The Australian today brings us a second round of figures from the weekend Newspoll survey. It shows that in spite of everything, the Prime Minister is rated the leader “more capable of handling Australia’s economy” by 48 per cent to Kevin Rudd’s 33 per cent, while Peter Costello leads Wayne Swan as “most capable of managing Australia’s economy as federal treasurer” by 53 per cent to 21 per cent. The Prime Minister is also rated the leader “most capable of keeping interest rates lower”, although his lead over Rudd has narrowed since last month.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
693 Comments
A little bit of push polling for Shanahan to spin up in the Oz. In a nutshell, it means nuttin’.
What % thought Bob Brown would the best Prime Minister?
What % thought The Greens would be the best economic managers of the Australian economy?
What % thought The Greens would be best in managing the challenges of Global Warming?
I saw those poll figures and slowly people are starting to warm to Kevin Rudd as a capable economic manager. By the election date they should be running even against Howard.
Wayne Swan still got a way to go but then again how did Costello fair against Ralph Willis back in ‘96 on who would make a better treasurer? Its a mute point.
As for the interest rate question the ALP can equal the government when their time comes to proving how to run the economy & set policy that would not agitates interest rate in a national micro sense. Its the international macro economics that is beyond our politicians whoever is in power.
As with any polls on the economy, this will always favour the conservative parties. People will usually answer that the conservative parties are better with the economy but that Labor is better with health, education etc. Of course, having said that it can be noted that during the 80s Labor was consistantly ranked better at managing interest rates than the Coalition due to the Coalition’s bad record with rates under Frazer. Does this mean that the Coalition should never have been given a chance to ‘manage the economy’ again? Of course not.
To argue that the economy is always what decides elections is to avoid the fact that polling showing the ALP behind on the economy hasn’t stopped them winning elections in the past.
Personally I can’t see the point in reporting this aspect of the poll separately, unless they’re going to look at other areas on interest in subsequent days. For instance, are they going to have articles focusing on the difference in polling between the parties on the issue of IR? Education? Health? Of course the Australian has every right to choose which parts of polling they focus on, but again I can’t see the point in just focusing on one.
Strange sorta poll this… just that storm in a teacup thing all over again. The weird thing about the libs (and their media cheer squad) this year has been their incapacity to maintain a consistent line of attack for more than a couple of days.
Today! Costello smashs up Swan! So what?! I thought the entire point of the ‘attack’ last week was to show that Swan won’t even be Treasurer… that we all have to be really worried about Gillard. But no, now we have to be worried about Swan all over again. I guess next week we’ll be told to worry about Gillard… Get it straight, Liberals and get it consistent. Just choose your attack and go with it – trust yourselves – trust your instinct… god knows – you’ve been good at it. This chopping and changing thing you Libs have got going though… it’s killing you.
I love how the right will use these personal polls and say they are going ok, but ignore the fact they will be smashed in the coming election, if Howard ever calls it.
But will the second round figures provide the reasurance Howard needs to call the election? I think not. Maybe the public is jaded by the endless self-congratulation of the Government in relation to economic management which largely seems to happenn on auto-pilot. In any event, the issue seems much softer in the minds of poll respondents this time around.
Still, I’m betting he’ll head off to see the GG next week and go for a slightly longer campaign to give the acid bath time to work on the ALP. 17 November anyone?
I do think its interesting that a clear majority want Rudd to lead to the nation, but dont think he is a better economic manager.
Perhaps some people think we live in a society and not just an economy??
Morning all.
For what it’s worth, I have a set of seat predictions based upon the last four elections and the September 2007 Newspoll state-by-state 2PP numbers.
You can read the full details here.
I plan on using the Newspoll results for marginal and safe seats as well, but I’m about to go on holidays for a week, so that one might have to wait.
Blatant push polling by the GG. Otherwise as Call the Election Please states they would have published the data with the rest of the figures and/or included a range of other questions.
When is someone going to pose the question: “Leader most likely to lie to Australians?” Now I’d pay money to have that included in the next NewsPoll.
Howard and Costello have done a very effective Goebbels style job on the economy.
The truth is that the present government has a less impressive record on economic reform and has enjoyed far more economic good fortune than the Hawke/Keating governments.
In three critical respects they have been poor economic managers, and any one of these considerations would merit their emphatic defeat.
Their weak and belated response to climate change will haunt Australia in coming decades. This was a decade the locusts ate.
The foolish fetish they have made over budget surpluses has not only perverted public economic literacy – deficits are desirable when the economy is in recession, as it will again be soon enough. It has also meant that key infrastructure in health and education, plus spending on research, have been sorely neglected. Yet these things are more important than anything else in underpinning long term sustainable growth.
This has ben a shabby and shallow economic record. If Costello and Howard really believe what they say about the economy then they are ignorant fools. Of course they do know better, which makes them worse than fools.
Pretty meaningless stuff, though it does show a softening of the government’s assumed credentials on macro economics. The Costello v Swan stuff is in a complete vacuum: how did Crean do against Costello? By definition people have little chance to compare the two prior to an election. Costello has name recognition, but very little voter sympathy. A more meaningful question would be what degree of credit to voters give Costello for recent growth.
Looks like Rudds “Im an economic conservative” ads are helping to brainwash the public. What a joke…..
Why no poll on who would be better at running health, education etc?
These additional Newspoll questions are a cheap and cynical attempt by The Australian to bolster Howard and his rotten-to-the-core government.
Damian J @ 5,
Howard used 33 day campaigns in 98, 01 and 04. With the Liberals coffer being almost empty, I am not sure that they can afford a longer campaign. Combined with Howards previous track record, I don’t think that the longer campaign will be the go. When he makes up his mind on the date, I reckon he will count back 33 days and call it that day.
sorry Scotty i cant understand your calling Wakefield a likely coalition retain, i live here and believe me the anti Howard feeling is running high, theres a lot of strugglers here and a lot of the single mothers Howard has been aiming at, Wakefield is mainly working class, with even Gawler once strong liberal leaning towards labor now, it’s on a wafer thin edge — one of the seats that should fall first here in South Australia, can you explain to me how you have come to this reasoning.
This appears to be a typical result for an opposition treasurer. I saw Wayne on Sky news Business on Sunday and he gave a good account of himself there. He needs to show that he knows the figures and the stats more often now. a good show of credibility on the interview circuit would do him good. He does answer questions every week on the Daily telegraph site if anyone wants a closer look at him.
Indeed Judy, the issue of taking mothers off parenting payment and onto Newstart when the youngest child turns 6 is something that will be “rewarded” in the natural course of events.
Funny how people have a habit of not forgetting this sort of thing.
On the supposed poverty of the Liberal war chest… $200 million dollars worth of advertising, using a few select advertising companies and all of the country’s media organiations before the campaign starts, buys a lot of “favours”, “discounts”, and “spruik now, pay later” freebies after the campaign starts. The “information” ads will have been paid for at full-freight, top-dollar… the discounts kick in (only to the Libs, of course) once things warm up a little.
Then there was the curious comment on Insiders yesterday that the lawyers have been whispering the government can continue to run the “information” ads right alongside party-political ones during the campaign. Caretaker rules, according to this theory, do not apply to legitimate “information”. Naturally Howard will define “legitimate”.
I’m not too worried about the selectivity of the Newspoll topics today. All it means is that the rest of the questions and their answers were probably pretty ordinary for the government.
But on the topic of Swan v. Costello, as commenters have written above, imagine Costello’s rating, that of an inexperienced lawyer with little economic training, way back in 1996. Close to zero, I’d expect.
Scotty, interesting list…but Labor already holds Ballarat.
Peter theres going to be an awful lot of latchkey kids, these mums just cant afford childcare on the pittance they get {supposing theres enough childcare places} and we’re all going to pay for it with lawless teenagers running riot later on, as it is we have problems.
Then assuming Rudd gets in, the costs for the “information” ads run during the campaign are subtracted from the Liberals public funding. Regardless of the legalities, this current advertising campaign is against the generally accepted conventions of the “caretaker” period should it continue.
P.S. Thanks for the tip on quoting properly William.
Rodent appears to be going back to parliament for his health plan (which bears an uncanny resemblance to Rudd’s, with devolution to regional boards).
I cant believe the pack of losers pretending to be our govt are still trying to work new major policy angles. Its ten minutes *past* midnight.
Obviously they arent that keen to “stand on their record”, hmmm?
Maybe Rodent’s hoping for a Teheran bounce? I suspect he’ll get the opposite.
#12, Julie I don’t think the Lib coffers are almost empty. They have been in power for the last 11 years and would have made sure that the war chest has been growing. I was once at a dinner party and a business guy let loose some info on the 2billion tsunami fund. Howard is the one who controls who gets the contract to do aid work.
I wonder how many of those polled know who Wayne Swan is? The incumbant is always more well known than his/her shadow and thus is credited with knowing their craft. This poll of course was conducted on the same people who said they plan to vote Labor 56% to 44% TPP. So much for the economy being a major factor in their thinking. They just want this government gone.
BB@16
Commonwealth advertising can run during a campaign if both leaders agree.
Despite the best efforts of the lawyers, there will be no government to initiate these acts after parliament has been dissolved and nifty legal arguments will amount to nothing.
JH will be a caretaker prime minister and that’s all.
There is no chance these ads will continue after the election is called.
@ 567 on the previous thread, blindoptimist said:
I can tell you how people will react when the price of petrol nears $2.
OK the OZ, first it was the PREFERRED PM that mattered, not the 2PP, nows its the PREFERRED TREASURER- give me a break!! Desparate stuff indeed
Bryce #23… the reasons weren’t given on Insiders, but as this government has a record of pushing the envelope, and considering “caretaker mode” is merely a convention, who is to stop them from running the info ads right through the campaign (without consultation with Labor)?
I can see your point… if, for example, there had been a real tsunami a couple of days ago headed for Melbourne and the SE coast… of course government ads advising evacuation, emergency etc. procedures would have been OK’d by Labor… but how do you define “emergency”? What about superannuation? Shouldn’t people know about the rules regarding their money, campaign or no campaign? Might that not be defined as an “emergency”? Just askin’…
“Nifty legal arguments” need to be put to a court. Would there be enough time to do so during an election campaign… through several levels of appeal, especially when there is little law (I expect) on the rules surrounding “caretaker mode”. Who would decide?
I think most people can see these “informational ads” are no such thing.
They annoy a lot of people and have convinced me (and plenty of others I know) to volunteer to throw the b*stards out. There’s always swings and roundabouts.
Natinoal media is good, but the grassroots campaign will be very much won by Labor.
This is stuipid, you would hope that the treasurer of 11 years might be able to hold a lead, at the end of the day as good as Wayne Swan is he doesn’t quite have the same media buy.
Sift through enough shit and you might find a shiny nuget, good work Dennis
In news from The Australian, new research has shown that the length of a politicians toenails is an accurate indicator of their ability to keep interest rates low – between now and the next newspoll, Dennis Shanahan will be doing a number of features on John Howard’s toenails and his amazing ability to “claw” back support in the lead up to the election. In addition, the next newspoll will feature the following question:
“In light of new research showing that a leader with long toenails is the safest bet for the economy and the clear fact that Prime Minister Howard has very long toenails, who do you think is the person best qualified to manage the Australian economy – John “sharp-toes” Howard or Kevin “stumpy-feet” Rudd?
BB@26
Yes, you could well be on the money here…
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=your%20say&subclass=general&story_id=585571&category=Opinion
Goebbels was a babe in the woods.
Lefty E thread @20.
Just to back that up….. policy on the run they call it. Rats on the run!
24
John Withheld Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 9:04 am
@ 567 on the previous thread, blindoptimist said:
Well, you never really know how people might react to an American attack on Iran.
I can tell you how people will react when the price of petrol nears $2.
Yes and it wouldn’t need to get near that either. It was the initial spike to @ $1.50 about 12 to 18 months ago that sparked calls for the investigation into possible price fixing. I believe last month that Costello continued that into early December.
Yes, well, we were all wondering where the usual Oz slant had gone yesterday. As others have pointed out, having questions about economics and treasurers without questions on health, education, foreign policy or environment is a fairly transparent exercise in carrying the government’s water.
RobertBe,
it’s all about the toenails.
Optimist,
Thanks for putting that image in our heads. I was eating my breakfast.
An either / or question doesn’t measure the real difference. People might be choosing Howard on economic management because of incumbancy and if asked the degree of difference – ‘a lot better’ ‘a littel better’ ‘not much difference’ you might see that there is not much difference.
The same of course goes with Costello. In 1996 an unknown quanitity in comparison to the incumbant. And has only needed to sit back and watch the Keating/China economy rake in the surpluses for him, making him look good.
And with today’s hospital policy the Govt is showing a remarkable lack of ability to produce policies considering it has 11 years experience and the vast resources of the public service.
BrissyRod, comment #6, you could possibly be on to something here:
“Perhaps some people think we live in a society and not just an economy??”
Aye, methinks the revenue producing units are getting uppity.
With Serfchoices, the Howard govt. is tampering with the “ava good weekend” Aussie way of life. ‘Tis a zealot’s step too far.
“Can’t play sport/attend a family function/go to a barby/ visit me sick bruvver/ go to the the flicks, etc. because I’ve been ordered into work and if I don’t go, I’ll get the arse, and have to deal with the dickheads at CentreLink.”
These Orwellian “Choices” appear to have met a wall, the writing on which says: “Get Stuffed, Johnny”.
On the matter of new ideas In psephology….
For 30 years, Adam had ‘em; since May 07, Possum’s got ‘em.
Can ‘The Australian’ now be officially classified as a junk newspaper?
As in junk bonds – something that people once thought had value but when focussed upon had no intrinsic value or quality. A waste of money.
Kina,
I think it best to start with the simpler question:
Can The Australian be classified as a newspaper?
Why are you bagging The Australian just because it scrutinises the Opposition which is their job if you dont like it dont read it Optimist and go and read The Age or the Socialist Morning Herald.
Heheh Swan is the butt of every political joke poor bugger wonder how he enjoys this tag the good old Rooster but BB i will bet Costello had higher approval ratings as opposition Treasury spokesman than Wayne Swan has today…why you ask because unlike Swan, Costello never has had to lip sync his lines with his advisers behind him lol!
More information on the Ukrainian election.
http://euobserver.com/9/24873
Howard and Costello’s health plan a dog’s breakfast or a pig’s ear I reckon.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Hospitals-need-more-money-doctors-say/2007/10/02/1191091070548.html
Glen, why do you assume Howard refused to allow for a debate between the Treasurer and Shadow Treasurer prior to the 1996 election?
As for debate on the Australian, I treat it the same as any of the other Australian tabloids. It’s completely irrelevant.
Julie @ 15
In 2004 the election was called on Aug 29th for an Oct 9th Election – A 41 day campaign
And the left continues to dominate in South America. Places never considered likely 6 years ago.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN0130615920071001
CTEP the Libs were that far ahead they didnt need to risk an off performance by Costello which is the reason for no debate…however the reason Swan will refuse a debate is because he’ll want a staffer behind him to lip sync his replies lol.
I like Poland’s politics there is a Right Wing party in Government and a Centre-right Party in Opposition and the Left Wingers have 2 small socialist parties that get less than 10% of the vote sweet!
Glen is eating scraps and saying out loud – Yum, this is really delicious.
While the scrap throwers are rolling their eyes and saying to themselves – You know, we really should have him put down.
Glen,
I am not bagging the Australian “just because it scrutinises the Opposition…,” I’m bagging The Australian because it does a disservice to our democracy. I don’t want to be rude, Glen, but I don’t rate you as an intellect worth taking seriously on most matters, least of all on matters relating to the media. I think you should stick to clever takes on Labor leaders’ names like Dudd and Dillard.
I will only say this once as it is boring and counterproductive to dwell on remarks that reflect such a simplistic view of the world, but just so Glen has an opportunity to understand, here’s my point:
the argument of “if you don’t like it, don’t read it” totally misses the importance of holding our media to a standard that provides for a clear and fair dissemination of information, crucial to democratic decision making in our society. The same argument is put up in the U.S by defender of Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News Chanel (FNC). Of course, to ignore FNC would be to tacitly condone the clear bias that the network pushes in it’s supposedly “fair & balanced” newscasts. There are countless examples of FNC trying to unfairly influence the outcome of elections in the United States by smearing candidates, distorting facts, omitting relevant facts in stories, ignoring obviously relevant stories, engaging in rank hypocrisy or running P.R for conservative candidates. I’d highly recommend Robert Greenwald’s documentary “Outfoxed” to anyone who has an interest in exploring this a little more.
