Some tidbits to tide you over through the middle of an agonising week-long federal poll drought.
• Chris Back, who narrowly failed to unseat independent Alfred Cove MP Janet Woollard at the September 6 state election, has been nicely compensated with the Western Australian Senate vacancy created by the retirement of Chris Ellison. It was initially expected that the position would go to Deidre Willmott, who stood aside as candidate for Cottesloe so Colin Barnett could cancel his retirement plans and lead his previously demoralised party to victory. However, Willmott withdrew from the race a few weeks ago when it became apparent she wouldn’t win, thereby continuing the state party’s sorry recent record on female representation. The West Australian reports that Back won the preselection vote “on preferences from party treasurer Dean Smith and the pre-contest favourite, senior vice-president Anthony Jarvis”. It also informs us that Back was “the veterinarian who controversially did not swab champion racehorse Rocket Racer after he won the 1987 Perth Cup by 10 lengths”. Back has more recently been “group managing executive of oil and gas company Equinox Energy”, but it’s “his role in the Rocket Racer affair which attracts the most attention”. Curious then that the paper didn’t say a single word about it prior to the state election.
• In case you missed it, George Megalogenis’s analysis of the grey vote in The Australian last week was essential reading like only Megalogenis number crunching can be.
• Courtesy of Possum comes a detailed breakdown of figures from Monday’s federal ACNielsen poll. Possum also weighs in on under-publicised Nielsen online polling.
• The recent Newspoll on issue perceptions inspired me to knock together the following chart based on its surveys going back to 1989. The chart averages the results for each year, in which time Newspoll usually publishes about three such surveys. Some issues are featured more frequently than others: immigration for instance is usually included once a year, so the spike to Labor in 2005 might not be all that meaningful. Note that “economy” wasn’t featured as a distinct category between 1991 and 2004.
223 Comments
Georgiou is retiring. From the Age: ‘His stand on asylum seekers infamously prompted Victorian Liberal MP Sophie Mirabella to call him a “political terrorist”. It did not bother him in the least. As he told one confidant, barbs only hurt if you have respect for the person delivering them.’
Then there were three.
Scathing review of the NSW Libs in the SMH today. My experience with the SMH during the Federal Election is that they were biased towards JH so surprised to see this.
classic from Annabel Crabb this morning
….
Shaun Carney is at it again, gorging from the cliche bucket.
His wrap-up of the first year of the Rudd government is hinted at early in the piece:
Rudd is not an orator. The Caucus is angling for a fight. He’s not a true Party Man. His ministers are haughty. Rudd himself is smug. Only ever had to beat Beazley. He’s a technocrat. Obsessed with detail and process. And, amazingly, he’ll never be loved by the public.
Sure, the polls are sky high, and have been for two years but…
So take heart Libs: the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
Sheesh.
Amazing how, after such a year, Rudd still has a better opinion poll rating than when elected!
I guess Labor’s opponents will keep referring to it as a honeymoon period because they don’t want to admit it might be true love, or that terrible “r” word (not recession, the other one) – respect.
I think Rudd has had a hard working, honest first year where he has delivered as many of his promises as he responsibly could, without backing away from those he has put off. those who can recall how insipid Howard was prior to Port Arthur will appreciate the comparison. I’d give Rudd and most of his colleagues an A, Tanner an A+, Garrett a B, Conroy a D. Nelson was an F, Turnbull is improved btu still yet to harm Rudd’s rating, so he gets a C.
Noting Georgiou’s retirement, it will be interesting to see who replaces him. If its another from the Andrew Robb school of neo-con head kickers then it will shift the Liberals even further to the right, as if thats possible. There must be a lot of unemployed stockbrokers out there now looking for a secure job in a safe seat…
From Annabel Crabbe’s column:
Amen to that.
Yes, the DT has featured the same ridiculous poll, with the headline “On first anniversary of Labor Government, voters say Kevin Rudd all talk, no action”, then in a linked article they list the Rudd election promises and their current status. Surprise, surprise, more than three-quarters of them have been delivered. The media have their ‘idea’ of the government’s performance, and then there is reality.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24688944-2,00.html
Am I the only one who is going to notice that the “employement” category is the only issue where the ALP has gone backwards?
For the information of members and their guests.
Some polling analysis since Malcolm Turnbull came to the leadership and the Global Financial Crisis (GFC).
(see detailed tables below)
The A C Nielsen and Newspoll weighted average of polling shows that after an initial burst of interest in Turnbull in Sept, shifting the primary votes to 41.5 ALP and 40.2 L/NP resulting in a 53.4/46.6 projected two party vote, the subsequent two months have placed the L/NP in a worse position than when Nelson was still leader.
Primary votes are now 44.6 ALP 38.6 L/NP, and a projected TPP of 55.5/44.5. That’s significant shift of primary votes back to the ALP with the L/NP holding only a fraction of the primary votes that Turnbull first brought with him in September.
There’s little doubt that this shift is all about Rudd and Turnbull and their respective responses to the GFC. If we look at Rudd’s approval figures he’s directly shifted from a 56/34 (approval/disapproval) in September to a 68/22 (approval/disapproval) in November, with the undecided’s constantly at 10.
Turnbull’s approval/disapproval ratings have stayed about the same 53/28 in October to 52/31 in November, although his disapproval has increased from 28 to 31, and the undecided’s maybe trending down, having shifted from 19 to 17, meaning people are making up their minds about Turnbull and it’s not positive.
The preferred PM ratings show Rudd moving from a 55/29 lead over Turnbull with 16 undecided in September, to a 64/25 lead with 11 undecided in November. That 11% undecided is the key figure. It’s just about the same as the 10% who have consistently been undecided about Rudd’s approval, it means people are having a good look at both Rudd and Turnbull, and they like much more what they see about Rudd and much less what they see about Turnbull, and are less uncertain about their opinions.
Couple this with Galaxy’s questions this week about Rudd and Turnbull, and again it shows that Rudd is being marked well with 45% saying he’s doing a good job, with only 11% saying the same for Turnbull.
These shifts in voting intentions and leader approvals and ratings, started with the shock of the GFC, but the continued move towards Rudd and the ALP, and away from Turnbull and the L/NP, is all to do with the way the two leaders have responded to the GFC. Whilst there are some who are always impressed by Turnbull’s “Rumpole of the Bailey” performances in parliament, the public does not have as high a regard for him.
In short, the public have been impressed with Rudd, and disappointed with Turnbull.
This is clearly reflected in the independent measures of the pollsters.
Polling weighted average of Newspoll and AC Nielsen.
May ALP 46.3 L/NP 37.5 Projected TPP 57/43
June ALP 44.5 L/NP 37.1 Projected TPP 56.5/43.5
July ALP 43.9 L/NP 38.9 Projected TPP 54.9/45.1
Aug ALP 44.1 L/NP 38.4 Projected TPP 56.1/43.9
Sept ALP 41.5 L/NP 40.2 Projected TPP 53.4/46.6 – Turnbull started
Oct ALP 44.4 L/NP 38.8 Projected TPP 55.3/44.7
Nov ALP 44.6 L/NP 38.6 Projected TPP 55.5/44.5
Approval Rudd, (Nielsen and Newspoll weighted average)
Month Approval Disapproval Undecided
May 66 23 11
June 62 28 10
July 62 28 10
Aug 58 31 11
Sept 56 34 10 – Turnbull started
Oct 66 24 10
Nov 68 22 10
Approval Turnbull (Nielsen and Newspoll weighted average)
Month Approval Disapproval Undecided
Oct 53 28 19
Nov 52 31 17
(Oct and Nov only as Newspoll didn’t ask that question when Turnbull first came in, in Sept)
Preferred PM (Nielsen and Newspoll weighted average)
Month Rudd Nelson Undecided
May 70 15 15
June 67 17 16
July 65 17 18
Aug 65 17 18
Month Rudd Turnbull Undecided
Sept 55 29 16
Oct 61 26 13
Nov 64 25 11
Galaxy ratings Rudd/ALP and Turnbull/LNP
Leader Good job Average job Poor job
Rudd 45 42 12
Turnbull 11 55 30
Possum and Andrew Bolt having an armwrestle here.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2008/11/22/of-race-and-crime-and-andrew-bolt/
Considering the critism many ALP supporters have regarding the Australian, I though todays over view of PM Rudds first year was extremely positive!
I for one am not sad to see Petro go! he is the laziest MP I have ever seen!
” he is the laziest MP I have ever seen!”
Beemer, I thought that role was reserved for Tip Costello.
Good to see Kev is still pushing climate change at Apec despite other leaders concentrating only on the financial crisis.
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/L/LT_APEC_SUMMIT?SITE=NDBIS&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2008-11-21-21-05-57
“gold no longer plays a significant role in the international financial system”
?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,24687337-643,00.html
Steve! the irony with your comment is I have seen Peter Costello around Kooyong more than Petro! who I have never sighted!
I am disappointed that Petro only suffered a 0.5% swing against him when it should have been 5.0%
Yeah then Shanahan had to ruin it.
[“gold no longer plays a significant role in the international financial system”
?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,24687337-643,00.html
There were some rumours floating around that someone was going to raise the idea of pegging currencies back to gold.
As I should have noticed immediately, this was a data entry error – I was using the Coalition’s figures rather than Labor’s. Now corrected.
Interesting article, but I have to say Bolt has got Crikey nailed for making a disgusting joke about Palin’s son with Down Syndrome.
It’s one of the unfortunate things about William locating to Crikey is that my coming on this site is no doubt contributing to the hit count of a newsblog that thinks comparing kids with DS to mongrel dogs is funny.
A poster here on one of the US election blogs a few weeks back made the same joke and I responded in pretty strong terms, if for no other reason than my daughter has DS. I like to think I would have responded in the same wayregardless, but… well obviously the personal aspects always makes one more aware of such things. But comments like that are rare on Pollbludger, and William is very good about slapping such posters down, and banning the truly bad. His blogs are civilised and, a few stupid nicknames aside, fun places to comment on.
But I have to say after reading the Crikey article on “the contest to name Obama’s dog”, I don’t really feel like contributing anymore to the hit count of anything connected to Crikey.
I’ll probably come back, but I’ll think perhaps I’ll give this all a miss till next year – my small protest – call it a month boycott – given I don’t subscribe, I can’t exactly demand a refund. But it’s sad because I pretty much live on this blog (which is probably sad in itself!)
Merry Christmas all, safe travels for those going on holidays, see you in the new year.
Petro Georgiou is notoriously lazy, both in parliament and in the House. The reason he is retiring is that he would undoubtedly be rolled if he sought endorsement again. I assume Josh Freidenberg is still interested in the seat. If he were to win he would be the first non-Labor Jew in the House of Reps since 1906, when Isaac Isaacs went to the High Court. (Since then there have been Falstein, Einfeld, Cass, Cohen, Klugman, Berinson, Danby and Dreyfus, all Labor). It would also see three Jews holding Melbourne seats, which I’m sure would be a record.
That should read “both in parliament and in Kooyong”.
Grog,
Hope you haven’t gone yet. I too was offended at the Crickey article you mentioned. I was disappointed in the article, and even more disappointed in the lack of response from Crikey subscribers in the comments.
I have cancelled my squatter’s email, and sent an email to boss@crickey voicing my objections. I am really glad I didn’t get a paid subscription.
