Roy Morgan has published a phone poll of 544 respondents featuring a series of preferred leader questions. Main findings: Kevin Rudd leads Brendon Nelson 65-18 and Julia Gillard 49-21; Gillard favoured as best non-Rudd Labor leader over Swan 44-12; Peter Costello the favoured Liberal leader of 31 per cent, compared with 20 per cent for Malcolm Turnbull and 10 per cent Brendan Nelson.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Morgan leadership poll
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
224 Comments
I think Joe Hockey would be a good leader. He comes across as more in touch.
have u read the link gary provided
his bet is mesmerelda
The greens at 90% really love Rudd or is it they loathe the Liberals.
Bishop is the one still holding Workchoices to her heart. She will have to repudiate it entirely if she became leader.
TP
read the link gary provides
he equates mesmerelda with sarah palin WTF
His problem is he can’t sell policy convincingly. Whenever he’s been pressed on negatives of something (e.g. Workchoices) he just goes all red or looks lost and falls apart.
I like the way us “poll academics” get mentioned when Gary gives us the two party preferred vote, but then fails to mention the primaries!
Aaargh!
I swear Morgan is just trying to get a rise out of people lately to generate more interest in his polls. He’s been writing some pretty nonsensical rubbish.
Thomas Paine, the greens hate the libs more than they love labor (although that may well be the case). I’ve a GF in Perth who always votes Greens #1, she always puts Liberals last (no matter what the HTV for the Greens says) and then ranks the rest based upon the HTV
No 9
Julie please explain the high percentage of greens preferences going to the Libs in WA?
No 6
I agree to a certain extent. But all he has to do his memorise the spin like Rudd and he’d sound pretty convincing.
Hello everyone……..Just doing a test.
Ahhh GP, even a conceded criticism of one of your own just had to include a dig at Labor to offset it
No 14
Have to be Fair and Balanced.
The usual GP, upper class guilt
And Doctor’s Wives
Greg Hunt is the new Joe Hockey.
G.P. The usual upper class twit. Mannequins at twelve paces. Labor gets points for live people@
No 19
What does class have anything to do with the topic at hand. The only people playing class wars is the Labor Party.
When are Morgan going to wake up and ask the punters if they prefer Bob Brown as PM?
I think they are afraid of the answer.
What are the OO and others going to go on about now that Costello has dashed their fantasies? There is a looming leadership vacuum in the Liberal party and now a narrative vacuum for some in the OO.
Turnbull might be the LNP next option but he is still quite green in media performance and waffles, talks nonsense, rubbish and uses too much over the top language.
The OO praising Turnbull the same way the did Howard and Costello would be like putting a pig on lipstick.
Anonymous
Posted Friday, September 12, 2008 at 11:07 pm | Permalink
“When are Morgan going to wake up and ask the punters if they prefer Bob Brown as PM? I think they are afraid of the answer.”
thats correct , they know it would be under 8% (ie. Greens vote last election) and so Polsters do not want to look silly wasting money on a foolish irrelevant poll of under 8% , meaning 92% don’t want him
Will be interesting to see if Costello’s news has any effect on the polls.
Don’t know if anyone has posted this yet or not about leadership in the Liberal party …..
… [article by Shanahan]
Malcolm Turnbull set to strike amid Peter Costello chaos
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24338630-601,00.html
The Costello leadership speculation hiatus lasted exactly 25 hours, 13 minutes 42.56 seconds.
Once the deluded grasp onto a fantasy they don’t ever want to let it go.
Poor Dennis. All that effort for nothing.
While I am usually not in a hurry to commend the OO, congratulations are in order for the OO which today pays Pollbludger bloggers the tacit *grin* compliment by catching up with what bludgerbloggers have been saying for some time. It is ironic that in the same week that Mark Day, in the OO, trashed bloggers, the OO has demonstrated that it is weeks, and months behind same. Samples from today’s OO:
Shanahan: ‘It just seems that everyone within the Liberal Party, through factional fighting, lack of talent, bastardry and depression, can’t get their act together – even with the prospect of government.’
My only comment on that is that while reasonably comprehensive, he left out cowardice as a signature element of the package.
Jennifer Hewett:
‘What a fiasco.’
My comment on that it is not news.
Lenore Taylor
‘For godsakes, start being an Opposition. It’s getting to the stage where I don’t give a toss who leads the Liberal Party, I just wish someone would.’
My comment on that is that bloggers have been saying for months that it is not news.
I hate to say this but I agree with Andrew Bolt, Climate Change is a giant left wing conspiracy, OOPS…. I mean, I think will hang around and have a go at the leadership closer to the election. It fits his behaviour…
Should read: I think Costello will hang around and have a go at the leadership closer to the election.
And yet Boerwar, Janet A keeps the faith…
GP, Frank hit it on the head. People who haven’t followed the HTV card. My friend’s choices are personal to her alone. She is a dyed in the wool Greens voter and as such, she was handing out HTV cards for one of the Upper House Green candidates for the Senate. If the HTV card she was handing out to others had suggested putting Libs #2, even though she was handing out for that candidate, she still would have ignored those preferences personally and put the Libs last.
Shanners is still utterly deluded if he thinks the government is even close to being a one-termer though. I mean please, let’s have some sanity for once.
Peter Ruehl in todays Fin Rev reckons – ” Brenda is never going to be PM unless there is a nuclear attack and the only only left are brenda and the cockroaches and even then a healthly looking cockroach might be an option”.
That should read “only ones left”
WTF is wrong with Costello! He says on Thursday that he won’t seek the leadership, and won’t serve if it is offered to him. But now we are back to the fact that this is actually a ploy, and he will run against Turnbull, but only if Turnbull first runs against Nelson! http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/back-off-warns-costello/2008/09/12/1220857835002.html
So he will go for a job he doesn’t want just to thwart a guy who does want the job. This has to be one of the most schizophrenic and gutless politicians in living memory.
