The latest fortnightly Morgan poll has Labor’s two party lead down from 57.5-42.5 to 56.5-43.5. Labor’s primary vote lead over the Coalition is 46.5 per cent (up 0.5 per cent) to 37.5 per cent (up 1.5 per cent). Morgan also brings us qualitative research on voters’ “concerns” with the way the parties and leaders are going about their business. More attitudinal gear this week from Newspoll, whose thrice-yearly survey on issues and the parties best equipped to tackle them was published in The Australian on Wednesday
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Morgan 56.5-43.5
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
402 Comments
Federal Liberals in the electoral wilderness for the next decade at least.
THE NARROWING!!!
The Narrowing – reminds me of the squillions of times conservative journalists (David Spears comes to mind) have declared Rudd’s polling honeymoon to be over – as early as a few months after he became opposition leader.
Two years later, no sign of it yet!
Dario really
Please check your facts
Lets look at Colonial’s $3billion
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24561886-661,00.html
http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/mp/5099347/mortgage-funds-freeze-55b-cash/
That is why the Federal government is asking the bank to use their new funds to buy these investment
If only they had think before they talked
Check yours
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz-government/news/article.cfm?c_id=144&objectid=10540088
Doh, wrong link…
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24573288-664,00.html
Once again Roy Morgan’s comments are bizarre. Referring to a qualitative poll done on 15/16 October, in his quantitative poll taken on 18/19 and 25/26 October, he makes the comment: “The greatest concern for the Government though must be the fall in the Roy Morgan Consumer Confidence rating to a 17-year low of 87.3 (see http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2008/809/). Australians are increasingly worried about the year ahead and reluctant to maintain spending.” But in that same quantitative poll he fails to mention that the Roy Morgan Government Confidence Rating is at 128 points, rising from a low of 107 in July.
He then offers his usual gratuitous advice: “To improve Australians’ confidence the Rudd Government must take further policy action to offer hope to Australia’s more than 1.3 million unemployed and ‘underemployed’* by cutting corporate taxes so Australia’s business’ can start hiring again.” He should stick to analysis of his poll results.
Just had a look at the first parliamentary day of Rudd becoming Labor leader @ http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/reps/dailys/dr041206.pdf
Anyone remember Howard being reduced to his “No. *JH sits down*” answers, because he was unable to elaborate on the issue for fear of being wedged in to a corner?
Mr RUDD (2.20 pm)—My question is again to the Prime Minister. Does the Prime Minister agree with comments by former Governor of the Reserve Bank, Ian Macfarlane, made in the Boyer lectures, that a lasting legacy of the economic management in the early 1990s was that ‘Australia had an inflation rate that was in line with world’s best practice; we had returned to being a low-inflation country’? Prime Minister, hasn’t the government’s failure to address skills shortages and infrastructure bottlenecks resulted in core inflation now rising above world’s best practice, with real implications for the cost of living for Australia’s working families?
Mr HOWARD—No.
But remember the Opposition often insist on yes or no answers nowadays
ltep @ 9
Can you elaborate on that bizarre comment?
Rudd doesn’t do it, and Howard never did it prior to Rudd’s ascendence.
He was unable to elaborate on issues for fear of being wedged in to a corner.
I’ll provide you with an example direct from Hansard:
“Dr Nelson —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. The question to the minister is: are Australian workers going to be worse off as a result of his government’s policies—yes or no? “
Why is it that people like Dovif and right leaning bloggers, particularly those on Bolts and Ackerman’s blogs think that decisions like the bank guarantee decision are made by Rudd and Swann without any advice whatsoever from the Treasury or indeed for that matter the Reserve Bank? What intelligence do these people possess?
I assure you Howard did do it before Rudd became Labor leader.
Dovif if the funds are so weak that their investors want to get their funds out then they are absolutely in dire need of a reshape of the competitive balance.
ltep @ 11
The opposition asking for a straight yes or no? Old as time itself. The government (PM in this case) giving a “No” without the opposition demanding it? Howard with Rudd as opp leader. Check Hansard.
And Howard did not do it before Rudd. He did it during Rudd’s time when his patience wore thin with Rudd’s piercing questions.
Enjaybee, especially when it was explained to the Liberals in an eight hour estimates committee last week. They basically asked the same question all day, got the same answer and came out of estimates mouthing the same nonsense that they did before asking the questions.
I can’t remember him doing it to Beazley, Latham and Crean.
But I agree with you that he seemed to do it more often last year when things were going poorly for the Government. I guess it was the ultimate way to answer the Dorothy Dixers, instead of letting Rudd get some more free publicity.
Sorry! I meant to say I CAN remember him doing it to those other Opposition Leaders.
Rudd’s insolent questions did not require a proper response.
My recollection is that in the first sitting after the Coalition was elected in 1996, all (or nearly all) Opposition questions were met with a yes or no. Then they spent the next few weeks asserting that they had made the parliament more accountable, as many more questions were being answered.
Yeah, I mean it’s only Parliament, you know, the place where the populace is represented by elected officials.
i bet Rudd is shaking in his shoes with that 1% drop in the polls, Shanahan will be gleefully rubbing his hands together shouting “Turnbulls coming to get Rudd, he’s right behind him, Rudd’s on the way out”, so i take it this looks like the honeymoon is finally over.
How dare Rudd ask questions of the then PM. How insolent can you get? He shouldn’t have been asking questions at all.
Questions Without Notice, 15 February 2007. Joe Hockey, cagey about data showing what was happening to pay and conditions under SerfChoices …
http://www.openaustralia.org/debates/?id=2007-02-15.41.1
GP, so insolent, he was on record polling, and won the election ending his 11.5 year reign.
Careful GP, your rust spots are showing.
Judith Barnes @ 21, what planet are you on? Read above. The honeymoon is yet to end.
Current Newspoll:
Rudd 59% Preferred PM, 44% primary, 54% two-party.
Turnbull 25% Preferred PM, 36% primary, 46% two party.
Not to mention Roy Morgan recording 56.5-43.5 and Essential recording 61-39.
Dream on Judith Barnes, dream on.
Morgan and Essential are bull butter Bob…
Newspoll
AC
and Galaxy are the only polls i recognise…
“Sharemarket confidence in Australia won’t be repaired for a while yet”
Dovif from an earlier thread.
But we have had three straight days with the Liberals not talking down the sharemarket and had three consecutive rises. If only the Liberals can maintain this newfound discipline there is hope for the future.
bob1234
I think Judith was speaking tongue in cheek.
I believe it was Swan not the Liberals who said the Inflation Geni was out of the bottle steve. Rudd also called it a rolling national security issue…so lets not point the finger entirely at the Libs.
I’m not talking ancient history Glen, modern history since early September, the Liberals haven’t had a good wood to say about anything on economics and are far more helpful when they don’t. The last Parliamentary session was spent bashing, Ken Henry, Stevens, Swan and Rudd. Any pretense of Liberal economic responsibility has been discarded.
oops wood? -word
PMSL, Bob, i was being sarcastic, i’m a dyed in the wool complete lefty laborite as most here can tell you, still it’s quite funny that i fooled someone, hmmm maybe i could go in the Bolt/Albretchson blogs and take the micky out of them, cheers to you Bob, Judy.
Glen @ 29 I find it sad you think that Labor and not the Libs can only be blamed.
The Liberals talk down the economy, Labor makes a big issue out of it. Both much of a muchness.
Apologies Judith Barnes.
If you are so convinced that they have spoken well of the Australian economy since September let me know because I haven’t been able to detect any positives from them. The Liberals have been ranging from negative to neutral at best.
I never said that i simply said if you are going to blame the Libs the ALP made just as many comments about the state of economy that the Libs can hardly share all the blame!
Glen, you are just going to have to adjust to the new reality. The polls will be there to remind you how they are being received by the voting public.
Hear hear Steve.
Exhibit A:
Pick the positives for the Australian economy here.
http://www.liberal.org.au/news.php?Id=1959
Labor to forn government in the ACT.
Link for 41
http://news.theage.com.au/national/labor-to-form-minority-government-in-act-20081031-5fea.html
Shock horror.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/stanhope-to-get-greens-nod/1348970.aspx
Not talking cabinet positions apparently. Good move.
Uplifting to see they resisted the allure of power.
Japan has just cut interest rates.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/01/business/worldbusiness/01japan.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
No 45
0.3% rates? That is obscenely low!
GP, what did William tell you about using the word ‘obscene’?
You’re a sucker for punishment. No wonder you support the Liberal Party.
*zing!*
SNIP: Unconstructive comment deleted – The Management.
oh dear, the death penalty has raised it’s ugly head again, it’s been dominating the late night talkback radio the last few nights, obviously the Bali bombers plight has ressurected it, i do think that Rudd could be far more forceful in his protestations, i know we have no power over the laws of another country but Rudd could be firmer in his statements, at least it has no chance of it being bought back here, i find it interesting that Bush, who with Howards help, took us into a war with Iraq that slaughtered thousands of innocent civilians, should have in his home state Texas the highest toll of executions, if it would bring one victim back i would be the first one there to press the button, it wont so thats a moot point.
very few of the murder families i’ve mixed with are pro the death penalty and that includes Bali victims, i’ve noticed that those who are the most vocal pro’s are quite happy to let someone else do their dirty work for them so they can keep their hands and conciences clean
rant over, sorry for going off topic but it’s been eating into me for a few days.
+1 to everything Judith said.
Interesting about Japan and America, both have extremely low interest rates yet their currencies are killing us.
I can see the OO headlines now: ‘Turnbull calls for Raven Master Rudd to give up on Swann and get some crows.’ This would be coupled with a learned ornithological article by Shanahan reporting that Rudd can’t tell the difference between a Raven and a Swann.
“Four extra ravens are being drafted into the Tower of London because of the financial crisis – to prevent a 350-year-old curse coming true. King Charles II decreed there must be at least six ravens otherwise a disaster would strike the nation and the Royal Family. And up to now, bosses have kept just one spare bird in residence to act as a ‘super sub’. But with the UK facing credit crunch meltdown, they ruled an extra four must now be acquired … Raven Master Derrick Coyle, 64, said: ‘I believe in the curse. It was said that if the number ever fell below six, the Tower would fall and great harm would befall the nation. We certainly feel more secure now’.” (The Sun, October 27)
hey GP
you are obscene!
Indeed Oz it is not an interest rate problem in those two countries but a confidence problem. Nothing much can be done until confidence begins to grow. It is going to have to start with the banks being confident in lending to each other, then to business and eventually the General Public. It is a very fragile situation that needs to be nurtured with a bit of goodwill.
Confidence will not begin to be restored until the Liberals cease talking the economy down (while accusing others of talking the economy down).
BB the ruskies seem to have a dose of the collywobbles too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/31/business/worldbusiness/31ruble.html?ref=business
Judith, you sound as if you would be interested to know about Murder Victims’ Families for Reconciliation (website http://www.mvfr.org) and Murder Victims’ Families for Human Rights (website http://www.murdervictimsfamilies.org)–if you don’t already.
I still reckon “confidence” should be higher in our financial sector considering a grand total of 0 companies have collapsed or been bailed out.
Oz not when you have an opposition saying and doing anything to try to talk Australia into a recession. Luckily it will probably as successful as everything else they have attempted this year.
In a crisis of confidence, confidence is king. The more the Liberals induce loss of confidence by their negative words, the longer this meltdown will continue.
And the fundamentals of Australia compared to the US are clearly much stronger as the RBA Deputy governor told us yesterday. The RBA actually did us all a favour by increasing rates earlier this year and giving themselves plenty of breathing space to both lower rates to stimulate the economy and subdue inflation in the future. I have yet to hear any Liberal agree that it was the right thing to do.
By comparison the US and Japan have very little room to move compared to what the RBA has to work with.
Hah, on this note, Alan Wood is on crack.
He’s acting as though the global financial markets have stabilised and it’s only Australia that’s gone down and that happened after the guarantee.
Yeah and what happened to interest rates? The banks and non-bank institutions lowered them specifically citing the guarantee. I feel like we’re going around in circles.