I too have a DS daughter, and it really rankles that even in supposedly enlightened online communities we still have to fight these battles.
I hadn’t seen the offending article till Grog’s post raised it but I have to agree that the joke about Palin’s son was not acceptable. Its bad enough to target political family members who are not involved in politics in the first place, but picking on personal characteristics as well, whether positive or negative, is just mean. That sort of remark is exactly why some good people hesitate to be involved in politics and we are left with the choices we have. I would happily lead the charge on making any jokes about Palin herself, but must agree – lets leave the families out of it please.
I agree with all of the above comments about the Crikey article. As the father of a child with multiple disabilities, it is extremely offensive and says a lot about the people who wrote it and their standards of conduct. We are all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars. Others of us just turn face down and inhale the filth to regurgitate later.
polyquats I’m still here – (seriously, I clicked on “pollbludger” in my favourites by accident – it’s a freaking reflex!)
Yeah, the article just hit me in the gut (probably more so because I only found out about it through a Bolt blog!)
I’ve also sent an email to “boss@crikey”.
Haven’t read the offending article yet, perhaps thats a good thing. In general I find Crikey to be a good place, so I’m left wondering what has happened too upset so many people, people who’s opinions I have come to respect over a long time.
Oie! – Crikey! – without reading it, I’m going to assume you’ve (SNIP: See Article 2 of Comment Moderation Guidelines – The Management) up accidentally and obviously, you need to fix that
Might want to have a look at that and apologise/retract/grovel or whatever as you’ve pissed off the people above. It seems out of character for your publication and a (SNIP: See Article 2 of Comment Moderation Guidelines – The Management) of highest order
Mr Green (or whoever’s lap this falls in, get over here(and there) and fix it
Getting on with the usual business ’round here, is it just me or has The Australian been a bit more balanced lately?… There are of coarse the usual attacks rants etc.(all papers do that) But I note a change in the overall reporting in the last few weeks.
re: “the snip” sorry William, must admit I hadn’t read that bit and fair enough. don’t you think it might be better to just blank that word rather then delete the whole paragraph? (just this once. pretty please)
I honestly didn’t know
The offending article to which Grog and Diogenes referred:
http://www.crikey.com.au/US-Election/20081121-Crikey-names-Obamas-puppy-.html
It is a shameful piece of journalism.
Very well, SB, though it reads a little oddly now.
On another note: good riddance to Petro Geogiou.
Thanks Mr B. wont happen again
1) He is retiring at the NEXT election
2) The Liberal Party will never be in government ever again if it ignores its liberal wing.
“On another note: good riddance to Petro Geogiou.”
And that’s the type of attitude that will keep your party banished to opposition for another 13 years.
In today’s print edition of the Canberra Times, from the editors (assumption, the article is not listed as being attributed to a specific author) is a listing of the first year grades for various people upon Labors front and back benches. I can’t bloody find the link to this on the Canberra Times website, so I’m only going to list the names and grades but the print edition has minimum several paragraphs each to explain their grades.
Rudd B+
Gillard A
Swan C+
Evans B-
Faulkner A
Albanese B
Bowen C+
Burke B-
Carr B
Conroy C-
Crean B
Debus C
Elliot C
Ellis C+
Emerson B+
Ferguson B-
Firzgibbon B-
Garrett C+
Griffin C
Ludwig B-
Macklin A
McClelland C
O’Connor C
Plibersek B+
Roxon B+
Sherry C+
Smith B
Snowdon C+
Tanner A-
Wong A-
A+: A star performer
A: Excellent on both policy and political fronts
A-: Stellar work
B+: Rising star
B: Above average but short of a star
B-: Showing talent
C+: Solid performance
C: Average bordering on mediocre
C-: Struggling
If no one else can turn up the URL for this story on their website, I will retain the print edition and can go back to the explanations for those who wish on a person by person basis and summarize what they said about each one. I won’t do that though unless no URL turns up and unless someone asks about a specific one.
Cheers
Rudd is a rising star?
How much further can one rise exactly? Prime Minister and President? lol.
“On another note: good riddance to Petro Geogiou.”
Indeed, one of the better Liberals discarded like an old cardigan.
GP, why are you happy PG is going? I’ve read a few ALP people who seem happy he’s off because he’s apparently lazy
Why are you happy about it? (seriously, no attack here, I’d like to know)
I wonder how they would have rated Howard’s ministers over their first year, those that were left from the beginning of their term.
bob1234@ 38,
The B+ comes mainly off of the back of 3 things in their opinion – mostly being wrong footed on petrol and pensions at various times in the last 12 months and the recent phonegate issue.
What the hell? He’s a liberal! Economically liberal, socially liberal.
He’s too liberal for the “Liberal” Party.
If you guys resent liberals being in the party, why do you call yourselves the Liberal Party? False pretenses, if you ask me.
Conroy is pretty lucky that the Canberra Times grading system only goes as low as C-. I think he’d be looking at a big F for fail using most schemes.
Which brings me to a topic Adam raised earlier. Rudd hasn’t lost a minister yet. The State governments have lost countless in the last few years (someone added them up to me yesterday and said there were more than 20 sackings in disgrace, with WA being the leader). Who will be the first Rudd Minister to get the boot? My money is on Conroy.
Dio, I don’t know enough about Conroy to say one way or the other. My main beef with this list was that I thought they was being way too harsh on Pete. I would have given him a good solid B not a C+.
ShowsOn@ 35,
Shhhhhhh!!!!! ………… Don’t tell them what they need to do to fix their problem and it won’t ever get fixed.
GP@33
A good way to live in the past – forget nothing, learn nothing.
juliem@37
Thank you. Did they do one for the Opposition as well? After all, Opposition Ministers get paid a motsa to be in the shadow ministry.
There would have to a different rating system:
A = Has developed a coherent policy, explained it well to the public, held a consistent line, and debated on issues and the evidence rather than on personalities and misinformation. Rising star.
B = Has put forward at least a single positive idea based on common sense. Shows promise.
C = Is known to more than 1% of the population but has done nothing. Still breathing.
D = Has done nothing. Not known to anyone. Still draws pay. Moribund, but not quite dead yet.
E = Has been active but negative. Is inconsistent, incoherent and full of fear and loathing. Has said things destructive about their own party and about others. Does not mind saying things detrimental to good governance of the nation. Time to access some well-earned super.
William
I take it Crikey is aware of the concerns of others on this blog? I enjoy this site. It is mostly fairly civilized, and, if it occasionally strays from acceptable norms, the errant ones are either brought to their senses, leave or get the heave-ho.
I suggest that Crikey does a post here, apologising. We all, including yrs trly, make cock-ups. Doing something about it is what sets people apart.
I’m confused. Generic P. thinks a bit of silliness about naming the Obama’s puppy is the offending article? It’s beyond me.
HSO
Check out the names suggested for Obama’s dog. That should clarify things.
Thanks, William, for the Newspoll Issues chart. What is striking is that Labor is cementing in superiority on handling all major issues since the election. Remarkable. Is there anything the LNP are considered to be better at managing? Deafening silence? Thought so.
Boerwar, those who would like to register their concern should send an email to boss-at-crikey.com.au.
HSO, look closer and you will see that one of the suggested names is “a mongrel called Trig”, a disgusting reference to Palin’s Down syndrome-afflicted baby. For what it’s worth, anyone who makes a joke like that here will get away with a severe censure if they’re lucky.
in the context of the vitriol and hatred many of the MSM have for Rudd and his government, the “reviews” of the first year of Rudd and his ministers have been very good indeed. Sure, they might have a few jibes along the way, and allude to “problems” either present or future, but I think that Rudd must be doing a very fine job indeed to get these reviews. If Glen Milne gives Rudd and 8/10, the REAL score must be 10/10!!
link
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24657135-5006016,00.html
think Gillard should be 9 not 7 though…
I did, Diogenes. I laughed, but still have no idea why Generic P. equates this with something published to do with with Sarah Palin’s little boy. Mind you, I often have difficulty with the reasoning of those of the more right wing of the LNP.
I reckon First Dog is very funny, and particularly like his take on Jasper the cat. It amused me today that a piece by Michelle Grattan, virtually quoting big slabs of Rudd simply talking in response to her questions, had the PM describing everyone pretty much adjusting to the move to Canberra and The Lodge; the dog loving the big front yard, but the cat still being in therapy.
Oh, William, I hadn’t twigged that that was the little boy’s name. I suppose I just took a cursory look and thought it’s one of those strange names Sarah Palin calls her children! How easy to not notice something which should be.
I thought Karl Barx was quite good.
email sent, William, Grog and all. Gotta say I feel like a total dill.
Mr B @ 53
Mice work mate – a class act
Maybe even “nice work” (although I am fond of mice)
It’s off topic, really, but about not noticing the things one should, I have a salutory tale from a friend of mine. Baby social worker, first placement asked to see a mother and son with severe cerebral palsy, in relation to proposed medical intervention. Ushers them into interview room and offers stupid, dribble proof baby book to the son, to entertain him while she speaks with the Mum. Asks Mum what he’s doing during the day, she says, completing second law degree at University. Friend hopes for earth to open up and swallow her.
William @ 53
Email sent. Also, I appreciate your approach.
With the dramatic swings on Wall St, I think it’s a bit presumptuous to attribute a 6.5% rise in the DJ to Geithner getting the nod at Treasury, but that’s how it’s being called. With Summers and Volcker as his main competition, does anyone know why Geithner is so popular in finance circles and what he is likely to do differently, esp how it will impact us.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7743226.stm
And remember Rudd’s trip to NY in September, the “Kevin 737″ trip. Who did Rudd meet to discuss the GFC? Geithner, I believe. What a complete waste of time for our PM to meet the man who will drive the US economy for the next four years during an economic crisis. He should have been in Canberra listening to Truffles tell him what to do.
BoerWar @ 48, No idea …. I don’t get a subscription to the CT nor do I read it every day even at the newstand. Perhaps someone who reads it more regularly than I might have some idea. Adam and ltep to my knowledge are the only other blodgers who live in Canberra. I think, though, that this comparison grading wouldn’t be as easy because with the change in leadership in August/September, they haven’t had one person in the same position for 12 months.
Re Boerwar’s criteria for judging the Opposition frontbench. The only possibility for an “A” would be Greg Hunt.
Yes, Adam, he is willing to put in the poloicy work and is bright. He has pulled back from some of his earlier silly publicity stunting behaviour. He is on the left side of the decent right. He is an inveterate networker and favour giver. Do you happen to know whether he is busying himself on the Liberal Party reform front?
Juliem. I saw that article today and thought it was pretty good, with the Rudd mark a little hard. It shows that the women in Cabinet are doing exceptionally well.
Borewater, all I know of the internal affairs of the Liberal Party is what I read here and at Landeryou.
Not that I support verbally bashing the disabled, quite the opposite, but shouldn’t we be preserving the right to say what we want as long as we are not breaking any laws?
‘I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’
So here we are on the eve of PM Rudd’s 1st birthday!!
12 months ago saw the election of the ALP in what turned out to be a convincing result not necessaries the landslide some here me included were forecasting, I finished up underestimating the ALP result by 10 seats and 3%.
Overall I have been Impressed with the Government’s performance! in particular the PM, Gillard, Tanner, Albanese and I’m slowly warming to Swan!