I could go on and on about this, but i suspect there is little point. Suffice it to say that Glen’s suggestion of “if you don’t like it read something else” is a little bit like saying, if you don’t like the political landscape, don’t pay attention to politics. That may work for people who place little value on a functioning democracy or take things for granted to the extent that they are consumed by indifference, but not me, Glen. I was raised to believe that democracy is something to be defended against all enemies, internal and external and that in order to achieve that, one must be eternally vigilant.
So – the polling figures indicate that the voters think Costello would be a better treasurer than Swan. BFD. Considering Costello has been been doing the job for over 11 years, supported by the whole Treasury department, he would be expected to be regarded as more capable than a bloke who is waiting to take over the job.
“I was raised to believe that democracy is something to be defended against all enemies, internal and external and that in order to achieve that, one must be eternally vigilant.” Optimist
I’m glad you agree that we cannot entrust our 1 trillion dollar economy to the woeful abilities of Wayne Swan! I am defending our country and remaining eternally vigilant to the consequences of letting Rooster Swan become the Treasurer surely the ALP could put a more competent person in the job?
Oh and your petty attacks on my intellect hmmm well its interesting that you equate anybody with differing political views to yourself as being stupid. I dont buy that argument im afraid!
Iran – it would be complete lunacy for the US to attack Iran. No votes in it here as the voters are sick of the Iraq thing. Iran would close the Persian Gulf, so no oil being exported from any middle east supplier. Petrol here would be $3.00 a litre minimum. No votes for Howard in that.
Wow, Wayne Swan must be pretty clever if he can read his advisor’s lips when they are standing behind him…
Glen – how do you know Swan would be a ‘woeful’ treasurer? Costello was a suburban lawyer in 1996 with little knowledge of economic matters.
I don’t know when was the last time you read the SMH. I will assume because I know you live in Melbourne Ports electorate that if you’ve read it at all, it hasn’t been much and probably online. The SMH has been taking too much out of the Daily Telegraph’s playbook. It isn’t even in the same category as the Age any more (Alan Ramsey excepted), it is more like the DT without the tabloid gossip stories. You have, however, correctly flagged The Age ;-D
Glen,
it is most telling that you choose to equate our democracy with our economy (by your logic, they appear interchangeable). That points to the reason why i don’t rate you as intellect worth taking seriously. The attempt to shift the focus to Wayne Swan and Australia’s one trillion dollar economy is reminiscent of the way that the Murdoch media outlets function in attempting reframe issues that don’t paint their political allies in a positive light. The last, best hope of this clearly struggling Government is to focus on its “economic credentials” and to run a scare campaign against the Labor front bench. True to form, Glen has again run this line, parroting the Government reflecting a mindset of confused petulance.
Glen, if you don’t like Wayne Swan, you should stop reading about him.
Given I have absolutely no imagination… I’m going to post what I posted yesterday about five minutes before the other thread got shut down. This is the second time this has happened to me… maybe i should think of going to bed before 2am…
***
Generally I take little notice of Newspoll’s little ’side polls’ (ie the one they released today) but this one interested me. It’s no surprise Costello is flogging Swan in preferred treasurer, but this stat:
But on the back of five interest rates rises in a row, Labor is narrowing the gap on who would be the best manager of interest rates.
Mr Howard was nominated by 36 percent of voters (up two points from August), compared to 31 percent for Mr Rudd (up four points).
Obviously I haven’t being paying attention here, but I would have thought given the scare campaigns and negativity in the media, Rudd would have been miles in front on this one (or at least ‘in front’.) I wonder if the stories that the ‘libs will be punished for interest rate rises’ actually hold much sway after all.
Makes you wonder what would happen if the economy suddenly becomes the issue of the campaign.
Thanks, mikem, for correcting me. I was basing that statement on information I read from another blog, not this one.
I was at a wedding earlier in the year sitting with one of treasury’s economist who has frequent meetings with costello and said that he did not have a clue about the economy or economics. He is the king of lip sync, and little if none actually comes from him.
This person had a phd in economics, and was very credible. Need I say more!
Stick that in your pipe Glen
Bryce #23… the reasons weren’t given on Insiders, but as this government has a record of pushing the envelope, and considering “caretaker mode†is merely a convention, who is to stop them from running the info ads right through the campaign (without consultation with Labor)?
Howard has got history of ignoring or getting around the “Caretaker Convention” as this example shows.
{The Howard Government has gotten into hot water before over the timing of these ads. The $6.1million campaign was first launched while the Government was in caretaker mode before the 2004 federal election. Mark Latham’s opposition cried foul over the ads being run during the election campaign, arguing that they were designed to scare people into voting for the Howard Government rather than provide information to the public.
As a result, the ads were tagged as “Authorised by the Australian Federal Police” in an attempt to distinguish them from the Liberal Party’s election campaign advertising.
The ads appeared again in July, 2005, after bombings on the London Underground. The renewed campaign ran over two weeks and was reported to have cost a further $2.2 million. This time, with no election looming, the ads were “Authorised by the Australian Government”, a clear message that it was the incumbents who were responsible for the nation’s security.}
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=your%20say&subclass=general&story_id=585571&category=Opinion
Shouldn’t this poll be Wayne Swan Vs Tony Abbott as treasurer??
Or Wayne Swan Vs Alexander Downer as treasurer??
Or Wayne Swan Vs John Howard(22% John) as treasurer??
Glen, a well argued case based on fact could win me over re Swan. Just present it. Now, when was Swan last Treasurer and when did he do such a bad job?
I’m amazed Swan even managed to get 21%. Shadow Treasurers usually have zero name recognition and Costello would have oodles of it having been around so long and as the annointed one for the PM’s job should they win.
In any case, elections aren’t won by Treasurers, they are won by leaders, policies and scare campaigns.
Optimist@50
You won the argument. At least by virtue of the fact that you’ve discovered punctuation, but also because you HAVE an argument.
That said, I will keep reading the Oz because I want to see how far down the rabbit hole Dennis (and Milne) will go.
Swan has never been Treasurer i might correct you Gary but he will be if Labor wins that is until Gillard wants the job…i find it amusing that you all seem to think Wayne Swan will do a bang up job on the economy if Labor wins that kind of ignorance can and will prove costly in the ‘hip pocket’ if anything Swan will be the target of Coalition advertising in the election…Rudd’s best decision was to confirm Swan as Treasurer if Labor wins lol another own goal people may not like Costello but they know he can do the job people dont like Swan and know he cant do the job…you are flogging a dead horse if you think people will take Labor seriously on the economy with Swan as shadow treasurer.
Abbott’s hospital plan sounds like the first step to privatisation to me. Why wouldn’t they? They have privatised everything else. Privatisation would be a powerful weapon to scare the populace.
Glen
I think you should address what Gary Bruce said @ 62.
Why is Swan bad? What exactly does he have planned that worries you? What would he do poorly that Costello has done well?
Here Glen, have some of mine:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
John Witheld
made me spill me coffee ya bastard
post of the year
#58 Max, thanks for reposting the comment from the previous thread. Frankly, it is the most incisive comment thus far on the thread.
#55 Costello was never a ’suburban lawyer’.
Abbott’s Hospital Plan is just a broader rehash of what the QLD Borbage National Party Government brought in.
It was an abject failure and just a return to the system under the Bjelke Petersen regime which was a system of Boards run by National Party lackeys on the gravy train but still had to have oversight by a centralised Health Bureaucracy in Brisbane.
Back to the future anyone. This mob are in a “Policy Vacuum”.
This apparent scare campaign about Gillard potentially becoming treasurer is ludicrous. Folks, Gillard is more popular than Costello. She’s certainly more popular than Swan. The public couldn’t give a rats about her political faction. Moreover, it’s a non-starter to begin with – Swan has a background in economic policy (and has published some very interesting material on it), whereas Gillard was a top industrial relations lawyer before entering politics. Why on earth would they shift them from their current positions?
I’m waiting for TheOz’s inevitable shift to tabloid form to match its journalism. Perhaps in the process, it might lose a few of the columnists (left & right) who said all they ever had to say decades ago.
Not that I think “economic management” is THE poll issue, or even one the major ones. Those are WorkChoices and Climate Change, with Taxpayer-funded ads catching up, and “sleeper issues” like Quarantine failures (eg fire ants, Citrus canker, equine influenza), recycled “promises” that are recycled because Howard has no intention of keeping them. Indeed, Howard’s allergy to spending on major national infrastructure – one of the things voters EXPECT the feds to do – is turning into “Mutter-power”.
In addition, TheOz’s target demographic ought to know that external pressures like commodity booms & busts, USA debt (macro & micro), the impact of BIG growing economies like China and India have far more influence on our economy, as long as the government keeps the fiscal lid on things – and the last Fed Gov that didn’t, in a peculiarly Australian crises (commodity market bust, drought) and landed in a fiscal mess not paralleled in USA / UK / NW Europe was the last Frazer Gov, when Guess Who was treasurer!
Given TheOz’s Internet-savvy, statistics-savvy, On-line media-addicted demographic, it’s blatantly “right of Ghengis” stance is, I feel, now a plus for Rudd. This occurred in USA-06 mid-term elections, when Rupert’s strident ultra-negative, ultra-right, pro-republican TV and press stances became a significant plus for Democrats – which most Oz readers would know!
{#55 Costello was never a ’suburban lawyer’.}
Except for $ Sweets.
Why is Swan bad? What exactly does he have planned that worries you? What would he do poorly that Costello has done well?
Oh Swan is bad because he ha NO plans for the future and has NO economic policy hows that for starters…for someone who voted against balancing the budget and who voted against the GST and other economic reforms augers badly for this ignoramus.
Wow you left winger sure do know how to debate bringing petty childish things like spelling and punctuation wow you clearly win debates doing this don’t you!
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
There that should suffice to make up for my lack of (,) in my last post!
Glen – who do you think Labor *should* have as Treasurer if not Swan, and why? How do you or anyone else know that he can’t do the job?
In answering, try and avoid arguments based on “experience”, because that one always leads to the conclusion that we should never change government.
How funny is Scotty and his ozpolitics link??
Dunkley and Casey are likely to be picked up by the ALP?? HAHA!!
Dawson to go in QLD?
Warringah is a LIKELY retain?? HA!
As for WA, Cowan and Swan are on the radar for Lib gains-they’re the only two seats that might go Liberal.
BTW, Greenway is on 11%-you’re guaranteeing that Greenway will swing 12% to the ALP? As per ‘The Castle’
Tell him he’s dreamin’!
Given that “neither” got 6% of the vote, doesn’t this mean that, if the Coalition wins then when Costello takes over in this term then HIS treasurer (whoever that may be) is getting thrashed by Swan?
Heading could read “Swan smashes Liberal candidate for treasurer!”
You need to put them in between the words.
Spelling and punctuation – as opposed to a stream of consciousness – can actually win the odd argument. Try it.
Glen, I agree with what Econocrat said in 77.
If, as appears most likely, Labor takes over Government after the election, which front benchers are appointed to which positions should be a matter of interest to you.
I for one, would be very interested in your take on the structure of the front bench, rather than what you think as recommended by our friends at the Australian.
The GG is reaching down really deep to find something to use as a lifeline for Howard. This isn’t journalism. And how does Shanahan find the time to research and write so many lead articles? Obviously he doesn’t read them back to check for inconcsistencies.
Re Max
I’ve been arguing for some times that interest rates are not such a great issue for the ALP much to the dissaproval of people on this blog. I just don’t think anyone believes the interest rates rises we’ve had would not have occurred under a Labor Government.
This makes me shake my head with disbelief every time someone talks about the number of high mortgage houses there are in an electorate as evidence that it’s bound to swing towards Labor or mentions that people are ‘bound to be angry’. It’s just a nonsense to me.
I also think conservative bloggers place far too much relevance on the economy to voting intentions of the mass public. You just need to look at the leaked Crosby/Textor polling to see that the economy is essentially a non-issue amongst voters.
For Labor to try and wage a war on the Coalition on economic grounds would be crazy. They’d be better off just not talking about it and hitting the Coalition where they are really hurting.
For mine Tanner would be better at Treasurer, but then again Finance is almost as important (but gets nowhere near the same recognition), so it’s not a huge deal for me.
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Am I in the bad books for taking offence to Julie’s comments last night.
I dealt with that by e-mail. By the way Julie, I sent another e-mail to your inbox.
CTEP, the recent rising interest rates don’t neccessarily tip the economic argument in Labor’s favour, but what they are doing is nullifying the government’s economic credentials. Without them, the government has very little left as positives, as shown by the polls.
If you are attempting to debate, it is important to make sense. Facts and sound reasoning are also highly desirable.
{Lecturer in media and communications at the University of Melbourne Sally Young has described Government advertising as “one of the greatest perks of incumbency”.
In modern politics, mass media advertising is considered a crucial factor in deciding election results particularly by the parties themselves. The financial and bureaucratic resources of government puts the incumbent at a distinct advantage.}
http://canberra.yourguide.com.au/detail.asp?class=your%20say&subclass=general&story_id=585571&category=Opinion
If something like this can be a major determining factor in an election campaign and influence which side gets into power for the next 3 years, then why can’t the Australian have questions on issues like this included in their Newspoll and determine just what the public really think and whether they are influenced by them or not.
As far as the economy is concerned Labor can simply run with the campaign that Howard and Costello have wasted our prosperity [not spending on infrastructure, hospitals etc] and use the opinion of economists thus;
“ANZ Bank chief economist Saul Eslake says the Federal Government should have made better use of the revenue it has made from Australia’s resources boom.
Mr Eslake has addressed the Australian British Chamber of Commerce and told the gathering the Government has spent or given away almost every single dollar associated with the windfall gains.
He says it has put upward pressure on interest rates and the money should have been used to address some of the national issues.”
http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/26/2044302.htm?section=australia
Managing the economy in Australia has mostly been a cakewalk for the Howard/Costello ‘team’. The Asian crisis in 1997 was no real threat to Oz. Since 2003, the money has been rolling in from the resources boom and blind freddie could have managed it well. We now have a 17 billion surplus. Let’s face the facts – the bureaucrats in Treasury manage the numbers for the Treasurer. The Treasurer’s main job is to say ‘No’ to ministers as they come up with silly ideas to waste our money. Swan or Tanner, supported by the army of well qualified Treasury bureaucrats, would do as good a job as Costello.
On a different matter-a 2nd cabinet member (Costello) has come out and slammed the new study into workchoices. So anything even partly Union funded -bad but Employer funded-good. Ouch -the truth really does hurt.
Glen, I was well aware Swan has not been a treasurer and thankyou for making my point. So how do you know he will make a bad treasurer? So far you have failed to answer this to my satisfaction. No proof, none at all, just a gut dislike on your part. Not good enough.
Anyone notice that The Australian has almost no coverage to the release of the “Australia at Work” report? I’m puzzled as to whether The Oz thinks the study isn’t newsworthy or simply wants to marginalise any research that reflects poorly on Workchoices.
I’ve seen two references to it under the breaking news section on the Australian website, but nothing more. Interestingly, the Herald-Sun and Tele gave it a prominent run. The Australian is just shameless.
It looks very much like Howard has closely been following Vladimir Putin’s strategy to try and control the Government benches in perpetuity.
{In addition, Putin’s own popularity and the Kremlin’s “control over politics and the media” virtually guarantees whoever he anoints as his successor a resounding electoral victory in the presidential vote next March.
Commenting on a suggestion he should head the United Russia party list for the December Duma elections, Putin said to huge applause: “I with gratitude accept your proposal.”}
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=253962
A compliant Media is crucial in both cases to holding on to power. In our case the Australian, Daily Telegraph, Age etc, well and truly fit the bill in this country.
# 60 “not have a clue about the economy or economics…. king of lip sync”
Is this a case of 11 times Economics I, rather than 11 years of economics? There have been hints.
Remember how he dealt with Turnbull’s tax paper, arguably the only out-of-the-square thinking on the subject in recent history? He just crudely misrepresented and sprayed all over it, rather than address the substance.
There have even been signs that he’s missed the politics. Recall the nightmare of compliance the GST was when first introduced? It seemed he had just ticked what the bureaucracy had served up.
Interesting that none of the economic and financial journalists has ever probed his economic understanding. If I’m being unfair here, please correct me. It’s just my impression.
Judy, It’s not so much me calling it a retain, it’s just that this was the way the numbers came out. If I recall correctly (my calculations are not in front of me right now ) Wakefield had an unusually high standard deviation, such that the ‘96, ‘98 and ‘01 elections were similar, but ‘04 showed a huge swing to Labour. It seems from what you’re saying that it will continue. There are going to be exceptions to my rule, particularly with seats (such as Bennelong) where the demographics change over time.