I missed that “with the prospect of government” line from Shanna’s piece. But my point remains the same: deluded.
Something else it shows if Shanahan is still speculating and shuffling those little cards around on his desk trying to find answers that add up to “Liberal government, 2010″, it shows he’s [i]way[/i] out of the loop. His columns are based (at their best) on maybe a phone call here or a corridor conversation there. This is not great political journalism in the Woodstein mold. It’s “making it up as he goes along”.
The OO’s criticisms of bloggers are that the journos do the hard work and the bloggers parasitically feed off them. Apart from there being nothing wrong with this arrangement at all (in my view), Shanahan’s desperate ruminations show clearly that he’s making it all up too, just like they’re accusing the Blogoshpere of doing. If we’re fantasising, then they are fantasising just as much as we are.
Wasn’t Shanahan gung-ho and a few weeks ago of Costello riding in to return the Liberals to their rightful place in govenment?
Deluded!
Yes. 4 weeks ago he assured us that we could “Count on Costello”.
And now he’s hoping aloud about the “prospect of government”. Looks very sad, partisan and delusional.
Now, this is what a real Labor government is all about. Can you imagine the Libs doing this?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24338627-601,00.html
Gary
Fibs would see the whole country living in cardboard boxes first.
Vera
and they would be the lucky ones
I heard a bit of an interview with Costello yesterday. Even when he was questioned repeatedly on whether he would rule out ever assuming the Lib leadership he still couldn’t give a definitive answer without leaving a loophole. Typical of a lawyer politician.
All the Costello supporters (Punce Pyne, Tony Smith et al) should be encouraging Turnbull to challenge Nelson, because that’s the only way that Costello will become leader.
ShowsOn
No, I think Costello will only take the job if he is drafted unchallenged into the job. He doesn’t want to actually work to get the job. This is the loophole he is leaving himself, apart from the perennial fallback: things have changed which I could not have foreseen so I am free to change my mind.
No, he said on Thursday that if he is drafted he won’t accept. The only reason he is hanging around is to stop Turnbull from getting the job, therefore, the best way for Costello backers to get Costello into the job is for them to support Turnbull in a challenge against Nelson.
I know that sounds illogical, but that is how screwed up the federal Libs currently are.
It’s Time
Of course turnbull and whoever his backers are will surely run interference should tip ever now “return” and become leader.
rodent’s book is yet to come out as well and no doubt that will have appropriate payback on tip’s book.
Looks like poison chalices all round for the fibs for a while yet to come. “people skills” abbott sitting there in the background hoping to be called after the coming blood-bath.
Aint it grand to see them playing in the sandpit
Hammock knows that he will sell more books if he is the member for Higgins. His publishers have done a great job in the publicity stakes.
If he had retired from politics his memoirs would just be another ho hum rewriting of history from an ex-polly.
Why would Talcum want the leadership now? I think he will do a Rudd and take over pre-christmas prior to the election.
ruawake – you could be right.
But what about the damage being done to the fibs in the meantime.
It could well not be able to recover.
Turnbull is “only” 53. (I checked, his birthday is the same day as mine and the same year, eeek).
Another scenario is that he stays a loyal deputy, lets Brenda get a swing against him at the next election, then takes over unopposed.
I don’t think he could ever “take over” the leadership now, even if his arm could be twisted. More than before he is now damaged goods, thanks to the fallout from his book, which comes on top of the months of damage his stringing them along from the backbench has done to the Fibs.
If by some miracle he did “become leader” Labor would have a field day with the ammunition he has left lying around for them to use. The insights they must have into his character by now – his unsuitableness for the job – would be considerable, and bound to be used to devastating effect.
Cuppa
Not much has changed about Costello’s deficiencies since election night and the Costello boosters have been at it for 10 months. They fail to see the damage of the goods.
The longer Nelson stays there to more glued in the Liberal primary will be at around the mid to high 30s. So the longer Turnbull leaves it, the harder it will be for him to win, or come close enough to stay on as leader after an election loss.
It’s Time
Yes he’s still the same sad bag of inadequacies as has been long known. The difference now is that his book enunciates a lot of it in his own words.
For example, the hurt by he felt when double-crossed by Howard has been know for so long now it’s become part of political lore. However, when it’s put in his own words – his choice of adjectives etc – it gives more tangibility to the substance.
Likewise where he lays out a list of policy changes he said he’d have purseued if he had become leader – ratified Kyoto, pursued reconciliation more actively etc – there’s one thing that’s conspicuous by its absence. WorkChoices. No mention of his planning to soften that. The obvious conclusion is that he’d have retained the thing, probably even made it more extreme as he’d long wanted to do (though before the election denied he would).
The book will put the flesh on the bones of a lot of what is already known about his character and policy weaknesses. Adding up to an arsenal of info and damaging insight that Labor would be bound to employ against him if he ever put his head up.
Cuppa
There is a lot in what you are saying. tip did well when he “had the microphone” (so did rodent) ie compliant speaker in the house, use of glib one liners or not answering the question, running rings around a compliant GG and other msn.
the book is totally different. the rules change away from tips position of advantage. IF – a big if, IF he tells it all – it has to damage the fibs. If not, he shows himself to be a gutless wonder, yet again.
Hammock did say something about No-Choices, he would have “sold” the fairness test better.
I wonder how avuncular Joe liked those words?
Talcum knows that one term Govts are as rare as hens teeth in Australia, so he is willing to let the damage be done, talk of a one term Govt. is Shanahan and Milne fantasy.