The only ministers that I’ve been critical off have been
Senator Conroy: He doesn’t seem able to handle the Internet and the new media, I’m not impressed with the new Internet filter and I’m still waiting for my digital T.V revolution
Nicola Roxon: In general she seems to have done an okay job in Health but I’m not impressed with her view on what is bringe drinking but if that is the worst thing she does then Nicola still receives a tick.
12 months ago many Liberal and swing voters were not convinced in Julia Gillard’s ability to be a PM, In my opinion she has been the star of this Government, I for one think that while the big test of rolling out the new I.R laws in a period of economy difficulties will be a big test but based on passed performance I believe the ALP can be confidence that Gillard can come though this period with flying colours.
I have argued that Lindsay Tanner should be Treasurer but as I wrote earlier I’m warming to Wayne Swan, not sure why considering he made a miss of the bank deposit but in all fairness he has shown a great deal of professionalism in dealing with the criticism.
I give the Government 8/10 which is the highest score that I’m willing to give any Government for no Government is perfect. while I have bagged aspects of the Government at times would I change my vote, in short NO
Now for the Liberal Party, basically they have had several opportunities to hit the Government but instead appear unable or unwilling to land the blows on the Government, we can give them a tick for the campaign on Pensions but in a year that the economy has shown serious stress you would expect the alternative Government to be scoring bigger hits.
I think part of the problem is Malcolm Turnbull while travelling better than Brendon Nelson, but Malcolm seems to be unsure how to attack the Government which in all fairness has played the issues well.
Over all there are big issues facing the Government but with the $10.4 Billion about to enter the economy with addition Interest Rate cuts I’m confidence as I was back in March this year when I predicted that the U.S was in recession that Australia can avoid a recession this in itself will make the ALP nearly unbeatable.
The other big issue is the ETS, I for one don’t believe I need a large increase in my power bills but I’m happy t see the Government invest in alternative energy as we have many natural sources.
The big problem for the ALP is NSW! that state could be very tough for the ALP next poll with already an uphill battle to hold Roberston but I would also think Maxine has a fight in Bennenlong and Kelly in Edan-Monaro there are of-course other marginals in NSW.
I heard an Interesting comment about PM Rudd in regards to his street walk in Brisbane after the storms, the person traditionally a Liberal remarked that
“Rudd seems more real than Howard for Howard would just stand their with his chin sticking out while Rudd was looking around asking questions”
Has anyone else noticed this.
The biggest load of cynical, dishonest, cheap, populist, irresponsible, hypocritical cr*p I have ever seen. They spent 11 years not raising the pension, they didn’t raise it in the 2007 budget, and then as soon as they’re in opposition, oh! the poor starving pensioners! They’re eating cat food! And it’s all cruel Mr Rudd’s fault!
I still don’t buy the argument that people will vote out Maxine because of the NSW government but overall a good summation mexicanbeemer 71.
Really? Based on anything in particular?
Kelly has a very high profile and is a very good local member. That counts for more in a country seat than it does in the suburbs. It won’t save him if there’s a really big swing in NSW, but he could buck the trend against a moderate swing.
Dario, it seems to be based on the belief that people don’t distinguish between state and federal elections.
Adam I agree with you but doesn’t that go to show just how poorly the Liberals are travelling!
Rudd & co have nullified that has an issue with the stimula package. in fact between that package and the $300 million for local government we can say that Rudd has wredged the Liberals.
The economy is now starting to play into the Governments hands and will continue to do so has long as we can remain recession free.
Gary! Bennenlong is a interesting seat for Maxine could be a oncer or that seat may be the ALP’s version of Lindsay that was unwinnable for the ALP while Jackie Kelly was the MP. the only reason why I Bennenlong being a fight is it has such a strong Liberal party history but if the ALP have won it once they can win it again.
Dario! Nothing in particular I only raised it as a talking point for its history of being a maringal but as Adam points out Kelly appears to be a strong local MP which as Adam points out is an asset in any seat but more so in a rural seat.
I would imagine the local government grants would go down well in Edan Monaro.
mexicanbeemer, the 2007 election was a landslide, and is reported so by sections of the media. Not just the 52.70 2pp, but also the 5.4% 2pp swing, which is the third largest swing (ie, the political landscape slid) since 2pp estimates began in 1949, only beaten by 1969 and 1975.
Tunrbull’s ascension to the leadership was at the most critical time for Govt and Opposition. He had the benefit of the doubt from some of the public and some goodwill/honeymoon time to use if he got things right.
Rudd performed well and Turnbull used the wrong tactics the net result being Rudd ensconced as the ‘real deal’ PM going about some tough business and, Turnbull pigeon holing himself as a traditional carping opposing for the sake of it Opposition. Turnbull went negative on everything, Rudd positive. Rudd won and the polls show it.
Sept/October/Nov activity pretty much crystallised the public’s feeling and opinion on Rudd and Turnbull.
I do believe they should have graded Rudd as ‘A’ since he had to take a party that had been out of power for 11 years and create government from scratch, putting them into action, give coherence, direction, discipline and manage the whole thing. Whilst also dealing with a press trying its hardest to undermine him and Opposition playing spoiler at every chance. That the whole thing has gone so well with no disasters or glaring idiocy from anyone is a credit to his leadership skill.
Rudd’s only problems have not been with managing the country or dealing with the business of government, they have been with the game of politics and press, something of no consequence to the lives of the public. Government or politicians if they are to be graded should be graded on their benefit to the public present and future, not on how well they play the game of politics.
Gary! I was basing my comments on election history and was looking to see what response would come from those closer to the seats I mentions.
bob1234! yes it was a landslide but I as many here saw poll after poll with the ALP headed for a TPP of mid to high 50s and into the 60s.
I’m not taking anything away from the result but I sort of wanted the polls to be right!
“bob1234! yes it was a landslide but I as many here saw poll after poll with the ALP headed for a TPP of mid to high 50s and into the 60s.”
Correct, from a few months in to Rudd’s leadership until the election campaign.
“I’m not taking anything away from the result but I sort of wanted the polls to be right!”
They were. The last polls before the election for the ALP were Newspoll/Galaxy 52%, Roy Morgan 53.5%, and ACNielsen 57%. ACNielsen totally borked it up. The rest were less than a percent off.
There are at least two things stopping Tanner being treasurer
1 It would be seen as a bit of a capitulation to the Libs to replace Swan (they were attacking him earlier this year)
2 He holds a marginal seat
Dio 64
Geithner has a lot of previous banking experience and as head of the NY Fed Reserve Bank has been directly involved in the bailout attempts so far. It ensures there are no misunderstandings of what has been done so far, while still allowing for new ideas. I’m not aware he has any strong ideological views either way, or if he does he has kept them well hidden. Lawrence Summers is brilliant but can be divisive.
bob1234
#70
Posted Saturday, November 22, 2008 at 10:59 pm | Permalink
Not that I support verbally bashing the disabled, quite the opposite, but shouldn’t we be preserving the right to say what we want as long as we are not breaking any laws?
‘I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’
This was th LAST comment made on dog naming affair , and was not challenged… and so I will
There is absolutely no “right” to say anything just because it is not illegal to say so A right always comes with a responsibiloty , an unemployed benefit “generaly should carry responsibilty to train or seek employment IF one freely speaks then resonsibility is to speak not indecently
I hav challenged posters irrelevant innuendo about daughtar Chelksea Clinton (to condoned silense) I hav challenged posters irrelevant inuendo questioning sarah Palin’s even being pregnant daughter & other nasty innuendo about her (but it was continued forover a month by many , with glee) When posters query Crikey about a blog , I wonder where decency standards were when Chelsea Clinton and Sarah Palin were vilified …..on a politcal site …I of all consistently to Obamaites everlasting delight criticised Obama severely on numerous politcal judgement & policy fronts but not his ‘disabilities if any nor Michelle Obama or his kids , none of thats is part of th playing fields
Problam and responsibility of regulation of indecency should not be left with moderator alone , he’s not here 24/7 Above repeated examples of Chelssea Clinton and Sarah Palin is now histary , but will it be repeated is th queston I also might adds its quite unfair to make posts here to th moderator complaining about what appears elsewhore on Crikey , any more than complaining to Enemy Marsupial up there on his tree about what appears elsewhore on Crikey…complain direct to he who writes or not at all
So Bob , there is absolutely nothing in your #70 that has merit I tink , perhaps you hit “enter” to quick on reflecton
And GROG , your proitest is quite justified….but suggest it may be far more efective writing a series of “sharp” messages to he who wrote what you did not like , so that he learns & then there is some minor upside from this matter , rather than denying yourself th pleasure of my company and lingo’s cultures to cut mustard on
No 40
Georgiou is a bloody wet that belongs in the Labor party.
I think a number of MSM commentators are missing the surplus/deficit politics that the Govt is playing out here.
Rudd and Swan know that the Murdoch media and Turnbull would love to wedge Labor on planning to go to deficit to keep the economy working.
Swan and Labor are quite deliberately singing the surplus / qualified non-deficit tune knowing that they more than likely will need to use deficit at some stage. And what is happening? People are coming out more and more saying that the Government must consider going into deficit if it gets to that, that deficit isn’t so bad and so forth.
So there will be a weight of commentary out there in the public domain telling the govt that it is OK to go to deficit for the purpose of keeping the economy healthy and that it is actually the correct thing to do. So later when the government does go into deficit it will be following the advice and public pleading of MSM and other commentators.
Come election time no one will remember much or care much that Swan was saying deficit wasn’t necessary but will recall that the deficit was used in accordance with all the opinion, thus Turnbull election wedge negated.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24686888-3122,00.html
The Opposition Scorecard, the First Twelve Months.
OK, guys, here it is. Given that nobody has scored the Coalition’s first year in Opposition, I thought I would give it a go. I have tried to be fair but it has been hard. It has not exactly been a labour of love. In terms of bias, most of you would know that I maintain an utter contempt for Howard. I have tried not to let that influence my judgement of the individuals below. In some cases it is a little bit difficult to know what to say because it is not immediately evident that the subjects have actually done anything to rate or to make comments about.
I have used the same ratings matrix as that used for Government Ministers and have added some comments. I have only judged the Inner Shadow Ministery, but have attached the list of the Outer Shadow Ministery and Parliamentary Secretaries in case you have not noticed who they are. Golly, life in Opposition must be tough.
General Comments
When you add up the individuals, some patterns appear. What the individual assessments throw up generally is that the Opposition is struggling across the board. The general lack of focus, talent and energy has been exposed in Opposition. The Shadow Ministry needs some serious injections of talent before it will even begin to look credible as the solid core of an alternative government. There is a serious lack of contribution to policy development and to much-needed Party reform.
After a year in Opposition, most, but not all, of the crew essentially appears still to be waiting and hoping to get lucky. They are all bark and no bite. Between a quarter and a half of them should do their party, and their country, a favour and resign now.
The talent depth problem in the parliamentary Liberal Party is such that the outer shadow ministery and parliamentary secretaries include ‘performers’ such as Sophie Mirabella and Barry Haase.
Another pattern that is striking is just how weak the National Party contribution has been. Most national shadow ministers are struggling in a very serious way in Opposition, and, as a group, form a very weak link for the Coalition. There are some better Liberal Party prospects that could be drafted in to replace the National Party shadow ministers.
The final pattern that is obvious across the inner and outer shadow ministery and amongst the shadow parliamentary secretaries is how pitiably thin on the ground are the Wets and the small L liberals. Had they been there now the Party would now be undergoing a post-defeat dynamic with some prospects of policies inching towards the ‘centre’. The broad church is broad no longer.