Thanks for your comments, though
Antonio (20) – Thanks, you’re right and I’ll correct that.
It is fairly obvious that the Government Gazette chose questions which they thought would produce positive results for the government, and probably trashed any questions they asked that made Labor look good. I mean, comparing treasurers really is bottom-of-the-barrel stuff.
Despite the polls, Rudd is the real underdog. He is up against a ruthless PM who has no sense of decency or fair play and News Ltd., who likewise have no sense of decency or fair play.
Rudd and Labor need to find as many ways as they possibly can to connect with voters but without relying on the mainstream media.
I really do hope Labor wins this election. There is something quite sinister lurking behind the scenes with respect to the relationship between the government and many parts of the media, and it is ultimately doing this country a great deal of damage.
glen, you talk of experiance then your on the wrong horse cobber swan has a degree in economics and costello has?
The fact that the Liberals anbandon their ship by not to contest Labor seats, show how doom they understand they are. I’ve heard that in this election, the Liberal only concentrate on keeping / holding their current seats. Well, with that sort of defeated strategy, why should we have confidence on them?
The fact that Coalition MPs distance themselve from their leader Howard by not wanting Howard goes near / attends their campaign speech; by not mentioning the unpopular Howard in their campgain leaflets. Well, why should we have confidence on Howard?
I really couldn’t care less about the economic credentials of the treasurer, as long as his policies are sound. He has the treasury to advise him on all the details, he just has to be willing to take their advice. I am far more concerned with this current government. Howard seems to be willing to throw caution to the wind in his bid to get re-elected.
I am looking forward to the Rudd era, not only for good economic management, but compassionate social policy. The Howard government is the highest taxing government in our history, yet education, health care social security and housing affordability have never been worse. As Hugh Mackay says, we have been asleep, but there are signs we are waking up http://www.smh.com.au/news/book-reviews/advance-australia–where/2007/09/24/1190486175335.html
Gary Bruce,
Glen doesn’t have an answer to your question because, essentially there isn’t one. The general thrust of a conservative response to that question would be something akin to what Patricia Karvelas wrote for The Oz today….
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22516432-11949,00.html
“The contest will be between a long-time successful treasurer and a newcomer with no runs on the board.” – Patricia Karvelas. Hell if we use that as the yardstick we would never change government and never change treasurers not even within one party. Stupid argument.
CTEP @ 78
I’ve been arguing for some times that interest rates are not such a great issue for the ALP much to the dissaproval of people on this blog. I just don’t think anyone believes the interest rates rises we’ve had would not have occurred under a Labor Government.
I really, really wish that was true. I would love it every single member of the electorate was forced to take an economics 101 course so that they knew once and for all that the government has very little control over interest rates. It would kill so many negative campaigns by both parties before they even begun. Sadly, I don’t think that day will come, although we have come a long way in the last three years. I’m sure a lot of people still think the government has some control of the rates
Interesting that you suggest that Labor should avoid arguing on economic grounds, because isn’t that promoted as a main reason for Latham’s downfall? Admittedly he didn’t have a 10 point lead in the polls, but still.
Out of curiousity, if you guys feel like engaging in, you know, debate… does anybody think the libs will use latham in the election campaign? Or has he lost that much credibility that it will be seen as a negative? Back when his book was released, everybody was predicting it was ammo for the upcoming election… not so sure now.
***
Rebecca @ 71
Gillard more popular then Costello? Big call. I agree the scare campaign is daft, as most scare campaigns are, but I don’t know if she is that more popular…or maybe it’s my bias showing.
I think most voters will see it Rob’s way (92).
One of the unfortunate but inevitable side effects of the Lib-NP government propaganda advertising blitz of recent years and particularly in very recent times will be its impact on the perceived credibility by the Australian public of the objectivity and professionalism of government departments.
By so closely linking “Australian Government’ with the dissemination of pro Lib-NP propaganda [too many examples to list] the obvious bias of the latter will be, I strongly suspect, be linked in the minds of ordinary Australians to the general performance of our public service.
In fact, I suspect many people will now view the public service as no longer serving the needs of the general public but merely [and I know by and large this is probably partly inaccurate] an arm of the Coalition political parties.
The level of trust will be diminished.
Sad.
such opinion polls are expected…. however economic policy is also
about the FAIR distribution of the surplus….. not just creating a surplus
(growth) ….. the fact that the govt seems to me so awash with money
suggests the settings are such that either taxes are too high or there
is not enough necessary expenditure or both! …… Is this current
policy good economic policy?
If anyone wants a good read that explodes the myth of the coalition’s economic credentials, I’d highly recommend Andrew Charlton’s book “Ozonomics.”
After reading it, I was reminded of Paul Keating’s remarks about the economy that Costello inherited….”this guy got hit in the arse with a rainbow.”
Scotty @#88.
There wasn’t a swing to Labor in Wakefiled. A distribution prior to 2004 merged Wakefield with the old Bonython and made it a notional Labor seat. There was actually a swing to the Libs.
Patricia Karvelas in the GG:
Ok, so an inexperienced person can become Treasurer and get some runs on the board… hmmm… a fair argument.
But hold on, we nopw learn that a newcomer with no runs on the board should not even try for Treasurer.
Well… maybe… but Swan it seems – does have some runs on the board, and from Opposition (surely a harder place to bat than from the Treasurer’s office).
Good for you Swanee! But wait… there’s more… Costello is arrogant and doesn’t have the smirk. Looks like Swanee is on a winner here… uh, oh… wait on…
Thought not… apparently being arrogant and having The Smirk makes you charismatic, surely an essential qualification for being Treasurer.
So it seems anyone with no runs on the board can be Treasurer. After they become Treasurer then this principle ceases to apply, disqualifying Swan, who while not being arrogant or being a smirker, does not have the charisma that being arrogant and having The Smirk gives to Costello.
Patricia is obviously well qualified and suitably numerate to comment on the Treasurership. Just take this quote:
WTF? We economic morons couldn’t possibly hope to understand how 10 = 12. I suppose that’s why Costello has so much charisma. Peter can do these kinds of sums in his head.
Scotty – the problem with Wakefield is that you can’t compare the last result to the ones before it. The electorate of Bonython – solid Labor – was abolished before the 2004 election and was sucked into Wakefield. In elections prior to that, Wakefield was strong Liberal, Bonython was strong Labor. The Coalition only just fell over the line in 2004 courtesy of “The Latham Factor”.
This election is an entirely different kettle of fish. This seat will return to Labor, mostly because “The Latham Factor” voters will return anyway, but also because of the general pro-ALP swing in this state.
I predict 52/48 to the ALP on election night: not as large as the state-wide swing, but enough to get the Labor candidate up.
Bushfire Bill – as it’s purely a convention, yes, nothing stops the govt running ads through the campaign that the opposition disagrees with.
That the govt authorises some (but not all) ads is however an admission that the ads contain ‘political matter’ (and, if in print, ‘electoral matter’, which means likely to affect voting behaviour).
Labor would have almost nil legal grounds, but a field day if the govt kept the ‘campaign’ ads going.
GARY 94 If its the same patricia karvelas she used to edit the student paper at RMIT and was one of those hard line lefties who have made the transition to establishment. Thats right Govts would never change at all with her logic.
Rudd is very prepared to become PM. He is someone who has done many different things other than by a poli and would enter the job of PM with the experience of being a senior public servant, a senior foreign affairs offiicial, is bi-lingual, exposed via his wife to small/medium size business issues and has some empathy with the poor given his childhood experiences. He is the most prepared person to PM in modern times.
101 Bushfire Bill, you’ve made Patricia’s piece sound like the rot it is. An excellent posting.
I hope the Libs keep those ads going. They’ve been the best Labor ads our money can buy. If you think people are sick of them now how would they feel about them come election day?
Didn’t Labor lose Wakefield to the Libs in 2004? If they held the seat in 2001 and then lost it in 2004 then surely there was a swing to the Libs in that election (courtesy Latham).
So surely there should be a strong swing back to Labor in this election, given the strong polling in SA and the absence of a Latham factor. Or am I missing something?
Hey Glen,what did you think of Howard as Treasurer????
I agree about the effect of the government ads. Everybody must be absolutely sick of them by now. If Labor keeps pushing the line that this advertising money would be better spent on hospitals etc, it will be a very effective campaign weapon.
Ah no, I’m confused. Wasn’t held by Labor, but they only just missed out on winning it 2004 despite Latham.
“Didn’t Labor lose Wakefield to the Libs in 2004? If they held the seat in 2001 and then lost it in 2004 then surely there was a swing to the Libs in that election (courtesy Latham).
So surely there should be a strong swing back to Labor in this election, given the strong polling in SA and the absence of a Latham factor. Or am I missing something?”
Yes and no. South Australia had 12 seats before the 2004 election. Redistribution cut away a seat. The safe Labor division of Bonython was abolished and absorbed into the safe Liberal division of Wakefield. This “new” Wakefield had a notional Labor majority of 1.5. Bonython incumbent Martyn Evans ran in this seat. The then-incumbent Liberal member for Wakefield from 1983-2004, Neil Andrew, stood down. David Fawcett, of course, won the seat, and the seat counted as a notional Liberal gain.
Karma @ 121:
Right. So Labor didn’t win the seat despite a notional 1.5% margin after redistribution. That would suggest that people there weren’t too keen on what the Latham ALP was offering I guess. Is there any reason to think that Wakefield will swing substantially less than the state-wide average? On a margin of just 0.7% in SA, I would have thought this would be one of the first seats in Labor’s basket on election night…
Costello v Swan….hardly likely to be foremost in peoples’ minds when they mark their ballots. And interest rates? It’s not the issue it once was. This is now a minor component in a larger picture and will most likely be subsumed in the broader issue of who is “most preferred.” In any case, it is hardly an issue that Howard can campaign on: he will also have some big negatives when it comes to whether he can be trusted on interest rates.
Terry McCran finance editor in the Herald Sun makes no bones about it, he is hoping for a Coalition win. Even tried to play the analyst and interpret the polls in apostive light for the Coalition? What makes these characters think Rudd will be done over slowly in a long election campaign. For what it’s worth I think he will win the campaign given the material he has to work with and given that he has the voters essentially on side. Amazing stuff really.
To be fair, he did point out that even on the most positive statistical outlook for the government, they will still currently lose (53 / 47).
I wonder just how long these partisan journalists think they can run a party campaign through the newspapers and not eventually get accosted by a disgruntled punter? They are playing with fire sometimes so blatant and malicious their reporting. I am sure people like Ackerman and Milne must have body guards by now.
I get hate mail simply for my letters to the editor I can imagine just how angry people will be with journalists who have a daily voice to spruik their bias.
I don’t think you have to worry about him. This is Wayne Swan’s response
to such piffle:
Gary (124)
I suspect Terry McCran is just playing to Rupert Murdoch tune. Hes smart but I am sure he even has a puke bucket next to his desk after he flogs out some of the dribble that makes print.
I’m sure he knows it bullshit …but he knows what side his bread is buttered!!!
Punctuation is not a left-wing conspiracy, Gary @77 and elsewhere. It’s a handy means of making the spoken word intelligble in written form. Let’s not score own goals when things aren’t going the Coalition’s way. It betrays a sense of panic.
Kina… they’ll manage. I presume they’re just doing what they’re paid to do, write stories for newspapers. That people would have any real anger for them is a bit alarming. Why get angry with someone for voicing their opinion? I thought this was a democracy.
I’ll try again, this time with the tag closed.
That’d be the poll’s TPP average from June 2006?
I’mm getting tired of hearing about these treasurers “managing the economyâ€. They don’t. They collect taxes and decide where to spend them. Sometimes where they spend them has an effect on the way in which the economy grows, like when they give cash incentives to an industry. Most often it doesn’t.
Occasionally, governments will choose to do something that alters the economy structurally. Like floating the $, or deregulating industries, or reducing tariffs, or making people work more for less. This particular government has not done very much of that sort of thing, at least until whetever it is that the stupid IR policy is called now.
This treasurer is really nothing more than a glorified tax accountant; really all he’s done is collect more and more money every year, redistributed some, and saved some more. to be honest, he’s done that pretty well, but enough of this garbage about “managing the economyâ€, or “running a trillion dollar economyâ€. That’s just garbage, the Federal treasurer does the same job as the guy at the cricket club who collects the rego fees and buys the equipment, just on a larger scale.
If Labor wins the election it will mean Australia will be a single party Federation and anything that goes wrong will be Labors fault. What will the Labor government argue that the Coalition left the country in a good shape?
By Rudds own admission the buck will stop with him when it comes to health. Any problems it’s Rudds fault. With emplyment the way it is any decline in emplyment will be Rudds fault.
So no passing of the buck and things getting done or being held accountable? Sounds pretty good to me John of Melb.
Pat I doubt there will be no passing the buck. NSW health will probably still be in a mess.
Pat why not hold the incompetent State ALP Governments accountable?
Ashley @ 122 – the reason I think this seat will swing less is that Fawcett has worked it hard over the past 3 years, no doubt mindful of his razor-thin margin. It will still be a Labor gain mind you, but the incoming Labor member (Nick Champion) will have a lot smaller swing than the ALP members who will win Kingston and Makin, even though all three seats require similar swings to win.
No doubt buck-passing will be attempted if thought to be politically worthy, however it would seem to me that the ability of outsiders to be able to say ‘it’s all Labor’ might make both sides more inclined to work towards solutions rather than playing each other off. That can’t be bad.
John of Melbourne –
Lucky thing you’re in Melbourne, eh?! You don’t have to worry about NSW Health! Just keep voting Labor in Vic. and you’ll be fine!
I’ve been to the Crikey web site & there is an interesting article on how a odds boffin has come up with a list of probable Labor gains. Have a sgwizz!
http://www.crikey.com.au/Election-2007/20071002-Polls-enter-the-final-quarter.html
That comment is with regards to health – not necessarily a defence of Sussex St et al.
Pat in your argument as I read it you imply that all sides are not working to their optimum level towards solutions, would this be the States or Federal government?
In my opinion ther will always be buck passing why would you accept the blame for something that goes wrong?
LOL, hasn’t stopped Howard from continually reliving 1996 and basking in the glorious economy that Keating handed him, sheesh, 11 years on he is still blaming all his mistakes on them.
As for Costello V Swan, it is pure myth, of his own making, that Costello is painted as a good treasurer. Facts are he has done nothing more than collect the proceeds of the reforms that were instituted for him and the boom from China. In the not too distant future that myth will be well and truly shattered when Swan opens the books and allows the treasury officials freedom to speak the truth.
From Tina of Canberra
Fred (107) The upper echelons of the Public Service have long been politicised, and Labor is at fault as much as the Coalition for doing this. It will be interesting to see what , if any, department heads remain if Rudd gains power. However, the masses of workers for the government will continue as they always have, regardless of political persuasion. I think that they regard their political masters with a healthy scepticism, regardless of ideology.
Interestingly, Canberra provides the ALP with two of its safest seats, and that is unlikely to change this election. Of course, the value of a vote in the ACT is about half to two thirds that of Tasmania or the NT, but that’s another story. It’s clearly not in the Coalition’s interest to provide another safe seat for Labor by allowing one vote, one value in the ACT.
I heard a funny story the other day relating to what could be described as ‘Phantom Pork’. Apparently, Mr. Cobb’s office ring up a mid-level medical bureaucrat (not federally employed!) in Far West and demands that a press release be sent to local rag announcing 200k of extra federal health funding. Bureaucrat replies that they’ve had no details of new funding – nothing on paper… heard nothing at all. Mr. Cobb’s ppl get huffy and say ‘it’s all happening – it’s all approved’ just do the press release. Bureaucrat politely declines pending further details or at the very least something on paper!
Anyone else heard any stories of Phantom Pork?
Howard getting grilled by Latham and Crean – Howard looking distinctly mouldy after this episode.
“Howard meets Honan: You be the judge whether he lied about it”
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/12/1060588384214.html
kina that article is over 4 years old.
yes I know.
Glum sez
Surely it is not our job as more or less supporters of the left to hold them accountable. This is the job of the state Tory oppositions. The only problem is the Tories are even more useless.
In NSW in particular The Greens attempts to hold the ALP governments responsible are often stymied by the homophobic, godbothering Liberals and Nationals who often side with Labor to prevent proper and full inquiries and block reasonable amendments.