So Talcum has two options, take over before the election and hope to keep the loss to a minimum (my preferred scenario) or wait until after the election and be the next “messiah”.
Dave
Unfortunately for Tip the juiciest morsels of what he has to say will be printed in the papers for free. Leaving not a lot of incentive to go out and actually pay good money for his book, unless one is really into the non-controversial, boring stuff. Political tragics, Liberal tribalists: not a wide readership I would have thought. Lucky he got his multi-figure advance up-front eh?
You’re right about his “performances” in Question Time. The government side always has the advantage in this format. It’s easy to rant and bellow at length under the pretense of “answering questions”, especially when you’ve got the compliance of a very partisan Speaker, which the Fibs had in David Hawker.
It’s a lot harder to make a platform for attack rhetoric when in Opposition. Too much like hard work for The Hammock, and he knows it.
Besides, I doubt his ego would be able to stand up to the withering attacks he knows will come from the Labor side of the house, now THEY’VE got the floor (and the ammo to use against him.)
I cant find the blog list? or maybe there isn’t one. William?
I can’t believe the Libs are going to roll Nelson this year. Did they really think ANY leader could have turned around Rudd’s popularity in less than a year? Rudd may be disappointing various interest groups, but there have been no scandals, no resignations, no major fuck-ups. In the absence of these, Rudd’s huge head-start of popularity is good for at least one parliament, and everyone knows it. Turnbull would be mad to take the leadership now, on the maybe 10% chance that things will go so radically bad for Rudd that he loses in 2010. If he waits and lets Nelson take the loss, he can take over after 2010 with fair prospects of winning in 2013. But of course vanity and ambition don’t make rational calculations like that.
As a political watcher I want Costello to go (the whole stoy is bloody boring). As an ALP supporter, I say stay! Stay! Stay!
I thought Annabel Crabbe was spot on with her “He just not that into you” column.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/annabel-crabb/the-cruel-truth-mr-right-just-didnt-fancy-you/2008/09/10/1220857634831.html
There will be no resurrection of Peter Costello, senior Liberal and party strategist Andrew Robb says.
http://news.smh.com.au/national/no-costello-resurrection-says-robb-20080914-4g2h.html
Of course Robb would say that, according to Dennis Shanahan, Robb wants to be Turnbull’s Shadow Treasurer.
Seems that Malcolm “Sitting” Turnbull is preparing his massacre of Brendon “Custer” Nelson.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24341493-5001021,00.html
Will the Channel 9 candidate for the Liberal party please stand up!
OK
Moving here to press for a “General Politics” thread to be refreshed weekly.
William correctly said that the WA state election thread was moving off topic. But he says:
“That’s exactly what opinion poll threads are. People staying on-topic is what will solve the problem.”
I have tried in the past to get people on the opinion poll threads to stick to the poll data, not discuss off topic crud.
So now I know that is how it is supposed to work – I will be on and off topic in this thread.
If Brenda is “Custer” then why is Malcolm “Sitting” Turnbull?
How are the Fibs going to introduce their money for single aged liberal voting women pensioners bill?
Will they be a laughing stock next week? Along with Bob Brown?
Or do they think they are still in Govt?
all Costello did on 60 minutes was reinforce his spinelessness, Tanya is definately dreaming if she thought that Cossie could have toppled Rudd and Rudd only became PM because everyone wanted to get rid of Howard, she conveniently forgot about work choices, tampa, AWA, the war, Haneef and all of the other little irritations that Costello was complicent in, not to say about the constant bending of the truth, Cossie has still left the door open to take over as leader at a much later date–his brother and even Ray Martin seems to think that, perhaps he wants to punish the libs and then make them beg on bended knees, i dont think his massive ego lets him realise he looks rediculesly like a petulant sulky schoolboy, it would certainly be a turn off for any prospective employer.
My personal opinion is that Cozzie’s had some kind of breakdown, a mind-snap.
He can’t get a job befitting the ex-Greatest Treasurer In History, he can’t have the leadership, his book is going to tank big time, and now he’s a laughing stock even among his own colleagues (the ones who only last week were “praying” for him to make a comeback).
There is no comeback, and no fallback. Cozzie’s dug himself a great big hole and is now busy filling it in. It’s actually quite self-destructive, and I wouldn’t be surprised if self-harm didn’t come into it at some stage. Unless he makes a complete break…
He just wants the attention that a little brother never had. Ok, so he’ll get it for a while, maybe another ten days. But after that, Cozzie will recede into the background and disappear into that pit he’s dug. He sold his soul to Howard and – even if it’s true Howard “always had a reason” for not going – Cozzie never gave it that last push to see if he could make it to PM. “No ticker” in spades, and he knows it more than anyone else. This next couple of weeks is his last political hurrah, and after that… The Abyss. Don’t get me wrong here… it’s all his own fault… but I’m actually starting to worry about his sanity, and his safety. It’s the humanity in me, I guess.
I’d say the only way out for him, the only method of self-rehabilitation he’s got left is to join his brother Tim in his World Vision work. It’d be a slow process, but I think it would do him a lot of good. No-one could naysay charitable work, no-one (except those with the hardest hearts) would criticise his decision on that particular path of personal redemption. Cozzie has skills… he could intimidate a few small Indonesians if he liked. Or maybe stand over some of the more modestly-sized Sri Lankans, perhaps even a diminutive Burmese General or two? On a good day, well, the sky’s the limit… why not take on a fully-fledged Somali assistant warlord?