Ratings used:
A+: A star performer
A: Excellent on both policy and political fronts
A-: Stellar work
B+: Rising star
B: Above average but short of a star
B-: Showing talent
C+: Solid performance
C: Average bordering on mediocre
C-: Struggling
Individual ratings
Malcolm Turnbull, MP Leader of the Opposition B- (Showing talent).
Comments: Has considerable potential, good presence, and has shown adaptability, but has yet to realize his potential. Hasn’t quite cottoned on to the fact that banking and barristering are different from being leader of the Opposition. His appetite for risk may lead to utter disaster. Reflexive negativity at a time when the nation is searching for confidence is likely to return to haunt him. Has yet to start a serious reform of the Liberal Party. Has yet to inaugerate a serious policy development process.
Julie Bishop, MP Shadow Treasurer Rating: C (Average, bordering on the mediocre).
Comments: In Opposition has been exposed by lack of departmental resources and by her shallow understanding of the issues. Has demonstrated a lack of sure-footedness in terms of responding to the media. This has been exemplified by her refusal to clearly disavow Howard’s silly critique of the next President of the United States.
Warren Truss, MP Shadow Minister for Trade, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government Rating: C- (Struggling).
Comments: Totally lacking in policy impact. A plodder in Parliament. Has failed to take any useful steps to stop his party disappearing from under his feet. Should be put out to pasture.
Nick Minchin, Senator Shadow Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Rating: C (Average, bordering on mediocre).
Comments: Another who performed better in Government than he has in Opposition. He has potential and his rating should be at the stellar level considering his opposite number is the weakest performer in the Government Ministery and that the Government has yet to deliver in these areas. Has yet to hurt the Government where it is most vulnerable. Totally lacking in policy contribution. His kingmaker role in establishing Nelson as leader of the Opposition was an utter disaster.
Eric Abetz, Senator Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research
Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate Rating: C- (Struggling)
Comments: A hopeless plodder in Opposition. Policy contribution in 12 months: nil. Is probably frightened of innovations. He appears to think that being narky is a useful approach but has not made a serious contribution to hurting the Government in the Senate where the numbers favour Opposition tactics. Has been there, but not done that. Should retire to make way for new talent.
Andrew Robb, MP Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and COAG and Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader on Emissions Trading Design Rating: C- (Struggling)
Comments: Has some potential but he is saddled with the Howard history of Climate Change denial and hence has serious credibility issues with the electorate. He is also saddled with Howard history of failure in terms of infrastructure development. Vis-a-vis COAG, he is also saddled with the late Howard Government political ploy attempt to foment fights with state and territory governments. Has shown little policy nous or adaptability in the face of all this. As the Shadow Minister responsible, he must bear some responsibility for the way in which the Opposition has been all over the shop on Climate Change responses. Has shown some insight into the need for Party reform but has done nothing about it. If he is still around, has the potential to make a useful contribution to the next Liberal Government.
Helen Coonan, Senator Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs
Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate Rating: C- (Struggling).
Comments. Would have an E- rating, were one available. She just does not get it. She should retire to allow an infusion of fresh talent into the Liberal Party.
Joe Hockey, MP Shadow Minister for Finance, Competition Policy and Deregulation
Manager of Opposition Business in the House Rating C- (Struggling)
Has some talent but has mostly misdirected it. He is heavily saddled with Howard Government baggage. Has yet to contribute a skerrick to policy development. In terms of parliamentary tactics is learning the bitter lessons of being in Opposition and has generally been completely outwitted by Albanese, his opponent in the Government. Has helped inflict considerable damage on his own party in the leadership shenanigans. Has lately mostly not said much at all, which is a considerable improvement on his first three quarters of a year as a Shadow Minister. Should improve from here.
Ian Macfarlane, MP Shadow Minister for Energy and Resources Rating C- (Struggling)
Comments. A useful performer in Government but is now just a time server until the next election. A wasted talent. Should resign now to make way for new talent.
Tony Abbott, MP Shadow Minister for Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs Rating: C (Average bordering on mediocre)
Comments: Lives in the past. Has shown repeated major failures of judgement. For example, he still thinks Howard was ‘magnificent’. Has caused considerable damage to his own party with his uncontrolled public chatter. Has been trounced by his opposite number in Government. Has some potential but would need to exercise a much greater degree of application to policy development, a much greater degree of self-discipline and a much greater degree of team work in the Party than has hitherto been the case.
Michael Ronaldson, Senator Shadow Special Minister of State and Shadow Cabinet Secretary Rating: C- (Struggling)
Comments: Might learn from experience, but has yet to demonstrate the potential to do so. Given his position, he must bear some responsibility for the demonstrated lack of party cohesiveness, for the lack of integrated policy development, and for the poor parliamentary tactics.
Nigel Scullion, Senator Shadow Minister for Human Services
Rating: C- (Struggling)
Comments: Has talent, and knows his electorate well, but is not very interested in the topic, and it shows. Has not made a contribution to anything much in Opposition.
Greg Hunt, MP Shadow Minister for Climate Change, Environment and Water Rating: A (Excellent on both policy and political fronts).
Comments: After some early silly PR stunting has settled down to serious policy development. Has good political skills. Is likely to be a key player in any future Liberal Government. In that respect, has the youth to wait for it, but may not have the patience to wait so long.
Peter Dutton, MP Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing Rating: B- (showing talent)
Despite the poor history of the Howard Government in this area, has at least been involved in causing some anxiety for the government in terms of pensions. Has yet to demonstrate that he is prepared to do the work necessary to induce people to believe that he can lead credible policy development.
David Johnston, Senator Shadow Minister for Defence Rating: C- (Struggling)
Comment: Who? What?
Christopher Pyne, MP Shadow Minister for Education, Apprenticeships and Training Media Rating: C (Average bordering on mediocre)
Comments: Did some flashy stuff immediately after the election when the leadership was wide open, but has virtually disapeared from sight since. Saddled with the woeful outcomes of the Howard years. Has shown no appetite for hard policy work. Has shown some party discipline.
George Brandis, Senator Shadow Attorney General C+ (Solid performance)
Comments: Has shown hints that he might be able to be a major contributor, but his contributions to date have not been sustained. Major law reform was let go by the Howard Government for eleven years, and the Rudd Government looks like it might be going the same way, but it is too early to tell. This provides a real opportunity for a major piece of much-needed policy development and one that would be welcomed by the public. However, while he has the talent for it, Brandis has yet to show that he has the desire for the hard work. Could make a major contribution to the next Liberal Government.
John Cobb, MP Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Media C- (Struggling)
Comments: Likable and in touch with some of the special interest groups in his country base, but just does not get it as a Shadow Minister. Is being beaten by an opponent with no background at all in the area. Should retire in order to allow for an infusion of new talent.
Michael Keenan, MP Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Rating: C- (Struggling)
Comments: Saddled with the most unpopular policy of the Howard Government, has yet to lay a glove on his opponent and has yet to show an appetite for serious policy work. Has been done like a dinner in parliament by his opponent. Perhaps not a fair test for a newbie, and perhaps should be given a chance in safer waters.
Sharman Stone, MP Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship Rating: C+ (solid performance)
Comments: Is saddled with Howard Government policies and with the Howard Government’s record of dog whistling. Is not herself a dog whistler. Will have to do some policy work to draw blood. Has shown some propensity for hard work and has demonstrated some political savvy. May have the opportunity to draw blood as pressure against absolute immigration numbers is likely to grow at a time of increasing joblessness. Will need to show judgement and strength to prevent the Opposition slinking back to dog whistling.
Steven Ciobo, MP Shadow Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors, Tourism and the Arts Media C- (struggling)
Comments: Who? What?
OUTER SHADOW MINISTRY (not rated)
Andrew Southcott, MP Shadow Minister for Employment Participation, Training and Sport Media Contact
Bob Baldwin, MP Shadow Minister for Defence Science and Personnel and
Assisting Shadow Minister for Defence Media Contact
Bruce Billson, MP Shadow Minister for Sustainable Development and Cities Media Contact
Chris Pearce, MP Shadow Minister for Financial Services, Superannuation and Corporate Law Media Contact
Louise Markus, MP Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs Media Contact
Luke Hartsuyker, MP Shadow Minister for Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs
Deputy Manager of Opposition Business in the House Media Contact
Margaret May, MP Shadow Minister for Ageing Media Contact
Scott Morrison, MP Shadow Minister for Housing and Local Government Media Contact
Sophie Mirabella, MP Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education, Childcare, Women and Youth Media Contact
Sussan Ley, MP Shadow Minister for Justice and Customs Media Contact
Tony Smith, MP Shadow Assistant Treasurer Media Contact
SHADOW PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY
Barry Haase, MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Energy and Resources
Brett Mason, Senator Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Education
Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, Senator Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration and Citizenship
Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader in the Senate
Cory Bernardi, Senator Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities, Carers and the Voluntary Sector
Don Randall, MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Energy and Resources
Fiona Nash, Senator Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Water Resources and Conservation
Ian Macdonald, Senator Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia
Jason Wood, MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Justice and Public Security
John Forrest, MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development
Marise Payne, Senator Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for International Development Assistance
Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Indigenous Affairs
Mathias Cormann, Senator Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health Administration
Peter Lindsay, MP Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence
Richard Colbeck, Senator Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
Boerwar @89
Great work. Can’t disagree with any of them.
I understood the quote to be about the right to free political speech, not a right to
be bad mannered and insulting.
Re 84,
Why would the marginality of his seat make any difference??
And for the record, what is it? I find it hard to believe that Tanner’s seat in Melbourne (known to be leftist leaning) would be more marginal say than Smith’s in Perth (which should be more right leaning in WA). Might be an interesting exercise to see what the two are …..
juliem,
Division of Perth – 58.85 ALP, v Lib.
Division of Melbourne – 54.71 ALP, v Grn.
“So Bob , there is absolutely nothing in your #70 that has merit I tink , perhaps you hit “enter” to quick on reflecton”
Not at all, I stand by my comments. Free speech? No such thing.
bob1234, thanks ……
still doesn’t answer the original question though posted by #84 of why it makes a difference what the margin of his seat is or isn’t in order to merit a switch to Treasury …….
OT, but …… get on your mobiles and vote for Luke to 191010 before 8:30pm tonight
{ off my Australian Idol soapbox now 
}
Generic Person
said
And if the few people left in the party can’t get past that it is unlikely the Liberal party will ever govern again.
One by one the people that could reform the party leave.
So I take it GP doesn’t support/like any prior PMs on either side except for Howard?
Sad.
Bob1234 and Ron,
My first post in response to Bob is caught in the moderation filter, though I have no idea why.
I agree with your premise, Ron, that free speech is not an absolute right, and carries with it a degree of responsibility to act fairly and appropriately. I stopped reading a blog I had enjoyed over the gleeful whooping that went on over some of the MSM comments on Hilary/Chelsea. But Hilary and Chelsea are adults, and players in their own right (as in Sarah Palin) so some degree of comment is to be expected. However, commenting on the players, Hilary, Chelsea or Palin, should be about them, and insults that impune others by implication are not acceptable. I am struggling to explain this, but what I mean is that a derogatory comment about Hilary is one thing, a comment about Hilary that demeans all women is not.