I like how he cites Malcolm Turnbull as some kind of independent economic analyst Doesn’t even bother to attempt to verify whether any of that makes any sense.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24578188-5013578,00.html
From the ABC web site:
All the management companies have to do is toe the line and apply for listing as (regulated) banks. That they will not shows that they want to have their cake and eat it too. Clearly they cannot cut it as “banks”. It’s time their investors woke up to this reality – the institutions in which they have invested are run by smart-alicks in sharp suits out for a buck sucked out of the older generation – instead of blaming the Rudd government for their woes.
That chap who claimed to have “$5″ left in his personal bank account the other day was a case in point: he had to borrow $50,000 to pay his quarterly BAS committment! His wife and his kids were in on the scam too! I say “Good Riddance” to these wankers and their get-rich-quick, tax evasion schemes. The sooner our country ceases being a captive to the manipulators and their shock-jock mates in the media, the better. A high risk investment is just that: high risk. The Battlers should not be forced into bailing them and their money manipulation schemes out.
It’s not every mortgage holder in Campbelltown who has to cry poor because he doesn’t have $50K handy to pay his quarterly BAS bill. VERY poor money management, I’d say, if all your loot (plus your family’s), including cashflow money, is invested in high risk funds. Typical low rent, small business types who think they’re Jamie Packer because they have a few K “in the funds”. Meanwhile Turnbull got his money out in quick time, LOL… what kinds of mugs are these people to think the Ordinary Joe gives a damn about them and their slick money?
“I still reckon “confidence” should be higher in our financial sector considering a grand total of 0 companies have collapsed or been bailed out.”
I think the issue is confidence in the prospects for economic growth. I don’t think anyone’s expecting a bank or insurance company to fall over – in fact, far from it.
“The more the Liberals induce loss of confidence by their negative words, the longer this meltdown will continue.”
Bushfire, you obviously attribute a lot of influence to the Liberals.
Interesting …
“But we have had three straight days with the Liberals not talking down the sharemarket and had three consecutive rises. If only the Liberals can maintain this newfound discipline there is hope for the future.”
Steve, a genuine question for you: do you really believe the Liberals’ utterances drive daily movements in the share market, or are you just taking the mickey?
The Reserve Bank Deputy Governor seemëd to take a swipe at the Liberals “Go for Growth” rhetoric too, Dyno.
I believe the Liberals are being more irresponsible than ever Dyno.
No 66
Rubbish steve. Only perterbed lefties are under the delusion that the Libs are talking down the economy or acting irresponsibly.
I don’t think it matters what the Libs do. They sit on the wrong side in parliament.
They may as well pretend to write chapters in books for all I care.
J-D, thanks for the links, i’ve had quite a lot to do with murder families and most feel the way i do, when i’d give my talk every semester to the police victimology class, peter, the head of major crime and the course convenor, would prompt me to give my views on capital punishment just to get it across to the young guys that we have a legal system not a justice system, its not perfect but for now thats all we have and as it should be, the victims idea of justice isnt neccasarily an eye for an eye, i’ll be interested in looking into these links further, i do get a bit concerned of being caught up with the religious right movements when it comes to American groups, a few crackpot groups here have tried to rope me in wanting to use my media profile but i’m too wary for that, i cant afford to show extremism or gild the lily while i’ve been relied on at times by the police to get the message across.
GP, so there would be no difference between the real world and the Liberal Party website would there?
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2008/10/no-economist-can-explain-whats.html
No 70
Wow steve, he’s basically repeating the budget estimates. You are truly unbelievable.
GP, you didn’t happen to find anything economically responsible or positive on the Liberal Party website by any chance? Me either.
ShowsOn, Peter van Onsalon’s publisher isnt a happy chappy with all the plaigerism etc, she’s very vocal here, P.v.O would be better off sticking to Abbott, his ideas might be way out but at least they’re his own, P.v.O. could collect all of Abbotts weekly rantings from his columns, bind them and sell them as an original book, dunno who’d want to read them but at least no one else would admit to being their author.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/publish-and-be-damned-20081030-5emf.html
LOL! The Conservative’s Manifesto is the title of Abbott’s upcoming book! Will it have to be sold wrapped in brown paper?
Judith I think that was a case of let the publisher beware – getting Liberal Party MPs to write about their political philosophy? What was she thinking?! Who was the readership?
P.V.O’s students? anyone else?
btw Judith – what/who is your gravitar?
Grog, the Liberals can’t find much to write about economics that makes sense these days either. It’s all carp, whinge, whiteant, denegrate and moan.
Well that is the Liberal Partry motto.
lol, now we’ve dissected the liberals writing prowess — or lack thereof, we’re being visited by an old scandal, how could we forget it? to be honest i thought this had gone through court and was dusted off and finished, with a liberal election campaign from hell this certainly was the cherry on top, come down memory lane with me.
http://abc.com.au/news/stories/2008/10/31/2407259.htm
Judith, it was Daniel Morcombe day in Brisbane today another unsolved disaster.
Steve,for a long time my heart has gone out to Daniel’s family, the week that Alan was missing was the longest in my life, i was at least one of the lucky ones, i know whats happened to Alan and we got his body back to be put to rest with all of our love, we know who killed him, if we’d been left wondering i dont think i’d be sane today.
Judith, there certainly is a lot to be said for the strength displayed by those who have been put through the emotional wringer to that degree.
No 79
An absolute disaster for the Liberal Party – unbelievable and unforgivable really, hence the reason for Karen Chijoff (a very nice lady) has broken off her marriage. As someone who handed out HTVs in Lindsay on November 24 last year, I can feel her pain.
Now this will be good viewing…
Oh it’s going to be gooooood.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24584237-601,00.html
Article in the SMH is still trying to spin the line that mortgage fund freezes are all the fault of the bank guarantee, but does admit that:
So about half were frozen before the government acted. Indeed that began as early as December last year. But this is nothing new. As also stated in the article:
“They point to the fact that many funds were forced to freeze accounts during the last recession in the early 1990s.”
And others after the huge sharemarket falls following the New York twin towers attacks but no guarantee was even suggested or implemented by the Liberals in Government.
steve,
Perhaps unwisely, I spent hours of my last weekend pointing out to you and others that just because a guarantee wasn’t the right thing to do, that didn’t mean the Govt couldn’t do anything.
Right on cue, the Govt did three things this week:
- made the suggestion that the funds become (in effect) banks (though I’m not sure how serious this idea was)
- made the suggestion that the banks use their balance sheets to assist the funds in some way (I’m sure Rudd meant this seriously, but the banks have predictably brushed it off)
- now apparently ASIC are moving to make it so that some investors can get some of their money back even when their fund is frozen.
All worthwhile stuff no doubt (even if a bit around the edges), and proof positive that the view of most Labor PBers (in effect, we can’t offer a guarantee, therefore we can’t do anything at all) was misguided.
PS Thank goodness for Ron, at least he gets it.
I’ll give it a miss, just confirms what most decent Australians already know, an immoral, unprincipled disorganised government with no policies or plans for Australia and the future.
I think I’d rather take my chances with a Coogee Bay gelato, than risk the nausea that would follow watching that program.
How quickly “Coogee Bay gelato” has become part of the Australian lexicon!
A very mishcievious and disingenuous view if ever I saw one’ Dyno. Nobody has argued that at all.
Show me where these Labor hoards have suggested do nothing. What has been argued is that:
1 shoring upthe banks, credit unions and building societies is paramount
2 non bank mortgage lenders should have access to the guarantee as banks have
3 that Liberals should stop talking down the Financial processes and economic leaders during a Global Financial crisis
4 That as confidence returns, mortgage funds will increase in value and the frozen funds will begin to thaw under the guidance of the regulators esp ATSIC
5 That funds are not frozen forever which was the wild claim of Dyno repeated often last weekend.
steve,
I certainly never said the funds were frozen forever. If you think I did, provide the reference please.
The regular in question is ASIC.
You obviously give the Liberals credit for having a lot of influence over the markets.
There were many comments last week along the lines of, people took the risk of investing in these funds, why should the Govt do anything to help them.
Anyway, now that Mr Rudd has proved me right, that there is plenty that the Govt can and should do about this, I propose to leave the topic alone. Argue all you like, but the PM has proved my point! Good on him for doing that, a lot of investors will be pleased to see something is happening.
“The regular in question is ASIC.” Ahh, that word would be “regulator” …
Something was always going to happen with the mortgage funds, Dyno and without them all needing a guarantee.
OO wouldn’t like their boss praising Kev. I wonder if he smacked a few wrists lol.
“Mr Murdoch said Kevin Rudd had been “very sure-footed” in his handling of the financial crisis and defended the Prime Minister against criticism that he acted too quickly in his blanket guarantee of the deposits of the Australian banking system.
“You’ve got to recognise when he (Rudd) did it, he did it the day after the biggest ever fall in the stock market and the US Congress’s first refusal of the $700million bailout,” Mr Murdoch said. “I think, relatively, over this whole financial period, he has acted very sure-footedly.”
He said politicians should be careful that their comments did not further exacerbate the delicate financial situation.
Asked if the comments were meant to refer to Malcolm Turnbull, he said: “I don’t think Mr Turnbull has done that.”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,24584219-36418,00.html
another view of how the guarantee has been handled by the media and opposition here.
http://www.thepoliticalsword.com/post/2008/10/30/The-bank-guarantee-e28093-what-does-the-Opposition-and-the-media-really-believe.aspx#continue
Steve at 95. That is a brilliant piece of writing. Encapsulates my thoughts precisely. I only wish I had the jounalistic skill of Ad Astra. Pity it won’t be shown in every newspaper around the country.
98 enjaybee – +1. A very good article.
steve,
Not a bad article, and I certainly agree with a number of the key points:
- the Opposition’s performance has been poor
- the media have been predictably shallow (except for Kohler)
- the language Kohler used was over the top
- but at least Kohler made a suggestion, that could be the start of something more workable.
I’m sure it will all settle down relatively soon, Dyno. At least the banks are slowly getting over their liquidity problems so the biggest panic might now subside.
Check out the fall in the Libor here.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/10/08/business/economy/20081008-credit-chart-graphic.html
Glen @ 27 wrote…
Bugger, I meant to post this before but got sidetracked.
Glen, like you I have on occasion, favored one mob over the other, not so much after reading this
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2008/10/30/pollster-house-effects-and-the-alp/
See how a deformed Senate system imbues such arrogance:
Oh you accept do you? How kind and generous of you.
ie. “Neither of them should exist”.
Interesting point. If the Libs don’t support the plan in it’s current form, it’s probably going to end up being more “radical” due to The Greens.
If people think the government should be guaranteeing the value and or returns of mortgage trusts they should say so rather than carping around the edges with nonsense.
One can only hope Murdoch made a visit to the offices of The Australian and kicked the backsides of a number of incompetent, partisan and dishonest journalists and editors and mangers.
The best punishment would be to turn the OO into Entertain Weekly and make them all write about Paris Hilton, their intellectual equal.
And let them talk Miranda Devine as well.
Oz it depends on whether the Greens would insist on making the legislation more ‘union friendly’ or would begrudgingly agree to pass it as it is ‘better than Work Choices’.
However, if the Coalition was adamantly opposed to supporting Labor’s legislation, Labor would have to capitulate to The Greens to get it passed. If the Coalition plays ball, The Greens have no bargaining power.
If the coalition plays ball? They oppose everything for opposition’s sake!
Howard: Rage against opposition!
He’d know a lot about raging against opposition. He spent a lot of time there in the 1980s. Go Hawkey!
Thomas Paine: Do you think you might concentrate on the US elections until Wednesday (our time). We Australians love elections and if nothing else these ones offer us a chance to think of something apart from our economic doom. Even if it did take the Yanks to trigger off the freaking financial disaster. Pretty please.
Venise here’s a light yarn to give you a laugh before you go to the US elections thread.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/01/business/economy/01deflation.html?ref=worldbusiness
Any state threads going at the moment?
Sunday Mail looks like it has done a poll in marginal seats… I’ve just seen tomorrows editorial. Looks like Labor’s vote is holding up. Can’t find the actual article yet though.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24586537-5006336,00.html
I think I am being invited over to the US election thread?
That is one poorly written article Max.
Welcome to my world Itep.
The Sunday Mail, to its credit, is a better read than the Tiser. Or maybe I’m just less cynical on a Sunday…
Anyway, the article itself is now out. They polled three marginal seats.