So, here’s a bold and fearless prediction: Peter Costello won’t go to Collins St. He won’t stay in Parliament to service the silvertails of Higgins. He’ll never be leader of the Opposition, and certainly not Prime minister. Peter Costello will go into charitable work, a truly noble cause and one he needs so much. I think he may just find his true vocation and could do a lot of good. God knows, he’s got a lot to atone for and to work out within himself… I honestly think it could be the genuine making of the man and a really good thing for Planet Earth.
To summarize my previus post: Costelo will join the family business.
i cant help but wonder how two brothers bought up the same way could be so different, i cant see Cossie doing anything charitable Bill, his ego and over inflated sense of worth would stop him, besides he’s far too lazy, i really dont think he’d ever be game to take over the leadership, theres too many long memories about the abuse he dished out over the years with the help of a compliant speaker,all of the so called humour, there’d be a congo line up waiting to dish it back to him and lets face it they’d have plenty of ammo, if he doesnt get in the front lines and stays quiet they cant reach him, the longer he stays the better his pension–and i’ll bet theres no lucrative job offers in the wings, business know how little he did as treasurer, did you see 60 minutes Bill, even Ray Martin had a couple of little digs –smiling nicely of course.
Judith, all true what you say, but I suggest it only reinforces my point.
Cozzie has nowhere to go along the path that his fantasising admirers have mapped out for him: position on a board, over-the-top remuneration etc. etc.
Cozzie is cornered. As you rightly posit: no-one wants him, not his party, not “the commercial sector”. There’s only one thing left: the Family Business.
Peter is not, at this moment, a charitable type of bloke. He’s a standover merchant who (when push comes to shove) could vut it in a fair fight aginst the Old Coconut, Howard.Right now Costello’s full of hubris and resentment that the party which doesn’t want him now (or until recently) has been lately begging for him to come back. But they’ve now moved on to Sitting Turnbull vs. Custer Nelson. Costello is, or will soon be, background noise.
Working for World Vision is a no-questions-asked path to escape. He can justify not receiving a huge, inflated salary, by pointing out – in full smirk mode if he wants to – that workers for charities don’t get the bulbous packages that corporate exes do. So, there’s an out on the salary sledge.
His brother Tim is an unmitigated force for good in the world (in my opinion at least… I’ve given a lot to his charity over the years). The prospect of the two Costello brothers joining forces – as I’ve termed it, working together in “The Family Business” – to do more good works is a strong one, hard to snipe at, no matter how cynical you are.
Further, Peter knows he has a lot of penance to do. There is no absolution without contrition, and without penance (as Father Kennedy used to drum into us altar boys). to be able to roll his sleeves up and help other human beings, out of the limelight must have a strong attraction to his tortured soul. Don’t think for a moment that Tim hasn’t been in his little brother’s ear on this one. Can anyone say Peter isn’t tortured? He’s concreted himself into a dead end. Good works are an honourable and, given he has a lot of skills (despite the unfortunate personality that goes with them), even noble vocation.
Peter won’t see it that way at first. All he’ll be looking for, at least at first, is a way out of the conundrum he’s gotten himself into with some kind of dignity preserved, even if it is faux dignity.
But I think he could grow into the role. Think of the potential… it’d be a way out of the business world (who don’t want him), out of the Party (who are frustrated with him and have never liked him), politics (where he was never going to succeed on his own), out of the expectations of the dead-beat jigsaw puzzle freaks like the Shanahans of this world, and a way back into the core values of his family: genuine service, traditional values and a charitable disposition. Most importantly, he can reconcile with Tim, the big brother who used to knock him around (and who taught him how to be a bully) way back when they were in short pants. It woudld be the ultimate Eff-Youse-All that Peter could offer his critics before subsuming himself in the minutae of looking after the less well advantaged of his world.
All the man needs is a little self-honesty. And I think that time has come. I think he’s ready for the break. I think he’d be doing himself, and others, a favour by considering a life of redemption in good works.
I’ve never thought Peter was stupid. I’ve only ever thought he was weak and misguided. Time to turn those weaknesses into strengths and really surprise us all.
But I think he could do a good job at it. And deep down, I think he thinks that too.
Costello’s “other life” as an IR revolutionary
http://workers.labor.net.au/features/200602/b_tradeunion_costello.html
Personally I feel Peter was getting revenge on Howard by striking out at Howard’s favourite little toy, the Liberal party. He probably feels he has been used and abused by Howard and Co and, to be handed the party by Howard on election night, after having made a mess of it, must have been a real slap in face.
Howard played with the toy until he broke it then gave it to Costello before heading off for home.
So every little dip in the polls must have been/be music to Costello’s ears as it means Howard’s legacy is in ruins. And it also pays out those who were against him but desperately want him to save them now.
Costello will hang around at his leisure and enjoy the fact that his presence makes everyone’s life more difficult.
Now if they all get nasty (including the Howard journalists) he can simply dump on them.
Hoorah!!
Given that many commenter’s on this site feel strongly about the role **The Australian** has in consistently reporting in a unbiased and balanced view of Oz news, I’m sure many of you will recognise that this award is justly deserved.
The Australian website wins 2008 PANPA Online Newspaper of the Year award
September 10, 2008
Costello is about to move in to Liberal Party destruction mode. Costello has no particular regard for Nelson, but, obviously, the thwarting of Turnbull is high on his agenda. But, this is just a precursor to the ideological battle between Unions and H.R. Nicholls cohorts.
Costello is playing all the Libs for suckers. He’s prepared to destroy it to resurrect it as a new Conservative Party.
the longer he hangs about the weaker he’ll be seen to be, his constituants are going to give him the heave if he stays around till the next election, i think he’s been overdoing the long lunches, the odd spot of golf, the overseas trips and the touring relentlessly flogging off his book in their time, even the most forbearing voters are going to resent being taken for fools, who would have thought he’d end up as the lib’s very own Mark Latham, the trouble is the man cant see himself as others do through his hubris.
hmmm, that award sounds like a brand of nappies lol.