People seemed to have no problem with this with Obama. For example, it was Ok to sling off about his history as a Community Organiser, because it wasn’t appropriate experience for high office (not that I agree with that point), and it was OK to mouth off about his association of people with certain past histories (not that I agree with that either), but I think everyone would agree that it would be wrong to imply that all community organisers were terrorists. But it is OK to insult Hilary in ways that reflect on all women, or even Sarah on ways that reflect on all Alaskans.
Trig Palin is not a player. All the children of all politicians should be off limits, until, like Chelsea, they chose to become players in their own right. So the Crikey article is wrong on two levels – it insulted an innocent bystander, and in doing so, insulted by implication, every person with Down Syndrome.
I’ll refrain from more at the moment, as I don’t want to get caught in the filter again.
So you disagree with what one says, but defend their right to say it, or not?
I think it is unfair to rate down ministers and shadow ministers just because their portfolio has not had any oxygen during the first year of the Rudd Government…criticising junior shadow ministers simply because they havent had media air time or that their main issues of concern havent had the national spotlight is unfair…i am talking of course about Michael Keenan, Steven Ciobo, John Cobb ect.
Boerwar 89
A self-sacrificing effort to wade through that lot. While reading the list I realsied I didn’t even know what Truss, McFarlane and Johnson were responsible for! And I thought Robb had a finance role, not infrastructure. Which rather proves your point. ROTFL
I would agree that Hunt, Dutton and Turnbull have performed as well as they could, though Turnbull’s lack of real udnerstanding on economics has been exposed. Quite dissappointed in Coonan, Bishop and Robb. The number of coalition “leaders” who can actually come up with alternative ideas is indeed few.
So you don’t understand the difference between your right to freely express your opinion, and your responsibility to treat other people with respect and dignity?
On the censorship issue, bob1234 seems to be making the Palin argument, ie criticism of her imbecilic statements is an attack on her right to free speech.
The lowlifes at Crikey are free to make the kind of comment they did. The rest of us are entitled to point out that people who act in that way are usually inadequate humans who disgust most members of the human race.
“So you don’t understand the difference between your right to freely express your opinion, and your responsibility to treat other people with respect and dignity?”
Moral responsibility or legal responsibility?
And again, I don’t agree with holocaust denial. Just pointing out the contradiction with the Mohommed cartoons.
bob
I assume you saw this. I just read a book on Holocaust deniers. Evidently the new denial angle is that Europe would be better off if Hitler won. I don’t agree with making Holocaust denial a crime. No-one ever thought differently because something was a crime. There will always be wackos like them. There is still a Flat Earth Society, which still publishes the OO (Official Organ). It’s a great irony that the ex-GG has become the OO as they really still ascribe to the Flat Earth theory that Oz would be better off under the Libs (any Libs seems to do).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7741288.stm
It is usual for ministers to hold safe seats for the reason that it is quite inconvenient and embarrassing for a minister to lose their seat.
Or a prime minister, heh, heh.
Speaking of ex PMs who have lost their seat, I noticed that comment where Howard accused Broadbent of joining the chardonnay set.
Does this date back to Wran, he was well known for his love of chardonnay, especially the Rosemont brand.
Maybe it reveals a deep seated hatred of Wran by the libs, even deeper than that of Whitlam. Wran was merciless to them, dispatching opposition leaders at ease.
Poetic that Howard lost his seat, wonder if Wran had a slight chuckle at that.
105 – Tom, that maybe true but many a minister has lost their seat. I really don’t believe that is an important consideration when choosing ministers. Bronwyn Pyke in Vic has been a ministers for 9 years and has difficulty holding her seat each election. In fact it could be argued that it is her high profile that helps her retain it.
It could also be argued that being a cabinet minister inevitably takes you out of your electorate more often.
and out of your state – unlike state parliament.
You know how well ministers are going when opposition supporters ask for their sacking. Bolt on Insiders wants Rudd to take up some post with the United Nations with Julia as PM, and for Swan to be replaced by Tanner as treasurer. How quaint?
They obviously think that Julia would be a lot easier to get rid of than Rudd, and as for the treasurer, it would be one down (Swan) and one to go (Tanner) instead of two to go!
Yeah, Rudd has achieved a life long ambition to be PM and is going to give it away because the conservatives want him to? Rudd is MORE than well on track to break Hawkies record as longest serving Labor PM. SO GET USED TO IT!
As for Swan and Tanner, Australia has the first and second best REAL treasurers in order since Keating. SO Bolt and your mates Akerman, Milne, Shanahan, Fish Face, Abrechtson, etc. etc. GET USED TO IT – LAUGH OUT LOUD!
I think its a hard thing grading opposition MP’s, sure some of them are out of there league people like Abertz, Coonan, Michin & Abbort should be moved on beyond that there are several MPs who could be better used in alternative portfolios
The Liberal Party does have some talent but due in part to the narrow focus of the Howard Government some MP’s are still learning how to be frontbenchers.
I don’t think Julie Bishop is performing that badly, admittable she should be in I.R or Attorney General role not an economic role.
People like Greg Hunt, Chris Pyne, Marie Paynes, Bruce Billson, Paul Dutton could be better used but in saying that due to the strength of the Government’s performance life for the Liberal Party is not going to be fun.
Regarding Petro, G.P I’m not sure how across the history of the Liberal Party you are but the Liberal Party always performs best when it is run by what can be called the Deakin-Menzies type rather than the Howard-Bruce-Reid types.
I find Petro lazy not because he is a wet but because I cannot point to him having done anything within Kooyong, Petro is never in the local media sure I’m not expecting him to have built a Hospital or a School but even something has mundane as congratulating the Hawthorn Football Club on winning the AFL flag.
Lets take his latest effort, we have a major economic issue yet Petro writes a colunm in the Age about needed to remain committed to Multi-culturalism, I’m sorry but I don’t see anyone in Kooyong raising that as an issue, I see people worried about their businesses, jobs, property prices etc.
Petro just seems trapped in a timewarp! he is a one issue MP! who seems struck on an issue that really no one cares about for it isn’t the color of a persons skin that is causing concern but does this company or that one have red or black ink.
The other big issue Petro never seems to speak about is Climate Change for it seems above him, just as the Workchoices debate seemed above him, Petro makes himself out to be big and brave on issues that make people feel good but when it comes to issues that directly effect the people of Kooyong Petro goes completely missing.
GP knows electoral success comes from the centre. He’s just selfish and wants his hard right policies.
A year on and Kevin is showing us he is still “here to help” or there to help in this case. I’m so glad the people of OZ got rid of that nasty little rodent and gave us St Kev instead.
also check out the video
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/23/2427221.htm
The debate of wealth equalisation is an interesting one? In the US the conservatives have used the term “sharing the wealth” to successfully belt the liberals over the head with great success.
I like most people, do not believe that your wealth should be shared with others. My wealth is my wealth and your wealth is your wealth. Hence the great success of the line “sharing the wealth”.
The problem however, in true economic terms, as I’m sure GP would be interested in, is that the SYSTEM of the taxation is wrong, which greatly advantages very high income earners and the rich.
Tom, Tanner is not going to lose his seat. Be real. No excuse for him to not have the Treasury should Rudd decide to put him there. If his seat had .10% margin, perhaps. But it doesn’t, and Lindsay is fighting Greens as the second vote in that seat and they give most of their first prefs to Labor anyways.
juliem, your point? It is completely feasible that the Greens will win Melbourne.
Re 111,
Nobody changes their vote based on what they see in parliament. Rudd is the master of the sound byte, and fits the Australian slight-conservative mould nicely.
Even when a meteor heads towards Canada people with cameras catch the action.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081123/ap_on_re_ca/canada_meteor;_ylt=Aml3pDZCWWH9oXPyM_YOkEPZn414
If they do at some point, bob1234, (I don’t happen to personally think so though), Tanner will be parchuted into some other safe seat for the next election after that happens much as Garrett was parchuted into Kingsford-Smith.
point was that imho I thought Tanner was safe in Melbourne. if I am wrong, I think Tanner will rematerialize somewhere else. He’s too good of an assett for them to not use.
The conservatives commentators aren’t touting Julia for PM because they think she’s any good, they just want to whiteant Rudd as a means to getting the Libs back in power, nothing more. Similarly they are promoting Tanner over Swan as well. You can bet your house on it that if either move actually did occur, the conservatives would start hammering Julia or Tanner just as much despite their current ‘praise’ for them.
Here’s a very early election tip Lindsay Tanner to hold Melbourne!
Yes the Greens do very well in certain parts but its like that other Greenish seat Melbourne Ports the Greens support while solid across the seat is mainly focused on certain parts.
One thing that needs reminding is that many Green voters can be considered small L Liberals and the next elect is going to be fought on economic management this covers both the economic situation and the ETS debate!
In light of the Government’s successful handling of these issues thus far I see no swing happening towards the Greens, If the Liberals with Malcolm Turnbull is struggling to gain traction then the Greens will also struggle.
I would imagine Malcom Turnbull is more popular in Melbourne than Howard ever was, maybe the Greens will be a real change come 2013 or 2016 for by then this Government will be starting to wear out its welcome.
“In light of the Government’s successful handling of these issues thus far I see no swing happening towards the Greens”
I do, the disaffected left-wing Labor voters who are disappointed with Rudd’s conservatism.
Boerwar, I generally agree with your ratings, with two dissents.
* I think Abetz is better than you give him credit for. He has the right skills for opposition – persistence, grasp of detail, a nose for weak arguments. He has given Carr and Conroy a lot of grief, and is smart enough to stay away from Wong, Labor’s best Senate performer.
* Abbott’s problem is that he stuck in a “girl’s portfolio” he has no interest in. If he was given something more butch, like IR, he would perform better. Don’t get me wrong, I think Abbott is a very nasty piece of work , but he has more ability than he is showing at present.
Who is going to give us a smiliary detailed ranking of the ministry?
smiliary = similarly
You should – Adam
Bob1234! I know who you are referring to but its one thing to talk about disaffected left-wing ALP voters dumping the ALP for the Greens but that will more likely be an issue after a few terms.
Another way of looking at it is for several years during the Howard Government we would hear about the doctor’s wives! come election day Kooyong moved by .5% yes their was a bigger swing in North Sydney but still the fact remains the ALP have maintained though-out the Howard years a very high primary vote.
Lindsay Tanner is a very likible local MP and what makes Melbourne historically safe is people don’t change their voting pattern very often.
Yes the Greens are incresing their vote but more at the expanse of the Liberal Party than the ALP, lets take the state seat of Melbourne, 10 precent of the Green vote comes directly from Kennett area Liberal voters.
Speaking of girl’s portfolios, Genderanalyzer (”man or woman – who is writing that blog?”) reckons I am 83 per cent likely to be male. Compare that with the girlymen of the right, Andrew Bolt and Tim Blair, who respectively rate 51 per cent and 28 per cent. Man’s man Possum weighs in at 77 per cent.
Wilma Bowe hahaha
In 1999 State election in the seat of Melbourne the Liberal Party polled 33% in 2002 the Liberal party polled 24% basically all that 9% drop went to the Greens were it has for the most part remained.
Spam Box, being totally objective, I think the performance of the Rudd ministry has been uniformly brilliant. That’s why someone else should have a go.
I would have thought people called William, Andrew and Tim are nearly 100% likely to be men, but then I’m a bit old-fashioned.