In Labor’s most marginal seat, Mawson, in Adelaide’s south, where Leon Bignell has a 2.2 per cent buffer, the poll of 521 voters showed Labor had increased its two-party preferred vote to 56 per cent, up four points on the 2006 election, while the Liberal vote dropped to 44 per cent.
In Light, to Adelaide’s north, where Labor’s Tony Piccolo hangs on to a 2.4 per cent advantage, the poll of 553 voters showed Labor’s two-party preferred vote had risen to 55 per cent.
This is up three points from the last election, while the Liberal vote slid to 45 per cent.
In Adelaide, Ms Lomax-Smith maintained a comfortable lead on a two-party preferred result among the 584 voters polled, winning 59 per cent of the vote to the Liberals’ 41 per cent. That was only 1 per cent less than she polled at the 2006 election.
Interesting figures. Hard to know how accurate.
“Interesting figures. Hard to know how accurate”
About 4% moe, Max. So they are not saying much at all really.
That’s using 22,500 per electorate.
in most circles Martin Hamilton Smith is regarded as a populist one man band, none of the others in the libs seem to put their hands up, they’re a lazy lot, the thing is the public know if MHS is allowed in power he would begger the state in no time with his grandoise schemes of multipal sports venues etc, he even put forward the plan to apply for the commonwealth games after he got into power at the next election, the elephant in the room is that the nominations closed well before the election and the winner would already be on the agenda, he seems to have an illinformed opinion on everything, admittedly i’m a bit biased right now, he criticised Rann for doubling the reward for “The Family”, he claimed it was just populist politics, populist or not it’s been the labor government thats supported us all along –re throwing away the key for Von Einam, when the libs were in power i tried to get in touch with the AG to pass on information i had been given by an ex con about V.E. having special priviledges, i was given the brush off, he was far too busy for the likes of me, when the scandal finally broke M.H.S. tried to raise a dust against the Rann government, that was untill i got in touch with him and threatened to go public about the way i was treated when i tried to bring it to the libs attention.
thats been the libs all the way, we got no help with the start of VOCS, in fact just the opposite, when labor was elected the AG Chris Summner couldnt do enough for us and finally became our patron and a good friend.
Labor isn’t anywhere near dead yet in SA.
I was reading an Advertiser article a few months ago saying that whilst there had been a massive swing against Labor in country areas (where much of the Liberal vote is), the metro areas registered quite low swings, the main reason being the consolidation of regional health services. Considering Labor got 56.8% of the 2pp in SA in 2006, there’s quite a buffer there for them.
When you look at MHS and his team, there’s barely any substance there, and MHS isn’t even bringing his own supporters with him. The latest statewide Newspoll may be 50-50, but the Preferred Premier rating is 48-30 Rann’s way. Quite pathetic on MHS’ part really. I know quite a few Liberal supporters who hate MHS and say he’ll never amount to anything.
And once election time comes, people just need to be reminded of the SA Liberals in power. They are unable to govern themselves, let alone the state. The moderate and the conservative factions rip themselves apart trying to climb their internal heirarchy. People want stability, not a party more concerned about themselves than getting on with the job of government. Mike Rann has provided that stability. The people that call him Media Mike are the same as those who yell KRudd. Nobody cares about silly name calling, but I spose there’s not much else for rusted Liberals to do when there’s no credible criticism when one compares to previous Liberal governments.
Merchant bankers and CEOs talk among themselves about their salaries.
Seems close to the mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlS8O257Gi0&feature=related
Kelly and the Australian just can’t help themselves. It was actually a reasonable article till the last paragraph pushed it into the typical OO nonsense category. It’s about time they got over there cling on to this straw.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24582552-12250,00.html
bob1234, i couldnt agree with you more, MHS goes about things like SAS soldier which is what he was in his previous career, he pulls stupid stunts to try and surprise the enemy {Rann} and most fall flat, he seems to do little or no research before he comes up with his populist ideas, the last sports stadium he proposed was supposed to be a copy of Telstra dome, he costed it at x amount which was well under what it cost originally to build Telstra years ago, the actual amount would have ended up double that, he’d be the last person we’d want in now theres tight financial times, he wanted to scrap the new hospital to build it, instead of a new state of the art hospital he wants to renovate the 150 year old RAH, renovations have been going on there from as far back as i can remember and it’s still an old inconvenient crumbling heap, by the way it’s now heritage listed which legally means little can be done to modernise it, parking is mainly an old decrepid parking station over the road, it should be given to the Adelaide Uni which is next door in a series of lovely heritage buildings they’ve renovated and restored, it would be ideal for lecture rooms etc.
jb and bob
I’m convinced that the SA Libs enjoy being in opposition because you don’t have to do anything. They are bone-idle lazy. MHS is a boofhead but at least he is making an effort. They have the worst shadow Health minister I can remember. Chapman is completely disinterested. It’s all too much like hard work.
this weeks fibs point of outrage methinks
(it has the dirty marks of them all over)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/30/2406065.htm?section=justin
http://news.theage.com.au/national/rudd-should-probe-who-leaked-bush-call-20081102-5g3m.html
All I want for xmas is a real opposition,not this bunch of whingers
Fair enough. It’s an important issue.
This is another way of getting at Rudd. Toolman and Cassidy were at it on “Libsiders” this morning. Appaerntly Mitchell, Editor of the OO, was at the same function as Rudd when this call came through. What’s a bet someone has jokingly said Bush didn’t know what the G-20 was and Mitchell has stupidly run with it. This has beat up written all over it.
Is there no limit to the number of Countries our Kev insults. From Japan, which firstly insulted our Kev by not officially congratulating him on being elected but apparently our Kev insulted them by not immediately racing over to Japan after being elected. The USA and now no Country can have private conversations with our Kev., because he will “leak” what was said in private.
What is it that the media will not believe this ‘ Both US officials and the Prime Minister’s office have denied the exchange took place’.
It was and is a media and opposition beat up.
yep – that’d me my reading of it as well. Hard to prove though.
Of course Toolman suggested that maybe Rudd himself “leaked it” to Mitchell. The big question is why would a politically VERY savvy politician like Rudd do that? Also Rudd used to be the shadow forein affairs minister. He would know the effect this could have within the diplomatic scene.
It just doesn’t ring true.
Mitchell of course could put this to bed immediately by saying one way or the other where he got this info from. That won’t happen.
I’m confused as to why anywhere here would believe The Australian. Haven’t we just spent weeks talking about how they lie and misrepresent the truth. And now another example, how surprising.
Cassidy was wondering why no-one had asked Rudd about it. Maybe most other journalists saw it as BS as well.
No doubt Turnbull will put on his lawyer gown in QT and go massively over the top on it.
off topic, does anyone else occasionally get sent to other parts of crikey blogs when you either refresh or hit one of the “recent comments” links?
It’s harder to prove the whole thing happened though and it is on the head of the OO to show it did.
and interestingly Uhlmann didn’t seem to think that he was included in the category of journos who should have asked…
Stephen Smith was on Sunday – did anyone see if Laurie Oakes raised it?
As BB and others have pointed out re other attempted smear,a pattern emerges.
1. event happens
2.commentary starts (seed planted) viz bolta and sheridan
3.time to digest, create rumour and false fact
4.suitable reinforcement viz turnbull “Malcolm Turnbull says Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has insulted all Americans and US President George W Bush. …”
5.unleash the dogs of war viz milne article ,and a poodle viz Downer on Insiders
6.now you have a fully fledged “scandal’
btw this has all the same traits as the belinda neale /nelson confrontation.
YES!! I thought I was going mad when it first happened. Then it happened again and again and I started thinking it was my computer playing up. Thank heavens it’s not either.
Grog 134, Laurie didn’t mention it.
Bob + other croweaters:
Be careful… the same thing could be said for the WA Liberals, and look what happened to Carpenter and co last month.
Yep, this happens to me too.
It just happened as I tried to update this post
Me too. It took me to Polytics TWICE.
Does that to me as well. Sometimes end up at Trevor Cook…
It once took me to the archived Morgan senate post from 2004.
For something which has importance diplomatically it wouldn’t hurt Kevin Rudd to say unequivocally that the story did not come from him and anyone in his office and that he and his office authorise the Australian to reveal the source of their story.
does anyone think the voters are going to care just who said what about Bush, he would be one of the most loathed presidents ever, compare it to Howard’s remarks about Obama who looks like being the next president, that brings it into perspective, it probably started out as a joke by the journos about Bush and one of the dills took it for fact and ran with it–or someone trying to stir the pot against Rudd, now there’d be a line up of so called journos to suspect there, i dont believe it came from Mitchell he and Rudd are close friends from way back, he has to put up with the journos Murdoch gives him and run with Murdoch’s right wing theme but it doesnt mean he has to like it.
It doesn’t matter if the voters care or don’t care. World leaders should feel comfortable that their conversations with our Prime Minister aren’t going to be reported in such a way in the media.
I personally wouldn’t be surprised at all if it was all made up but that doesn’t mean the questions shouldn’t be asked.
SA poll thread up.
ltep,
Both the USA and Australian officials have said that conversation did not take place.
Why should our Kev get involved in he beat up.
So I know GP’s pet peeve is the net filter, and he likes coming back to that whenever he sees the Libs under attack, but I’m going to pull the rug out from under him by demonstrating that it’s The Greens who are taking a more active role in the issue than the Libs.
Exhibits A: http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;355409327;pp;1;fp;16;fpid;0
B: http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/S11346.pdf
And C: http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/greens-senator-quizzes-conroy-on-filtering/
AHHH FFS.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/02/2407930.htm?section=justin
Muskiemp the issue isn’t whether the conversation took place, it’s what provoked the Australian to run the story. Was it made up by the Australian or something made up by Kevin Rudd’s office or him? Rudd and his office should advise that they are fine with the Australian revealing the source of their story.
Oz, good on the Greens for taking an active role. Here’s hoping they fight the Government to the end on that issue.
Why do they always have to be naked? Doesn’t that sort of detract from them being taken seriously?
I don’t know what they expect, but I suppose they think “Hey the last time we got naked it worked”.
Labor should just write off that demographic. Let them vote Liberal as they so obviously want to do. No matter what the government does they’re going to find more stuff to criticise.
The Australian is Australias Fox News but with less credibility and much dumber writers. It is self destructing any remaining creds in its desperate attempts to help the Libs get reelected
after reading Michelle Grattan the minds boggles at the ammunition the Fib lackies have in just one paragraph. Get ready for next OO headlines,
Rudd insults: (take your pick) China Russia England Indonesia Sth Korea Canada Japan Brazil Singapore and the World Bank EU OECD AND APEC.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/capitals-idea-as-rudds-shirtsleeve-stormtroopers-talk-tall-20081031-5fko.html?page=2
“Rudd is talking to many other leaders including, this week, a late-night call with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev. Since October 1 Rudd has had phone talks with British PM Gordon Brown (with whom he keeps in close contact), Japanese PM Taro Aso, US House Democrat majority leader Steny Hoyer, House Republican minority whip Roy Blunt, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia, President Bush, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the chairman of China’s National Development and Reform Commission Zhang Ping, Canadian PM Stephen Harper, World Bank President Robert Zoellick, Italian PM Silvio Berlusconi, OECD secretary-general Angel Gurrio, President Lee Myung-bak of South Korea, European Commission president Jose Barroso, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil, and Singapore PM Lee Hsien Loong. He has also written to the G20 leaders, and to the chairs of APEC and the East Asia Summit.”
OZ
I think most pensioners and carers are happy with Kev’s handout and promise to increase pensions next year after the review. It had a very positive reaction when announced.
This would be a Fib stunt. Was Fielding starkers on the back of the horse with the oldie? lol
Gratten has already said the leak came from the the US side. Why do some commentators here deliberately make believe they dont know this? Sounds more like a OO tactic.
You’d hope so, considering they got more than they were going to get with a short term $30 a week increase. Plus, as you said, the promise of more.
I gusse it is more convient to propergate the lies if it sits more closely with your position.
Thomas Paine can you provide a link to a story by Michelle Gratten that says so? I honestly haven’t read anything that has said that.
Pensioners will never be happy.