Wonder how they judged it. Most supportive of the Liberal party? Dedication to misinformation in the face of irrefutable facts?
Err,,, Wayne Swan has a view on Costello…
Peter Costello wasn’t the solution to our economic challenges, he was the problem, writes Wayne Swan.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/all-the-credit-none-of-the-blame/2008/09/13/1220857897265.html
Actually, can anyone name a better newspaper for feedback and argument than The Australian?
Herald blogs? Pffft.
The Age? Baldedash.
Like it or not, The Australian deserves this award. They may hate bloggers, but no publication has facilitated blogging better than the Oz. Call it Rupert’s plaything, or a loss leader, or even the Opposition’s Organ… but you have to admit News, and in particular the Australian has done better than most in opening up its pages to comments.
That is a correct and I find it annoying that the SMH doesn’t have a decent blog set up. If they want flies to buzz around their advertising then a few decent easy to use blogs is the way to go.
By the way – Swan sticks the knife deep into Costello in that little piece. Tell us what you really think Wayne!
I would also like to nominate –
Janet Albrechtsen for *Best and Fairest * .
Christian Kerr for *Best flame ever*(crikey!)
Dennis Shanahan for *Strategy*
Caroline Overington for *Trying her hardest*(after injury)
And how will all this argy bargy reflect on a newly elected WA Liberal Government, espically for the WA federal players like Bishop etc ?
As soon as all the ‘OMFG it’s the end of wall-to-wall Labor!!1!’ dies down, I bet Bishop will start throwing her weight around, and bearing in mind she’s in opposition and Barnett isn’t, life could get quite interesting. Remember, she tried to become WA Liberal leader after Richard Court got kicked out – there’s some ambition there.
The worst and funniest thing that could happen to the Liberals is if the next Newspoll is an outlier a 54/44 or the like. They will all be wondering if Nelson is cutting through and bring them to even more confusion.
The last extract of Costello’s book reads like a mixture of mundane political sniping at Labor, rewriting of economic history with himself has hero and a very softly worded hint that Howard should have stepped aside or at least prepared for succession. Sorry but I find it fairly spineless and wishy washy. Costello is trying to be ever so careful. One hopes that in future years he will write a proper genuine description.
Brenda’s first QT trick blew up in his face.
No 86
What history is rewriting. The only revisionists are those here in this blog.
No 88 should read “What history is he rewriting?”
GP
It will take about 30 years before we know – then we will have the cabinet papers.
Details?
No 90
Damn, I’ll be an old and grumpy fifty-something.
how can i get the upper house events on days when ch2 just plays the senate as they are doing today?
Judith
You can get a stream on http://www.aph.gov.au
Dario
Brenda asked why pensioners are worse off under Labor.
Rudd gave details of the $20 per week increase in the last budget.
OH goody Censure motion.
No 94
The new aph website is quite good. The ABC repeats of QT are always edited and chopped – at least full versions can now be accessed.
Brenda has finally figured out how to move a motion to suspend standing orders.
Ummm, Bird of Paradox @ 85,
That deal was set up without her knowing. As soon as she heard about it (through the press, I believe) he squashed it. No ambition there.
Uh oh, the return of the processed sausages!
Any Libs around? Does Nelsons QT piffle embarrass you folks?… honest question.
Baked beans and Jam sandwiches Batman!
Oh Brenda has a can of baked beans.
Disgrace 
An excellent speech by Nelson. Rudd is a disgrace for ignoring the opposition leader.
Oh go people skills! What a fantastic parade.
The Member of Warringah is a great parliamentarian.
The Member for Banks should be silenced.
Go Jenny
Oh Jenny is just awful.
LOL Wilson Tuckey – always reliable humour.
Why? Everybody else in the country has…
Oh dear, the surviving Coalition ex-ministers all voted against it in Cabinet last year.
And their much vaunted bill? Nowhere to be seen.
Bunch of grandstanding amateurs. They will never be taken seriously until they learn the Parliament is there for more than stunts and frivolous points of order.
BB
On Cossie, in the words of Nietzsche;
“And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss looks also into you.”
Cossie has been contemplating that abyss since Mrs Howard said “No” during APEC.
thanks ruawake, i have it playing but i’m getting an echo effect with the speech, is that normal, it makes it hard to follow
oh oh! i just worked it out i had media player running as well, gawd how dumb am i !!!!!
Can someone give Brenda a bit of coaching on Parliamentary proceedure.
Today is the 2nd time he has failed to present a motion properly, last time Truss got him out of the mess. This time Albanese was soft on him.
The non-existent bill is another issue, come on Fibs you are in opposition, get used to it.
No 114
Albanese is a dolt.
GP, you undermine your credibility here by such naked partisanship. Just going “my guys are brilliant and your guys are dolts” is not going to persuade anyone of anything.
It’s also the kind of comment that’s going to get deleted from now on.
SNIP: Move on please, GP – The Management
It’s a trifle snobbish…
The reflection is really on Joe Hockey as leader of opposition business, People Skills would be a better choice, at least he knows proceedures.
So has it all been about pensioners so far?
No 120
No, Bronny is superior to them all.
Dario
Govt questions were mostly about housing affordabilty and the new guidelines released today.
Opposition questions were all pensioner related.
GP
Bronny has never recovered from not being made Speaker.
No 123
I think Dorothy Dixers should be abolished such that QT is not consumed by self-aggrandisement.
No 124
I think David Hawker was brilliant nonetheless. A record number of expulsions for unparliamentary rabble from the ALP.