“Compare that with the girlymen of the right, Andrew Bolt and Tim Blair, who have respectively rated 51 per cent and 28 per cent.”
Probably the ‘whinging’ factor.
Also William doesn’t “blog” in the same way Bolt and Blair blog. He provides some facts and allows us all to ramble on about them. He doesn’t orate about his opinions – I don’t even know which way William votes.
I reckon we should have a tipping competition to see who William does vote for!
I suspect they’ve based it on the frequency of mentions of male and female names. Politics being what it is, psephology sites are heavily weighted with the former.
i will go one better i’ll give ratings for the government as well out of 10 out of 20 ministers
opposition- M Turnbull 8/10 hasnt got it down pat as policy goes but has a good satisfactory rating has a good profile and does seem to know how to play politics.
J Bishop 5/10 sorry, but I’m not a big fan of her shes got in trouble copying speeches she letting turnbull be treasurer as well doesnt really understand economics.
W Truss 6/10 as already pointed out his letting the national party fade away.
Minchin 6/10 i dont want this to seem a left leaning comment but his too right for middle Australia plus he admitted he doesn’t know how to use a computer then Turnbull puts him in technology.
Abetz 7/10 the main person keeping labor on there toes in the senate wasn’t entirely happy with the way he acted with the Ken Henry saga but that’s his job.
A Robb 6.5/10 has some potentially but how boring is he plus i too didnt realise he was in charge with infrastrature.
Coonen 5/10 my liberal freind loves her but i cant stand her hasnt got a clue horrible being interviewed
Hockey 7.5/10 unlike others i dont mind him always got respect for him after taking IR last year, love seeing him get angry could be a beazley and be competitive but never PM.
Macfarline 5.5/10 annoying
Abbott 5/10 i honestly don’t believe his a good politician last years election campaign was horrible “peoples Skills”
Ronaldson 5/10 havent heard much from him
Scullian 5/10 same as above
Hunt 8/10 doing a good job actually putting polices out there i’ve meet him before not a bad bloke.
dutton 7.5/10 one of the up and commers
D johston 5/10 havent heard much
Pyne 6/10 up and commer but geez never a leader preety weak
Brandis 7/10 dont mind him
Cobb- 5.5/10 not the worst but ewwww
Keenen 6.5/10 his not to bad good campaigner
Ciobo- 5.5/10 not the worst but preety bad
Total- 122.5 ave-6.1
Govement- K Rudd 9/10 really popular ranking committed to 75% of policies which is what the people voted for and pretty good reviews
J Gillard 9/10 the best performer in parliament 2 important portfolios and handling it well
Swan- 6.5/10 improved dramatically after bad start starting to be solid but still seen poorly by many.
Evans- 6/10 not high profile but no mistakes so far
J Faulkner- 7/10 doing a good job keeping over a disciplined government
Tanner- 9/10 should be treasurer good in Parliament and in media experienced
S Crean 7/10 preety good performer preety quiet until maybe getting as free deal with china
S Smith 8.5/10 surprisenly good no mistakes so far very solid
Fitzgibbon 7/10 very solid
roxon 7.5/10 preety happy last year with her still am seems like she cares but i beleive she can go head hanting to much lately
macklin 7/10 preety solid
Albanese 7.5/10 preety good in Parliament seems to give everything handles his responibilities well
Conroy 4/10 sorry dont like him filter idea stupid and struggling with the high speed broadband idea bad infront of media
Carr 7/10 quiet but handled car plan preety well
Garret 7/10 pretty quiet as he doesn’t see over climate change but improved dramatically in question time
P Wong 9/10 very very good performer starting out when she went to bali awesome in the media
Mclellend 6/10 decent does his job
Ludwig 5/10 havent heard much from him
Burke 6.5 preety good performer
fergusian 5.5/10 okay but preety annoying
Total-141 Ave-7
William
The manliest I’ve found so far is Janet Albrechtsen at 84%. Even Overies is 71% male.
Apparently Miranda Devine scores in the 80s as well. Jeremy Clarkson however is in the 90s, so I guess it’s not completely useless.
viclabor,
I’m a Liberal, so have different biases to yours, but I reckon you’ve done a good job with those ratings. I’d only question a few of yours:
Turnbull – very disappointing so far as Leader. Needed to be far more statesmanlike during the acute phase of the global financial crisis. More like 6/10.
Hockey – could sstill turn out to be a good performer, but has dumbed down his act – a lot – since the election. Who knows why. 6/10.
Gillard – sorry about this, as I know she is a Labor darling, but what has she actually achieved apart from flaying the Libs in Parlt (at which she is admittedly very adept). All the hard work re WorkChoices was done before 25/11/07 (not by her, either). Education – ?! Overall ok but nothing more. 7/10. *Holds his breath and waits for the cries of outrage to begin*
I’d give Swannie 8/10 though.
“All the hard work re WorkChoices was done before 25/11/07″
Perhaps I should clarify this. As soon as Labor won it was inevitable that WorkChoices would be repealed. I can’t see what is so inherently brilliant about the way in which Gillard has done it.
What’s more concerning is that PBs readability rating is only undergrad college level, the same as Paul Krugman at the NYT. This is not far ahead of the High School level Bolt and Junior High level Overington.
Possum scores a post-grad level.
Planet Janet needs a genius to read it as does Glenn Greenwald.
http://www.criticsrant.com/bb/reading_level.aspx
Diogenes,
Just goes to show how brilliant we all must be at expressing our complex ideas in accessible language.
Err … or maybe …
The basic point about Turnbull is that being in opposition really, really sucks, and there is often no “right” way to deal with situations. It’s all very well to say that Turnbull should be statesmanlike over the GFC, but no opposition ever won an election by agreeing with the government. He’s in the same position Beazley was in after 9/11. If he criticised the government he was unpatriotic, if he didn’t he was “me-too-ing”. All and opposition leader can really do is stay on the attack and wait for the breaks. If the breaks don’t come – as they didn’t for Beazley – you’re cooked. That’s just the nature of parliamentary politics.
Adam,
Accept all that, on the other hand he’s given us about ten times the optimal dose of phonegate, and it’s also a point of note that the election is two years away whereas Beazley was stuck with 9/11 just before the 2001 election, so maybe Malcolm doesn’t need to be quite as combative all the time at this stage.
I’m also not sure where the Opposition is going with the “never run a deficit” theme, it’s totally obvious that the Govt is going to run one, and that most economists (rightly or wrongly) are going to say it was the right thing to do. When Kev + Wayne start changing their tune the Libs could be left trying to defend last year’s orthodoxy.
Fair enough Dyno
With gillard maybe i was using my biases but i do include how they perform in the media and perception which she has a good one, plus being a lefte i think shes done a great job with education.
I’m very happy with your views on swan but i took the whole year and he worried me for the first half and my lib friends unfortunately dont havce the same view as yours and think hes a joke.
Turnbull i can see where your coming from but from speaking around the traps he has reasonable favorable reviews.
Summers gets the number 2 economic job. Presumably, he is easier to control as an adviser than as Treasury Sec.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/11/summers-to-be-c.html
I think the difference between the Liberal opposition now and the Labor opposition in 1996 is that Labor accepted that they deserved to lose, because Keating had succumbed to arrogance and vanity, and that they had to have a period of introspection and rebuilding, which Beazley was the right leader for. Beazley, you will recall, has said that he never expected to be PM – his job was to rebuild the party, lose a couple of elections, then hand over to a leader who would win. That is in fact, more or less, what happened. This opposition, however, does *not* accept that they deserved to lose. They think the Howard government was right on all the big issues, and that they only lost because Howard miscalculated his retirement. They are really, really angry about being in opposition, they think Rudd is a complete fraud, and they expect the voters to come to their senses very soon. That’s why they ditched Nelson so quickly. No-one could seriously expect the polls to turn in less than a year, but they apparently did expect it.
(to continue) That’s why Turnbull is attacking everything Rudd does so frantically – because he is the slave of the same high expectations that Nelson was. He *has* to turn the polls around by the middle of next year, or the knives will be out for him, too. Given his obvious level of frustration, I expect Abbott to be the next one to have a go at the leadership.
dyno @ 140
Well done and fairly thought out IMO.
Agree Turnbull, Hockey and Swan. Disagree, Gillard. Understand your points but much of her responsibilities are still a “work in progress”.
I can’t for the life of me understand the low ratings people are giving Swan. He has taken over a portfolio in an area that was suffering the effects of an overheating economy that has rapidly been transformed by events totally outside our control and has still been able to allocate the cash to implement Labor’s election promises.
The Genderanalyzer website did not say that Bolt was 51% likely to be male but 51% likely to be female.
scorpio to be fair i think the allocation of cash to election promises has as much to do with tanner as he manages the finances i like him a lot more now though but i still find myself listening to rudd more in regards to economists
Given that we are fairly certain that Bolt is a man, doesn’t that show that the Genderanalyser is bunk? (What does it say about Ann Coulter, by the way?)
Some to almost all the shift between 1999 and 2002 in Melbourne (and Richmond, Coburg/Brunswick (redistribution) and Northcote) was Liberal voters shifting to Labor (the standard swing voters) but being masked by the large Green vote rise.
bob1234 #70
“Not that I support verbally bashing the disabled, quite the opposite, but shouldn’t we be preserving the right to say what we want as long as we are not breaking any laws?”
‘I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.’
bob1234 #104
“Moral responsibility or legal responsibility?
And again, I don’t agree with holocaust denial. Just pointing out the contradiction with the Mohommed cartoons.”
You said “you stand by your (abov) comments”
I was lite in reply to your #70 tinking what you reely meant but restricted to very broad principal However your #104 examples make clear what you reely mean…although don’t quiet say
Your examples turned upside down all contain a “not” , but that’s triple negating reely because without th “nots” you ar actualy saying…. I suport th right of people to verbally bashing the disabled…… I suport th right of people to deny th holocaust….indeed I suport th right of people’s free speech to say anything at all beit about children or sleeziness whatevers , as long as its not illegal
You’ve mistaken assumed free speech is an “unfettered legal right” subject to Law , but th Law does actualy recognise Society’s standards of decency and will punish those exercising free speech blatantly breaking those more obvious broad community standards , so free speech even at law is not even unfetered as you imply…….at Law recognition is free speech carrys responsibility to act not indecent , and with that your srgument crumbles
What you ar left then with solely is what is not illegal to say Obviousley Law can not codify all aspects of indecent human behaviour so society relys on self regolation ….unfortunateley it has to also relies on basic standards commonsense
Therefores to requote you “verbally bashing the disabled” is not illegal at all , but is is illegal by community standards of this Society…….and those that defend that “unfettered right” ar as much part of th problem (as th “disability basher”) and ar no part of th solution of standards & tolerance education for those that follow
Which is why I mentioned vilification questioning if Sarah Palin had been pregnant or had had a child……th standard is her political policys not her bedroom according to most Societys levels of decency standarrds Free speech rights ar abused by those that treat that right without responsobility , but that does not make that right without that decency responsibility as you imply , but you ar actually demonstating my point reely…….as did crikey , and many before & no doubt in futures
Ann Coulter is 71 per cent man. Michelle Malkin on the other hand is 89 per cent woman. My own favourite blogger, Harry Hutton, has set a new record of 95 per cent man.
“I expect Abbott to be the next one to have a go at the leadership”
hahahahahahahhaha
dyno,
Two points here. Malcolm is making the same mistake as Nelson to some degree.