I commented on the Rudd insults all Americans thing in reply to, I think, Generic Person last Thursday. This was to the effect that Rudd’s office had denied the comment about Bush not knowing what the G20 was, as it had been the subject of the call to Bush, and secondly, while Bush may be stupid, why would he return a call about the G20, if he didn’t know what it was. Adam in Canberra’s thinking was that it was someone from the other end. In any event, for the ABC to be pursuing it, and giving no credence to the notion that silly Eddixinder’s calls for an enquiry into the matter constitutes news, suggests they have openly abandoned any balance or sense.
156- TP
that doesn’t square with this article:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/rudd-blushes-at-account-of-bushs-g20-ignorance-20081029-5anj.html
Just read that Michelle rattan article.Now that’s the real story in how hard our Kev and his Government are working.
The fibs can only carp on the outside, while the Rainman watches with green eyes and just jumps up and down yelling ” Swan doesn’t know, Rudd is doing nothing at the same time doing things without thought” and promises bipartisanship as long as it’s done his way.
Because he is ahead of the game as he managed to help the run on the Mortgaged funds by getting his money out early well before slow Rudd could put a guarantee on bank funds by acting in haste.
harry
I noticed GPs “obscene’ outrage too regarding the phone conversation.
perhaps the fibs felt that the phone issue was the one that gained the most traction
hence todays setup on insiders with dolly.
Oh, and that Rudd’s office had commented on Monday, so I was also cross that it was still being touted as news four days later.
They may have commented but perhaps the comment was inadequate.
164 HSO – it was odd that a story from Monday that got no traction all week would be given a run again on Insiders – though I guess Milne’s columns generally get a mention. And they did mention it last week (to whit a few blog by Bolt on the subject this week).
BTW Milne is running for President of the National Press Club. What a riot.
165 – how so inadequate? They denied they leaked it; denied Bush said it.
The Oz can answer for themselves – haven’t seen an “we were r.i.g.h.t.” articles on the subject…
Ltep, im a pensioner and i’m happy to wait till the government can work out just what they can afford,as are most of the pensioners i know, to me it looks like a nutter looking for her 15 minutes of fame, who is this pensioner action group? i’ve never heard of them–or maybe is it a group of her pals egging her on? i’m managing on the pension and i’m still paying off a small morgage, my broadband and books are my luxuries, i dont smoke or play the pokies and bingo and i have a full life, most pensioners i know find the GST is the bugbear of their life, even with the subsidy, well they cant blame Rudd for that.
Gus & Grog, it just annoys the c%#p out of me that the ABC just quote whatever c%#p is being run by such as Milne and Bolt without question. It’s just again been the headline story on ABC RN news, with the last line being that Rudd’s office had declined to comment. Probably, a good thing.
Bird of paradox, WA is a completely seperate situation. The Labor 2PP in WA was always much lower than what SA has been used to, and the WA Libs only got in to power with the Nationals. Here in SA, the Libs have to do it alone. There’s also the fact Carpenter has no charisma, and called an early election with a shambolic election campaign. People in WA were also sick of so many scandals from both sides, whereas in SA, Labor has run the tightest ship in the country – almost scandal free.
Very different situations.
Ltep @ 165, what grog said.
Oz @ 167, are you having a lend of us?
Grog, where did they deny leaking the story? If they deny it they should give the Australian permission to reveal the source of the story if it did stem from their office.
HSO – no QT this week, so I can’t see the ’story’ having much of a life.
And isn’t it somewhat odd that “diplomatic sources” are worried about this, because wouldn’t that suggest that the story is true that GW didn’t know about the G20?
So it’s true and Rudd leaked it. or
It’s true and Rudd’s office leaked it. or
It’s not true and Rudd lied to The Oz. or
It’s not true and Rudd’s office lied to the Oz. or
It was a joke made at Rudd’s party that The Oz has reported as fact.
there’s probably other ‘ors’ but I can’t think of them.
Nope, it was in the Sun-Herald today. He’s challenging Don Randall. Apparently it’s “split the journalistic community”.
I don’t think I’ll be able to watch NPC speeches any more. Won’t be able to put up with this smug grin.
Those wishing to create a gripe against Rudd have proven only barely interested in the data as we have seen.
Don Randall is President of the Press Club? How?
Glenn Milne ran last year and didn’t win.
ltep – I doubt they need to give The Oz permission to do anything.
Greg Sheriden wrote:
probably not good enough for you. But Sheriden is hardly endorsing the veracity of The Oz’s reportage.
Probably because he’s not Milne.
Can anyone seriously expect Glenn Milne to get voted in after his relatively recent drunken physical assault?
Milne was sitting in the Prez of the Press Club’s chair for a lunch address by someone (think it was Costello?) a few weeks back. Is he the deputy at the moment?
Wait sorry, *Ken Randall.
Don’s the Liberal MP right?
But Don Randall isn’t even a member of the Press Club is he?
He’s one of the Vice-Presidents.
You know the fibs and their supporters are desperate if a ridiculous attack such as this faux ‘leak’ is all they have to run with. FMD.
Don Randall is the wacky Lib MP from WA.
Its an embarrassment to the people of WA that he’s still there.
google still has the beatup in its top story panel,though curiously only two more references have appeared since the original 17 references.
self-referential journalism perhaps is dying.
Opposition calls for AFP probe into Rudd/Bush leak story:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/02/2407947.htm
“Deputy Opposition Leader Julie Bishop says Mr Rudd needs to provide a clear explanation of how it happened.”
“”It is a massive national security problem.”
Oh come on Julie… that’s over egging it just a little isn’t it?
190 ltep – wow “national security”???
see that straw and let me clutch it!
Hard to know what the AFP would be investigating – surely a crime would need to have been comitted, and I don’t think any top secret documents were involved here lol. Top secret over wine gossip perhaps
What a joke
Wonder if bishop still supports the Howard govt line thgt Obama is the friend of terrorist? And will she demand all ties be cut with the US if he wins?
Well that is the new pattern of Rudd attackers of course, nothing valid to attack with unless lots of straw is used first.
Actually it was quite funny, after all stopped sniggering at the response “what’s the G20″,
Bush was told it is to discuss how many Brazillions will be needed to fix the crisis.
Everyone ended on the floor in tears.
Fibs trying to divert attention away from Talcums bumbling over the WFC?
What Julie is actually asking to be investigated is the disclosure of a part of a conversation which both parties say didn’t take place. Mitchell, of the OO, would not be happy with this investigation. He could be called to name his source, if there is one.
Itep @145:
A perfect recital of the tactics behind the Murdoch-Liberal Party axis that runs these stories.
1. Plant the story. Make it up on the smell of an oily rag.
2. Get questions put in QT about it.
3. when it is exposed as false, say, “But if if was true, it should be investigated”. (Uhlmann today posed the theory that Rudd was the leaker. Therafter his whole piece was based on this total fantasy as if it was true).
4. Get other newspapers to take up the story.
5. Quote other newspapers as “press reports”.
6. Quote your own articles as “press reports”.
7. Give it an “affair moniker, as in, “The George Bush Affair”, or add “-gate to it, as in “Phonegate”.
8. Start referring to it as if it was true, a proven fact, competely established.
9. Start the jokes going around, as in,
10. Try to get the story – which was disproved within days of its emergence, remember – into the folklore as “fact” (actually you don’t have to try very hard, you just assert it as a fact when everyone’s forgotten the jist of it) and then bring it up when reciting a list of “Rudd Gaffes” a years later, as in, “… and then there was ‘Phonegate’. This PM and his government out of control, leaking like sieves and total celebrity junkies”.
What Itep wrote was classic: “Who cares if it’s a lie, unbelieveable and totally out of character… it should be investigated anyway.”
Hateful, ugly stuff, from a typical purveyor of it.
Thanks Itep.
Rupert warned them to lay off talking up a recession so they needed something else to fib about. Being a bunch of dunderheads the Fibs couldn’t think of anything themselves so had to fall back on a week old beat up from their OO.
The OO is starting to wal on very thin ice. How long before they dont even bother to build a straw man before Liberal party supporting attabks on Labor. What is the step below joke paper?
Bushfire Bill, a complete misrepresentation. My point was that I personally wouldn’t be surprised if it’s not based completely upon ‘fact’ but that I believe the events surrounding it should be brought to light.
I also wouldn’t be surprised if Rudd or Rudd’s office leaked it in an attempt to spin the government as some big player on the world stage.
The whole point is that the public should be presented with a full picture of the incident. If the Government has nothing to hide they will authorise the disclosure of the source of the story. If the story is not stemming from a government source the Australian will be forced to print as such and then the source will be irrelevant.
Apparently Rupert Murdoch is worried about Poll Bludger becoming a National Icon.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24589987-5003402,00.html
Yes William, you’d better be careful or you’ll have Uncle Rupert on you.
Rupert gives a speech calling for an end to ’subsidies for the well off’ and for a move to a republic… leaves the Liberal Party a bit out in the cold.
the ahem,beat-up has completely disappeared from google news.
smack down clowns
Gus it’s still on the “top stories” of ABC. (nowhere on news.com)
And BB it now has a name – “G20-gaffe”
yep catchy.
The beat up wasn’t on either channel 7 News or Nine News tonight in Vic. That shows you how much credence they give it.
Is parliament on this week?
Bushfire Bill @ 197. It looks very much to me like an attempt to damage Rudd’s credibility internationally and domestically. It’s always had the ring of a lie. I mean why would Rudd, an ex-diplomat, someone who is working very hard to establish Australia as a powerful middle level player internationally, do something so unutterably stupid as to leak something damaging to Bush.
Itep, Rudd should absolutely not do anything other than what he’s done which is to say the newspaper report is w-r-o-n-g. He should not speak publicly about the details of a conversation with Bush or any other national leader. What do you think would happen if all national leaders blabbed to the press about their negotiations with each other?
ta grog
the new spin is ‘The Federal Opposition wants the Australian Federal Police to investigate how a private telephone conversation between Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and US President George W Bush became the subject of a newspaper article’
FFO
They may not be able to authorise something that didn’t take place.
Lead stories on ABC TV News is the cranky pensioner who isn’t satisfied with $1400 handout from the tax payers, to whom I say, O.K. dearie, how long do you think I had to work for your $1400. Kerist, I’m on pensioners’ side and I just want to slap her. I wonder what other tax payers might think might be thinking?
And, of course, Uhlmann, on the story that won’t die, at least if he has anything to do with it. Disgraceful.
So Rudd is that vain that he would put the government’s standing with other countries at risk tosatisfy his ego? Does that really ring true with anyone other than the most rabid Rudd haters eg AB? I agree HSO 207.
HSO I never said he should reveal the details of a conversation with a foreign leader. I said he should authorise the paper to reveal who their source is if it comes from someone in his office. If it doesn’t come from his office they’ve got nothing to fear.
I assume all these people who are claiming there should be no investigation or further questioning from the media also object the government investigating Cabinet leaks to the media. If so, they should condemn the Government for getting the AFP to investigate the Fuelwatch leaks a few months ago.
It would also be helpful if the Australian were to print a correction to the story if they are in the knowledge it is completely false. In any case they ought to do some follow up.
Gary Bruce @ 211
It wouldn’t surprise me and I don’t ‘hate’ Rudd. I just understand he is a politician like any other.
Itep, O.K., but as someone else pointed out Rudd doesn’t have to authorise the paper to do anything. Moreover, again it makes absolutely no sense for anybody from Rudd’s office to be the source of such a story. It would make them look dills, and unless they are contemplating a career move in a radical direction, such as the dole queue, there’s nothing to be gained and everything to lose.
Steve @ 201
Read the story in your link. I agree with everything Murdoch said in that story, I am sure there was a lot more which was not told and probably a lot I would not agree with.
I like this bit.
and
My emphases.
The story is pure fantasy written in the hope the hand wringers get excited which they did. Of course the general wont accept the story as it is totally opposite to their expereince with Rudd. It is the LNPand OO in desparation mode.
213 ltep – Can’t you see how stupid it would be politically for Rudd to go down that path? Rudd is many things but stupid he isn’t.
TP @ 216. Log a complaint with the ABC. They are supposed to be impartial. This reporting all day from Insiders in the am, all day on RN radio news and this evening’s TV news, is really very worrying. If people can’t rely on the ABC, we’re in dangerous territory.