Well Johnny had 12 years to get rid of it…
No 127
Rudd has not been any quicker Dario.
Hawker was the weakest Speaker I have seen in nearly 40 years of listening to / watching Parliament. Even worse than Leo McLeay, though not as unpleasant.
No 129
I disagree. The Parliament is a superior institution thanks to his service.
After 10 months? Oh please. The Libs will just have to suck it up and get used to copping exactly what they dished out while they were in office if they weren’t willing to make any reforms themselves.
I don’t think ’service’ and Hawker belong in the same sentence
GP
Jenkins has made it clear that he will not tolerate certain types of questions, today he ruled part of a Govt question out of order.
Did Hawker ever do this? NO.
Now you’re just being silly GP. When you are in good form you say some intelligent things here, but when you are just midlessly partisan you’re not worth commenting on.
Howard just walked all over Hawker, and you could see every day how he resented it, but he was too weak to do anything about it. Andrew was a bit better, Sinclair much better.
No 133
For good reason. The then Government’s questions were always in order.
Does Dorothy Dix vote? She would have only been interesting to Howard if she was a member of a target demographic.
He had the pensioners all sewn up and thus didn’t need to bribe them. That was the message of today’s Question Time.
Poor old buggers, they loved Howard but now we know he (and most of the rest of his Cabinet) continually turned down extra benefits for pensioners recommended by the responsible cabinet ministers. The Coalition’s case is thus a complicated one.
In order to get over the line they need to establish that the stress on pensioners is new, as a result of pressure from petrol and grocery prices, which in turn (they have to argue) are entirely down to Rudd’s alleged “incompetence.” So not only is Rudd incompetent (in their minds) but he is also callous about it, preferring to run committees rather than get on with the job of pork barreling, like they [i]didn’t do[/i], at least for pensioners. See what I mean Complicated.
Complicated, that is, by the fact that 65% of the voters think he’s doing a great job and 56% want to vote for him, poll after poll, time after time.
No 134
Come on Adam, the shameless partisanship from those of ALP persuasion on this blog has been relentless. I don’t see you exercising the same critical eye, though.
What’s the HTML tag around here GT and LT signs or square brackets? Looks like my “quote” got accepted but the HTML tags weren’t deleted.
Crikey!
No 136
The Coalition is forced to go into battle on these issues in order to attempt to get some momentum. It isn’t working for the precise reason that Macklin stated: we had 12 years to do something about it. That’s the only time I will agree with the ALP.
BB, just put a single pair of square brackets around an entire quote and it will be picked up
It will be at least a year before the Opposition can get up and bleat about the pensioners without inviting the immediate response, “what did you do about it?” That’s just the political fact. Beazley had the same problem in 1997.
The problem for Brenda is he wimped it.
He should have pinched all of the Greens policy on pensions not just a teeny weeny bit of it.
While he may be the hero of 800,000 single aged pensioners he has pissed off 2.2 million other pensioners.
Not smart politics when the 800,000 vote for you anyway.
No 142
Pensions should be abolished actually, if he was really running a line of small government and self-responsibility.
and when plenty are dying off every year
The Greens have a policy on pensions? What is it? Free tofu for all?
GP
So logic would say that income tax should also be abolished, given that it was introduced to pay for the old age pension.
What would the company tax rate need to be? 65% sounds fair to me.
Thanks Dario.
BTW, while we are here fiddling, New York (or at least the banking sector of it, and hence the world) is burning. Seems Lehmann laid off their mortgage based securities with just about every governmental and financial institution in the world, including many Australian councils and other investors.
They’re saying in serious newspapers this could be the Big One.
No 145
LOL. The Greens believe everything should be free, that everyone should be taxed to oblivion and forget about jobs. A most ridiculous excuse for a party if there ever was one.
No 146
28% is about the world average. Ours is thus too high.
Something GP and I agree on
And in a perverse way, it’s a godsend that Labor is out of Government in WA as if the Minig Boom goes pear shaped, Poor old Colin Barnett and the Regions will cop it bad
So McCain will be distancing himself even further from GBW?
That should have been GWB
GP
You missed my point.
You said that pensions should be abolished. (Fair enough your pov)
I said that given income tax was introduced to pay the pension, by your logic income tax should also be removed.
So for a Govt to remain in surplus, Liberal philosophy, the money has to come from somewhere.
So what is that source of funds? Company tax or excise?
Ah, capitalism. Ain’t it grand.
No 154
Yes, ideally income tax should be removed. However that isn’t going to happen.
My view is that a flat tax should be introduced with a high tax-free threshold.
Also running surplus budgets is but part of Liberal philosophy. It is also giving money back to the people, not hoarding it for the sake of a surplus. That is why the ALP’s “raiding the surplus” argument is just obscene beyond belief. The ALP is hoarding taxpayer money – there is a clear need for it to either be returned to the people or productively spent/saved.
With inflation running high GP? That would be moronic.
I recall the coalition making a very big song & dance last year when Labor introduced its national broadband policy. “Those economic vandals are raiding the Future Fund!” fulminated Costello, the biggest of the big spenders.
Of course the fund itself was to remain untouched, only drawing on the interest derived therefrom. To be used for infrastructure to develop our productivity.
But that wasn’t good enough for the Liberals, who now espouse public money be “productively spent”.
No 157
You’re the moron for not having the diligence to engage in the argument.
That again is the point GP – productively spent. What was the productivity increase in the Libs last years in office? Oh yeah thats right 0% repeat zero, zilch, nothing.
We can either spend the surplus on infrastructure or consumption. Howard was concerned about re-election so it went on consumption. Hence his 10 interest rate rises.