1. Turnbull is repeating Nelson’s combative, aggressive stance both in the house and in outside interviews. It doesn’t go down well with the general public and makes them seem weak and not in control of their strategy in opposition.
2. Malcolm is making Nelson’s mistake of nailing his feet to the ground on somewhat trivial issues hoping to get some traction. In the meantime the effort they are expending is totally wasted because the Government just keeps moving on, staying three or four steps ahead of the opposition.
While you are anchored to one spot your opponents can get one hell of a lead over you and just keep on opening up a wider and wider gap that you can never hope to narrow while you just tread water.
I noticed these things and a number of others some considerable time ago but have been reluctant to express them because I am enjoying the status quo immensely.
One that has been mentioned previously by others is the Libs reluctance to distance themselves from failed or somewhat discredited Howard policies. The electorate rejected them and the current opposition should have too.
I would like to know if PBers are male or female?
Just for the record, I am male. Hang on I’ll check just to make sure. Yep, sweet!
Tom the first & best! I just don’t buy that for the ALP scored a thumping win therefore what is the evidence to support the theory that Liberal voters went to the ALP while ALP voters went to the Greens all in equal numbers.
No. It tells us that crap is gender neutral.
NOTE: Musrum, to do quote tags, just put [ and ] around the quote, and make what follows a new paragraph – The Management.
Seems like leading business representatives are having the same problem adjusting to changing economic circumstances as the Liberal Party leadership.
They just don’t get it that the private sector is not what it was and there are other options available if they are caught in a cycle of contraction rather than spiraling downwards in ever decreasing circles.
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2008/11/business-to-governor-thanks-for-advice.html
Steve, this shift is neatly summed up in the US as “Roosevelt is the new Reagan.” We might also say that “Keynes is the new Hayek”, and not before time.
I think to claim that the ALP won no net votes off the Libs in Melbourne is ludicrous.
The swing to the Greens was larger than the 2002 Liberal primary vote by over 3% (partly due to the Greens not running in 1999) (http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/state1999resultMelbourneDistrict.html and http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/state2002resultMelbourneDistrict.html)
I am not claiming that no voters went from the Libs to the Greens but that there was also a combination of Lib to Labor and Labor to Green which explained part to most of the 9% drop in the Liberal vote.
IMHO, Tanner is in the right portfolio. Finance Minister requires someone hard nosed. It can be a much harder gig than Treasurer.
It’s been a long time since we had a good FM. Minchin had the potential, however, he was as much in Howard’s thrall as the rest of them.
The ABC promos for the second episode of the Howardistafest tomorrow night show that Howard’s ministers weren’t necessarily driven by doing what was best for the country but what would earn them praise from the boss. For a pat on the head and a tummy tickle they were prepared to do just about anything. And they still would.
Yippee two polls in one day
1) Guess who William Bowes votes for
2) The gender of the posters
I will guess William votes for the ALP & I’m a chick!
“Ann Coulter is 71 per cent man. Michelle Malkin on the other hand is 89 per cent woman. My own favourite blogger, Harry Hutton, has set a new record of 95 per cent man.”
No , Ann Coulter is 100% woman as ar all women , method of expression or depth of ideas ar not criteria , although Ann mayt not measure highly on warmth richter scale Put a baby in arms of a female and a male and th differnce is there…..whereas lipstick can be a hint , but not always And obviousley my 98.74% score has been discriminated against
Well, I tried to explain this a few months ago, but youse all ignored me. I guess arguing for seven hundred posts on the color of Bob’s Brown’s belly-button fluff as seen from the perspective of the DLP 18-34 demographic versus the paper-marking practices of ALP scrutineers in the seat of Corio was more important. Hey, it’s a pseph site. What am I complaining for? For the record the answers are: “Blue”, “Non-existent” and “Grubby”.
Anyway, what I tried to explain was how, when the rage for beer with the color, flavour and just about everything else brewed out of it – except the alcohol – took off overseas a decade ago, and when the sales of what came to be called “alcopops” overseas soared due to the fact that it was really colorless, tasteless beer and that beer was taxed at a lower rate, on account of it being the working man’s drink, some smart guys in Aussie brewing thought they should give it a go.
“Let’s brew the bejesus out of beer and then add raspberry flavouring with a couple of tablespoons of sugar to sweeten things up a bit!” they said.
“[Groan]” said their colleagues. “We’re making enough out of real beer not to have to worry about kid’s beer,” they intoned. “It’ll be expensive. It’ll be complicated. We’ll have to buy new vats and learn new skills. And all for what? A few schoolies getting pissed on the cheap?”
Then some smartie in the corner (he’d hardly said a word all night) asked why did they have to brew beer? If beer-based alcopops looked and tasted the same as pure alcohol with flavouring, why not just buy up a shipload of alcohol and turn it into alcopops before it gets to be metho?
“Nah,” his mates said. “We’d have to pay too much tax,” they said. “You only get the discount on beer. By the way who the bloody hell are you?”
“Why,” he said, “I’ve never been near a brewery in my life. I drink chardonnay. I have teenage daughters who I’d hate to think of as drunk as sows up the Gold Coast when they finish their HSCs. So I’m not really qualified to offer any advice at all. Except…” he hesitated.
“Yeah? ‘Except’ what?” the beer boys sneered.
“Except… I’m in PR for this company, and I know a lot of people who might be able to change the tax laws so that whether we brew colorless, tasteless beer in a really expensive process, or whether we just buy grain alcohol and add Coke or raspberry to it, they don’t care a fig. Why go to all the trouble when all you have to do is make a party donation around GST time and the problem disappears?”
“Hmmmm… ,” his boozy pals said to themselves. “Why not give it a shot?”
And the rest is history.
Alas, the tax wallahs have finally caught up with them and they’ve put the kybosh on just adding cordial to raw alcohol and calling it a “designer drink.” Now you have to actually brew the sfuff, properly.
Enter “malternatvies”. Get it? Brewed as beer and then turned white by a clever process of chemical bleaching, filtering and God knows what else. It ends up as the same ethanol (CH4COOH… I think) as grain alcohol, but because they brewed it, it doesn’t cop the tax slug.
I don’t know whether the Sunday newspapers are naive, blinkered or just plain deliberately forgetful about the genesis of the “alcopops” tax rort, closed by KRudd after being opened by Howard in 2000 when the GST was introduced, but the whole thing behind the “oversight” by the Libs was that their cobbers in the brewing industry were too lazy to follow overseas practice and actually go through the motions of brewing the life out of beer to produces Lemon Zingers (or whatever they’re called). So they just bribed the Howard government for a tax lurk.
And they got it. Every last cent.
That’s the simple story, and now the papers are going on as if “malternatives” are some kind of big, new idea. They’re not. They’re what everybody else has been doing in other countries, but what our local brewers didn’t have to. Because the Libs gave the lazy bastards a free kick in the form of an “overlooked” tax loophole.
Read it and weep: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/when-an-alcopop-is-not-an-alcopop/2008/11/22/1226770800593.html
I wouldn’t pi$$ in their throats if they were dying of thirst.
(And don’t ask me how I know all this. I just know).
How?
hahahaha
The cure for lame duck president.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/opinion/22collins.html?em
Don’t laugh too soon, it has been my tip for months. The Libs will realise they need a “real” politician to lead them sooner or later. I agree with Adam, Abbott will be the next messiah.
I was laughing at the Liberal Party.
“lame duck president”….and a lame duck president to be
Its th worst of all Worlds
Detroit auto need resolution , Obama legally can not decide and Bush if he knew what to decide may not want to anyway
Detroit auto needs to go bankrupt period…any money thrown at that dead industry is a waste of money…
I would eat my best hat if Tony Abbott became our leader…
Turnbull maybe as a Beazley until Greg Hunt wins it for us in 2013/16…
Greg Hunt has already dug his own grave, he will be seen as destabilising Nelson on one hand and a raving loony enviromentalist on the other.
He has no hope as long as he stays in an environment related portfolio. How does he get an economic portfolio? – Sorry trick question, he doesn’t.
Ruawake that is how he is seen by the looney left and yourself…who cares???
Rudd didnt have an economic porfolio before being leader…neither did Nelson…surely the next Labor leader wont come from an economic portfolio…so your argument is spurious…
Hunt is a rising star…and Labor have nothing equal to him on their benches…
BB, you are a goldmine of useful information.
“Detroit auto needs to go bankrupt period…any money thrown at that dead industry is a waste of money…”
What happened to all the theories of business innovation, high paid can do people, well trained business people prepared to take a situation and improve it? Has the whole right wing world fallen into a deep hole and given up? Is do nothing the new standard for business? Why not sell the companies to the Chinese for next to nothing and see if they can do better. The shares are so cheap at the moment they could hardly go wrong.
Hunt is a personable young man of moderate views and considerable intelligence. That should be enough to doom him to a limited future in today’s Liberal Party. Does anyone remember Peter Baume, Chris Puplick or Judi Moylan? No. That’s what happens to Liberal moderates. Sorry Glen.
Glen
I was referring to the Liberal Party loony right, Greg Hunt stopped Nelson from weakening the Liberal Party stance on climate change and an ETS – that is why he is seen as a loony lefty – by the Liberal Party.
Agree with Glen there. It’s reprehensible that the Government is throwing money at an industry that is already on its last legs. All the bailout will do is prop up the Big 3 for another couple of years, before they inevitably go bankrupt as a result of producing a whole lot of cars that nobody wants.
What’s even worse is that the Australian govt is effectively handing these US car makers free money to save themselves in the US, while propping up an incredibly inefficient industry here in Australia. I thought Labor governments were in favour of free trade and tariff reduction – propping up the Australian auto industry is a heresy that Keating would never have let happen…
Is that what we’re doing now? WWKD – What Would Keating Do.
Ok – I admit, that’s a stupid comment from me.
However, I still stand by the fact that propping up the Australian auto industry with billions of dollars worth of subsidies makes no economic sense for the country. It:
1. Gives Australian taxpayer money to companies that are going to go bankrupt anyway;
2. Encourages Australian workers to enter the auto manufacturing industry, even though it is ultimately doomed; and
3. Allocates taxpayer money away from infant industries that may actually have a future in Australia, such as biomedical manufacturing or green energy development. These industries are instances where Australia may have a competitive advantage over other countries, rather than auto manufacturing, where we will always be undercut in terms of price from Asia and always be beaten for quality by Japan and Germany…
Here’s an interesting article that examines the options available to General Motors.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/business/22nocera.html?pagewanted=1&em
Yes, I agree.
If the government had ba-, fortitude, it would nationalise the factories and keep the workers employed making green cars.
I’ve got to agree with some of the bludgers on this one. Throwing capital at struggling publicly owned companies is a waste of taxpayers dollars. At the very least, the government should share in the same proportion of its contribution as to future profits – surely!
US Treasury has some very serious problems. It has to work out which companies are “too big to fall”.
GM has started Chapter 11 discussions although they claim only because of “due diligence”. It’s share price has dropped 93% in the last year. It’s pinning it’s hopes on staying alive until it’s plug-in hybrid car is out. Should we bail out a company that was bought off to pulp it’s electric car and now is dying because of bad decisions
Citigroup is even closer to going under. It is also “too big to fall”.
But where do you draw the line. And how many industries can you socialise? And how can you keep rewarding CEO’s who have killed their companies?
