
-Howard Hater 291.
Interesting, HH. In my work driving cabs in Warrnambool I carry a lot of oldies. Workchoices seems to be a regular theme of their concerns. Although it doesn’t affect them personally, they’re worried about how it will affect their grandchildren and the future of the country. Of course, I’ve no idea how they might otherwise have voted – might all be aged lefties. But if they are representative of their group… Howard is in huge trouble if this demograph goes.
Generic, others have dealt with your concerns on state/private schooling. So I won’t enter that area. But I will say at the technical education, the Howard Govt attempts to set up an alternative private further education system have been a disaster.
The private institutions have, in general, taken up the ’soft’, low-cost options such as traineeships in hospitality, retail, and info technology. TAFE has been left to do the heavy lifting in the electrical, metal and building trades. These require a big infrastructure investment in workshops and machinery. To some extent TAFE has some in place, but the squeeze put on them has meant they can’t invest enough. No wonder we’re falling behind in the number of people we can take through. Some situations do not benefit from competition.
“I will be grumpy if suddenly I have to pay 3x as much fees for my kids to go to the same school.”
I am sure the increased Federal dollars going to elite private schools have not made a jot of difference to the fees parents pay. They have risen consistently faster than inflation for the past five years. Many of these schools could actually function without fees at all, so high are their capital reserves these days. Incredibly, they even benefit from bequests in the wills of old boys and girls. The money piles up. But of course high fees act as a useful filter, don’t they? Forgive me a bit of class warfare, but I am astonished the Feds can pour millions into these elite schools and still lie straight in bed.
I think there are a great swathe of independent schools that do not fit into this category, and provided they remain not-for-profit then there may be a case for supporting them based on the pressure they take off the infrastructure of the state system. But that funding should all channel through the state government, with checks and balances and accountability in terms of values, curriculum and outcome.
And yes, Rudd should just play a dead bat for now and then do what makes sense after he gets in.
You are right Don, but the debate is framed around the community Christian schools who don’t have need the fee filter, they just need the money. That the elite schools get any taxpayer money at all is an outrage, and the Libs and GO are careful to frame it around middle class christian schools.
I know this is off topic…
The Coalition MP’s are conducting themselves terribly at the moment. I would say to them “Stop questioning the public. You keep doing this, you deserve your defeat. If you are going to conduct yourself, conduct yourself with class and be free of self-delusion (which is how it is coming across towards a majority of voters.
Rats
Further to our discussion on the ALP’s “Fiscal Conservativism” (and thanks for a well-structured civilised discussion!), your point here:
“In respect of treatment of the “Future Fund†I cannot see what is the difference between Labor’s treatment of the $6B invested on broadband or the treatment by the Liberal Government of the entire amount.”
Exemplifies the ALP’s attitude perfectly and contains the same problem that Peter Costello and accountants working around Australia would presumably struggle with. Namely that spending part or all of the future fund to pay for infrastructure like high-speed broadband is, in accounting terms, a capital expense, with an ongoing liability attached to it (maintenance). By contrast, the funds are currently a publicly owned asset, which generate revenue for the purposes of funding future commitments.
Herein lies the issue. I understand the ideology and motivation of the ALP is grounded in increasing infrastructure to improve productivity. Fine, no problem there. However, it is the issue of selling down an asset to fund a liability that makes the label “fiscal conservative” really hard to justify.
Anticipating a counter-argument that high-speed broadband will deliver productivity which will have a net effect on GDP and ultimately tax-take and thus, be an investment, this is, at best an optimistic view and at worst, financial folly. Run it past a business of reasonable size and it would not pass muster. There are FAR too many variables here and an asset which has performed well above expectations should not be sacrificed for one with high risk and an indirect route for return of investment.
Far better is the suggestion that infrastructure be developed in concert with state governments and private industry (bearing risk) and contributed to with a fund established for such a purpose, through investment growth.
The reason for the future fund in the first place was the deep debt hole that was left in the 1990s and no conceivable way of funding the mountain of public servant superannuation. Perhaps the dumbest thing we could do is disturb that fund.