That was where there actually was a leak. Both the Government and US says there wasn’t one in this case, so for what possible reason on the face of the planet should there be an AFP investigation in to it???
Good luck with that
Itep, at great risk of being SNIPPED, you are such a drongo.
You betray your real attitude in the second paragraph of your post:
You are so transparent, mate.
This is a man who meticulously engineered an election win last election. He has worked in the PS and spent time around the diplomatic corp? If he doesn’t know what needs to happen no-one does.
Nothing about this story rings true.
So to be a big player on the world stage you embarrass the POTUS? Oh yeah, that makes sense doesn’t it? I think even Rudd could see the weakness in that argument.
Every one, log a complaint with the ABC. I can deal with the O.O. being a liar for the Libs., we must not allow the ABC to be the same.
No 223
Calm down HSO. The ABC is no mouthpiece for the Liberal Party.
GB no QT this week (Melbourne Cup and all). Back on the 10th for a week. ONe week off then the last two week from the 24th:
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/info/sittings/index.htm
Wish they’d stop acting like one…
But this is not a Cabinet leak, and the story has being denied. No one investigates stories that are factually wrong. What confidential secret was revealled? What information that is subject to Cabinter-in-confidence?
I do condemn the Govt for the investigaiton into the leaks that have happened this year – cf the one dealing with The Canberra Times – the AFP raiding his house was way OTT. The best way to investigate leaks is how they dealt with the one done by Laurie Oakes earlier in the year. The AFP rang him, said who is your source, he told them to get stuffed. End of story.
No 226
They are not acting like one. They are reporting the accusations of the Liberal Party as part of their balanced coverage of both sides.
I assume that the Courier-Mail story quoting Murdoch (Steve #201) is an advance of his Boyer Lecture. Bludgers may want to tear themselves away from the keyboard to watch the Dirty Digger on ABC1 at 10.15 p.m.
Btw, the pensioner performing the Lady Godiva stunt was a disability pensioner. not an aged p.. I agree with the general tenor of reactions (earlier in the thread) to her dissatisfaction with the handout.
No 229
An ungrateful mole. That is the only appropriate reaction.
Generic Person @ 224. I am unlikely to calm down. We face perilous times economically and in terms of the impact of climate change. If the ABC cannot fulfill the requirements of impartial reporting, it will cause huge doubt in the minds of those who rely on it, when for instance, we here in Victoria have a tinder dry place ready to go up in flames.
If the ABC loses its reputation for impartiality, it loses everything, and we lose as well. It’s that important.
No 231
It is nowhere near impartial. Goodness me you have an uncontrollable outburst everytime there is a negative story about the Government. Please understand that we live in a democracy and criticism of the government is entirely legitimate. Spare us the feigned indignation.
I agree Grog. I wouldn’t support a formal investigation into the story at all. That’s not to say the Government couldn’t press the newspaper involved to reveal their source.
Bushfire Bill, I’m not sure what that comments meant to ‘portray’ apart from me not being blinkered into thinking Rudd’s the best thing since sliced bread. Most politicians at a high level are egotistical and keen to portray a strong image for themself in the media.
HSO, the Government don’t need to authorise the paper to reveal a source but papers generally don’t like to reveal sources for stories unless it is with their permission, hence why governments need to get the AFP to push the media to get that information. However, the Government could say that it was not from Rudd’s office and that if the paper is alleging that it is they should reveal the source.
As to the people saying Rudd’s office would not be stupid enough to leak such a story… the Government are still amateurs when it comes to handling the media and general tactics. I still think they bungled the promotion of their first budget and haven’t gotten themselves organised yet. The Opposition of course, are a complete shambles.
Generic Person @ 232. You can accuse me of having “an uncontrollable outburst every time there is a negative story about the Government.”, however, I am just as likely to be critical of them when I think it justified. My indignation is not feigned; your constant ranting about “obscene” whatever it is, is just rubbish, in my view.
233 ltep – the problem with that, is then they would be forced to demand the same of any story involving any “leak”. I can;t see it happening.
The AFP can’t do anything “infomally” so there’s no way they can “push the media” to get that information.
And again – what crime has been committed? Why would the AFP be called in?
You don’t get the AFP in because a story has been inaccurately reported. The RBA leak was more confidential, and I would be against the AFP being involved with that (internal RBA and Treasury ok) and ths would certainly be against the Govt having to ask the AFP to be invovled in this just to make a show of not being the leak.
The G10 phone call story will be starved of oxygen and die over the next couple of days.
Grog I’m not suggesting the AFP do anything for this story. My comments were in relation to other occasions where the AFP have investigated media leaks. I already agreed the AFP shouldn’t be involved and questioned the Opposition’s attempts to paint this as a story crucial to ‘national security’. I also wonder why it’s Julie Bishop who’s saying these things and not Helen Coonan, who surely should be the shadow minister most concerned.
I don’t buy newspapers, but I did today for the Cup formguide.
They are saying in the Telegraph that Rudd has damaged our alliance with the US about what he is reported to have said about Dubya. If Rudd did not say it, The Australian newspaper is a disgrace.
I’ll tell you who has damaged our future alliance with the US, Howard saying what he did about Obama.
JOHN HOWARD MUST APOLOGISE TO BARACK OBAMA ON THE FRONT PAGE OF EVERY MAJOR NEWSPAPER IN THE COUNTRY IF HE WINS THE PRESIDENCY!
John Howard is completely irrelevant and I’ll be quite glad to not see him on a newspaper cover ever again.
Agreed – only politic tragics such as us, working with so fine a brush over the most minute and trivial pieces of political archeology.
Its more probable th alleged conversation nevber occurred so there is no leak to find
Now if in th unlikely event such converaston did actualy occur it would not hav been leaked any more from George Bushs office as it would from Kevin Rudds because Leaders of all countries (and there trusted officials) hav treat conversations as 100% off limits for publication on security grounds
So more likely this is a created ’story’….history is littered with them intended to damage both th ‘left’ and/or th ‘right’ Rudd should (and probably will) just let it pass into historys dust bin as tomorrow there will new news & story will dies
My 240 post was referring to 236, but it applies quite well for 239 as well!
237 – no worried ltep. My confusion.
I don’t know why Julie B said it either… or why she would bother saying anything for a long while – I think her career is pretty much dead now.
Every answer in question time to her should begin: ‘I thank the honourable member for her question, I wonder who wrote it for her…”
Well, Itep, our alliance with the US is very relevant. Because Howard is no longer PM, does not excuse the offense caused to the future president of the US.
And if the so called man of steel is man enough to apologise, he should say sorry to the Democrat Party as well. Howard is only too well aware of the importance of the US alliance therefore MUST say SORRY!
How ironic. What a beauty!
AS far as Milne is concerned, for mine it’s “Goodbye ‘The Poison Dwarf’ and “Hello ‘Mr. President’”.
How is the opinion of a former Prime Minister of any relevance? It’s quite clear the current PM didn’t support the former PM at the time on those comments nor does he now.
I note that Kevin Rudd hasn’t been so arrogant as to try and interfere in the US Presidential election openly. I can only imagine the reaction if he did so.
Howard has nothing to apologise for re th US Alliance It is not damaged at all by howeards comments Hell it survived Gough’s ministers tearing into th US publicly
anyway Howard did not even appologise to th Aborigines
Because he was NOT a former Prime Minister at the time.
Funny thing the meeja.
its now back on googles top stories *the abc link has pride of place*
I spoke too soon. now 22 stories (siff efika and turkey are running it now)
aaaaggh.the fibs are such fools
http://news.google.com.au/nwshp?rls=ig&hl=en&tab=wn&ncl=1265559156&topic=h&scoring=d
ltep, your hero is saying sorry, fair dinkum.
If he dosen’t he is a WEAK WEAK WEAK coward!
And that’s the way he will be remembered.
Howards future is here:-
http://www.iccaction.com/
No 247
An Aboriginal apology was unnecessary and undesirable.
GP
I agree the Aboriginals have nothing to apologise for.
good to see you are developing a social conscience.
In all fairness and if the were anything but Liberal Party mouthpieces the Murdoch media should have condemned John Howard with the utmost severity for his unprovoked attack on Obama and the US Democratic party.
Here we had the leader of a democratic country, a US ally, getting himself directly involved in the US Presidential election, supporting one side. It was a gross abuse of the position of PM and really should have resulted in Howard’s resignation. This was Howard and the Liberal party putting party ideology before the well being of Australia and before democracy. It was a shameful action.
Luckily for Howard the Liberal party didn’t get reelected and we didn’t have to suffer the utter shame of our PM having to get down on all fours to apologise and beg forgiveness.
If the Murdoch media and ABC go on about a non-leak created using their own straw with such vigor when they rightly know that it is fake, they should not have passed Howard’s disgraceful effort by.
I think this latest episode, if confirmation was ever needed, demonstrates the Murdoch media and ABC are not much more than operational arms of the Liberal Party with the over arching purpose of undermining Labor and getting the LNP reelected.
There latest effort will most likely set up a gigantic sense of cognitive dissonance in the general public who now know Rudd well enough that he wouldn’t be doing such things.
The cognitive dissonance will create that sense of disbelief in the story but also serve to highlight Rudd’s strong international performance and standing.
I can understand the strategy of the Murdoch media here, to try and attack and undermine a Rudd strength, his high profile international skills and standing. These were the same guys who tried to undermine Rudd’s visit to ground zero in the USA during the economic crisis.
TP, I reckon we have suffered utter shame of our PM getting down on all fours and sucking upto Bush. I reckon even the Dubya administration was a bit embarrassed by it.
Neither do the Australian people.
Now that is my point.
If Howard was not sucking up to Bush and was acting in the best interests of our alliance, he must apologise to Obama for the same reason.
Good thing the apology was on behalf of the Government then
Centre here’s a site you might appreciate so close to the Melbourne cup.
http://catpolitics.blogspot.com/
steve please, I am trying to forget about yeasterday. I had Barbaricus going for a fortune in the Mackinnon Stks. I still haven’t had any sleep over it.
I reckon Mad Rush and C’est La Guerre are the go for Tuesday.
would you mob here, who are supposedly about the most cued in and attune mob, in relation to the political system, please take a moment to consider, i.e., think about, the implications of people not trusting the ABC in the event of a major disaster. That’s what Uhlmann is doing, for me, at least. I’m certainly capable of discriminating between reports on political events and events that have to do with coordinating responses to disasters, but not everyone is. Conflate rubbish political reporting with the brand, and the brand is tarnished.
I know, Howard tended to be a pushover, anything to be in the same room, with or without dignity or integrity.
We have seen a bit of slash and burn tactics from the Murdoch media, ABC and Liberal party. At a time when confidence was the major currency they all decided to trade in confusion and uncertainty. This group certainly does not have the interests of Australians at heart if it is in opposition to an opportunity to support the Liberal party.
They seem to be getting worse and moved to use fabricated events to run their campaigns.
These people should be asking themselves that if the Turnbull Opposition is so hopeless that it needs them to continually attack the Govt and fabricate stories for them to even seem slightly relevant then, shouldn’t they be worried by their total incompetence?
It can get to a stage that a continual campaign against the government for no legitimate reason can be harmful to the country.
Harry its back off googles top stories (only 27 refs -the latest 5 being from a single agency france press reference run thru the international channel).
I think constant vigilence is the key re the MSM beatups-catch em soon enough and they die out-bit like stopping cockroaches breeding.
btw the usual suspects were involved in this latest smear-the abc just added fuel to a dying fire.
No 260
Nonsense. The Government, or the Parliament as a whole, represents the people of Australia.
thANKS, GUS. bLOOODY 3 LEGGED CAT,
However, it is not the Australian people. If the Government wanted to apologise on behalf of the Australian people, as they could have according to you, they would have. But they did not. Move on.
re link at post 252.
Wow, Howard might be starting to sh!t himself LOL.
GP
I hav said Howard has nothing to appologise for for damaging th US Alliance because th US Alliance was not damaged
I would place Howards comments commenting on another Coutries Eections as ill judged and woiuld same of rudd if he was still PM in 2012 and adversely commented on th Republican candidate (Iwould however like to know th full context of his remarks & lead up questons as his comment was ususual anyway)
However disagree ver Aborigines apology Believe it was needed not as an appology for what we hav done but what predecessors hav not done enough of as a symbolic line in sand so th Aborigines themselves were still aggrieved there had been no recognition of past errors with th implication reel or otherwise that past policys were ok when they were not by all governemtns
No 268
More nonsense. Any action by the parliament is one done on behalf of the Australian people.