See http://www.smh.com.au/text/articles/2007/09/30/1191090936579.html for examples
Lol, Johnny Rocket wouldn’t dream of it. (I like your post it made me laugh) Vic health is in a bad state too if memory serves me correctly I think Moorabin hospital. We also have issues with Police corruption
Does anyone know where Margo Kingston writes these days? (She doesn’t seem to be on the SMH any more)
Thanks
:)
There is a big difference from the average Joe voicing his opinion to his mate and a person using a State and Nation wide newspaper to voice their partisan based opinion in order help one side win an election regardless of truth and facts. One is reasonable the other is corruption of duty, unless it be balanced in the same paper with a counter opinion. Especially if the opinion misrepresent facts and contexts or deliberate omits peritent facts.
Being in a widely published newspaper the opinion is given credibility regardless of its true credibility.
When Howard sacrificed his party to doom – the longest suicide note.
John Howard’s industrial revolution
November 20, 2005
http://sunday.ninemsn.com.au/sunday/cover_stories/article_1915.asp
Unless it is The Australian. Like their counterparts in crime, the current government, we are “onto” their tricks and can’t be fooled any more
{Does anyone know where Margo Kingston writes these days?}
Julie, looks like she just runs a web site and writes books now.
“Not Happy John” is the latest effort and has its own website.
This is Margo’s.
http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/blog/13
There’s a comparison of 1996 vs 2007 using 10 months of polling data. So far 2007 bears a remarkable resemblance to 1996. If the similarities continue through to the election, then the ALP is on track to achieve a swing of over 9% and a hypothetical seat win of around 40 seats.
http://www.ozelection2007.info/forums/viewtopic.php?id=767
John Howards Industrial revolution will succeed as Kevin Rudd has by and large emulated most of his policies. He may have sacrificed his government for this revolution.
Michel de Nostredame everyone should hold their Governments accountable left, right, centre whatever!
For those who have their own web sites going & would like extra ‘tools’ like a Webb poll I have found one -
http://www.vizu.com/
Hope its of some use tome one.
#150 Julie, I think she still very very occasionally appears on http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au and http://www.webdiary.com.au She has a book out this month “Still Not Happy John”.
154,
Thanks Scorpio
. She was my lifeline when we lived in America and had news only via the various newspapers webpages.
Spotted an interesting footnote on Margo’s web. Haven’t seen it on any others.
{Contributors please note that this site is archived in the National Library of Australia in perpetuity.}
Looks like a good site too.
“At 77, and elsewhere” (130), one of course finds Glen, not Gary. My apologies. A pedant chastened.
John of Home-of-the-premiers-on-yarra: what Michel de Nostredame was trying to say was that the state Tory oppositions are not doing their job and running interference when others have a go.
He agrees with your sentiments.
To that net end, I heard a rumour on the news broadcast while in the car recently that Barry O’Farrel in NSW could be out in a leadership spill within 6 to 12 months if he doesn’t pick up his act. They don’t think he has done enough since the elections in March.
Aristotle #155
This is all very nice, but i see you’ve missed the crucial numbers concerning a comparison of the preferred treasurer. Clearly only limited use can be found for such statistics as primary votes or TPP.
Cheers Michel de Nostredame & Albert Ross
The Liberals have to pick up their act thus far Johnny has been talking about how good he has done in the past I am looking forward to what he has to say in regards to Housing affordability. His re-election platform should be economic and green times for all!
Since O’Farrel is a moderate, my guess is “they” refers to the hard right, e.g. Dave Clarke and his fellow wackos.
Which is worse the hard left of the ALP or the hard right of the Liberal Party?
Glen @167
Clearly the Hard right of the Libs. They are actually influential.
Hard right of the Liberal party. The hard Labor left are never in positions of power anyway. If someone wants to be Labor leader, they move from the left to the right (e.g. Hawke and Keating).
The hard left of Labor have a separate party called “The Greens”.
Last time i checked Gillard was deputy leader of the ALP Yo ho ho?
Glen
Deputy leader of the ALP has about as much power as Deputy leader of liberal party….i.e. none.
Sorry, that should be deputy leader of coalition…
Here we go with the Gillard slurs again… of course in the times of Howard it is easy to overestimate the size of the ‘hard left’. When you get people telling Malcolm Fraser to join the Greens you know you’re in trouble.
Greetings, all. I can tell you why we will vote for Labor this election.
My wife worked all this years starting in 2000 in small sewing/alteration business.
Back then she had paid public holidays and 3! days of sick leave per year.
Then things “progressedâ€. No pay rises for last 3 years! Not more paid public holidays, leave or sick leave! Enormous pressure, stress and shouting at work. “If you don’t like it – just leave†attitude from the owners. Limited time for breaks and even for toilet! Well, my friends, as for us – it is time to put the creeping balance back for working families, and this is why we will say, bye-bye, Johnny.
Kina #151,
Well said.
I was eating my lunch and didn’t want to interrupt it to type. Thanks for a point well made.
Glen #167 There are extremes on both sides of politics so I think the answer to your question is that they are as ‘worse’ as each other. They have more in common with each other than either would be prepared to admit. Both sides are ideologically driven, unprepared to compromise, see politics as a moral crusade and their utterances are replete with name calling and pointless categorisation (for example, the Right refers to ’socialists’ and ‘bleeding hearts’ while the Left refers to fascism and religious fundamentalism).
To the Chinster – you should have a look at the wakefield polls in the Advertiser – Wakefield has been consistently polling higher than seats such as Kingston, from memory 61% and 58% TPP.
I don’t think so. Religious conservatives are opposed to the idea that people should form governments that actively solve problems, instead they suggest moral authority derives from mythical beings. The only problem with the looney left is putting too much faith in the power of government to solve everything.
But ShowsOn the looney left thinks only the government should regulate things and only the government should decide whats best for people…religious conservatives might be a problem but big government looney leftwingers are equally disasterous…
A flawed position, but one that can be argued for logically, see John Rawls.
It is patently illogical to refer to God to argue positions on issues such as, the use of embryonic stem cells, whether or not teenage girls should receive the cervical cancer vacine, and whether homosexuals should be allowed to marry.
One side of extremism still favours a form of logical debate, even if the conclusions are flawed. The other frequently reverts to illogical reasoning, usually based around arguments from authority “God says so so it must be true…”.
Many would argue the left’s reasoning is just as illogical and ill-conceived as those of the religious right.
Explain to me the flaws in Rawls’ Theory of Justice?
Glen, nobody outside your overheated imagination believes literally that _only_ the government should decide what’s best for people. Possibly what you mean is that people on the left believe in more government regulation than you do. So what? Is believing in more government regulation always necessarily wrong? Do you believe in no government regulation of any kind whatsoever? Do you understand that that equates to believing in no government of any kind whatsoever?
180
Glen Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Many would argue the left’s reasoning is just as illogical and ill-conceived as those of the religious right.Yes, Glen, many would indeed argue that, you’re absolutely right. *Differences of political opinion exist! Hold the front page for this breaking story!*
181#
Rawls does not include healthcare as a primary good.
A number of Rawls’s arguments concerning liberty depend on contentious assumptions about the status of our values. Specifically, Rawls tends to see them as the products of human choices. But not everyone sees things this way. Especially not those who are religious.
Rawls says that the parties in the original position would insist on the special conception once their society had reached a particular level of wealth. That level is reached when individuals’ “basic wants†have been fulfilled and social conditions allow for “the effective establishment of these rightsâ€.So the bar is set pretty low.
178
Glen Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:50 pm
But ShowsOn the looney left thinks only the government should regulate things…
……
Glen, um, regulation is something that governments do: it is a legislative function. Do you think this function should not exist? (Anarchy) Or be delegated to business ? (Cronyism) Or be the preserve of the monarch ? (autocracy)
I think you will find, since the Glorious Revolution, Parliaments have been responsible for lawmaking and I think you will find that even the greatest Tories, from Edmund Burke down, have thought this was basically a very good idea.
Glen,
are you going to do the right thing and cite the source of what you just put up?
Anarcho-capitalism while possible is not plausible you need some level of regulation but obviously the more the market is in control the better.
I would not dispte that Tories support lawmaking so do i but i do not support socialist big government as a common good it is not….
Maybe the Libs can have a scare campaign on the ALP raising capital gains tax or that they’ll introduce a wealth or death tax that ought to keep Swan on his toes.
Glen,
are you going to cite the source material or not?
Yes Glen
What is the Coalitions Tax Policy?
I wonder if this move has been instigated in preperation of a Change of Govt ?
http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=423666
Or the Democrats. Were there a viable Democrat in my electorate (unknown at this point) my preferences would go there first. Don’t know about others, but from where I sit, the Democrats are the first port of call if you are looking “left” from the Labor party. The Greens would be “left” of the Democrats.
The die is cast, the longer Howard waits the greater the Liberals will be humiliated on election day, they are now only prolonging the inevitable, and making matters much worse for themselves, Howard has a weakness he cant stop lying.
As far as the Nationals are concerned, will they even have enough seats to be considered a political party after the election? truly they are now paying the price for giving up there own identity, and cow tailing to the Liberals every whim.
Australians are looking to the future and Labour has a vision for the future, the Liberals are obsessed with the past and are living in the past, and this has been one of their greatest downfalls, besides their lies.
People are looking to the future, not the past and they want the political balance restored, especially in the senate.
There is nothing Howard can now do, other than do more damage to the Liberals, it is to little to late, his reign is over.
Howards legacy what will it be? A liar, a war monger, even starting a war with workers and the unions that protect them, robbing the weak and poor and giving to the rich, the most divisive man in Australian history, the first elected dictator in Australian history, sure there will be more about his legacy to come out after he is defeated at the election
Optimist, how dare you! Glen knows Rawls like Alexander Downer knows the income tax thresholds, and would never copy verbatim from, say, http://pages.pomona.edu/~mjg14747/033-2006/RawlsLiberty.shtml and make it look like his own opinion.
Betcha Eddie is spitting bricks
… Judd just came down on the Carlton bandwagon. That also means we probably will see Fev in an Eagles team next year.
Links Julie? Sources? Confirmation? Please?
Wow Judd is going to play for the Tankers!
Gees he must be in it for the $$$$$ because Carlton have just as pathetic training facilities as Melbourne (his excuse why he didnt pick us) and not Collingwood who have uber facilities…
Heheheh enjoy playing for losers for the rest of your career mate!
Rudd’s record approval ratings, put into an historical context.
http://www.ozelection2007.info/forums/viewtopic.php?id=768
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/02/2049029.htm
Judd to play for the Tankers next season….
Aristotle, what were Dr. Hewsons ratings as compared to Rudds?
Glen, looks like we share a footy team in common; I also barrack for Melb Demons, but had a disappointing season. I’m very keen on Melb Storm who won the NRL Premiership on Sun night – a fantastic result. Hopefully Labor can have a similar result on the Night of the Returns.
“197
John Withheld Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Links Julie? Sources? Confirmation? Please?”
I see that Glen got a story here already but this is the one I read on The Age. It might also be noted too that about a week ago, the story was floated that Peter Sumich was being wooed to come to Carlton as an assistant. He was Judd’s position coach for 6 years. This might have had some influence on Judd’s thinking. I do not know if Sumich has actually been signed to the Carlton staff yet or not.
http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/judd-chooses-the-blues/2007/10/02/1191091095434.html
Is there any real benefit for Labor winning the election by more than a half a dozen seats?
Lord D it just goes to show people can have things in common despite their political differences…hehehe not only did he give the ‘filth’ the bums rush but he chose a team who plays on Telstra Dome 12 times nice for his groin and has worse facilities than the mighty dees and yet he goes and picks Carlton…far as im concerned Judd is a scumbag who chose a club purely for the $$$ nuff said..
Kina 205#
Except a repeat of 1998 in 2010 that’s what will happen if it is a Ruddslide in 2007.
Thanks Glen and Julie.
Sumich has already re-signed with West Coast.
Judd made no statement about why he dismissed Melbourne, Melbourne said it was because of poor facilities.
Collingwood have a great gym at the Lexus Centre, but a lousy oval.
Carlton’s new gym will be better than Lexus, and they have the best surface in Melbourne at Princes Park.
Kina there is no benefit in Labor winning!
Replace Swanny with Peter Garret isn’t he a Millionaire?
I thought I might share a conversation I had with some small business owners a few days ago…
These people are in the unfortunate position of seeing their new business dry up over the last 6-12 months. Why? People are spending more money on their mortgage payments and petrol. This means less to be spent on goods/services provided by these small businesses. Who do they blame? That’s right, one JW Howard (Who, as they say, talked the talk but couldn’t walk the walk on interest rates).
I was surprised by their animosity in light of Howard’s aim/claim to the be champion of small business. Would be interested to hear others thoughts…
@ 206 nuff said:
Not that what you say is true, but aren’t those the pure tory values by which you think we should all liv?
Matt what were these small business owners selling?
Judd is more of a scumbag John Witheld because he led the Demons, Collingwood, and Essendon on that they had a fair chance of receiving his services and he then chooses to wear the Carlscum jumper next year…while i dont like his decision it was the capitalist thing to do….one must except that if one is a Tory!
There are two Glens. The posts at 186 and198 were not written by the same person. Reminds me of the old Bugs Bunny cartoon. Mornin’, Ralph. Mornin’, Sam. Happened at the change of every shift.
Then, just like the cartoon, everyone else continues to punch the soulcase out of whatever Glen is on shift.
It will be November 24. Called Sunday 21 Oct. ( Parliament will be recalled for one week, w/c 15Oct).
Either that Roy or i am a schizophrenic…take your pick Roy!
John of Melbourne @ 210
They were mainly in the area of home renovation/landscaping
Good-oh, another reason to hate Carlton (I’ve been lacking a really good one since that drunken old swine Elliot retired).
Can we stop the footie crud. Its cricket season now. Its about the future guys.
197-4 38 overs.
Adam, If you are going to call someone a “drunken old swine” then spell their name correctly – its Elliott. He is a friend of mine. He likes a drink, he works hard, he loves Carlton, he is a generous supporter of charity – and is not a swine.
Optimist its pistols at dawn you have insulted my family’s reputation!
Just to keep you from wetting yourself over this just do a simple search on Wikipedia for John Rawls and this website http://pages.pomona.edu/~mjg14747/033-2006/RawlsLiberty.shtml
I didnt think these were things you wouldnt be able to find out easily for yourself Optimist but to make the job easier i thought id lend a hand…technically some parts were revised by myself but i see that you are a stickler for the rules Optimist lol!
Showson 181 said
The other frequently reverts to illogical reasoning, usually based around arguments from authority “God says so so it must be true…â€.
One hears a lot of the same reasoning about climate change issues, except substitute Al Gore, the UN, the IPCC, or the CSIRO for God!!!
“John of Melbourne Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Aristotle, what were Dr. Hewsons ratings as compared to Rudds?”
Not too good, John. He always had a high disapproval.
Nielsen only showed the top raters, but Newspoll have all their ratings and apart from a brief stint in the low 50’s following the launch of “Fightback”, he hung around 40, +/- 5 or so. By the end of 1992, he even collapsed into the 20’s. A bit too divisive John Hewson, I think.
You can check them out here: http://www.newspoll.com.au/
Follow the lnks.
Gee isn’t Hayden in fine form at the moment. Is Channel 9 showing any of these games?
Fox Sports 2 – Rupert does something right.
Poor people i empathise with them.
Have they tried WA they’ll make a killing?
Funny how JWH gets the blame for everything. In relation to interest rates he can’t do anymore he is running a surplus and petrol is set by markets.
Maybe in the new socialism if we get wall to wall Labor Governments Rudd can fix the petrol price.
As a Victorian it hurts me to say it but Brad Hodge needs to be booted from the team…stick in Voges perhaps he can do better caught behind for 3 is not good enough from Hodge…thank god for Symonds!
Elliot is not a swine. He is not fit to carry swill to them either.
Hang on, wayyyy off topic. Ahem.
My next post will be about politics and the coming election.
Thanks Aristotle
The GG is woeful and right wing dribble, the average Australian does not read it, yet sadly they do read the other News Ltd tabloids which are often just as bad and just as poorly researched and written, always catering the the lowest common demonator.
Thankfully for Rudd the vast majority of Austrlians are sick of hearing about Howard and his ‘team’ and they want them gone.
The GG is laughable, it is as if it is being written as a rodent party pick me up, the only people who would believe in what it says.
It is a comedy.
“thank god for Symonds!”
We can always rely on Queenslanders to get Australia back on track.
Re John Withheld:
My next post will be about politics and the coming election.
Sounds like a good idea… hint hint.
Haha maybe I’ll suggest that to them next time, should shore up the Labor support in WA if nothing else
Like Mal Brough Ruawake #235!
