The Sunday Fairfax papers (see here and here) carry a Taverner poll covering mortgage holders only from Sydney and Melbourne, showing a 57-43 lead to Labor. There was apparently a similar poll published during the 2004 campaign which had the Coalition leading 54-46 among this group, but I can’t find any record of it. Seats in which this looks like bad news for the Coalition include La Trobe, McMillan, Corangamite, Deakin and McEwen in and around Melbourne, and Lindsay, Parramatta, Dobell, Robertson and Macarthur in the Sydney area.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Taverner: Labor leads among mortgage holders
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
617 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 13 » Show All
Being addicted to drugs isn’t a crime.
# 398 Generic Person Says: November 18th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
But it is hatred of democracy to include justice outcomes into social policy.
“They are not taking away money, they are quarantining the payments to ensure they’re spent on survival rather than drug purchases.”
But there is a big danger that if these people are not adequately helped to overcome their addiction, then they will resort to crime in order to get by. Howard is good at punishing people, but I wouldn’t trust him when it comes to rehabilitation. Like ND said, this policy could end up being a disaster, but I also suspect that Howard hasn’t thought through the implications because he is only doing it as political wedge for the sake of his re-election.
348 – Grog that’s spot on. It’s what we’ve been looking for all day. Right balance between ensuring it’s kept very jocular and not sounding nerdy.
Yawn… Kevin Rudd has two options here.
He can ignore it (I’d prefer developing policies for the future of Australia), or he could copy it (it’s a good policy, we’ll copy it).
Either way, it’s yet another wedge issue of the libs that will only make them look like the desperate try-hards that they are.
403
A political wedge?
surely you are not suggesting after 11 and a half years of Government, that with one week before the election, that being miles behind in the polls. that Howard would introduce this policy for political purposes?
So GP you would like to see the Baby Bonus, Child Care Rebate, Old Age Pension, Disability Support Pension, Carers Pension and allowance, War Widows pension, etc. quaranteened?
Or is it just welfare for the unwashed?
Pity those drug addicts aren’t into price collusion.
Or paying bribes to dictators.
Or rorting.
GP
By “all welfare payments” do you also include payments to farmers, tax incentives to business, diesel rebates to miners, several billion in the car industry package… or do you only define “welfare” as giving tax-payers money to poor people?
ta Samuel K, it made my wife laugh (which is about as good as I can do)
GP ,
you are starting to sound like Glen et al.(read desperate), and your social policy stands reflect that of other 18th century thinkers, such as our soon to be ex-PM.
Can anyone please explain why so many are raving on like lunatics and perpetuating this absurd 55% 2pp and 30 seats changing hands bullshit based on polls? Get real. History and common sense should show you that polls only are indicators – but of what? Forget 55. Man, 53 is HUGE. Anyway, where are all the coalition lunatics to put some balance into this farce?
It is another policy to try to secure the Liberal base. It works on two prejudices:
All dole bludgers are drug addicts.
All drug addicts are dole bludgers.
If they are trying to secure their base at this stage, it demonstrates how far behind they actually are.
Regarding Generic Moron’s take on it, he is just depressed because his mob are going to get cleaned up in 120 hours time.
410
Rudds response is to point it out as policy made in desperation and on the run. He believes the drugs problem needs addressing, but would want to make sure a plan that doesn’t put elderly at risk of increased crime as a result of increasingly desperate drug users having to turn to other means to supprt thier habbit.
Generic Person clearly doesn’t understand the difference between the 1903 industrial relations system and the system that Keating introduced. Maybe he should go and have a little read and learn about Enterprise Bargaining.
Does he sit there transcribing Liberal Party pamphlets onto this blog or what??
Gary Morgan said in Friday’s poll release
Still don’t have these polls, which should be the first after Labor’s campaign launch. Maybe Morgan’s checking because the result’s too good for Labor to be easily believable.
He’s doesn’t have the time, he is still trying to get his law degree so he is eligible for Liberal pre-selection. He was going to go for the House of Reps, but it was too hard, so he has settled on a seat in the loser’s lounge.
It’s the last desperate act of a dying administration! Rudd ain’t gonna fall into that trap! Only 6 more days and we are hopefully rid of the Rodent/Smirky
Just email that one off to Rudd’s office can you BB Dave? (oh don’t bother, if they’re worth their salt, they’d already be reading)
lol
Does anyone know of a forum where coalition voters go to whip each other?