No 270
Yes in hindsight Howard’s comments regarding Obama were inappropriate. But his foreign policy approach back then was a joke – it appears more refined with Biden – the insufferable windbag – at his side.
See you later, estimable bludgers.
GP is good at talking nonsense
Dario
how “obscene” of you to suggest that about GP
nite all
No 274
An obscene lie.
Obscene nonsense even.
Remember to wake up early and tune in to the Cassidy and Trioli show.
No 277
What time does it start? 6am on ABC2?
The topics of Apologies, Howard and Horses all came together in this story from the recent dark age.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/11/25/1038173693007.html
Makes you think about how different the country is now.
My apologies… GP is good at talking obscene nonsense
Kate Ellis reinstates compulsory communism at universities:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/unis-to-bring-back-fees/2008/11/02/1225560645008.html
For one i agree with my collegue across the aisle – this will just restore the “good old days” of student unions being able to run far left wing campagins supporting Hamas and the PLO (among others) and day trips to dention centres
No 282
Exactly right. For goodness sake, Ellis is so dimwitted on this issue that she’s let herself be consumed by the silly begging of the NUS. If students want child care and advocacy, they can pay for it themselves. I simply cannot fathom why other students, who are already on minimal incomes as it is, should have to subsidise services they will rarely make use of.
When compulsory student unionism was abolished, there was a collective sigh of relief from the silent majority of students who attended university to get their degree and get into the workforce. No longer did they have to spend hundreds of dollars to subsidise services they never use or subscribe to extreme political ideologies with which they did not agree. When unions finally had to work to accrue new members under the VSU regime, the consequently low membership take-up proved that the majority of the student body does not get any value from union services.
But lo and behold, the Minister for “Umming and Arrring” has reinstated CSU by another name: compulsory amenities fee; a fee which student unions will almost certainly squander and misuse. I hope the Coalition & the independents block this nonsensical attempt to reinstate compulsory communism.
Note to william: I know you dislike the “c” word, but frankly there’s no other appropriate word.
Garrett sells out soul again by killing the National Academy of Music…by fax:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/to-be-elite-is-not-the-same-as-being-elitist-20081102-5gbw.html?page=-1
GP I agree with you on VSU/CSU. Student unions are essentially useless and, as with any other union, should be able to think of ways to get students to join voluntarily if their services are so great.
I’ve yet to see a compelling reason to reinstate CSU and given that Barnaby Joyce is one of its main proponents that’s telling you something.
The OO is beginning to fall into a pattern of adding a negative story about the bank guarantee to the last paragraph of every story. They could just as easily have pointed out that many funds remain frozen from well before the guarantee began.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24592617-12377,00.html
Nothing on our TV news this morning, on all 3 channels 7,9,10, re the lie of the phone leak.
Story is dead.
GP is quite right in opposing an apology. An apology without compensation is nothing.
First, a few word about our ’settlers’. (You might have missed some of the following in what passes for history in Australian schools.)
The ignoble savages who invaded a little over two centuries ago belonged to a nation with the following characteristics. They whipped people to death, more or less. They hung people for the theft of not very much. They exiled individuals for life for even less (splitting families as they did so). The age of consent was 12 – a nation of paedophiles? Misogyny was deep-seated – women with a vote? They worked half-starved children to early deaths in the coal mines, the dark satanic mills, the chimneys, the brothels and the workhouses. There were mass rapes by their armies when they stormed cities. They were out-and-out religious bigots – their constitution still prohibits a catholic as head of state. They bought and sold rotten boroughs in a so-called democracy. Not that democracy mattered at all in the continent when the ignoble savages arrived. They arrived with appropriate military forces and a military commander. The ignoble savages were by far and away the world’s biggest slave traders. The system of government was so thoroughly corrupt that 25% of the naval vote was defrauded or just plain stolen. Naturally, if they saw something elsewhere in the world that they wanted, they took it. They thieved whole nations and lands on a grand, global, scale. If the owners objected, they murdered them. Their museums and galleries are full of the plunder still. They were prepared to use rum as a currency. They ran the original drug cartel, were major international drug traffickers, and went to war (with China) when it had the gall to object to the trade. Above all, these noble savages, and their modern day apologists, excelled, and continue to excel, at hypocrisy.
These were our ’settlers’. The modern apologists of the ignoble savages would have us believe that the ’settlers’ behaved just like today’s middle class folk from Toorak and the North Shore!
While they mucked around with their governance arrangements over the two hundred years, the ignoble savages’ theft of the continent was actually quite slow-moving. The large-scale land theft and shooting part of the invasion ended when the ignoble savages murdered a large group of men and women in the Coniston Massacre of 1927. (The shooting part of the invasion by the ignoble savages might have lasted into the 1930’s in Arnhemland were it not for the intervention of Thompson.) The Occupation phase staggers on, with the need for the Northern Territory intervention, and its efficacy, being the latest examples. Over all this hovers the gloss of holier-than-thou, pseudo-Christian claptrap. It is a characteristic of the hypocrisy of apologists for the ignoble savages that they routinely blame others for the results of the theft and the thuggery. The apologists pay some people to make up the righteous-sounding words, which other people then religiously report in the media. Sophistry in the service of the ignoble savages. The apologists do an excellent line in confected outrage at what the victims do to each other. This shifts any notion of responsibility from the ignoble savages, you see. The apologists are not stupid.
The apologists for the ignoble savages have a mortal dread of the truth about the past; they distort it assiduously and with great cleverness; and, in so doing, they distort the truth about the present. Which is their point.
Disputation about an apology is just a continuation of the pious hand-wringing that has been a hallmark of the apologists, the ignoble savages themselves, the plunderers of a continent, and the receivers of stolen goods for over two centuries. Whinging about the cost of social security payments (the hypocritical gall!), is like whinging about paying a thousandth of a cent in the dollar for a continent. The apologists encourage that sort of thing. There is nothing in Australia like the hurt of those citizens who are led to believe that somebody might be getting something ‘more’ than they are for ‘nothing’. Artful dodge by the apologists.
Let’s take a step beyond the hand-wringing, the whinging and the hypocrisy. Let’s forget about the apology. Let’s forget about checking our navels to see whether we should say sorry or not – for, amongst the apologists, who really cares? They enjoy playing with the discussion, practising their righteous hypocrisy, the one consistent element of their ‘civilisation’ for two hundred years. They enjoy playing the history game. Let’s leave the ignoble savages behind. Let’s leave the remaining apologists in our midst behind. Let’s make them irrelevant. Let’s put them all where they belong – in the past, with their their precious debating points and their hypocrisy, their sophistry and their distortions.
The truth is blindingly obvious to any reasonable, decent person. Justice stares us in the face. It is time to start arranging for proper compensation. This would mean that Australians have finally made the full transition from the ignoble savages who arrived two hundred years ago, to the decent people we mostly are, and could fully be. We will finally have decided that it is we, now, who make us what we are. We have some unfinished business. Let’s just finish it.
Boerwar @ 288, are we talking about Britain in the 18th Century or Australia’s reaping of oil royalties from East Timor and the use of Nauru in the 21st Century?
Tom.
Boerwar that’s one extensive post!
I don’t agree with you that an apology without compensation is meaningless but I support the establishment of compensation funds.
It appears I was wrong. Now Alan Jones is resurrecting the story by interviewing Bolt, Bolt of all people is telling us that Rudd has leaked the story and also it’s not the first time this has happened. These people just don’t give up, they are impossible. Now he (Bolt) is saying all journalists are to blame for a cover up by not asking Rudd about the phone call.
Rudd is being accused of delusions of grandeur.
Bolt is adamant that our Kev is not to be trusted and is sooooo arrogant.
One could go on about La Stupenda’s article in this morning’s Herald. But one will list only a few highlights.
The intro starts thus:
Full marks for originality of expression there, and it just gets worse. Interest rates are tipped to fall on Melbourne Cup Day, but punters will be asking themselves:
“Many countries”? Let’s turn down the hyperbole and make that “some”. We wouldn’t want to spread doom and gloom, Michelle. And these snippets:
“Mega billions” “Mega” meaning “million”, that would make “mega billions”, awww, about a thousand trillion dollars. I knew the funds were pretty rich, but not that rich.
The whole article is a lazy, by-the-numbers, piece of trite doom-saying, par for the course for this old boiler, well past here prime. I honestly don’t know why some here regrad her pieces as good journalism. A school-kid in a Year 7 composition class could do better. This article tells us nothing new, and does that poorly.
But after spreading all this misery, Michelle tells us what she thinks is the problem:
Gloom? From Overseas? Try a little closer to home, old girl.
GP – why is it obscene on one hand for students to pay for services they might not use but OK for the taxpayer to fund an elite musical school for musicians most taxpayers wouldn’t pay to hear play?
Rock musicians don’t seem to need government handouts, so why are classical musicians different?
If classical music is worth listening to and developing, then its supporters will fund it themselves.
Old forms of art shouldn’t be propped up in the name of sentiment. We don’t fund people to paint in the Classical style for the sake of it – we recognise that art hs moved on. Music has too.
… and while I’m ranting….
If I see one more article about Sony laptop batteries catching fire, I’ll SCREAM!
Palin takes prank call from fake French president
It’s a wonder Rudd hasn’t been accused of being behind it. Still, the week is young, and Bolt el al seem to have a lot of time on their hands.
The new government plan is not CSU but it’s stupid.
Universities will be able to force students to pay $250 to run services like clubs, student papers, sports etc. but instead of that being run by the democratically elected union, it will be run by the bureaucrats in the chancellery.
Apart from the fact that most student unions are useless.
The Bush beat up is part o0f an ongoing campaign to try and tie the worst of Howard and co characteristics to Rudd.
The so-called phone call mirrors the Costello disclosure of his private conversation with Greenspan. Costello denied he had disclosed any information which prompted about a dozen journos to play the tape back of him disclosing the info he said he never had.
The petrol and grocery prices so called promises mirrors Howards litany of broken promises.
The Heiner incident tries to mirror Howards failings, his close friendship with Pell and Hollingsworth, his blanket pardon for any past wrongs and any implied cover up.
The campaign for an increase in the pension is to paint Rudd as mean spirited for denying any increase. Howard was famously portrayed as mean spirited by his own.
The butler story is to paint him as out of touch, as Howard was accused of.
Rudd as a control freak mirrors Howard as not listening to other opinions and making all decisions.
Rudd rushing into decisions without planning mirrors Howards unplanned and uncosted NT intervention and the Murray water rescue.
Next cab off the rank will be tying the infrastructure rebuilding program to Howards regional rorts.
And I expect there will be some sort of whispering campaign for a Pru parallel.
I would suggest that has more to do with them being factional playgrounds for the ALP than any problem with having democratic, student run organisations.
Oz 296
Yes that is a dumb government decision – univesity administrations are the last people you would give the student money too. Most are the last refuges of 90s style management control freaks who have mostly been booted out of private and public service organisations. In my experience most are appallingly unaccountable and often inefficient. I don’t know an Australian academic who doesn’t despair of their own adminstrators (high level – this is not a rant against those doing the support jobs). At Adelaide Uni the administrators outnumber the academic staff, yet whenever there is a funding shortage (i.e. every year) the talk is always of what lecturing positions to cut. They even sent a directive around that lecturers had to refer to adminstration as the “professional staff” not administrators or support!! (talk about insecurity).
No 293
1. A Government is inherently more accountable than a student union.
2. Teaching music is has both educational and artistic merit, thus I support it. Every dollar for education is a dollar well spent.
No 296
I hope you’re not implicitly supporting student unions supported by compulsory fees. The notion that student unions were “democratically elected” is in my view a furphy. In many cases, less than 10% of the student body ever votes in these elections and yet the union is given control of millions of dollars of student funds without a real mandate.
GP @ 302
I completely believe in compulsory fees for uni students, although I am warm to the ideea of means-testing. Uni services have become almost non-existant since VSU, something needs to be done.