Faster internet in return for citizen’s hard earned sounds very much like a story about a guy called Jack and some beans I heard about….
Jas
I appreciate the discussions we have had lately, you have certainly helped me to revisit a few ideas about public servants and now state education! Thank you.
We do have very different views and that is great. I think we only sharpen our value set against the steel of someone opposing it. Don’t worry about me taking anything personally, I wouldn’t be here if I did! I do apologise too, if I ever let the passion spill into patronisation!
My background was in low socio-economic state education and I value it. Some of the best professionals before or since have been in that system.
Yes, I do have a passion for diversity and believe that citizens can all have their expression of this and, as tax payers in a welfare state, deserve funding to pursue this.
You are right, there are a great many independent schools in the low-mid fee category. They outnumber “grammar schools” about 5 to 1 across Australia. These schools would cease to exist without this funding. I know a business manager in one of these schools and he confirmed my suspicions recently, that many disadvantaged students are on full fee relief. At his school, fees are around $3000 a year but over 25% of the students in the school are on full or partial fee relief for financial/refugee or other hardship. Without this funding, these schools wouldn’t make it.
Those that advocate choice in education also realise that as citizens we have the right to educate our children with the strategies, philosophies, world views and opportunities that we value. The idea that a secular humanist “one size fits all” approach to education is outdated and, paradoxically, narrow-minded. This does not cause diversity to flourish.
I remember a report about that great bastion of democracy and secular humanism, France, and their public education. Muslim girls are constantly vilified by staff for wearing the traditional Hijab, to the extent that it has been against the law for students to wear ANY religious or belief-based clothing or artifacts in a public school. The reasoning is essentially that the education system has a secular humanistic worldview that all citizens are expected to accept. Perversely, the supposed “tolerance” of all beliefs has led to the undesirable outcome of the oppression of beliefs outside this worldview for tax paying citizens..
What happens when a social democratic state really gets a monopoly.. remarkably similar to some elements of a fascist state when it gets to this stage, I would have thought!
We can rejoice in our differences, Jas! I am not a capitalist any more than a socialist! The centre of politics is a far more exciting place to be (particularly on a site like this!) and I appreciate passion for political thought!
Cheers!
Crispy @ 370 – it is well known that the elite Adelaide schools – St Peters and Prince Alfred College – own MILLIONS of dollars worth of real estate in the City of Adelaide. And yet they still get MILLIONS of dollars worth of Federal Government funding.
Meanwhile, my local (rural) school has 18 children in the year 1/2 class; three of those children have Asperger’s, thereby needing special attention and as well as that they have a girl who would (should) be classified as gifted (exceptional reading and maths skills), but as they don’t have the teaching resources to deal with her accordingly, she is fast sliding back into mediocrity.
What is that figure? 70% of students are getting 35% of the funding? It’s a bloody outrage…
Oh please enough Alice in Wonderland drivel hidden behind vague claims of accounting concepts and business models in relation to the future fund – it is really quite simple.
The future fund is just a big pool of money, taxpayer money taken from our pockets as we speak, going into the stock-market. It is not to fund the States providing infrastructure (State providing and funding telecommunications infrastructure is a novel idea indeed – care to expand on that idea and the reasons for it – perhaps States are just much better at service delivery than the Commonwealth under Howard?) it is to fund future commonwealth superannuation liabilities.
Rather than have a proper provision in the national accounts for this future liability, the Treasurer over-reports the surplus and then with an accounting slight of hand pumps it into the stock market through the future fund. How is the stockmarket doing at the moment; this moment where the economy could be benefitting from broadband.
It is not ‘financial responsibility’ nor ‘fiscal conservatism’ it is a failure to account properly in one set of accounts and a big pool of taxpayer money outside of them. The liberal party escapees at crikey have been talking about this for years.
Given the Commonwealth has the big pool of money, and neither side is suggesting the future liability be properly accounted for in the national accounts the debate is simply about where the Commonwealth draws its funds for the broadband project. Unless of course we are ’staying the course’ with the dial-up strategy (which is still a lot better than the other stay the course strategy we have).