There’s no real point doing this with the Australian auto industry – its condition is terminal. The only reason it still exists is because every govt has thrown money at it to keep it alive, so as to keep the marginal seats in the Geelong area and Adelaide on their side of the ledger.
That’s even worse! The govt should be in the business of running the country – not building cars. If there is enough demand for green cars, then car-makers will build them. Yes – there may be an argument for subsidising green cars. But it should not happen in Australia, where the auto industry is dead without subsidies. The green subsidies should be happening in the US (perhaps), Japan and other (profitable) areas of car manufacturing. Throwing money at auto manufacturing (green or not) is a sure loser for any Australian government…
re 188. And that should apply to all business including farming. If a business requires taxpayers funding then that business should be partly owned, according to its contribution, by the government.
What is this? Government funding to public companies would have to be the worst form of dole bludging social security handout, to business bosses, on the face of the planet.
Ahh, applying the laws of private markets to the environment. That’s worked out splendidly in the past, hasn’t it?
Jokes aside, car-makers already are building them. Except for idiots like GM and Ford. Please throw out this idea that private companies are the cleverest things in the world, always ahead of the curve and always onto what’s going to sell. The simple fact that GM is in its death throes proves otherwise.
The only thing that the terminal state of the Australian car industry has shown is that’s a stupid idea to build cars no one wants purely so you can “Hey, we have a car industry!”.
Diogenes, socialise the lot, put failed CEO’s on the dole and employ people with brains. There are plenty out there if given the opportunity.
Swing Lowe, stuff the marginal seats then. Let them fold if that’s the case.
Ahh, the world’s full of irony!
Government dishing out taxpayer dollars left, right and centre is perfectly feasible. But the Government expected a stake in what it invests in or a return is communism.
Glen says let them Auto companys go broke , but he is joined here in agreement by others , and on a left site
Yous hav all become conomic rationalists , but with a tinge of no faith in private Sector either I can only assume th economic rationalists hav worked out th costs to Revenue , yes revenue in this let them go brolke scenario , lt alone outlay , let alone social costs
Yous hav forgotton that Labor principals does not go that way Having abandoned capitalism and Friedman , yous hav also forgotton that Keynes has always been th answer and Europeans understand that , may also forgotton that makers of what public want ar not Ford/GM make , may also hav forgoten petrol is not a clever 21st Century source anyway , and most of all hav assumed diferent management and with some Big Govt guides without Detroit feather boating would not produce better outcomes
Only burial is unfettered capitalism , not all systems and approaches
Ron
The problem is that everything is grey. Pure Friedman, Marx, Keynes etc won’t work. And humans are terrible at drawing lines when things are fuzzy and grey. How far do you go?
Adelaide has been bailing out Mitsubishi for thirty years now and it’s still on it’s knees. You can get to the stage where you are throwing good money after bad.
Ron, I feel like I’m on the cusp of making sense of that post but it’s just eluding me.
Sad, because it looks insightful.
An interesting discussion on the auto industry tonight. Oh well, something else to do now that AI is over. Wish Wes would get lost.
back to the auto industry though. I’ve got perhaps a unique perspective on this as I grew up in Michigan and my father worked his whole life in the auto industry (been retired for about 13 years now). Perhaps some might not remember but Carter bailed out Chrysler in 1978 or 1979. I don’t know if they will do it this time or not. The foreign automakers are much more competitive and can get things done. Unless the Big 3 (as they are known in the states – GM, Ford, Chrysler (in a partnership with Daimler, the German company) can get their whole business structure in line with the profitable companies, any money will go right down the drain. I haven’t studied the background of these companies so I don’t know where the problems are, where they can cut costs and reorganize things. If the problem costs are in the money going to entitlements to retirees like my father (health care, pensions, etc.), there is simply no way that they can take that away as it is a contractual obligation and short of filing bankruptcy, there isnt any other way that they can get out of it that I know of.
If Congress gives them money, it will not fix the problems as they are underlying and of many years duration, they won’t go away overnight. Sad as it might be for the US and for my home state of Michigan, I think that the taxpayers and Congress have to give the auto industry a bit of tough love and let them go. Frankly, going back to bailouts, the 700 billion one from earlier this year was supposed to “fix” the market from getting worse. That didn’t work either. Don’t know about the rest of the bludgers, but this household has seen the margin call letter more than I care to in recent months. I don’t support tossing money out unless there are some hard guarantees and promises attached to it.
Let the auto industry go in the US. Australia? I don’t know, don’t know enough about it locally to say one way or the other. To date, I think that everything Rudd has done has been fine, so I’ll trust their judgement on this. As noted in QT last session though, Rudd has put some safeguards on the money to the Aussie car makers so it can’t be poached back to America ……
Yep I think you’re right. But politically, and that’s what’ll come down too, it’s suicide.
If anyone has difficulties reading Ron’s writings, I strongly advise that they buy a Mario Vargas Llosa novel, especially Conversation in the Cathedral. He’s a Peruvian genius who ran for President once and has somehow annoyed the Swedes enough to never receive a Nobel Prize for Literature yet.
Ron is the Australian version. The writing is uncannily similar.
The current problems in Michigan. It is not looking good.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/us/23michigan.html?pagewanted=2
Juliem,
This article has a good wrap-up of the US automobile industry problems. Doesn’t look too good for your dad’s retirement & healthcare benefits though.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/business/22nocera.html?pagewanted=1&em
We didnt throw money at Ansett but Rudd and Co thinks its ok to throw money at an industry that has been terminal for decades…
Surely we could spend billions of dollars better?
On cars, I’ll try to offer a non-ideological answer. As an engineer call me biased but this is a technical problem, which I have no faith in economists to come up with a sensibe answer on (as with so many aspects of transport and industry policy…)
In terms of economies of scale, there is no reason Australia can’t have a viable auto industry – at one million new car sales per year, its easily big enough to justify a manufacturer (not four though). Sweden had two manufacturers on a smaller domestic demand (but with much bigger exports). There are two problems with the industry though – much of the plant is old and obsolete (eg former Mitsubisihi) and foreign owners would probably rather manufactuer in their home plants and import – so they only do the minimum necessary to obtain local subsidies. Its a long time since someone built a large, modern, highly automated (i.e. competitive) auto platn in Australia. So yes, we could have a viable auto industry, but the only reason we keep the one we’ve got is jobs in marginal electorates. We need a new auto industry. Fast.
That being said, building “green” cars is a big opportunity market. Unlike the rest of the global car market, it is not an over-supplied market segment. But will Ford or GMH invest here to create it? I doubt it. I think we are better off being pragmatic – offer conditional assistance if Toyota (or someone else) if they actualy build one, but only on a matching basis. So Ford and GM shoudl get nothign unless they commit to building an advanced car. Most past assistance has been used for doign nothign more than retooling factories to build the latest Detroit tank here.
As an aside, I think we exaggerate our techncal capability to do such thigns. Governments have run down funding for engineering and scientific research in both acadmeia and CSIRO for decades. Its an open question whether we still have an adequate skill base to build a genuine industry here. We’re flat out building electric trains.
Glen the Liberals are just as guilty if not more so as Labor of throwing money at a failing car industry. And it’s not even in their ideology lol.
Centre, I personally like this paragraph.
http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2006/02/jones.html
I know we did but not to the extent that our ‘glorious’ PM has done…
The AFR made noted in one of it’s articles today the wasted tens of billions of the Howard Costello era. I wonder if that is going to be made into an issue, it should.
Given the strengthening personal data for Rudd and the weakening of Turnbull I would be guessing it to flow through as a TPP increase in the next Newspoll, all other things being equal I wouldn’t be that surprised to see a 57/43.
Then you get an industry like “childcare” where just one operator, ABC were getting 44% of their annual income from the taxpayer and able to make an annual profit of $80m. Just goes to show that “close connections” to the Liberal/National Coalition pays off remarkably well. Corporatise the profits and socialise any losses.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/alan-ramsey/george-was-ignored-over-childcare-fear/2008/11/21/1226770735308.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot?
http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20080611-Car.html
Glen refer to steve’s post @ 206 of the substantial subsidies handed out by the Howard government.
There was no doubt, if there was a vote in it, Howard would throw bucket loads of cash at it!
Glen @ 100
I agree that it is far more difficult to shine in Opposition than it is in Government. The latter has the money, the initiative, lots of ‘friends’, and all the skills, experience and intellectual support that public service departments bring with them. However, this means that the Opposition has to work harder, not less. Others have made comments about the current Opposition seeming to have the notion that they are the natural party of government. The corollary for many of them seems to be that there is no need to do any work until they get back in. It appears to be a bit of psychological trap, particularly for the old hands. If this leads to ratings of ‘C-‘ (struggling) for many in the Inner Shadow Cabinet, so be it.
Looking at the three you specify. Keenan has the poisoned chalice. His Shadow Portfolio responsibilities have been one of the epicentres of Government v Opposition debates. His visibility is not the issue. The issue is that he has not cut it. His opposite number has used the portfolio to establish herself solidly as future prime ministerial material. Cobb has done nothing in relation to policy development. His party is disappearing around him. He has contributed nothing in parliament. The only thing he appears to have actually earned in 12 months is his rating of C-. Perhaps you would like to specify the contributions Ciobo has made in parliament, in committee, in party policy development or in party reform? I am willing to re-rate him if you come up with some positives. Until then, he must be counted as part of the very large core of dead weight of the Inner Shadow Ministery.
Glen, read Scorpio at 209.
Shame Howard Shame!
Boerwar, thoroughly enjoyed the work you did in assessing the Shadow ministry. There is no doubt your writing and research skills have taken a quantum leap in the time you have been commenting here.
Gillards performance is highly overated….
Keenan hasnt done anything wrong vis a vis the debate on IR, he hasnt had to debate Gillard on IR yet he will next year i think…but at the time being the Coalition doesnt have an IR policy and Labor arent pushing hard on theirs so i hardly think it is fair to dismiss someone like Keenan this early…the mere fact he was put in the job means the party thinks he’s up to it…and granted he is against Gillard but IR is a dead issue right now and all Gillard has done is stand in for Rudd i havent seen her say or do anything on IR or Education…where is the Revolution???????
You clearly haven’t been watching TV for the past 12 months.
The IR Legislation hits Parliament on Tuesday.
0-2 for Glen tonight.
Adam in Canberra @ 125
I have noted your comments on Abetz’ performance and have upped his rating to B (Above average but short of a star). I hope I have not over-egged the cake on the basis of your comments. It does raise the technical issue about whether ‘average’ actually refers to the rest of the Opposition. If so, average is pretty average.
With respect to Abbott, I believe that your comments add to our understanding of his personality, and possibly to the gender nature of portfolios (lol), but do not affect his rating, which remains at C (Average bordering on mediocre). I agree that he, along with most of his colleagues, is operating below his potential.
The UK cutting their GST from 17.5% down to 15%
http://news.smh.com.au/world/britain-set-to-slash-tax-on-goods-and-services-20081123-6ey8.html
Goodness, even Airbus is being outsourced to China now.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2008-11/21/content_7229723.htm
Meanwhile, this is one way to chew up their “stimulus package” quickly.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2008-11/21/content_7230479.htm
They’re certainly not messing around and it won’t hurt their Co2 emissions reduction program any harm either.
Newspoll: 55-45. New thread.