John of Melbourne,
Rudd wont fix the petrol price, but will take the pressure of the middle east somewhat which should reduce the jitters. also given that the American election will have more impact on this than any Aust gov could have. Anyone seen any impact on oil prices since the Iran cat came out of the bag?
ruawake @235 You beat me to it
Matt Says: @ 211
{These people are in the unfortunate position of seeing their new business dry up over the last 6-12 months. Why? }
This comes back to what I have said previously. Economics 101!
Every action of Government has an equal and opposite reaction. You take money out of the economy through lowering disposable income through say, workchoices and reduce spending through uncertainty of employment and it will flow throughout the economy.
How? You cut back on the flow of money within the economy because you reduce the amount of money that is available for the multiplier effect. ie; disposable income spent in goods and services provides for more employment in those businesses, more disposable spending from those employees, more tax payed by those employees and businesses and on and on it goes.
Dry that disposable income up and restrict spending through insecurity and increased mortgages and rents, petrol, food and other essentials and you have the makings of a depressive economy.
Peter Costello and John Howard, good economic managers! ha ha ha.
Glen
Longman is lost. My internal polling at the Bribie hamburger joint told me so. 13.5% swing to Labor.
I doubt that Ruawake especially given Brough’s high profile and good press were he not the MP id have said it was on the rocks but i believe Mal will pull it off…do you know how many voters would have to change their minds from last time with a 13.5% we’re talking thousands and thousands of people highly unlikely.
No Matt don’t suggest itWA is Coalition territory only just but it’s Coalition territory. We’ll need that to stave off Rudd.
Rowan I’m sure Rudds gesture of pulling out a few troops will help the situation there. The real issue is when will the Christian US bomb the Mullahs in Iran back to the stone age?
Expect Rudd to send in the SAS for this job if he is PM.
Always love a Bribie hamburger joint poll, they are rarely, if ever, wrong.
Keep up the good work runawake.
Glen and his fellow Libs lovers are living a fantasy world, a very sad disillusioned fantasy world, filled willed little angry ‘teams’ of rodents who spend their days dreaming of ways in which to maintain power while denying the Australian people the oppurtunity to vote them out.
I mean it is so simple, if Howard is so confident that he should be in power let us have the chance to decide, oh wait that’s right, he decides whats right and what is legitamate in Australia.
The swing required at Longman in 6.6%, not 13.5%. My Qld sources agree that Brough is a good member and will be hard to beat, but if there is a big swing on in Qld that might not save him. Longman is prime WorkChoices + interest rates = pissed off voters.
Keating has a letter in the Australian today where he gently chides Glenn Milne for an article he wrote regarding the arts.
Worth a read.
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/letters/index.php/theaustralian/comments/australian_literature_is_outbid_by_rugby_league/
Glen
As a local I may know a little more than you, Brough will not win Longman. I have argued this point before on other threads. There is a major “character” issue that is hurting Brough, it may not be getting too much coverage in the national media but it sure is in the local “freebie” papers.
john of Melbourne,
True the troops pullout wont make much of an impact, but the confrontational aspect of the Bush Howard middle eastern policy will be reduced. And your’e smoking some bad granola if you think Rudd’s going to put any troops at Bush’s disposl in Iran. Bush would have to hate the republican party to do anything there in his last year. He’s a lame duck (in all but dictonary definition) and I would expect the White house to hose the story down in the next few weeks.
runawake, what is the ‘character’ issue?
Is it meaty or just a beat up/rumour?
Am i to assume the ALP have put up a Union official against Mal Brough because if they have they’re already lost it…
Dear me, Brough is just about the only member of the Howard Cabinet with a positive public image at present. They can’t afford to have him besmirched.
Maxine is going well in Bennalong. Howard’s gotta be concerned.
{According to the 2006 census, Bennelong is the only Liberal-held seat among the nation’s top 20 for residents who speak a language other than English at home. Mr Howard holds it by a margin of 4.3 per cent, or fewer than 3500 votes based on the 2004 result and a electoral redistribution.
The initial response yesterday suggested her quest may have been successful. Joshua Khoo, a 22-year-old swinging voter, said he thought the former ABC journalist was “very personable”. “I was taken aback by how real she is,” he said.
Connie Tung, the 2005 recipient of the Premier’s Award for Young Chinese of the Year, said she expected Ms McKew to appeal to younger voters.
“She really took the time to answer questions with heartfelt responses,” Ms Tung said.
Long-term Coalition supporter Jeffrey Lee said Ms McKew “almost makes me want to vote for her”. }
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22509680-11949,00.html
The Labor candidate is Jon Sullivan, former state member for Caboolture and husband of the current member. I don’t know what he did before he was a state member. He has a beard which won’t help him any.
Alpal,
Have you heard anything about Saroff being only 2 points behind Margaret May in McPherson on the latest round of Labor polling?
Incredible if it’s the case.
hmmm doesnt say terribly much about Jon Sullivan but doesnt appear to be just a union crony…still he doesnt have a website!
Nevertheless i believe Andrew Laming is far more likely to lose his seat on an uber 10% margin than Mal Brough…but his seat will be marginal after the election i believe…
Bush may do it inadvertantly through Israel which will bomb Iran’s Nuclear facilities.
Another poll the Howard Government doesn’t agree with.
{PEOPLE on Australian Workplace Agreements are better off, not worse off as suggested by a new survey, Prime Minister John Howard says.
The Australia at Work study, which surveyed more than 8,000 workers, has concluded that people on AWAs earned on average $106 a week less than those on collective agreements.}
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22518914-11949,00.html
{But federal Workplace Relations Minister Joe Hockey dismissed the study as untrustworthy because of its association with Unions NSW and the timing of its release just before the election campaign.
Mr Hockey said unions were trying to push against the tide and that workers in Australia had more jobs and higher wages under the Howard government.}
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=270068
I am not willing, for William’s sake, to post about Brough here, but if anyone wants to email me spying.badthings@gmail.com I will let you know.
The margin in Bowman is 8.9%, not uber 10% – where are you getting your figures from Glen?
Joe Hockey publicly defaming academics: quite offensive, but what we’ve come to expect from this sorry lot called the Howard Government.
And I see a lot of criticism of the Mad Monk’s latest crazy health policy.
For future reference:
Blair Liberal 5.7
Bonner Liberal 0.6
Bowman Liberal 8.9
Brisbane Labor 4.0
Capricornia Labor 3.8
Dawson National 10.2
Dickson Liberal 9.1
Fadden Liberal 15.3
Fairfax Liberal 13.3
Fisher Liberal 13.0
Flynn National 7.9
Forde Liberal 13.0
Griffith Labor 8.5
Groom Liberal 19.0
Herbert Liberal 6.1
Hinkler National 8.8
Kennedy Independent 10.5
Leichhardt Liberal 10.3
Lilley Labor 5.4
Longman Liberal 6.6
McPherson Liberal 14.0
Maranoa National 21.0
Moncrieff Liberal 19.9
Moreton Liberal 2.8
Oxley Labor 7.2
Petrie Liberal 7.9
Rankin Labor 3.0
Ryan Liberal 10.4
Wide Bay National 12.2
Glen Says: @ 256,
John Sullivan listed here, Glen.
http://www.alp.org.au/people/?task=qs&seat=longman
i knew it was not more than 10% but it was most certainly close to the mark…thank you for the correction Adam…Ruawake would we be involved in smear politics by any chance lol?
Adam, out of those I think Labor will win:
Griffith(obviously) – with a 10% swing at least to the Ruddster
Brisbane
Lilley
Rankin
Caprocornia
Oxley
Bonner
Moreton
Blair
I consider all these dead certainties
Possible Labor gains:
Herbert
Flynn
Bowman
Petrie
Macpherson
Forde
What about Boothby, lol, lol, lol.
That depends on whether it’s true or not… whatever it is.
Adam
Believe me it is very, very, true
HH, I would move Herbert to the A list, and I would add Leichhardt and Hinkler to the B list.
how do you know its true do you have evidence?
http://betelection.com/071002%20-%20market%20movers.xls
Possum: re MacPherson. I will snoop around- and get back to you. I will take a few days.
John of Melbourne @ 271 Says:
There’s a few there well worth getting on still.
Maxine at $2.00 is a good bet still. Glad I got on early at $4.00.
Howard Hater: I think Ryan is a B-list seat.
Glen,
Don’t worry. If Brough loses his seat he can move down south and work for those girls that call themselves the Demons. He’ll fit in with all the other losers at Melbourne.
“how do you know its true do you have evidence?”
Glen, Yes. So do others. Families, Community Services is the key.
Adam Says:
Swing required at Longman in 6.6%,
abc says 7.7, why the difference?
Spoken like a supporter of ‘the filth’ Paul K…
How does it feel to be rejected by Judd lol!
Also i am glad that our supporters still have all their teeth maybe its because we’ve got dentists who barrack for us instead of ex-cons lol!
Well I am awaiting ruawake’s email.
I think the comments of this disgruntled Liberal voter explain some of the movement to Rudd. It means from what is said here that some of the movement is soft and not necessarily going to last.
{the ALP is not and probably will never be the party for wet Liberals such as myself. The enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend. I understand that, and whilst I will be voting for the ALP at this election, I do not do so out of any delusion that they represent my values. I do so because Howard must be defeated and humiliated in order for we wet Liberals to retake our party. }
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/yoursay/index.php/theaustralian/comments/historys_aced_now_move_on
Glen,
See the Bomber Fly Up.
Now you know who I follow.
charles, I have to confess I have forgotten where I got my 2P margins from now – I set that table up in April. Calculating 2P majorities after a redistribution involves a fair amount of guesswork and 2P majorities for NSW and Qld should be taken as indications only. I might now change my margins to match Antony’s just to avoid causing confusion.
So Am I
BTW useless trivia Mal Brough’s Brother is popular Qld Television Host and former presenter of Family Feud (90’s version) Rob Brough (he of the real bad Curly Mullett.)
Possum Comitatus Says:
“Have you heard anything about Saroff being only 2 points behind Margaret May in McPherson on the latest round of Labor polling?”
If the newspoll is right and my spreadsheet is right she should be within 1.6%. But then the polls have a 3% error and the whole thing is a bit rough so I suppose she is doing ok.
“Swing required at Longman in 6.6%,
abc says 7.7, why the difference?”
That is a pre-redistribution figure. If you look at the bottom of the page:
Last Update: 8 November 2004
Well well i still think any analysis of Collingwood comes close to that of Essendon supporters but hey…still you were rejected by Judd as well and not over our crappy facilities nobody knows why he gave up on the Dons!
Thanks, where do I get the post redistribution from.
I just posted them. Scroll up.
2007 ABC pendulum is below. Adam’s is very similar
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2007/guide/pendulumindex.htm
Glen,
If only the Liberal Party did to Howard what Essendon did to Sheedy and maybe you would have had a chance of winning the election.
Bill Shorten sure knows how to have a campaign launch.
Loved the “Gillies” bit.
{But the prophecy that earned the biggest laugh came from Gillies.
“In the snow-melting and water-rising years that are to come, when the deserts grow, and the typhoons pelt and the cane toads crawl ashore in Tasmania and petrol is $9 a litre, we’ll be in there for you battling still,” the Gillies Howard said.
“Still serving you faithfully, into our 80s and our 90s, keeping true to the Liberal faith – all for one and every man for himself.”}
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22509681-11949,00.html
Paul K maybe right.
Listen to Hockey wriggling on PM
Sounds a bit like you Glen. Sure you’re not Max Gillies in disguise? lol
Paul something tells me that Knight wont be bringing home the Premiership Cup next year for the Dons so changing coaches wont automatically get you the prize and neither will it do that same for us and Dean Bailey…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/02/2049069.htm
Along with this classic quote:
Beaudy Alpal, I’ll owe you a beer
Sorry, but I am writing this under duress. My inner pedant has taken control of my hands.
The adjective is “biased”, not “bias”.
And nonsense isn’t “dribble”. That’s the stuff that comes out of your mouth when you drool or the thing you do with a ball. It’s “drivel”.
Hopefully, the evil curmudgeon within will let me free, now.
“Listen to Hockey wriggling on PM”
Adam, I think Hockey can expect a nice juicy writ arriving any day now.
Honestly, he really is thick.
Readers should be aware that putting their email addresses online is not a good idea, unless they are tolerant of spam.
Now that’s dirt.
{“We’re not planning to get involved with any military action against anybody.â€}
Might be a “Non-core” undertaking.
{BARNEY PORTER: He also claims the Bush Administration’s new focus is getting support from its allies, including Australia.
SEYMOUR HERSH: The Brits are interested in this idea, there have been expressions of interest from Australia, other countries, the Israelis of course have gone bananas, they’re very upset about the idea of not going. If you’re going to go into Iran, the Israeli position is very firm, they want us to go, and they want us to hit hard.
You do not, as somebody … an Israeli told me, if you run into a lion, you either shoot it, or ignore it, you don’t pluck out its eyebrows. Going in and taking out the Revolutionary Guard and not taking out the nuclear facilities, for the Israelis is it a non-starter.
But that’s the plan, the plan is to be more surgical, more careful, and they’re getting some of their allies on board.
BARNEY PORTER: Last week, the Foreign Affairs Minister, Alexander Downer, said he called on Iran to stop supplying weapons to militias in Iraq, during a recent bilateral meeting with Iran’s Foreign Minister.}
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2007/s2048168.htm
Thank God for that. If the USA and Iran want to go at one another let them but we should keep out of it. There are enough problems in the world without our needing to go out of our way to look for bad guys to fight.
Will Howard use those annoying repitive automated phone calls again?
Oh no that’s right he doesn’t need US technology to win, my oath he is a loser.
John of Melbourne @ 266:
Interesting sheet that – shows (I think) 19 Labor gains.
Some > 5% swings to the ALP in there: Herbert (though that’s often tight despite the margin, and the odds are close) and Deakin for example.
Jon and for anybody else who is interested the site is:
http://betelection.com/elections/
I look at it most days with the hope the market has only a 14 seat gain for Labor, hopefully come election proper, fingers crossed.
Yes Hockey has got himself in a fine pickle. It turns out that the WC research he was slagging this morning was initiated by the University of Sydney, not by the unions, and was half-funded by the government! The academics are now threatening to sue him. This is what happens when you lash out blindly when anyone shows that your policies are harmful.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Academics-lash-out-at-Hockey-criticism/2007/10/02/1191091068685.html
#
205
Kina Says:
Better chance of me winning my bet with a right win Liberal that Howard would be seen as the man that destroyed the Liberal party in six months time.
Seriously, if may create a window of opportunity for the moderates to reclaim the party, but I doubt it, i suspect the right wingers will hold onto power and happily watch the party fade away much as the conservatives have in England.
Bye Bye Rodent please refrain from being a hypocrite in every post you make didnt you read the papers where Maxine McKew was heard in South Australia using automated telephone messages…so the ALP have used them before the Coalition…
If it is only 19 gains and Labor has a majority of what 3 if the Libs can get their act together they could roll Rudd in 2010 given the amount of Labor marginals…
Julie says
“Democrats are the first port of call if you are looking “left†from the Labor party. The Greens would be “left†of the Democrats.”
In my view, the first port of call should be a left position within the ALP. Despite Adam’s arrogant (dare I say “hubristic”) claim that he can ignore “true believers”, it is possible to at least keep real issues on the agenda. There are people on the right who have a conscience, and who can be swayed. It’s always a matter of numbers, but faction bosses don’t control people.. see the triumph of Simon Crean in his preselection battle.
The Democrats are hardly a port of call for anyone. They are the spawn of a disappointed Liberal whose “keep the bastards honest” cry eventually trickled down to a sordid backroom deal over GST (in the name of being a “real political party”). Who knows what they stand for, or cares.
The Greens? Apart from the fact that they only have one issue, it seems to me that they concentrate on impossible ideal solutions, rather the feasible second bests.
By all means keep Kevin & co honest. But “the unity of Labour is the hope of the world”
Why would Maxine McKew use them in South Australia…
Has Beenalong moved???
Dream on Glen, Labor in for 20!
I think it will take 2 election losses before the Libs get their act together and give the boot to the extreme right wingers. Most people want moderates. Extremists on both the left and the right are history.
Nice to see the site says 18 ALP gains, J of M.
Though my money’s on 30+
And interesting to see Hockey ‘disputing’ factual data gained from an analysis of thousands of actual AWAs.
Its pretty simple folks: high skilled workers will tend to fare ok in a dereg market. Low-skilled will tend to fare worse in the absence of collective bargaining.
No surprises there. All a bit of a no-brainer. But go on, make a tool of yerself, Shrek, see if I care. Its your funeral!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22419533-12377,00.html
McKew puzzles Adelaide voters
Bye Bye Howard you need to read the papers more often…
But Paul K a moderate or 2 moderates will take over if Howard loses…Costello and Bishop….