Yes GP I was going to raise that earlier too. Not to mention at some unis, mine included, there is sometimes only 1 candidate for a union position (e.g. sports councillor) so there’s no democratic choice. In addition student union elections are not run in a terribly transparent way, the candidates run on issues such as improving the cafeteria food (this one getting trotted out every year with no difference to the food offered).
In the end it ends up being a popularity contest, whichever candidate has the most friends, coupled with the support of one of the branches of the main political parties (ie Liberal or Labor) is elected in a landslide with 90% of the vote.
you go to sleep secure in the knowledge that you’ve squashed all the cockroaches you needed to stop the buggers breeding.
Now Im normally not paranoid (oh ok,just alittle) but when I went to bed last night the beat up had all but died.No google top story, no move in references at all.
So imagine my surprise when I logs into google and its back,”Amid claims the leak caused offence to the Bush administration, Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull urged Mr Rudd to apologise for embarrassing Mr Bush.”
The latest tool running this is Radio Oz with this gem ”
“People are suggesting it has put at risk the alliance between Australia and the United States.”
77 references on google now
http://news.google.com.au/nwshp?rls=ig&hl=en&tab=wn&ncl=1265559156&topic=n&scoring=d
(back to vigilence mode)
I don’t particularly understand how the Liberal Party can call for an inquiry into the leak and then come to their own conclusion that it was Rudd who caused it.
Labor staff burn out
by Glenn Milne
“Senior Labor figures are concerned about the level of burnout among staff and its impact on policy making. And about the fact that, with a complete lack of work-life balance, Mr Rudd is increasingly reliant on young and childless advisers”
1) Someone please tell Mr Milne that starting a sentence with ‘and’ is something he should avoid.
2) What relevance is it that the Government is ‘reliant on… childless advisers’? Does Mr Milne come from the Heffernan school of ‘bucket[s] of nappies’?
ltep @ 306
Because they’re desperate to sling mud at Rudd and hope something sticks. It’s been the story of the Liberals since December 2006.
We aren’t comparing Government and union, we’re comparing university administration, who are not students, who are not really accountable to students to student unions.
And? It’s not like the unions themselves go about and tell people not to vote. Itep, I don’t think there’s much choice in many elections either. But there’s nothing stopping you from you running.That’s democracy. Contrary to what you and GP are trying to say, something is not “undemocratic” because you don’t like the candidates, nor the result.
GP’s probably just bitter that the Young Libs haven’t contested a few elections. Who knows, maybe they would have one? In fact, in some recent cases they’ve one elections on a platform of neutering the union. I don’t agree with that policy, but I respect the students decision to vote over the decision of the university administration.
No 303
The fact that many services have disappeared is a clear indication that the majority of students gain no value from them. But even putting that aside, services like childcare, dental care and legal advice are already funded by the State and Federal Governments, which makes the compulsory impost on income-poor students doubly unfair.
The furphy about “more expensive food” since VSU is ridiculous. In most cases, union food outlets were of lower quality than their privatised equivalents, and the discounts afforded to union members amounted to a few cents at best.
So Milne’s new response to two years of consistent polling is “I talked to some bureaucrats who are tired. The polls are wrong”
Oz, the ‘you can run if you choose to’ argument is silly. I could choose to run in a student election if I wanted but I don’t have the money to be successful nor the political backing that winning candidates have. There’s a certain futility in student elections when the same party wins every year with 90+% of the vote.
Going by your argument Sinapore is an excellent democracy. It doesn’t matter that noone ever wins any seats other than the PAP, as long as people have the option to vote for someone else or run themselves everything’s fine!
Milne also fails to point out it is quite common for high staff turnover in the first year of government. Many of the staff in the first 6+ month will be transitional.
No 309
I was responding to dawson’s comments re: Garrett’s murder of the Music Academy. But even so, student unions have often compared themselves, absurdly, to local governments. The fact is that they were not really accountable to students because they were never elected with any meaningful mandate; and their funds were always guaranteed via coercion. Even if you fulfilled all the academic requirements of your degree, you could be denied graduation if your union fees were not paid. It was complete nonsense.
Not at all. If find student politics to be a nonsense because it is inconsequential. Most university students agree – evidenced by the drastic falls in membership.
No 314
Should be “I find student politics…”
According to documents recently released Malcolm Fraser is the former Prime Minister to have spent the most in the past year ($508,882). John Howard also spent big in the months from 24 November 2007 to 30 June 2008 ($257,864) with Paul Keating spending the least over the year at ($349,887).
No 316
Ex Prime Ministers should have all pension & perks capped at $120,000.
Yes I should mention that those totals don’t include pensions, which for the most recent former PM is at $330,000 a year. To borrow from the phrasebook of another, that is just obscene.
More from The Australian re: the return of CSU;
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24593032-601,00.html
You do understand that logic applies the majority of democracies around the world who don’t have compulsory voting?
I’m not sure how you can read that article and still call it “The return of CSU”.
At least we know where your arguments are coming from:
No 318
I agree. It is an inappropriate impost on the public purse. But even if I accepted that their pension should be that high, they should not also have access to such generous perks which puts their post-PM packages north of $500,000 – which is clearly ridiculous.
No 320
Most democracies around the world have voter turnout of more than a single digit percentage.
The fund management sector is calling on the government to help them:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/03/2408374.htm?section=justin
Just because none of them want to be subjected to the rules and scrutiny banks must comply with, doesn’t stop them wanting a bail out if they are in trouble. Too bad.
One thing people should realise is that if one of the consequences of the current crisis is a shake-up of the finance sector with some funds being squeezed out, that is NOT necessarily a bad thing. Ther ehas been a proliferation of “investment vehicles” in recent years, some explicitely designed to avoid normal reporting rules. As long as banks can supply capital to the economy the operation of other funds that do not report and manage risk in the same way is NOT essential.
I recall one student union ‘referendum’ on the ending of mandatory detention for refugees being held when I was an undergrad that had a massive voter turnout of 6% GP.
No 321
Mr Hodkinson is an acquaintance of mine. And his arguments are accurate.
The problem with Angus McFarland and the NUS is that they cannot establish that students actually want these services because when faced with the prospect of marketing union membership to the student body, few actually sign up. If students desire union services, they will pay union membership fees.
No 325
Massive turnout….:D
I cannot believe Oz has the audacity to liken real democracies with that of student union “elections”. The difference could not be more stark.
GP I must admit I agree with you on VSU and the services generally. Many of them just provide employment to the service provider staff, and assist a very small minority of people. Those that are really needed, like women’s health issues, arguably should be provided by the relevant state health departments anyway, in which case making the students pay for them just amounts to an additional unfair tax.
You can’t cherry pick examples. Either you want compulsory voting, or you accept that voluntary voting is legitimate. You don’t get to make up a threshold.
The Youngs Libs hate student unions because they very rarely win, that’s pretty much it. The petty Labor politics played in student politics is rather pathetic, but I’m not one to call for the abolishment of a democratic institution that represents students rights simply because my team doesn’t get in most of the time.
Anyway, this is all moot. Mandatory student unionism is not making any kind of return. The services that the Government wants to see provided are completely legitimate and all students deserve them.
GP further on VSU, apart from the many cases of questionable election practices, often including people failing to disclose affiliations with political parties, there is the history of financial mismanagement too. I am aware of several cases where large amounts of money have been unaccounted for, or some where union assets were allegedly transferred to officials or groups they supported.
Again, confusion is arising between student unions and those who are elected to run them. Do I disagree with them? Most of the time. Are the incompetent? Often. Do I disagree with democratic student advocacy organisations? No.
Further to my 330, here is just one example of the sort of questionable financial practices associated with student unions in the past. This one was Melbourne, 2003:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/07/25/1059084206414.html
No 328
Completely agree. That’s what the Liberal party and ALSF have argued. Many services provided by unions are already provided or should be provided by governments.
I will admit that I am completely in favour of compulsory voting. But having said that, even where voting is voluntary internationally, there is a far larger turn out than any example in a student election. You cannot legitimately argue that an elected body is even remotely representative if more than 90% of the electorate does not vote. That should be plainly obvious whether you support voluntary voting or not. But putting that to one side, student unions have been using the “democratically elected” card to disguise their rampant misuse and mismanagement of millions of dollars of guaranteed student funding.
That’s not it at all. The Young Liberals have a rich history of union leadership going back for decades. Whilst we have had less success in recent years, voluntary student unionism has been apart of our platform for decades as part of our support for freedom of association.
Oz
I don’t see how your arguments support each other. Philosphically I support the idea of student unions too. Examples of incompetence and even corruption do not justify eliminating the concept. I also have no problem with making the voting compulsory.
However I don’t agree with the idea that they should be able to compulsorily levy fees on the students. Student unions are not governments. They are not scrutinised and held accountable in the way governments are. The question of provision of the services and representing stuents views politically are quite separate IMO. If the students wanted the services, as GP said, they would pay for them. Most would rather just buy a new iPOD instead.
No 332
Very good example. There are multitudes more of them in the ALSF submission on VSU:
http://www.alsf.org.au/images/alsf_vsu_submission.pdf
No 334
100% agree. I should also say that I am not opposed to student unions.
At least there will be the option to delay payment, such as you can do with HECS. The thought of having to scratch together an additional $250 a year on top of books and travel costs wouldn’t be great for most students.
And your response to a lack of representation of students is to castrate the representative organisation entirely.
I am not a student union and I do not condone the misuse of funds. Not that I accept that every union engages in the “rampant misuse of funds”. There are plenty of good services out there provided by student unions. However, I do not see any issue whatsoever with having an advocacy organisation. Even though the Libs hated Whitlam and accused him of corruption etc. their response wasn’t to abolish Government, was it.
The problem is that they’re not particularly good advocates and those who do not believe they are shouldn’t be forced to contribute to their running if they choose not to.
I’m a strong believer overall in unions and their worth but having witnessed the wastefulness of student unions I wouldn’t contribute a cent to them as should be my choice. I’ll wait to see the detail overall, but I don’t really see why governments can’t contribute to the running of student services as required without needing to slap this additional fee on students.
Of course your argument could be applied to any “levy” or “tax”.
Here is where I stand.
1. There should be on campus services available to all students, even though they may not think they need them, or even if they may not use them at all.
2. Those services should be run by students, not by university bureaucrats.
It’s absolutely hypocritical of people to say “Oh a $250 fee is going to hit students hard”, whilst they supported the continued increase in student fees and the introduction of full-fee paying places. What hits students harder than any $250 levy are the thousands of dollars paid in fees. If we’re talking about “Poor students struggling” why not looking to making tertiary education free again? Or increasing subsidies? Yeah, I thought not.
Oz
The problem with your argument is that you still haven’t linked the compulsory student fees with the advocacy for student concerns. Advocacy is the legitimate role of any union. Fees for services is a different arguement, even though that is where over 90% of the student union money always went. There has been no diminution of the calls by student unions for student needs to be addressed since VSU came in. The services have dropped away, but thats beside the point.
In fact, most of the services readily used by stidents on campus these days are private businesses. All of the big student unions I am familair with simply leased out rights to run shops, cafeteria, gyms etc to private busineses who run them on commercial lines. Many have separate sporting associations that provide those services.
My position is that student unions should be running both. Sports, clubs, volunteering programs, student papers, campus events etc. should be run by students, not the university administration.
No 338
They’ve been castrated because students do not seek or desire their services. It’s as simple as that – if students want representation and services, they will be happy to pay union fees. The fact that an overwhelming majority of students refuse to pay fees, demonstrates quite clearly that either student organisations are not providing a valuable service worth paying for; or, they are no longer relevant. I am inclined to believe it is the former, and as such, unions have to work (geez, imagine that) to ensure that union membership is valuable in order to attract new members.
Neither do I. What I do oppose is compulsory membership of that organisation. It’s like a labour union in the real world: if workers desire advocacy and representation, they will pay their union fees. Why should student unions be any different?
Oz, the Howard Government did not abolish student unions. It abolished compulsory membership and compulsory levies.
Oz 340
That is again a non-sequiter – you are linking the non-payment of the fee (for services) with the lack of advocacy for the students on issues like tuition fees.
