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
Newspoll part two
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
693 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 14 » Show All
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.
Sid Marris in the Australian has produced the most balanced article that I have seen all year, and guess what? It’s about our current favourite subject, Australia@Work .
{COLLECTIVE bargaining provides better rates of pay for low-paid workers than individual arrangements, a government-funded study shows.
The study, which was funded by the federal Government and unions, said individual agreements bring in the dollars for higher skilled employees.}
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22518909-601,00.html
It’s well worth a read and doesn’t do the usual “spin” favours for the Government.
Goodness gracious Edward, Adam has you tagged as unworldly and academic (not to mention a lawyer) . So, all this talk about merit and performance is just meretricious humbug. Is it not?
But, just so you know, we aim to kill not maim Tony in Warringah.
Thanks Adam (403) – that’s the answer I was looking for. I could have gone and researched it myself, I suppose, but it’s nice to ask these questions here, knowing that the answer will be provided.
My next thought for worst ever policy was “whatever Bruce” did to lose his seat.
Glen, do you know how many seats Howard lost in the 1998 election?
Andrew Charlton has a good article in October’s Monthly giving the ‘Costello-as-economic-miracle-worker’ myth a seriously good shoeing. I’m guessing it is culled in part from Ozonomics?
There’s also a Mungo MacCallum piece on the Liberal leadership (I’ve not quite got there yet).
In other news, I was also peeved at the government’s response to the Australia@Work report. The academics will obviously have been expecting such a response – but it’s still pretty poor to just contradict them without any supporting evidence.
Hugo 440,
That one was unworthy of you.
To compare AWA’s with collective agreements negotiated by unions is impossible to do fairly in my opinion. I am not impugning the integrity of the reports authors – merely that there are different academic schools in IR and Sydney represents one end of the spectrum and Adelaide another. I doubt many union people would have charitable comments to make about Judith Sloan for instance.
There is a segment of the economy that competes entirely on price, say for instance cleaners or to a lesser extent retail. I have no doubt that some of these people did exploit WC pre the fairness test to rip off penaltys and OT for next to nothing – but it is highly likely these would have been the people who were the worst payers under the award system too. Secondly there are many people who do have bargaining power in the big cities – eg your medical receptionist would have a top rate of pay of about $34K per annum ($1500 more than GG) under an award – I doubt very much that you would have many medical receptionists being paid that in Sydney.
I dont doubt people support fairness – the real issue is do we really need to spend MILLIONS on the OLD IR system to ensure it with stupid prescriptive rules. Is there not something obscene about appointing multiple people on considerable 6 figure packages with pensions to boot to determine whether or not low paid people get $20 or $25 per week?
Of course the IR Club was going to scare up a storm and the Liberals have only themselves to blame for it – I truly believe they did not think it would be much of an issue and the union propaganda was/has been effective.
Its of course a moot point because Rudd has done the deal which will bury the unions anyway – the death will be a little slower and a little more palliative but terminal nonetheless. I predict many of the last crop gof union secretaries oing into parliament will be the ones to deliver the coup de grace should Labor win.
ESJ (447) – I shall concede that my parting shot was a little graceless.
However, I stand by my substantive point, which is that people at the bottom end of the labour market have lost out considerably under WCs. Yes, they were down the bottom before, but things are getting worse. All this study (like others) does is demonstrate that.
However, I agree with you (see, it is possible!) when you comment that the government has handled the issue terribly, quite probably (as you say) because they didn’t appreciate the backlash it would elicit. But all this shows to me is the very ad hoc nature of the Act in the first place – the government wasn’t prepared for the backlash because they hadn’t really thought through the policy in the first place.
For what it’s worth, I think they would’ve got away with it if they hadn’t reached so far. If they’d just brought in the bills previously knocked back in the Senate (eg the original unfair dismissal exemption), they wouldn’t be in the position they are in now.
Glad to see Glen keeps talking about 98 and how Howard didn’t lose government, but the thing is Labor won 18 seats that year. Labor only needs to win 16 this year.
During the 1920s the employers and their front the Nationalist Party grew increasingly impatient with the Arbitration Court, which under that great liberal judge H B Higgins sought to defend the living standards of the unskilled blue-collar working class (then a much larger class than it is now). In 1928 and 1929 there was a series of bitter strikes and lockouts in the coalmines and on the wharves. Bruce, a former army officer of rigidly upper-class outlook, suddenly decided to wind the clock back to 1900 and brought in a bill to abolish the Arbitration Court. Hughes led a group of Nationalists who crossed the floor to defeat the bill, whereapon Bruce immediately called an election. The result was a Labor landslide, with Labor winning 18 of the Nat-CP coalition’s 42 seats, including Bruce’s seat of Flinders. Unfortunately for Labor, the Wall St Crash followed the election by only a few weeks…
Pages: « 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 14 » Show All