This is the only reason the government introduced AWAs. They think cleaners, and retailers working casual for 30 hours a week, who earn $25,000 a year deserve to be paid less.
That’s what this is all about. Paying people at the bottom of the ladder even less.
LOL!!!! It must drive the Coalition supporters crazy knowing they’re flogging the proverbial dead horse.Most of the stuff they’re spouting this time around they’ve spouted in previous decades.The same rubbish over and over again.Nothing ever changes from election to election.
The road they are on is fixed and they are going down.
Sorry Glen et al,you backed Howard in ‘96 to bring you in to power.You’ve supported his brand of hubris ever since.But, as you know,the gods do not in the long run support hubris and they turn viciously on those that cause it.
Your time has come to savour the bitterness of defeat,enjoy it,I’m certainly going to enjoy you experiencing it.LOL!!!!!
ShowsOn if they thought that and wanted that why have real wages increased under Howard but decreased under 13 years of Labor your argument fails then and there!
Bob in that one post you’ve displayed more hubris than Howard in 11 and a half years nuff said!
Polling from now (or before) is not of itself predictive of what the election day will bring. All that it shows is that the electorate is in the mood to stare Howard down.
Let’s call it for what it is: juvenile brinksmanship, in other words, a tantrum. We, the polled electorate haven’t actually thought what this change will mean, in detail, so of course, in another poll we go for Costello over Swan. That’s the point: we haven’t thought the change through. Our quibble seems to be with Howard. This is where the plan ends.
As poll results are open to interpretation, how about this for the post APEC Newspoll quiver: those polled approved of Howard staring down his own front bench and folding them into line.
And, the return to status quo of 56/44 is the electorate’s response to apparent succession management. The electorate was not expecting a negotiated future handover to Costello.
The only issue is John Howard. It is looking for John of 2001 or 2004.
The electorate is waiting for Howard to show that he is rock solid. Being shown who’s boss would do the trick, but buying us off would also do nicely.
Fundamentally, the Australian electorate does not have any reason to change the federal government. Boredom is not a reason. Boredom is a sign of idleness.
The electorate as a whole does not understand any of the apparent big issues being proffered by the media: he economy, climate change, political theory or security. The corresponding needs of a person are
(i) money in the pocket and availability of things to spend it on;
(ii) that they can manage their own immediate environment, so that they are not too hot or too cold;
(iii) that the government affords a balance between opportunity and interference in their lives that is tolerable; and,
(iv) that they can go about their business without fear of attack.
And what’s surprising of all those things is that we like the government intrusion. The use of dob-in phone lines in welfare, security, tax compliance and visa monitoring is on the rise. We don’t mind dobbing in strangers. Instead, we mind a lot when strangers transgress our expectation of what is right. We will act in our self-interest. And in the balance of daily experience of the electorate, it is not in our self-interest to change the government.
No ’sqeamish’ issues that may have made some think twice are on the table. Issues of social concern have been successfully eliminated from the main political game. Even climate change, which looked like it may have started with altruistic beginnings has been reduced to a simple choice between feeling guilty about something no-one seems to be seriously able to do anything about, or, wishing it would go away. Refugees and the NT intervention are in the same category.
The polls are the public’s public tantrum. And what’s a tantrum about? We feel that we are not getting what we are entitled to. We probably want more money. Or be led properly. One or other or both.
We can, however, be made to forget our tantrums, when our wants are set aside due to impending danger or if we are busy with a new bauble.
So, in the event that we are promised the bulk of the budget surplus basically as cash in hand (as tax cuts, or whatever else), are we going to change the government?
or we wake up to find out that interest rates jump by one per cent; are we going change the government?
or we find ourselves in an emergency situation as the poll date nears; are we going to change the government?
Ask yourself, which of the above diversions, off the top of one’s head, are NOT in the capacity of a federal government to arrange?
Australians are risk-averse and craven. Not more than anyone else. Frightening us or buying us off, will work.
And not all of us at that: let’s face it, only the ’swinging’ fifteen per cent of the electorate need to feel on election day that they are frightened, or have a chance of a reward come next tax time, or convinced that their self-interest does not lie with the change of government. And that’s all that matters.
With this in mind, I’ll call it this way.
I think a 2PP vote of at least 50.1% in favour the Coalition on the night is almost a certain. That includes a bone for Rudd for sterling effort represented by a swing of 2.6%, Turnbull’s scalp and the symbolic return of Lindsay to Labor. And the Coalition will return to the treasure benches with a minimum 8 seat majority. Have a fiddle with these settings on Mr Green’s calculator. and this seems an irresistably likely outcome.
Does this sound familiar – shades of 1996.
http://www.thewest.com.au/aapstory.aspx?StoryName=423742
Thats because the senate essentially kept Keating IR system Glen, which retained award protections for the low paid.
Until [*BONG*] 2004 election deliver the senate. Then like the scorpion midstream, the Libs brains trust sunk the fangs into the ‘Howard battler’ frog.
And now they’re going down; in a record economic boom.
What a pack of idiots! They deserve the door, and you know it.
Because the Labor government and the unions came to an agreement (the Accord) to restore profit margins and stop wages growth in the interests of the national economy – this is called statesmanship. The benefits of that sacrifice by the unions have been seen in 14 years of continuous growth (not 11.5 years, please not). The growth in wages since 1996 has taken place under the IR system which Howard has now scrapped. If WC is allowed to become fixed law, it will go into reverse.
Yes, Hockey has made a bit of a fool of himself (again), but that’s what you get when you put someone who is basically a blagger into an important portfolio. Hockey’s problem is less that he slags off research without even reading it, it’s more that he doesn’t appear to read much of anything – all of his contributions to public life have been lazy ill-considered rants (largely about unions). This is to be expected of someone who went through student politics , the law and then into parliament at a very young age. But then, these Liberals, they don’t have much life experience outside the legal profession, so he’s probably the best they’ve got.
But have wages gone down under Howard and under workchoices the evidence says NO real wages continue to increase Lefty E! Your argument fails because Keating was in for 5 years and his IR system once he left office had wages down by 1% after 13 years in Government down by 1% and they were happy about it saying how good it was cos it wasnt inflationary what a joke!
Glen is right this time. I heard the Maxine McKew phone ads on PM. It was bizarre but true. And there was a pathetic interview with Penny Wong defending the indefensible. They even offered, as a defence, that they didn’t call people on the “do not call” register. Why Maxine’s voice was being used in SA I have no idea, but maybe it was a bit of test marketing, which I hope failed the test. I hope the government doesn’t do the phone thing again this election either.
I can only presume that parties do this stuff because it’s been proven to work somewhere (in the US?). But I think it’s an invasion of privacy and should be banned. It actually doesn’t appear to be illegal to phone someone with a political message even if they are on the DNC register – politicians seemed to have granted themselves an exemption.
305
Gippslander Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:43 pm
The Greens? Apart from the fact that they only have one issue, it seems to me that they concentrate on impossible ideal solutions, rather the feasible second bests.
The only reason the Greens seem a one issue party is that the media do not give us the opportunity to show much else. It is also not in the best interests of the ALP that we get to promote our policies ( IR just one ) because it will show that the ALP are not as worker friendly as they express. If the ALP wins office the workers/unions will be under just as much stress as they are now but by then the hope of the ALP right will be to make unions like the AMWU CMFEU etc as weak as the company backed SDA. Workers fight under a Lib government they get sold out under an ALP one.
I was interested to read that article from the west, with Costello claiming his tax policy was already out there (ie outlined in the budget). I still suspect there’s a big tax cut coming, and that the government is relying on this for its main election policy.
I say this after reading assorted criticism of the coalition’s new health policy (ie local hospital boards, less power to state govts). The thrust of the criticism from quite a few health groups was that money was the main thing needed to fix the health system. Now, with its big budget surplus and forecast continued good times, why hasn’t the government offered more money for health? Health is a big issue, the money is available, why not spend some? I don’t think spending money on health would affect interst rates, as it’s building infrastructure that’s needed. Whereas tax cuts could put pressure on interest rates.
I think Rudd and Swan’s line, that the government has wasted the profits of the mining boom, will go down well with those voters who wouldn’t know their Pilbara from their Hammersley.
The Greens would do much better if they WERE a one-issue patrty, IMHO. What sank the Greens in the Albert Park by-election was their daffy schools policy, which Labor cheerfully exploited, and why wouldn’t we? But why does a green party need a schools policy at all? Most people agree with the Greens on green issues – I certainly do – but the rest of their policies were bought at the Communist Party’s winding-up jumble sale, and it shows.
I’m off to dinner now, so save your outraged response till I get back Bill
More of the same boring crap… Do you just cut and paste this stuff?
Show me the “real wage increase” when the government is letting businesses use AWAs to pay workers at the low end $75 – $100 a week LESS! How is that fair in an economy that has produced a $17 billion surplus? Or are you one of those all for one, everyone for themselves Liberals?
You seem to have absoultely no idea how Labor fixed the economy in the 1980s. I can’t tell if this is wilful ignorance, or if you are trying to appear idiotic as a debating tactic.
During the late 70s and 80s the biggest problem in our economy was stagflation – inflation plus high unemployment. Wage breakouts were out pacing economic growth. Your lot did absolutely nothing about it, which is why the electorate told them to piss off in 1983. It took a Labor government, WILLING AND ABLE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE UNIONS via the Accords to slow wage growth, but convert it to an increased social wage. This was delivered as tax cuts, savings (superannuation), and importantly, Medicare.
Your mob did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the inflation that was killing the economy. From the 1980 election ’til the 1983 election, all the Government did was fight over whether they would be run by the agrarian socialists in the Country party, or the metropolitan interests of the Liberals. The Government knew what the problems were in the economy, but didn’t have a clue or the capacity to fix it.
So stop spouting this government crap that there were no wage increases. What increased was the capacity of the economy to grow, and an improvement in living standards.
Faced with new challenges on climate change, infrastructure, and work place fairness, it isn’t surprising that the Liberals look like being dumped again. They are always dumped when they are complacent, and sit around doing nothing for a couple of terms.
314
Why Rudd Must Lose Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pm
Polling from now (or before) is not of itself predictive…
….
WRML, you seem to have done a great job of persuading yourself that Howard will scrape in. What is lacking in your argument is some evidence or some logic. The talk of tantrums is absurd: a tantrum is a passing fit of pique, a sign of immaturity. You seem to be saying that voters, in their mature moments, will support Howard. But the same voters can revert to child-like behaviour and threaten (when asked by the relevant pollster) to oppose him. In your analysis, these petulant voters have been frowning at Howard for a very long time – longer than your average tantrum by about 12 months.
Well, you stick to this analysis: it is a comfort to everyone who wants Labor to win….
Why Rudd Must Lose,
Your post is so simplistic I don’t know where to start to respond. Your contempt for the average Australian is so evident that I wonder why you bother to post on a site like this at all. As far as voters being “risk averse”, here in Victoria, we got rid of Kennett whom the media told us was our saviour, and installed a young untried new leader named Bracks. Hardly an action which could be considered as you put it “risk-averse and craven”.
Adam,
What has happened? Have you become the voice of conservatism on William’s blog? Oh dear
Can’t you see the future is Green and that Berowra, Goldstein, Higgins et all are ready to fall to the new wave of the future?
Are you the last bastion against the rampant Howard Haters?
Dear WRML,
You are smoking and inhaling.
Try getting out and about to talk to people. Don’t sit in your ivory office, isolated from the community. If you do , you will find that people have actually logically, rationally, with aggravated malice decided to do over the Libs. The polls show it, Howard and his cronies know it, Everything from now to the election is simply about how many seats Labor will take.
I know it hurts to believe it, but the truth always hurts
BTW
The Uni of Syd WRC Centre which produced today’s report is to Labor what the Adelaide Uni version featuring Judith Sloan is to the Liberals. Any informed person knows that.
Its why its so hard to see the objective truth about the WorkChoices debate.
Oh goody, now I get to banter with both Left and Right!
Glen – For someone who bangs on so much about economic management, you don’t seem to have much of a grasp of it. There are in essence two causes of Australia’s current good fortune. First and foremost, the structural changes wrought (amongst much angst from their base) by Hawke and Keating have set the economy up to withstand the shocks from the World economy (eg the Asian metdown of 1997). The fact is that the economy has been growing since mid-1991, nearly five years before our current wonder-Treasurer got his hands on the levers.
Since arouond 2001, the economy has boomed largely because China and India want to pay top dollar for pretty much anything we can dig up or chop down. This has led to historic, billion-dollar surpluses, usually far over what the Budget estimates have predicted (so clearly Costello has some trouble in adding up). My question to you, Glen, is what do we have to show for all this wealth? What long-term strategy has Howard and co pursued to a) prolong the boom, and b) take full advantage of these extraordinary tax receipts? I saw it estimated recently that the government has had somewhere in the realms of $400b in “windfall surpluses” (ie, surpluses over and above those which were predicted). Where has all this money gone? You know, apart from being pissed up against the wall every three years in order to get the government re-elected.
Bill (321) – I do admire your passion, but do you really believe that the Hawke & Keating governments (for example) did nothing whatsoever for working Australians? What about Medicare? Compulsory super? Are you suggesting that these reforms are without benefit to the less well off? And this is before we get to those touchstone issues of the Left – Keating, for example, did more for Aborigines than every other government combined.
By all means critcise Labor (God knows they deserve it a lot of the time), but your blanket assertions do not do your arguments any good.
On another matter though Bill, how goes the Kingston campaign?
Why Rudd Must Lose has a good point. The ALP followers on this site which is pretty much all of you should remember this.
To gain Government The ALP MUST WIN the majority of the seats at the federal election. They can not gain government by winning an opinion poll.
323
Adam Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 7:14 pm
I’m off to dinner now, so save your outraged response till I get back Bill
No outrage Adam we both know where we are coming from so why fight! im too tired anyway
“To gain Government The ALP MUST WIN the majority of the seats at the federal election. They can not gain government by winning an opinion poll.”
maybe opinion polls don’t win govt. but by golly they scare the pants off the libs.
“Why Rudd Must Lose has a good point. The ALP followers on this site which is pretty much all of you should remember this.
To gain Government The ALP MUST WIN the majority of the seats at the federal election. They can not gain government by winning an opinion poll.”
Thanks for that deep psephological insight.
Thanks KT.
At the end of the day there is night. At the end of the night there is day.
Sounds like a Liberal Health Policy to me!
335 GG -
Are you auditioning for a job in an ALP members office or do you already work in one?
Glad you appreciate it KT.
IMHO, there are three things that have driven wages higher over the last 15-20 years:
……
The rise of China as a locus for global manufacturing. This has driven down the prices of manufactures and, correspondingly, driven up the real wages of consumers everywhere.
……
The application of advanced information and communication technologies across the economic spectrum. This has increased the productivity of all factors of production, including labour, and allowed for further growth in real wages.
…..
Low interest rates, being a function of low inflation (China), liberalisation of global capital markets and relaxed official monetary policies.
In general, these factors have allowed a prolonged and historically rapid economic expansion. All the signs have been positive: rapid expansion of the labour market, strong increases in household consumption and business investment, untroubled growth in credit of all kinds, increases in fixed asset prices, profits and real wages, unimpeded growth in Government outlays.
None of these things have anything to do with Mr Costello. He cannot claim credit for the boom in China. He does not run the Reserve Bank, and still less, the US Federal Reserve. He is not responsible for the WTO or the global IT industry. He is not even responsible for the basic structure of the Australian financial system. The most he has done is de-frag parts of the income tax system. In other respects – on GST, Super, Capital Gains – he has caused more harm than good. Don’t talk about driving the economy: he is just a very good faker.
personal experience just found out
my partner has worked for 12 years same job (newsanget employee}
and have just found the new owners hav’ent paid super entilments for 2 years.
response from govt. agencies
1- we can help but in a few years
2- do you wish to remain annonomuis
3- confused partner and pissed of at money being stolen from her says no
4-staffer says not a high priorty case
In the meantime money that has been paid into super fund since 1994 is getting eaten up in super company fees.
we have now started to pay some of our own cash into the fund so we dont lose the principle but a lesson learned if you aint rich and can afford to fight the system you are stuffed.
sending a copy to lib.hq &lab.hq to see if i get a reply
“To gain Government The ALP MUST WIN the majority of the seats at the federal election.”
I should point out that this isn’t strictly true, as the ALP may form government with the help of the independents Katter & Windsor. Sorry Thommo, your sterling analysis falls a bit short.
Warringah would be nice!