Are you saying that a student union needs a budget of $10 million+ per annum to mount campaigns against fees? I find that hard to believe – you could employ a lot of big law firms for that.
As for your first point,
“1. There should be on campus services available to all students, even though they may not think they need them, or even if they may not use them at all.”
I agree there should be services available on campus. But why should the students be forced to pay for them? And why should the union get to decide what services it will provide. There is no constitution at work here to dictate what areas of service are legitimate. Given the number of people on campuses, the State should provide them. Indeed, that need is true of the average shopping centre.
This argument doesn’t make sense. Some of the larger universities stepped in to fill the gap when VSU was introduced. They gave unions a few million dollars to continue running certain services because they, sensibly, believed that services for students should be run by students. So those services still existed, albeit, in a slightly minimised form, and were still being for by students.
You like connecting the dots between “Students didn’t pay union fees, so they don’t want services!”. Well that’s obviously not the case since in many universities things like sports, clubs, publications, legal services, child-care services, concerts and parties still exist and are still utilised by a large number of students. The difference being that instead of paying money directly to the union and letting students run them, their paying the university either through increased fees or a reduction in other services.
No 340
Oz, you criticised me for comparing unions to governments, yet you are now using a similar argument to support compulsory fees; i.e. they are like a “tax” (which are invariably levied by accountable governments).
As Socrates and I have stated, student unions are not governments. Governments are much more accountable.
Why? That promotes inefficiency and waste.
Oz
Why are you so insistent on linking the services to student unions? Are you/were you a student union official or employee? I am anything but a liberal party hack or lawyer, but if even GP and I can agree on this, then I think you need to consider that your position is far from mainstream. So why does it matter so much to you? I don’t detect a rational reason for your position in the strengtht of your arguments.
Also, you still haven’t given any in principle reason why the union should provide student services. They are not the department of social security, and are probably not professionally qualified to make such dexcisions anyway.
Oz
One final thing – you referred to not picking unfair examples, but I think the examples are typical. My views on student unions are based on experience on three campuses in various capacities over three decades. I have yet to experience a student union that was efficient, and none spent their money in a way that benefited the majority of students. Most were run by a small circle of self-serving activists that were not representative of students, and rarely talked to them except at election time.
Please point out where I said that the only role I believe student unions have is advocacy? I believe I said several times that they have a number of other roles.
Why should I be forced to pay for the legal system, when I’ve never used it in my life? I am of the opinion that things like those I have mentioned, clubs, societies, sports, student papers etc. should exist for all students.
Now either you accept that they should exist, and that all students should have equitable access to them, or you don’t. If you do then have to decide whether the university runs them (which means students pay) or the union runs them (which means students pay).
You can talk all you like about how government and unions are different, and they are. But the arguments in favour of taxation at government level to provide services can also be applied to campus level. Especially when you consider that services aren’t going to magically disappear, because students actually want them, contrary to what GP keeps saying. The only difference being that the university will run them and not unions.
No 345
I don’t have a large problem with students running student services. That is not my argument. My argument is that student organisations should not have compulsory membership or compulsory levies.
I’m connecting the dots, so to speak, because it’s a logical conclusion. If they don’t want to pay for union services, they don’t want those services.
I think this proves that GP is in fact Sophie Mirabopoulos.
I’ve actually said it 5000 times, you’re failure to recognise that is a problem on your behalf, not mine.
You keep pretending that the options are somehow “No services” or “union run services”.
The choice is “University administration run services” or “Union run services”. I would much rather that students run programs for themselves than the university administration.
No. If you read what I posted earlier, you would have seen that I criticised unions for being factional playgrounds of Labor.
I relish not being in a “mainstream” position, considering what the “mainstream” is.
If you read the second half of my post you’d realise that students are paying for those services, only to have the university run them in a lot of cases.
Services on campus have not disappeared. They still exist because universities recognise that students want them. Why else would they pay millions of dollars of year to run them?
Why in these difficult financial times when students already are under financial pressure should be made to give 250 dollars up for nothing i repeat NOTHING!
This is just stupid! Typical ALP raising taxes…Students should refuse to pay it on mass. Do you honestly think students would rather 250 bucks in their pocket or to have to give it to the University!
There you go again comparing student unions to governments. STUDENT UNIONS ARE NOT GOVERNMENTS.
This argument is ridiculous. I accept that student services should exist, but only where students indicate a demand for them. The clearest indicator is payment of union membership fees. Since most students do not pay fees, they do not desire those services.
No, the same arguments do not apply because governments hare held accountable for their decisions. There are mechanisms in place to ensure that funds are not misused or embezzled. There are much more stringent accountability measures. They are completely different to a student union.
Thus, it is disingenuous to proclaim that it is appropriate to compel the whole student body to subsidise the social lives and activist intentions of a small proportion of students.
Anytime you don’t use government funded legal advice it’s “inefficient and wasteful” yes? “Accountability” doesn’t apply here, it’s the principle.
Better question – Do you think students would rather have $10K in their pockets and have to give $50 to unions, or do you think they’d rather be $10K and $250 out of pocket for a worse result.
How can Student Unions be Governments when less than 20% of Students vote in elections…they are hardly democratic or fairly representative of all Students hence they have no legitimacy to call themselves governments and justify ‘raising taxes’ it is a weak argument!
No 353
Then that is their choice if they want the university administration to run those services.
That is your problem: you refuse to accept the notion that students should have a choice.
No, you’re wrong and you won’t admit. The clearest indicator is how much the university pays to run services. For example, UNSW and USYD gave almost $10 million to student run services. Because they recognised that students want them, and it’s a positive for the university.
I never said they were governments, though GP likes to pretend that I did. I merely use the same principle of everyone chipping in to provide services for… everyone, whether they think they need on January 1st or not.
Explain when students got a choice?
No 356
Yes, accountability does apply. There are many levels of accountability which apply to governments; none of which apply to student unions – with the exception of a perfunctory annual election. You cannot compare student unions to governments.
The University charges students thousands to write essays and get a diploma i dont think they are struggling for cash they already get enough out of students!
It is there job to run some services that is the responsibility of the Institution and they get enough money from enrolment fees to cover this and if they arent they arent running their affairs well enough.
Many students dont want services they want to go to University and learn, go home and work. They dont want to spend their lives at Uni.
Good thing I never have.
Now where talking about a different issue, philosophically, where you on the right disagree with the idea of being taxed to provide for services that you won’t ever use. If you believe the opposite, then there’s no reason why that can’t be applied to any other level of society – including on campus.
I am not wrong. You believe in compulsory levies and compulsory membership of student unions. I do not and neither do most students.
Then they don’t have. I don’t have kids and don’t want subsidised child-care, so it shouldn’t exist. Right? And no, do not even think about “accountability” because your issue with the notion of provision of equitable services through a “levy” or “tax” (which is already occuring) is ideological. If the Liberals issue with student unions was a “lack of accountability” how do they propose to make them “more accountable”? And how exactly is the university administration “accountable” to students?
Glen 362
“The University charges students thousands to write essays and get a diploma i dont think they are struggling for cash they already get enough out of students!”
Well to be fair that one I disagree with – many university administrations here are desperate for cash, with the current funding formula plainly inadequate compared to many OECD nations. Try running courses like medicine or engineering on current payments per student. I agree with you on VSU, but not uni funding.
Oz, just so we have an idea… what services do you think are essential in regard to universities?
Except that they already are being forced to pay for those services and so you have no way of testing whether or not they actually want them.
I’ve said about 35 times what services I think should be provided for students.
They are regulated Oz. Unions never are.
Not necessarily. I don’t use the public health system, but I support it, for example. I don’t believe in zero government. That would be pointless.
My philosophical objection comes from the desire for those on the left to compel people to pay compulsory fees to unions; or compulsory fees to universities which then distribute them to student unions. Unions are not accountable. Governments are. That is the primary and most important difference which is why your attempts to coalesce ideological principles about how governments should run with how unions should run, falls flat on its face.
No 369
Yeah, two of them were legal advice and chilcare facilities – already subsidised by the state and federal governments. Why should students be compulsorily subsidising the duplication of services?
Oz are you referring to clubs, student papers and sports?
I don’t see how any of those are essential or how they can’t be supported by students who want to take part in them? The student papers are the most dubious of those examples and could be solved by just releasing electronic papers at law cost (e.g. voluntary writing, no paid positions in the staff and running of advertisements where necessary).
Are there other services you’re referring to?
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
In fact, I would argue that the student unions are more accountable in the provision of services that the university administration. Let’s take a look at child-care. Union run child care services have a board which consists of members of the elected student union, management, consumers, and the university administration. What exactly is ‘lacking’ in accountability? Again, the same argument for student clubs and volunteering programs. Run by elected students with university oversight as well as constituent oversight through member clubs.
I can only hope Mr X and Steve Fielding support the Opposition!
elected by 20% of students hardly democratic!
There is no “duplication” of university run child-care centres catering specifically for students.
No 374
Oz, you still haven’t answered my question. Why do students need to subsidise a service already subsidised by the federal government?
So removing all student representation makes it more “accountable”? Doesn’t make sense.
I have to go to lunch, good discussion. Have a good day.
No 376
Often far, far less than 20% Glen. I participated in UNSW elections, wherein a student populace of 40,000 exists, but only 1100 voted. 2.75% is hardly a commanding mandate, is it?
No 379
Who said that we wanted to remove all student representation? Those are your words, not mine.
See above.
Why should education unions subsidise their own legal advice services… why should police unions… why should nurses unions…
They apply specifically to students, and if you had any experience with what they do (I do, specifically in child care centres) you would understand that there are stark differences in the goals of the organisation and the service provision as compared to your ABC learning.
Glen, Joyce supports the ALP on this matter so if he gets the Nationals in the Senate to vote with him (as you would presume the leader would do) then Fielding and Xenophon’s vote will be irrelevant.
University run services, which are the actual alternative not “no services” would have no student representation.
I actually have to go now, lol.
No 382
One key difference Oz: Teacher unions, nurse unions, police unions all have voluntary membership.
Oz, should membership of unions in general be compulsory?
He wont though lol!
No 384
Just because universities run some services does not mean student representation has been abolished. Your argument is nonsense and disingenuous.
I’m not sure I particlarly understand why the decision was made and announced by Kate Ellis either.
LTEP
I suspect Ellis is Mininster for attracting positive media coverage.
Minister for umming and ahring, Socrates.
ABC midday news, student rep complaining about the fees being controlled by the Uni and that there is no return to compulsory union membership.
No student union controlling the money, no compulsory union.
So, what exactly are the reds under the bed brigade complaining about?
The compulsory levying of fees from students for dubious ‘essential services’.
This is soooo booooring.
Oh is that all. I got the impression from the first 3 posts on the topic that there was some other concern.
[quote]Generic Person
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 at 1:14 am
Kate Ellis reinstates compulsory communism at universities:
Mary Hannah Wade
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 at 2:20 am
For one i agree with my collegue across the aisle – this will just restore the ‘good old days’ of student unions being able to run far left wing campagins supporting Hamas and the PLO (among others) and day trips to dention centres
ltep
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 at 5:23 am
GP I agree with you on VSU/CSU. /… [/quote]
No 393
If the services are absolutely essential, either the university will assume funding responsibility or students will willingly and voluntarily pay for them.
PAAPTSEF we don’t know exactly how the scheme will work yet. It depends on the details whether it is essentially a return to CSU under a different name. For instance, does ‘control by the university’ allow the universities to decide to give all the money to the student union and allow them to decide how its used?
It’s not a surprise really that criticism of government policy will get you named ‘reds under the beds brigade’.
The last couple of hundred posts have been pretty dull, but I can’t let GP’s outburst at 314 go unreported:
I know you’re highly strung, but is something this hysterically shrill really necessary? It’s hilarious, though.
By the way: the only thing I was wondering about The Great VSU Debate is… why did Kate Ellis make this announcement? She’s youth minister. I thought the education minister would’ve made it… now that I think of it, I don’t know who that is.
“It’s not a surprise really that criticism of government policy will get you named ‘reds under the beds brigade’.”
Only if that criticism moves miles away from the policy to “compulsury communism”
Well GP is well known for being provocative.
Bird of Paradox, the Education Minister is none other than Julia Gillard.
No 398
Of course it is necessary.
New thread.