Count down the hours, it’s more fun!
There is a whisper doing the rounds of a sad journo known for his “white line fever’ who stays up late at night writing favourable replies to his blog because he only gets negative attacks. Now lobs onto other blogs for company , instantly recongisable by empty one line reponses which he think are pithy and amusing. Uses some sort of “common” handle as his nome de plume.
Think that Rudd will let this one go through to the keeper. Its just Rattus sounding shrill and desperate, blabbing out something he hasn’t really thought about.
His only hope is that Rudd will fluff some response to this and how many times has Rudd mishandled something in this campaign?
415 Samuel
good question, lets find out by linking ecconomics to IR since that is a fair fight.
pop quiz GP
1. has productivity grown or decreased since the introduction of Libs IR reforms?
2. increased or decreased by how much?
3. pre Lib IR reforms we were over 40% above the OECD average for productivity growth- where do we stand now?
Forget Insiders, comment of the day goes to Gideon Haigh on Offsiders:
“An Official Newspaper of the AFL, that’s ridiculous. It’s like having an Official Newspaper of the Liberal Party. Oh wait, we have one of those.”
Cue polite chuckles from panellists. Methinks they’re getting a bit frisky in Gore Hill
Suggested headline for tomorrow’s papers:
“HOWARD TRIES DRUGS”
actual answers to 424
Productivity groth down 50% since intro of Lib IR reforms, we are now 16% below OECD average.
IR reform is a big reason since wage reduction is favoured over productivity groth in the Lib system- undermining our economic future competativeness
Caroline’s comment reminds me of the sayings of Chance the Gardener, played by Peter Sellers in “Being There”
{President “Bobby”: Mr. Gardner, do you agree with Ben, or do you think that we can stimulate growth through temporary incentives?
Chance the Gardener: As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden.
President “Bobby”: In the garden.
Chance the Gardener: Yes. In the garden, growth has it seasons. First comes spring and summer, but then we have fall and winter. And then we get spring and summer again.
President “Bobby”: Spring and summer.
Chance the Gardener: Yes.
President “Bobby”: Then fall and winter.
Chance the Gardener: Yes.
Benjamin Rand: I think what our insightful young friend is saying is that we welcome the inevitable seasons of nature, but we’re upset by the seasons of our economy.
Chance the Gardener: Yes! There will be growth in the spring!
Benjamin Rand: Hmm!
Chance the Gardener: Hmm!
President “Bobby”:
George,
Thanks so very much for the tip and heads up on The Monthly magazine. I was finally able to track one down today while we were in the city. Stopped into a big newsagency in Kings Cross. I am enjoying it so far and am thinking about subscribing but will wait until I have read the whole magazine first. Cheers
Something to ponder on climate change that I wrote up for a media press release today:
Everyone MUST read this synthesis report. It is science policy at its most compelling, with our very future at stake.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf
The IPCC Synthesis Report (summary for policy makers) is basically a precis of the previous three 4th Assessment Working Group reports, released in 2007, on the science of climate change (WGI), likely impacts and adaptation (WGII), and paths to mitigation (WGIII). As such, you could be forgiven for thinking that there would be little or nothing new here. Yet I sense that there is. The language used to describe the looming risks seems less clinical – more emotive, than that in the previous summary for policy makers (SPM). The generally conservative assumptions are laid bare, rather than hidden away.
A good example of what I mean is the description of sea level rise. A number of scientific papers have, during just this last year (so too late to be included in the AR4 main report), seriously raised the prospect of metres, rather than centimetres, of sea level rise by 2100 (and much more beyond). In this synthesis report – perhaps in response to this growing recognition – it is made abundantly clear that the predictions of 18-59cm rise is patently a lower bound, because rapid future ice flow dynamics are not included. In essence, what they mean by this is “…because we can’t adequately model the unexpectedly rapid loss of Arctic sea ice and accelerating disintegration of Greenland and West Antarctica and put a number on how fast this will proceed, we have no choice but to leave it out of our projections…” (and thus risk conveying a gross underestimate of the true possibility). At least now they say it in the SPM.