Joe Hockey on the 7.30 Report still blathering on about how people are better off since SerfChoices was introduced. He doesn’t really seem into it tonight – not really convinced with his own arguments anymore. I think the Libs thought that the economy (low unemployment, significant growth) would give workers the power. Typical of market fundamentalists that think the market can regulate itself – it sure will – with absolutely no pity or care for actual people.
Seriously, when you hear some of the stories from people who have been adversely affected, I can’t believe I am actually living in Australia anymore. SerfChoices will be the downfall of this government, and hopefully that means they will get rid of those market fundamentalists (sayonara Nick Minchin) and allow some humanity to shine forth in the party in the future.
Joe Hockeys peformance on the 7.30 Report
0 out of 10
I idea that voters are “throwing a tantrum”, “playing a trick”, or any other the other excuses that get thrown about are completely false. I’ve yet to hear one single reason why a person who voted for the Coalition in 2004, when called and asked who they will vote for now would say ‘Labor’ unless they genuinely believe Labor is the better party (for them or for the country).
A better argument would be that yes, there is a lot of influence to be exerted between now and election day, leading to these people changing their vote back to the Coalition, for a genuine logical reason (to them).
WRML: I’ll take a punt and guess your contempt for the electorate comes from 2001 and 2004. I guess you should wait till the end of the year and see if it evaporates or not.
335 GG -
Do you have useful skills? Make coffee, appear presentable, answer telephone? Perhaps I can offer you a career (unlike the ALP – who tends to kill of staff when the MP goes and offer no career path – not unlike the Indian practice of settee). You and I will directly negotiate your wage and remuneration package.
I need someone for my business who can write outrageous marketing copy with limited reference to fact. You may be of use to me.
Send your email address to William if you are interested.
Joe Hockey performance on 7.30 report
0 out of 10
The poor man is a liar!
0 out of 10
A bit harsh but you’re right, Joe doesn’t seem to care any more that his responses are inadequate. Kerry O’Brien just seemed to let him get away with this. Is he KOB just hanging him out to dry?
WRML,
It’s good to have you on board to take the pressure off Glen. I mean Glen must’ve worn out his keyboard many nights by almost single-handedly defending The Rodent, Dolly Downer, the Smirk, the Mad Monk & Co on many threads such as this.
For a first-timer on this thread you’ve certainly have a talent for making um … interesting statements – such as:
“I think a 2PP vote of at least 50.1% in favour the Coalition on the night is almost a certain. That includes a bone for Rudd for sterling effort represented by a swing of 2.6%, Turnbull’s scalp and the symbolic return of Lindsay to Labor. And the Coalition will return to the treasure benches with a minimum 8 seat majority. Have a fiddle with these settings on Mr Green’s calculator. and this seems an irresistably likely outcome.”
This is way more bizarre than Shanahan and Akerman at the GG! Why you even make Nostradamus look like a Rudd devotee.
331
Thommo Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 7:28 pm ..
Why Rudd Must Lose has a good point….
Thommo, WRML can point out that to win, you have to win. That sounds sort of obvious. He has made forecast of the result – a win by Howard – based on the tantrum theory of polling data. It sounds quaint. It sounds like a bedtime read. But it doesn’t sound like a good explanation for anything much to me….
Joe was pretty hopeless on 7.30 tonight – his usual bluff and bluster in the place of rational argument. He’s not nearly as good a performer as some credit him – at one point he agreed with KO’B when the Gingermeister suggested that Hockey was just taking the bits from the Australia@Work report that suited the government’s arguments, while slagging off those which don’t. (Hockey replied “Well, that might be true”) It’s hard not to think that Joe doesn’t ever prepare for interviews – he just learns the talking points (eg “union bosses”) but has trouble moving beyond them. Mind you, he has to sell a dog of a policy, so it probablt doesn’t matter much what he says.
While I am on a roll, I would like to discuss the “Latham effect”. It seems many commenters discount 2004 figures because of a so-called Latham effect.
IMHO Latham is wrongly much maligned in the ALP. After all the Bomber himself admitted the ALP were heading into the 2004 election facing a loss of 50 seats. Perhaps the ALP will recognise one day that Latham for his flaws was speaking the truth on many things about the ALP.?
Secondly will he make an appearance before polling day? I reckon he’s got to be a chance for an appearance.
ESJ – who is this Mark Latham of whom you speak?
350
Edward StJohn Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 7:57 pm
While I am on a roll, I would like to discuss the “Latham effectâ€. It seems many commenters discount 2004 figures because of a so-called Latham effect…will he make an appearance before polling day?
Will he campaign? I believe so – for Joe Hockey and Chris Pyne.
Does anybody think its a bit redundant the way Kerry O’Brien says the 7.30 report ‘will be back the same time tomorrow…’
Hmm… that time would be… let me guess … um… 7.30?
Edward St John is a pillock of the community who believes he is God’s gift to…….. (choose your noun). He is long remembered as the only Member to ever be sledged by his own PM during his maiden speech. He has always been adored by PM’s wives, especially John Gorton.
Need I continue.
Hockey’s response to the research is irrelevant, the people who know they have lost wages, their parents, their grandparents maybe even their uncles aunts, sons and daughters all know the truth.
Then there are Vampires.
‘VAMPIRE’ may kill off QLD Libs
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/vampire-may-kill-off-qld-libs/2007/10/02/1191091070382.html
At any rate, I’m pleased that people have stopped banging on about AFL transfers. Surely sporting references should only be allowed if they have some sort of tangential relationship to politics?
Like this – both the NRL and AFL Grand Finals were won easily by the teams that have dominated the competition all year. Hopefully this will also be the final wash-up of the election result.
Poor Jolly Joe! So out of his depth…now he’s trying to apologise and claim that the other kids do it too in an attempt to stay out of trouble.
http://abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/02/2049286.htm?section=justin ["WorkChoices researchers mull legal action over accusations"]
Methinks the big fella has just let this one run on for a little while longer than it was already going to.
Heffernan never ceases to make me smile…
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22520997-29277,00.html
He does deserve a reward for acknowledging climate change, then linking it to Asian Invasion though.
Joe Hockey: will he lose his seat as well? The wishlist grows ever longer.
WTF is Hockey going on about on 7:30 Report!?
He seems to be thinking of other things, like the AWA he wants to work under, you know, the one where he gets hourly penalty rates, and is paid $410,000 a year! LOL!
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22493525-952,00.html?from=mostpop
Don’t you love the Doctor’s Union
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,22520681-5005361,00.html
The fact he is still in the senate after smearing a high court judge demonstrates how weak our politicians are.
Yeah blindoptimist, where is weatherman Mike? I haven’t heard peep from him since he quit the ABC. Has North Syd just been considered a writeoff? Do they think the big guy can do himself in?
I’d like to see the look on Glen’s, WRML’s, ESJ’s, Steven Kaye’s, Nostradamus’s and A-C’s faces in around 2 month’s time when the Rodent (with a distraught Hyacinth by his side) has to give a concession speech as it becomes clear that not only have the Libs been unceremoniously dumped by the voters but that his Bennelong fiefdom of over 30 years has been snatched from him by McKew! That will more than make up for the disappointment of the swing against the Libs not being enough to get rid of Dolly Downer, the Mad Monk and the Smirk as well.
Heffernan never ceases to make me smile…
I like the thinking behind a theory that has refugees pouring into a country that is already the driest inhabited continent on Earth and getting drier (Antarctica is a bit too cold for most…)
Kiwipundit,
I suspect that Howard will finally, graciously acknowledge the contribution of his loyal and long suffering Treasurer and say “It was all Costello’s fault”.
361
Frank Calabrese Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Don’t you love the Doctor’s Union
[DOCTORS have backed the Federal Government’s plan for increased local control of public hospitals, but warn chronic bed shortages and understaffing will only be fixed with a funding injection. The proposal to create 750 new hospital boards has not attracted widespread support, with nursing groups and the state governments slamming it as wasteful duplication of bureaucracy and a return to splintered, inexperienced management. The Federal Government would force the states to hand control of hospital budgets and management to a new local board as a condition of receiving commonwealth funding…..
……
This is really bizarre. Maybe the States should let the Feds have the hospital system. But the concept of having local boards run hospitals is weird: the Libs are saying to the States: you can’t run hospitals and we don’t want to run them either, so we’re going to get a whole new bunch of people to run them instead. We don’t know who these people will be, but they will be “local.” The concept could be taken further… local police, local schools, local roads, local everything…..but of course, you’d have to do what the Feds told you to do or you’d be a local nothing.
….
I am very troubled by this nonsense. It is the stunt of the century.
365 Kiwipundit,
Maybe I should offer you the job instead given that burst of uber enthusiasm instead of GG.!
It’s a real job so I would expect you to be in by 8.30am and leave about 5pm, 45 minutes for lunch and there would be some errand running.
I’d be willing to start either of you on about $30,000 per annum (which is $5000 above minimum wage). Work Hard and I will review your wages at the expiry of your probation period.
Hockey’s performance tonight on 7 30 Report was even worse than Coonan last night and she was the pits!
Personally I thought it was brilliant!
ESJ,
You have forced me to continue.
Were you not the apparatchik that damned John Gorton as being unfit to be leader and PM because he had the same drinking problem as you. Did this not lead to the coronation of Queen Billy McMahon the revered Liberal PM who sucessfully ……………
Your contribution is greatly revered by all within the Party. Your judgement unquenched.
Hockey is apologizing to the academics but won’t retract his comments abut their Union links. I taught Dr. Van Wanrooy at High School and her mother is a fellow teacher at a local Primary School, we both belong to the NSWTF . Definite Union links there Joe!
It was chaos. Cannon balls were flying heavily between both ships and sailors on both sides were suffering casualties.
“Arrrgh, we’re taking hits here, hard, take the wounded below!!!” Bellowed Captain Hamster.
“Ah.. Cap’n, we’ve no beds left for the wounded!” Ventured Bony, looking a little worried, “but I have a plan..”
“Go on, but be quick, we’re dying here, lad!”
“Well we do have some old hammocks and a box of band-aids. They can string them up and look after themselves for a while!”
“Go, man, go! We’ve got no time!!” nodded Hamster in agreement
Meanwhile the black ship was starting to lurch a little and Captain Rudder had problems of his own. Ms Lanyard gave a report of the wounded to him. She always hated this. Having once been in charge of the wounded and miscalculating the number of bandages before a crucial battle and promising older wounded sailors villas in Spain when they clearly couldn’t afford it still made her a laughing stock..
“23, mostly blown livers. Might make it at a pinch I guess, Cap’n!”
“Not to worry, my dear, we’ve got this wrong, in the past, and I’m the first to admit that. Now, we’re determined to get this right. To strike a balance of fairness and a fair go and to let people know that the buck stops with me!” Replied Captain Rudder.
“Err.. yes, lovely, Cap’n. But what do you want me to do?” Responded Ms Lanyard, confused, as a rather large canonball planted itself between them, throwing dust and wood and splinters all over both of them.
“Think, woman! We need action!! There’s hot coffee and donuts in the mess, get a committee together to file a report!!! Hurry, after your lunchbreak!! Oh… and if the wounded are dead by next week, just assure them that I’ll personally take over looking after the wounded!!”
He had barely finished his sentence when another Cannon ball ripped through the deck, taking his big toe with it.
“GGGGGGNNNNNNNNNNUUUUGGHHHHH! Blast.” He grunted in pain
“Damned if I’m going to the emergency room. A bloke could get killed in there!!!”
I’ve just sent this email to Hockey:
I run a small business (70 employees). When WorkChoices was introduced in 2005 we made an appointment with an IR law firm to check whether we were compliant. We spent $420 for 40 minutes of “advice†from a prat in a suit who essentially told us that nirvana had been achieved and that we were now free to screw our staff in whatever way we wanted (and who told us nothing else).
This election, we’ve made our first ever political donation, earmarked to Maxine McKew in Bennelong. We’ve got two further donation tranches that, depending on polling, will be earmarked against Howard ministers. If North Sydney is looking vulnerable, we might spend at least one of these tranches on Mike Bailey’s campaign against you. Watching you just now on the 7.30 Report made my blood boil Hockey. I don’t want to be in a room with people like you or that prat from the law firm or any other manifestation of this frontal attack on Australian community.
I repeat: this is the first time we have ever made any political donations in either a personal or company capacity. I hope we get rid of you and your ilk.
Paul Hodgson
328 GG
I agree. This – “do over with malice”… such wonderfully pugnacious language – is very likely to happen if status quo persists. A five per cent swing or more and Howard (and everything he stands for) is history. This is why I am forwarding the buying off and/or frightening tactic as two most likely to retain government. It remains a staring down contest: if Howard does not blink and orchestrates a security or financial crisis then he is almost guaranteed a win. However that is a bif if, and requires that he does not blink. And blinking includes pleading on Kerry O’Brien.
326 Paul K
Your point about Victoria is valid. For Victoria and at that time. State elections cannot be won or lost on blatened fear or favour. They seem to be either emotional affaits (appeal of Bracks), or the eventual opposition insists on shooting itself in all feet it has access to for the duration of the campaign.
363 Kiwipundit and others,
I set out the conditions, which I think Howard will use to win. If the reverse happens that half-a-dozen readers of this fine blof will be derided up hill and down dale.
Imagine (and just imagine, nobody’s asking you to believe it ahead of time) the reverse.
GG, the REAL Ted St John, who died in 1994, was a very admirable character, a genuine liberal who opposed apartheid when most of his party were still defending it. He was opposed in Warringah in 1966 by a League of Rights-backed candidate who said he was a commie. Once in Parliament he stood up for the truth about the Voyager disaster which Holt was trying to cover up. THIS ESJ is some North Shore Young Lib prat who isn’t worthy of carrying Ted St John’s drinks tray.
Isn’t that Edward St John dead, GG? I thought he died back in ‘94.
Maybe this is Edward St John, the Younger.
314
Why Rudd Must Lose Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:58 pm
Polling from now (or before) is not of itself predictive of what the election day will bring. All that it shows is that the electorate is in the mood to stare Howard down.
Sounds to me like the sort of reasoning that said Keating couldn’t lose in 1996!!!
And nothing I wrote is not true.
Paul
Well Done just remember to keep telling your friends etc-keep up the momentum
BTW ever heard of Getup-they are cordinating strategic ads to target both individuals and the Lib Gvt as well
ps i recently changed jobs -mentioned whether he used awa’s nearly lost it
this guy employs 15 ppl (consultancy) and has spent well over 10k trying to be compliant (so we can advise others as well) and has just given up
the speed dial now reads “city morgue” instead of workplace authority -thats about how useful and relevant DEWR is
Adam,
Despite your petulance in the turmoils of outrageous misfortune for you on this blog know that you have a friend in me.
GG – I dont care about your backchat, if your prepared to work hard and respond to discipline I will raise my starting salary $32,500 its my final offer.
With great respect WRML, your scenario is being played out while we blog.
The libs have $17b + to spend and they will not go down without spraying as much of that about as they can during the campaign.
No child will be without an Ipod. No living room will be without a Plasma TV. The spendathon has not even begun.
“Frightening”, read constant references to unions, inexperience , women in power, Kevin Rudd’s glasses are “Bi” focal.
I recommend Possum as an antidote for all the buldust.
GG, you may be right that St John had a drinking problem, I have never heard that suggested. But he wasn’t an “aparatchik”, which presumably means someone who comes from a party organisation. St John was a barrister and legal academic who had no connection with the Liberal party “aparat.” (Source: Rydon, 206). So not everything you wrote was true.
WRML, what is blatened? I think you are making up the language as you are going along. Your logic approximates your knowledge of English.
WRT your apparent point. The Australian electorate, at large, does not believe JWH any more. He lied about interest rates, he lied about ‘Work’no’Choices’, he lied about the reasons for going to war, he lied about children overboard, he lied to Peter Costello about handing over. There is very little he has not lied about.
The electorate has made up its collective mind, and deluded souls like you, and Glen, and Christopher Pearson, and Terry McCrann should just accept the fact. You are wasting our time, and your energy. You should work on a basic understanding of the English language. It will do you a lot more good.
cheers,
Alan H
Showson 324 says
This was delivered as tax cuts, savings (superannuation), and importantly, Medicare.
Possibly the most significant and fundamental economic reform of the Hawke/Keating era (there were quite a few others of similar impact) was the introduction of universal and transportable superannuation (previously this was largely a perk of the Public Service or the upper echelons of private industry). The principal advantage of this reform was to wean the public from the great government mammary in the form of an unfunded old age pension. This reform was to have its fully effect in the LAW increase in the superannuation contribution from the employee salary/wage packet from 9% to 15% over the triennial period 1996-1998 ( with 1% a year coming from the employees(reduced wage increases) and 1% a year coming from the employers) this would have taken the total superannuation contribution to 15% of earnings (the level at which most actuaries consider that a sufficient sum will accrue over a normal working lifetime to produce a reasonably livable income stream in retirement, for the majority of people.