It is frankly a really stupid debate to be having. And I will observe the treasurer has had a decade of strong economic growth but has only discovered these accounting trick ‘future’ funds in the last year or two leading up to an election. You could try and hide this rubbish in the full text of the Australian and International Accounting Standards, and throw in an annexure of government accounting standards and it wouldn’t change that it is stupid to be arguing over whether the broadband is funded from immediate tax revenue, or the stuff Costello has left lying around. No-one really believes we shouldn’t have broadband; and until I see something more sensible about the States providing it I will ignore that.
Sorry GO, thought you were ignoring the school stuff while you were actually sitting there writing it. I would have moderated a couple of words in my anti-future fund rant, if I’d known there was a chance you’d read it and respond. Too often I have tried to pick up an interesting debate to have the other side just leave.
Again apologies but as much as I disagree with some of your school stuff, there is an element of truth in what you say and that requires a discussion of appropriate funding balance without ‘class warfare’ being thrown at us. My answer to the class-warfare challenge is if we can’t discuss who needs what and who gets what, then they shouldn’t be getting it at all.
As for the future fund, surely you don’t buy Costello’s political spin and rubbish on these? The future fund is all about the superannuation problem he has ignored (surely not good economic management) for most the boom and the others are about the capacity of his economy to absorb the needed investment now.
Again please accept my apologies if I was a bit harsh can I blame the 100’s of accountants I work for (I’m a lawyer who’d know none of this accounting rubbish if it wasn’t for them).
Generic Oracle (302),
You are a thread-diverter – the most consistent thread diverter of all. You have not only opened up a can of worms but got Jasmine (332) to call on “Chris†(whom I take to be me) to give a “good answerâ€. For the moment, I will restrict myself to a few comments. Your statement that state schools “are nowhere near as efficient in terms of manpower†is not backed with evidence. I am in the process of gathering evidence for a book that I intend to write, but some of my figures are for some years ago and need updating. In 1999, the last year of the educationally vandalistic Liberals ruled the state, Victorian government primary schools had a PTR of 17.2:1, compared with Anglican primary schools with 12.9:1, Catholic primary schools with 19.9:1, other independent schools with 15.2:1. The secondary PTRs, in the same order were 12.6:1, 10.6:1, 13.4:1 and 11.2:1. The ratios of pupil to total staff in 1997 were for government primary schools 14.8:1 and for all non-government primary schools 15.4:1. The secondary figures were 10.4:1 and 9.4:1. It would be logical to assume that, if those figures had been broken down by private school sector, the Catholic system would be worse than the government one, and the other private schools better.
The voucher for a Victorian government school student is about $5,000, with some variation according to the student’s level. When you add in funding for other school programs, the figure increases somewhat. The last school I taught in had a total funding per student of just over $7,000 – woefully inadequate – thanks to the last Liberal Government’s staff cuts, which the current Labor Government has not reversed in secondary schools. There are very few out-of-school services in Victoria – thanks to the last Liberal Government. Over 90 per cent of funding goes to schools. Some of those out-of-school services are accessible by private schools in any case.
There has been a push to turn the government school system into a competing cacophony of small business run by supposedly entrepreneurial principals. It is not at all efficient. It is a complete mind-boggling disaster with all the business jargon: e.g., “transformational leadership constructâ€. If you want more examples, you can find hundreds from my old school on the BS Bingo section of the satire section of http://www.platowa.com. There are very fewer layers of administration in the government system, which simply means a greater burden has been placed on the staff of each school, who now have to do tasks that were once done for them. This detracts from the educational endeavour of the school. Don’t get me started. The story of education is the greatest example of mindless claptrap adopted in our history, a story of deceit and ignorance. Private profit partnerships are another con, which is why the Victorian Government has refused to adopt them in education.
I am going to stop now, except to stay I do not have an objection to government funding of private schools, though I do object to the Howard Government’s method.
Thanks Chris, I did mean you!!!!!!!!!