No 158
Cuppa the Future Fund was not designed to facilitate infrastructure spending, but to fund public servant superannuation.
The ALP derived the funding from the Future Fund because they were too lazy to find the money elsewhere.
SNIP: Please stop name-calling, GP – The Management.
Have a sensible response GP, or just avoidance?
No more discussion on who “the moron” is, please.
For the record William, I said the idea was moronic, not that a poster was a moron
Spare me the insults, generic.
The FF remains untouched. Only the interest (some of) is to be used, to develop overdue infrastructure, to increase our productivity and prosperity.
That’s money productively spent.
So the FF was good policy but the “funds” set up by Labor are “slush funds” and stealing the peoples surplus, give me a break.
Also the FF was funded mainly by asset sales not the surplus.
The Jeremiahs and Cassandras look like they might have been right. Lehman Bros files for bankruptcy after the buyers flee. Merril Lynch sold. And the insurance giant AIG will file for bankruptcy if the Feds don’t cough up $40B.
“In one of the most dramatic days in Wall Street’s history, Merrill Lynch agreed to sell itself on Sunday to Bank of America for roughly $50 billion to avert a deepening financial crisis, while another prominent securities firm, Lehman Brothers, said it would seek bankruptcy protection and hurtled toward liquidation after it failed to find a buyer.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/15/business/15lehman.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
The soap opera continues.
Turnbull refuses to rule out challenge
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24347227-5013871,00.html
No 165
Wrong. The capital may be untouched, but the interest has been inappropriately drawn from, against the original spirit of the fund.
No 166
It’s only becomes a slush fund if either political party uses the money against the original spirit of the fund. In this case, public servant superannuation was its predominant purpose as defined by the legislation.
Tricky arguments like “oh only the interest is being touched” don’t wash. The whole idea of the fund is to earn enough interest to fulfil the government’s future obligations to public servants.
In addition, if I recall correctly, the government, as 50% partner in the broadband network, will be putting profits back into the FF to increase the capital.
No 171
It is absolutely wishful thinking if you think the broadband network will be profitable. Why do you think the government is fronting up the 4.7 billion in the first place? Because it is uneconomic to build in regional and rural areas.
Those assets that were sold to make up the future fund.
What was the “original spirit” of those assets?
Surely not to be sold and the proceeds given to public servants.
GP
What to do about all those Telstra shares in the FF? Parked there to do what, pay PS super?
Codswallop.
And how much of that interest is left after the government rents back those assets?
Any reason the rental rates on those assets jumped recently?
Shifting column in the spreadsheet is not making money.
It most closely relates to the acquisition method of large corporates who avoid assets like the plague to prop up share prices. If the credit crunch flow on is serious enough the government should be seriously looking at re-acquiring those assets.
Apparently property appreciates unless you’re the government – what a joke Costello has proved – he was speculating on the market instead of developing and investing in his own country.
No 174
Have you any idea the size of that obligation? Costello had the vision to make provisions for it now, not recklessly spend the proceeds from the Telstra privatisation.
The ALP, predictably, saw it as a pit of gold ripe for pillaging.
so the Fibs last year voted down Brough’s recomendation for an increase in the base pension rate, what a pack of two faced fools.
No 175
Absolute rubbish mate. The interest of the Future Fund is perpetually reinvested in order to procure a sufficient return to satisfy an ensuing massive public debt owed to public servants.
The government did not touch it at all, except to add more capital from budgets and Telstra 3.
Rudd now believes he can use the Future Fund for whatever he pleases. How arrogant and short-sighted.
No 177
Get back under your rock. Rudd promised to end the blame game, but has since become its biggest advocate.
Sydney Morning Herald, 6 June 2007
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/trade-data-no-cause-for-congratulation/2007/06/05/1180809516516.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
(Australia went for around 6 years under the coalition without a single month of trade surplus.)
…with the states
and the rent is paid by what
Stop fluffing about with the jargon and engage the brain – you can make money by making a new name for it.
I hope the ridiculousness of this conversation is apparent to the readers.
Whao has all that money that’s making the interest – not the Australian people any more, and yet now they’re obligated to rent the workplaces of their own public service.
In the intellectual spirit of the original question asker – “please explain?”
No 180
Of course, Kohler forgets that Norway is the third largest oil exporter in the world.
No 182
Onimod, what on earth are you blathering about?
Yes, please explain seems to be the apt phrase to apply to everything you say.
Please be less abusive, GP.
Shall we take it nice and slow GP?
I’ll ask simple questions – where did the money for the future fund come from?
I’m not arguing the need for the fund, but if you’re going to blather about spirit and the like, we might as well have some fundamentals to being with to try to discover what the difference between you and the rest of the posters here is.
The sijmple truth of the matter is that the Future Fund is not a Constitutional institution. Therefore, whatever the government who sets it up says it’s, can be reversed by the succeeding government.
The Rudd government is perfectly justified in using the FF for whatever it wants. Howard cannot rule from beyond the political grave.
No 186
The vast majority of the Fund’s capital consists of Telstra shares and portions of previous budget surpluses. If you are under some delusion that the funds came from somewhere else, I’d suggest you are quite mistaken.
So what was the “original spirit” of Telstra?
Would you agree it was “against the original spirit” of Telstra (PMG) that it be sold and the proceeds used to fund the retirement of public servants? (as per 169)
No, it is not against the original spirit of Telstra that it be sold because Telstra still has a universal service obligation to all Australians.
You’re trying to argue that it is not “against the original spirit” of a telecommunications organisation, paid for and previously owned by every Australian, for it to be liquidated to fund the retirement incomes of some Australians?
GP
You forgot about the odd Airport here and there – now owned by Macquarie Infrastructure.