My recollection is that JWH promised to continue with this reform during the election campaign and then found it to be a discard-able ‘non-core’ promise as soon as he was elected.
IMHO this was the single most important act of economic vandalism perpetrated during the coalition’s most recent hegemony over the Australian economy
There are so many ways Labor can use WorkChoices during the election campaign. It threatens just about everyone and especially people with debt and or kids. AND there is the worry that Govt wants WC to cover 100% of the work force and, also of WC2.
“It also found that more than half of the 177,000 people who signed up to AWAs this year said there was no negotiation about wages and conditions with their employers.”
Therein lays the fundamental problem with WC and, what it is all about for Howard. Get unions out, reduce their power and membership and thus dry up funds and talent for the Labor party. Doesn’t matter to them who and how many are sacrifice in the process.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/awas-disadvantage-qlds-retail-hospitality-workers/2007/10/02/1191091086203.html
Hockey will need to back down quickly, the academics are serious in their legal action, Hockey has basically accused them of fudging their research.
This is the most serious charge you can level against an acdemic, it destroys careers and reputations and I don’t think Hockey can claim any sort of legal or parliamentary privalege. Besides substantial damages to pay Hockey could also be looking at future garnishes on his parliamentary super pension.
From a workers point of view you are to be admired Mr Hodgson.My young son was screwed over by one of the large Multinational fast food chains the day the WorkChoices became law.The Liberal and Nationals by introducing this legislation have guaranteed that no person affected adversley by these laws will ever vote for them in the future.Stupidity really.There was no reason to introduce them.The economy is supposedly doing fine.I have written to our local member (Lib)several times and asked why.Never had an answer.I can’t wait to vote them out.
Don’t you just love the way that the Libs attempt to trash any facts put forward which fly in the face of their claims made on behalf of their failed policies, only to bring more attention to the disastrous effects those very same policies are having on people.
People affected by policies such as “workchoices”, are definitely NOT sleepwalking or imagining the situation they now find themselves and their families in.
Reminding them of this is invaluable political value for Labor and the stupid fools can’t see it. Priceless!
“(Mr Hockey) has made some very serious allegations about me and my team being union bosses in disguise masquerading as academics,” he said.”
http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Academics-lash-out-at-Hockey-criticism/2007/10/02/1191091068685.html
Arbie
Maybe Hockey doesnt/cant understand what defamation means
Ministers only have parliamentary privilege when they speak in Parliament. They sometimes forget that they can’t slag everyone as they please when they are not in the House.
Hockey is a desperate man – he knows it is his job to defend WC at all costs or he will be blamed for the government’s defeat, although it was really Howard and Andrews who mixed up the toxic brew which is now poisoning their chances.
Seeing as how we’re all waaay off topic I thought I’d post this link. http://www.ozelection2007.info/forums/viewtopic.php?id=767 You can bang on all you like about comebacks and soft votes, but the polls are indicating doom for Howard, and they are the best, most realistic guide we have to what is going to happen in a few weeks’ time.
To clear up Glen from 302.
Automated messages were used by the Libs during the 2004 marginal seat campaign. this was at the same time that the Libs tried spamming emails using Howard’s sons company at the time. The technology has been anoying Australian households since 2001 through outgoing call centres (they leave a personal message while their staff catch up with the automated dialing system). -reference is my own industry knowledge.
The Libs did use it first you see.
What Hockey has done is similar to accusing a scientist of fudging results to get a research grant, it will be interesting to see what happens next.
I’ll donate $10 to the ALP if Hockey gets sued over his comments. Truly you dont know what you are talking about comrades.
It’s amazing that WorkChoices is still the centrepiece of this campaign, and is looking like being the cause of perhaps the greatest landslide in Australian Federal political history.
Has there ever been a more disastrous public policy in our nation’s history?
Conscription, maybe?
Paul Hodgson,
Come out and enunciate it, man! Exactly what is it that you are trying to say? There appears to be a subtext that you don’t appreciate the Armenian Armtwister. He is a friend of John Howard and, if august journals such The Australian and any other Murdoch tabloid hate sheet say that is a good thing, then who are we to disbelieve it?
I reckon you are really a Union Boss and you’re just looking for another defenceless business to ruin so that Uncle Joe can spray “Shut down by union bosses!!!” over its windows. I am really getting sick of seeing “Shut down by union bosses!!!” all over my non-swinging electorate.
Maybe Hockey doesn’t/cant understand what defamation means
Probably thought they said “Deification” and didn’t feel like it. lol
Hockey will have to do a big grovel, gravely damaging his reputation and drawing even more attention to the damning findings of the research – that WorkAllWeekend really does what it was designed to do – lower the wages of unprotected and unskilled workers.
Because in WorkChoices MKI it enabled an employer to totally screw his workers with impunity.
The electorate saw through it,and is still seeing through it.
ESJ, leaving matters of ethics aside, I’m not sure it really matters if Hockey gets sued or not. The fact that he is already backtracking indicates that he again is playing bad politics. More bad publicity in an area of weakness for the government. If Howard can keep a straight face while telling him, I reckon he’d be on the phone to Joe telling him to keep his head down for a little while.
Scotty, Hughes *won* the 1917 election on conscription, although he lost the two plebiscites. The correct and more instructive analogy is Bruce’s attempt to abolish arbitration in 1929, which led to the Nationalists being massively thrashed and Bruce losing his seat.
IMHO determing future events by the application of rear view mirrors is foolish. Smacks of Maginot.
BTW I wont specifically respond but to those trying to spin the Australia@work report today I guess you are all in the words of Vladimir Illich (whom Adam and I both love to quote) useful idiots for the ALP.
Adam
You’re right, Hockey will have to do a substantial sincere public apology.
He is probably talking with lawyers right now as to the wording of it.
Unless he chances a court suit and the massive damages that would follow.
It’s marvellous really, the Libs keep the spotlight on their failings all by their own hand and Labor just have to sit back in astonishment, watching the meltdown occurring in slow motion right before their eyes.
Nevertheless, Adam, John Howard went to the people on the GST in 1998 and managed to scrape home, and like workchoices the GST was not a part of his election campaign pledges…so there is evidence either way…
Alan H, 385. I don’t know… a typo? a gerund of ‘bleet’? Thank you for the pointer.
As for your substantive point. I would like Howard to stop playing footsie with the power he clearly wants. If he wants to go hard right and use hard methods, he should not piss about.
It’s not unlike Been There’s comment at 379:
“Sounds to me like the sort of reasoning that said Keating couldn’t lose in 1996!!!”
I don’t think Liberals won that election; Keating & co (by far the better team in the round) – lost it. At some point in that campaign, or maybe just before it began Keating lost the desire for Howard’s jugular.
And now Howard looks like he doesn’t really want to fight either. Having his winded minions accuse state governments of causing miscarriages and engaging in academic libel is not fighting.
Hi Adam @ 384.
You are absolutely right. St John was more the weapon of choice against Gorton. Just another representative of the Sydney Push against non NSW politicians who aspire to be PM.
Maybe the Libs have had a bet between themselves about just how high they can get the next AC Nielsen poll.
What strikes me is the total absence of any National Party comments on workchoices and IR for the past 12 months. Zilch, nil.
They are probably hoping to slip under the radar and let the Libs take all the heat.
ESJ – the Australia@Work study is pretty comprehensive and academically rigorous. I’m assuming that you have read it – I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on exactly why you think it’s not credible (without saying “union bosses”).
The government has dealt with this issue badly – Hockey’s response will keep the story in the media for a day or two longer than it would have without his intervention.
And what the Libs still haven’t got their heads around is that ANY coverage of IR, in whatever context, is bad for the government. What people often forget is that Mr & Mrs Voter don’t really pay too much attanetion to the details of policy, but the mere mention of the-IR-policy-that-dare-not-speak-its-name reminds people why they hate WCs, and why they will vote against the government.
So personally, I’m more than happy for the government to continue their tactics as used thus far.
306 Bye bye rodent. She did use them in S.A. For the life of me I don’t know why. The money would be much better spent elsewhere. People like them as much as companies ringing at tea time.
“John Howard went to the people on the GST in 1998 and managed to scrape home, and like workchoices the GST was not a part of his election campaign pledges…so there is evidence either way…” How can Howard go to an election on GST yet not talk about it during the election campaign? Am I missing something here Glen? You see Glen the goods and services tax (GST) was introduced in Australia on 1 July 2000.
The Nationals have to run on country issues like council amalgamations and water and the drought. Howard’s recent package is good for the Nats to take to the electorate but no matter how much effort they put in Morgan and AC will undercut their vote.
And according to Rudd it was fundamental injustice day lol!
I’ve been to the Crikey web site & there is an interesting article on how a odds boffin has come up with a list of probable Labor gains. Have a sgwizz!
http://www.crikey.com.au/Election-2007/20071002-Polls-enter-the-final-quarter.html
ESJ,
Unless that is $32,500 per week, I fart in your general direction.
Howard does have some vague criteria for dismissing ministers, Santoro had to go. He wasn’t involved with a court case though
. Hockey had better do the right thing quick smart to fix this up or he might find himself on the backbench before he faces the voters. ;-D
Arbie Jay @ 388
Agree. He has stumbled into a minefield. Because it is “published” – his comments are now on the public record – he could face a charge of libel. The old “odium and disrepute” in the eyes of the populance.
I reckon a suitable “garnish” would be a burnt bit of toast.
You need a subscription for the crikey link. What was the outcome?
Goodness me Glen (407) – I realise that you were only in primary school in 1998, but the GST was front and centre as the primary issue of the campaign. Why do you think Labor got so close that year – a few extra votes here and there and Howard would have led the first single term government since the Depression.
Still, regardless my views on the GST (then and now), at least Howard did put it on the table before the election. This allowed the proposal to be debated over an 18 month period before its eventual introduction in 2000. None of this was the case with WorkChoices, a policy not flagged pre-2004, and one which the government has since made very little effort at explaining.
John Howard and his team have a weakness, that has lost them the election, they cant stop lying.
Yes but my point stands something very unpopular didnt result in Howard getting booted out and no Hugo i was not at primary school in 1998 perhaps you were thinking of yourself…
371 ShowsOn. You obviously have no idea. He was absolutely pathetic. Which is a good example as to why the polls are the way they are.
GG, with respect, you don’t appear to know much about the history of the Liberal Party and its predecessors. The non-Labor side has always been led from Victoria with rare exceptions – the major ones being Hughes and Lyons who were both Labor turncoats and so don’t really count. The line of succession went Barton, Deakin (V), Cook, Hughes, Bruce (V), Latham (V), Lyons, Menzies (V), Holt (V), Gorton (V), McMahon, Snedden (V), Fraser (V), Peacock (V) – the rest we all know. The only NSW leaders were Cook and McMahon, both failures. Howard is the first NSW non-Labor politician to dominate his side of politics since Barton. There was no “Sydney push” in the Liberal Party in 1969 – Victorian dominance was taken for granted. The only serious NSW leadership contender was Barwick, and he gave up waiting and went to the High Court in 1964. No-one took McMahon seriously until 1971, when there was no-one else. And even if there was such a push, St John wasn’t part of it. He was a rather unworldly academic lawyer who was genuinely offended by Gorton’s behaviour and acted entirely on his own. Furthermore some of Gorton’s most trenchant critics were Victorians, such as Jess and Howson. This is all in both St John’s book A Time To Speak and Alan Reid’s The Gorton Experiment.
415 – GG
Now now, you wouldnt talk that way to your Labor MP as you opened his mail, answered his calls, did his or her banking and collected their drycleaning would you?
In the real world people are paid according to merit and performance, this may be a shocking concept in your sheltered workplace where blind obedience and loyalty is all that counts – but I am offering you a real world career old chap? Besides who knows what could happen to you if you forget to clap or laugh at the appropriate time working for an MP.
There is also the aspect of government funding for the study that Hockey and Costello criticised.
“Mr Hockey called the researchers “former union staffers” and Mr Costello said the study was partially funded by the union movement, which skewed its findings.”
If Hockey and Costello feel the funding has been missused they can demand that the funding be returned. It has happened in other jurisidctions.
National Cancer Institute asks LBNL for return of research grant money
The National Cancer Institute billed Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory more than $800,000 this month, charging the lab with taking grant money given to a cancer researcher who allegedly falsified data.
http://www.dailycal.org/sharticle.php?id=23
Paul Hodgson 375
My sister is a hard nosed, long time half owner/operator of a successful small business, in a highly competitive industry. She deals with the admin/management side of it, including employee stuff.
She and her business partner HATE Workchoices. It creates more work and gives them less choice in their business decisions than before. It has also opened the floodgates to a ‘race to the bottom’ in their industry, and they are soon going to have to decide whether to screw their loyal employees, or close the business.
They much preferred the previou system and will definitely not be voting for Howard.
Yes, but Glen (421), the point is that people knew what they were voting for in 1998. They had no idea that a vote for Howard in 2004 would get them WorkChoices.
This will go down very well with the Asian voters of Bennelong.
“AUSTRALIA’S north faces a future threat of invasion by Asian refugees who have run out of water because of climate change, outspoken Liberal senator Bill Heffernan has warned.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22520997-12377,00.html
“much prefer the previous”
Bedtime for JM.
Hugo 411 I rely on my comments at 329, informed players would confirm this view. I have not read the report as yet and have no doubt the research method is acceptable and passes muster but as much as there are schools of thought in IR academia the leanings of Sydney Uni are well known. Like all academic reports facts can be tortured.
The GST resulted in the government losing the 2pp vote but may have shored up government marginals in slightly affluent suburbs,( think eastern melbourne). there is a very good article by nick economou about it.
Captain Smirk needs renaming as Captain Arrogant. I heard him today on the radio saying it was insult to even be compared with Wayne Swann.
Now talk like that will do him a lot of good. The man lives off the back of the Keating/China economy, doesn’t understand how the basic tax scales are actually applied, can’t remember how much the tax cuts were and, now thinks he is beyond comparison. It wouldn’t be so bad if he actually had earned some credentials rather than claim credit for the work of others.
Every time anybody of the Govt opens their mouth they sound like spiteful, arrogant fools.
Edward
you sound desperate almost strung-out in fact looking for your “help”
i know a bloke bit fat, a little stupid , dopey grin, loves camels (i mean loves camels) bit of a liar -ideal Lib material , actually he already is
Joe someone or other is his name-
im sure he is in your little black book
nudge nudge
Obviously Heffernan hasn’t been in Jakarta or Bangkok in the rainy season. SE Asia is the wettest place on earth. What a moron. It really is a serious indictment on the NSW Liberal Party that such a fool could be a Senator.
Defamation can be done in two ways, Libel which is written or printed material and slander basically verbal (Joe Hockeys accusations). Definitions as follows:
1. defamation; calumny: rumors full of slander.
2. a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report: a slander against his good name.
3. Law. defamation by oral utterance rather than by writing, pictures, etc.
–verb (used with object) 4. to utter slander against; defame.
–verb (used without object) 5. to utter or circulate slander.
1. Law. a. defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures.
b. the act or crime of publishing it.
c. a formal written declaration or statement, as one containing the allegations of a plaintiff or the grounds of a charge.
2. anything that is defamatory or that maliciously or damagingly misrepresents.
–verb (used with object) 3. to publish a libel against.
4. to misrepresent damagingly.
5. to institute suit against by a libel, as in an admiralty court.
The government were hoping Kevin Rudd and his team might slip up, but it is more likely they will, because they are under greater presuure not to lose at any cost
No gusface I am always trying to “save” the lost souls. I have seen too many people chewed up and spat out by the Labor Party in my time. Just trying to save a errant young man like GG from the path of despair.
Bangladesh? Has Bill seen a map lately?
As for Indonesia, I doubt they will ever have the organisational capacity to mount any sort of coherent attack on our northern shores.
ESJ – your response at 329 is just another smear – if you have proof that the authors of Australia@Work have somehow falsified their findings, I would be very interested in hearing it.
The fact is that there have been a mountain of studies which have shown the deleterious effects of WCs and next to nothing disproving that. Consequently, your side have had to “play the man”, by demeaning the academics who have actually done some research on this topic (unlike, say, you).
I guess that’s because WCs is indefensible. Still, at least your house cleaner will be cheaper.
Glen Says:
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:51 pm
Compare the date of the article and the date on your post. Pre Historic history.