Figure SPM.7 is a simply stunning summary. Unlike the previous version in WGII, this explicitly links impacts to mitigation scenarios. In doing so, it clearly shows that under the most stringent mitigation scenario proposed (scenario I, in which CO2 equivalent is limited to 445-490 ppm, global cuts of 50-85% in emissions are achieved, and warming of 2-2.4C is realised), there is a high confidence that a slew of what can only be described as catastrophic impacts (30% species loss, major coastal flooding, most corals bleached, significant global water stress), will unfold! The fossil-fuel intensive business-as-usual scenario runs off the chart, with a disturbingly plausible risk of up to 6.8-8.6C warming – truly “game over” for humanity and most other life on this planet.
Indeed, it is a damning indictment on our collective vacillation, inaction and deliberate stalling to date, in facing up to this problem (Australia and the US as two prominent curmudgeons), that we are now facing the stark choice between a bad situation, a catastrophic situation, or a civilization-terminating situation. The EU has defined “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” (what we were supposed to avoid, according to the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) as being anything over 2C warming – and many claim this is already too much for comfort, given the changes we are witnessing now at 0.8C warming. There is some dark humour to be had in contemplating Table SPM.6 then – because only 6 of 177 mitigation scenarios reported therein actually allow for the possibility of avoiding 2C!
There is one bit of good news, if policy makers will just take heed. Table SPM.7 shows, quite clearly, that the costs involved in moving fast to address the emissions problem are incredibly small, or perhaps even beneficial overall (and that’s before we count the social and environmental cost of not taking action). To achieve the most stringent mitigation of 445-535 ppm CO2e, the reduction in GDP by 2050 is 3-5.5%. This means, roughly, that we become twice as rich (in real dollar terms – equivalent to the average yearly Australian wage now being over $120K instead of $60K), in July 2050 instead of January 2050. So the catch is, in making this choice, that you have to be willing to wait 6 months, to save the planet.
427 BBD – Don’t use facts and logic – you’ll confuse poor generic person.
It smells like an attempt to shore up the Liberal base, or the redneck Liberal base(to be more precise).
Rudd will agree with it, so Howard can’t run the line Labor is soft on drug users.
This is all the Rodent has left to offer? LMAO
Oh great, quarantine welfare payments to drug addicts will only increase petty crime. In my last place I was burgled 3 times in 8 months and the police said it was most definitely drug addicts. So now, the little money they get on welfare will be locked up, so they will only just find other ways to get the money.
Is anyone still listening to Howard? Hmmmmmm……..I don’t think so.
In reality this is Howards means testing for drug crime punishment.
430 – You’re never going to convince anyone here with a long post like that.
There are many addictions that have overcome people.
What policies is Howard proposing to deal with people who are addicated to power and addicted to lying?
“It’s not right that people should have control of taxpayer money when they have been convicted of such offences.”
From Rattus Pistus?
Unbelievable!
Is this the sort of policy announcement that can magically swing an election?
I doubt it. Methinks the Rodent has used up everything in his bag of tricks.
I think a lot of people will sense the desperation and pure cynicism behind this sort of crap.
GP-if we should lock up drug addicts, doesnt that mean we should lock up Piers Ackerman for his cocaine habit? He’d be a popular boy in the slammer with his new friends.
That’s very close to spam, Amaranthus.
Arvo all, are we expecting a poll tomorrow? Newspoll/Galaxy/? Roy’s being awfully slow with his promised sunday polls.
Nobody feeds and houses themselves and supports a drug addiction on $320 a fortnight.
In fact, the only people likely to be injured by this, is someone trying to go straight.
Yes, dole payments are spent on the pokies, bookmakers, cigarettes and alcohol … but I thought the libs were the pro personal choice party?
Wasn’t last week’s national Newspoll released on Monday, rather than Tuesday?
420 new aussie:
Try opusdei.org/dclarke/ahawke
They must be somewhere, surely. Coalition bloggers.
“Maybe Morgan’s checking because the result’s too good for Labor to be easily believable.”
Yup their last effort of 62-38 risked their welfare payments
438
Howard Hater Says:
November 18th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Is this the sort of policy announcement that can magically swing an election?
Actually I’ll be surprised if it’s the sort of policy announcement that’ll make the morning papers tomorrow (it’ll probably get a mention in the 6 o’clock news – all part of the “what the leaders got up to today story”)
Maybe no polls until Newspoll on Tuesday?
What happened to the Morgan marginal seats poll due out today?
444- I just did. Jeez, home page looks like its been done by some primary school kid on one of those school laptops we’ve been hearing about.
Pages: « 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 13 » Show All