Have a look where those nice generic ‘budget surpluses’ came from GP.
This has been done before – I haven’t got the patience.
On with the cheering…
No 191
The original spirit of PMG was to provide telecommunications services to all Australians. Telstra is mandated by legislation to provide essential telecommunications services to all Australians.
Whether the entity who provides those services is owned by government or someone else is irrelevant.
No 193
Onimod, you can keep living in your own sphere of ignorance but the reality is that you present spin and no facts to support your argument.
Now that I have proved you wrong on Telstra, you deflect the argument to something else.
Oh for God’s sake GP and others.
We had an election. The use of Future Fund money was a specific election policy, tested, argued against and fully debated.
That’s the bloody end of it.
It’s the Commonwealth’s money, not John Howard’s. Rudd sought permission to, and can spend it on infrastructure if he likes with the total endorsement of the only ones who count in this case: the voters.
Fair dinkum Gp, you’d argue about two flies crawling up a wall, and all the way back down again.
To sell the copper network, the only network that enters the vast majority of Australian homes was bordering on criminal.
Sure sell off the retail arm of Telstra, Telecom, PMG or whatever you want to call it. But the Govt should retain control of the infrastructure.
From this national asset we could have made billions – but oh no, sell it to balance the books.
The Liberal Surpluses were a fraud. They were entirely paid for by asset sales, that includes the fake Labor $96 billion debt.
Last word
proved wrong?
Telstra made some 50% of the future fund.
I’ll give you your proof assertion if you’ll answer this – what was the total value of Commonwealth Government assets sold in and around the parliamentary triangle of Canberra during the Howard Government?
There’s no ‘proving’ going on here – it’s a political blog.
Is that really what you think you are doing here?
196 BB
HAHA
…only if JWH had an opinion on the flies…and he probably would!
It’s not the “universal service” aspect I’m questioning.
When did funding the retirement incomes of select Australians become part of the “original spirit” of a publicly-owned telecommunications organisation?
RUawake wrote:
And airports. Do please tell, GP, when did “the original spirit” of airport facilities, built up and previously owned by every Australian, begin to include being sold, with proceeds to fund the retirement incomes of select Australians?
OK.. what are odds for Nelson toomorrow to stay as leader??
My Avitar is gone?
Lawdy me, GP is a combative young ‘un, ain’t he? Presuming he’s a he, of course.
I reckon BB is on the money, so to speak. It was part of Labor policy, taken to the election. End of story, as far as that’s concerned.
However, the Fund is, as many bludgers will recall, being managed by a U.S. firm, and I wonder, given the developments with Lehman Bros. and Merrill Lynch, and possible further fallouts (Alan Kohler certainly seems to think so), just what the next quarterly report might say about the financial health of said fund.
Whoo Hoo, Brendon to vacate the leadership!
Aussieguru01,
Sportingbet says:
Turnbull 1.50
Nelson 2.50
It’s on.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/
Ha Ha
Bye Bye Brenda.
Nelson is twice the man Costello could even be in his dreams.
So does Brenda get to be shadow foreign affairs guy?
Cuppa,
They’re both zeroes.
Amazingly… ON TOPIC!
ABC TV news report “breaking news”: Liberal Party spill on tomorrow morning.
Nelson has called a spill to try to wrong-foor Turnbull.
I smell a Smirk: too gutless to do it himself, he’s egged-on Brenda.
Vicarious pleasure.
It’s actually a brave move on Brendon’s part to face Malcolm down. More guts than Costello, that’s for sure. I wonder if Costello will actually knife him for taking attention away fro the Great Book Launch?
Kerrist! Can’t even break a story.
Must.remember:do.refresh.before.posting.
Say what you like about Nelson, his scattered policy-on-the-run, the crass populism, his pained expressions. He had the bottle to take the leadership at the party’s nadir, and has now called for a spill with the polls and the odds against him.
He’s vever shirked a fight, unlike the Smirker who seems to believe everything is owed to him and should be handed into his lap.
I’ve got respect for Nelson for that.
Ruawake @ 207,
“Posted Monday, September 15, 2008 at 7:14 pm | Permalink
Ha Ha Bye Bye Brenda. ”
I KNEW it was coming down this week, hope he gets dumped. And I’ve got tickets to QT on Thursday, wish now that it was tomorrow, but I will just watch on TV at 2pm and look at their disarray
……..
BB. For once, and possibly the only time in my life, I cracked it!
Bushfire Bill @ 207,
” Nelson has called a spill to try to wrong-foor Turnbull.
I smell a Smirk: too gutless to do it himself, he’s egged-on Brenda.
Vicarious pleasure. ”
Costello wasn’t even in Parliament this afternoon, on Monday. Wonder if he shows up for Parliament now
………
Talkback liberal supporters are all over the place at the moment. Labor supporters are hoping for Abbott and Costello – a pair of clowns for a pack of clowns.
Nelson got the job because Minchin and his cronies did not want Turnbull.
This is why Nelson is going down!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMeub2NK_Fs
Oh pfffffft!
Turnbull is on $1.50 for leader at the next election.
I was just about to put the complimentary $365 I won on Maxine all-up on Malcolm, but I’d have to wait too long.
Turnbull will win. No doubt about it.
They’ll think hard, make the appropriate plonking noises and then elect Mal.
Bye, bye, “Custer” Brendan… but BB can’t wait to collect on Sitting Turnbull.
Unless, of course, Tanya pleads with Costello to accept the nomination for leader? Giggle.
This is better than that silly “The Young & The Restless”. What about “The Middle-aged & Only Slightly Agitated”.
Just saw Brenda on ABC News – he looked shell shocked. I wonder who tapped him on the shoulder and told him it was all over?
New thread.