Is there a better Chris for informed comment on education? If there is I don’t know them.
It was a long thread and I’m thinking GO didn’t like the number at the top when it started.
But in future I’ll – bite my lip and buy what I’m told.
Chris
This is about the closest I have seen to you “having a rant”, though I know this issue is close to your heart.
So it appears you and I both have a background in education. I have taught in some desperately underprivileged state schools and on “the other side of the fence” here and abroad in Asia. I have also taught students who are extremely wealthy, the likes of which Australia just doesn’t have. So we both have experience which affects our view of the world, Chris.
Queensland is very different to Victoria and I have no doubts that the Libs didn’t put the money into state education that they needed to, but the “competitive state school” model that operates in a lot of Queensland, whilst not perfect, does ensure better outcomes on average than fixed catchment systems. Again a debate not for here.
Actually, I didn’t “divert” this one, it was a response to Sideline (#295):
“On another issue, another front has opened up against Howard. I notice on the SMH website lately that the NSW Teachers Federation are running online ads getting stuck into Howard about giving taxpayers money to private schools.”
Though, I do confess I am often led off the topic title. To be sure, though, much of what I have read this weekend might be more reasonably placed in an ALP forum. It is little more than partisan gloating and personal insult (to leaders and bloggers alike).
I have never been censured once by William and would cop it sweet if I did but I thought the purpose of the forum on this site was to discuss politics and elections. For the ALP, economic credibility is a real and present issue, as is avoiding the accusation of class wars with criticism of funding for private schools (that Latham clearly did) is relevant, I would have thought.
Well at least more than stating that John Howard is a lying rodent, Dolly Downer is a sook and that Peter Costello is a gutless wimp, or do we have different definitions of what constitutes political discussion?
I was reading the break down of the poll numbers in the Age, I note the over 55’s split 50%-50%
Generic Oracle
Communicating vir the net can be brutal and one may offend without really intending so please take what I have to say in the manner intended i.e. politely and without intending to offend. If you think that I have overstepped the mark I apologise and put it down to my clumsy way with words.
I am afraid that you understanding of what is happening with the future fund (FF) and the purposed investment of the $6B by Labor is confused.
You are correct that the FF is a Capital asset in the hands of the Government and the purpose of the FF is to generate income to develop the fund till it covers the unfunded liability of Commonwealth Public Servants Superannuation It is well worth mentioning that this is a unfunded liability of the Federal Governments (of both colours) making and was allowed to developed because the Feds though that they could make a profit (or should I say a smaller liability) out of those same public servants. In fact the development of this fund goes well back before 1990 – in fact you can take it back well before the 1970.
To generate the cash flow needed to allow for a reasonable return the FF is put in the hands of a Manager. This manager (for a large fee – it has been mentioned in the press but I forget what it is now) invests this in business enterprises throughout the world. The usual vehicle for this investment is usually shares (but not exclusively) so when the shares go up or the Business pay a dividend the FF makes a profit. It is the basically the same method that you and I use when we invest our savings through a managed fund.
What Labor plans to do with the broadband is exactly the same except there is no middleman, no manager taking a huge fee. Just like the managed fund Labor plans to invest in an enterprise that will carry on the business of building a broadband system and subsequently charging users for the services provided.
The advantage with Labor’s plan is that the capital asset is invested in Australia and not some other country. There is no middle man creaming off huge fees, I understand that this middleman, appointed by the Federal Government, is a non resident so we the taxpayer don’t even get a chance to benefit through the fee being taxed in the hands of a resident.
I am unaware how you arrive at the conclusion that further funds will be required for “maintenance†The business like any other business is designed to make a profit to cover such things along with wages and materials and dividends which is just what you will get back for a managed fund.
Your comment “the funds are currently a publicly owned asset, which generate revenue for the purposes of funding future commitments.†This is exactly what Labor purposes for its broadband investment so instead of holding share in Telstra it will instead or also hold shares in a broadband business.
I am sorry that I find you first three (3) paragraphs to be irrelevant to anything to do with Labor’s broadband plan and the nature of the investment.
You comment suggesting that the broadband business will include a financial risk is spot on. However, what you failed to realise or mention was that the investment of the FF includes the same type of risk. Remember that there is no such thing as a risk free investment of for that matter a risk free business. The way to reduce risk is to “balance†your investment. However, investing such a large portion ($6B) of the FF will increase this risk. However, the likelihood of such a business going broke in Australia, I would suggest would be limited and akin to the risk of holding Telstra shares. (Remember that such a business would most likely be a monopoly). So without doing all the “sums†neither you nor I could be able to determine what a change in the risk would be if any.
I get the feeling that you concerns about Labor’s plan is based more on “political consideration†than on financial facts. As you can see that the only difference between leaving the funds in the FF and investing in infrastructure is the location of the investment and a reduction in management fees paid and the nature of asset held.
Now I hope that I have not been too blunt. As you can see I had a lot to say and I tried to condense it as much as I could.
Generic Oracle ,
I never use terms like “Krudd†or “lying rodent†or abuse other posters, no matter what I think of their ideas. I was being jocular in calling you a thread-diverter. Yes, this site is overwhelmingly anti-Coalition, as is every forum I look at, except Andrew Bolt’s, where there are so many in denial that it’s overflowing. However, some of us can conduct a civil if passionate conversation with those of different views. I just skim over the usual ranting. On the very rare occasions on which others are uncivil to me, I ignore their incivility because, as far as I am concerned, it demeans them, not me.
As for education, I have spent more than 30 years reading the opinions of people who have not the faintest idea of what they are talking about – not putting you in that category – and I am very tired of it, because their thinking has caused so much damage to the education what was once a system.
If you want to now a little more of my background in education, you can go to he discussion forum on http://www.platowa.com and scroll back through the pages till you find the Farewell thread (which is probably somewhere back in April). It might also give a bit more insight into my beliefs regarding education. It was the Kennett Liberal Government which made me a committed ALP supporter. I watched the Liberals’ destruction of my profession and of the school system with incredulity, not only incredulity at what they were doing but also incredulity at how easily the media was deceived by it, and decided that such an appalling government just had to go – and I worked to that end. Now that it has gone, I am working to get rid of the residue of thinking that remains in power from that era.
Victoria hasn’t had zones (“fixed catchment areasâ€) for about 20 years, but the competitive model is far more than that and I can guarantee, as someone who held positions of leadership in Victorian schools for 28 years, the current leftover Liberal Government/IPA-devised model is inefficient and ineffective.
This site is supposed to be psephological rather than political, and I agree that Labor had to dump Mark Latham’s hit list.
Long time lurker, first time poster (here, at any rate). Just wanted to encourage GO, Chris, Jas et al for an illuminating debate. For what it’s worth, I’m not convinced that taxpayers money should be used to additionally subsidise services that government already provides. This is as true for private health insurance as it is for private education. I certainly don’t buy the line that these subsidies ‘ease the squeeze’ [a blast from elections past] on the public system. If government can reduce spending on these areas, they do (usually by not meeting inflation increases year on year). If I choose to buy health insurance or send my children to private school, that’s fine. But I don’t expect to be given additional funds to do so – the government already provides perfectly adequate services.
Chris
Ahh, it makes a little more sense now. Well I had never known you to rant, so I’m glad I qualified by “as close to a rant”!
I am largely unfamiliar with Victoria and its education. My family has a tradition of teaching, originally hailing from Sydney where I saw catchments embed ghettos and foster educational classism in state systems.
I consider myself more appropriately “UK trained/experienced” so the whole Outcomes Based Education has largely passed me by, I admit. Queensland (where I am currently in Educational Leadership) has not been enamored by OBE and our system has not generally incorporated its doctrines.
You are also accurate about the nature of the site being technically psephological rather than political and also that you show honour and dignity with your posts. I use this site as much for sharpening my knowledge of issues and the history of them and your posts have enlightened me in that regard, so thank you!
Have you a title for your book, yet?
Yes.