It’s looking a very merry Christmas for pensioners and families and, not unrelatedly, the Rudd government, which has added a further 1 per cent to its already formidable two-party lead in a Christmas eve Morgan face-to-face poll. Curiously, the Greens are down from 10.5 per cent to 6 per cent in a survey conducted half before and half after the government’s emissions trading scheme announcement of December 15. The slack has been taken up by a spike in the Labor primary vote from 48.5 per cent to 52.5 per cent, their best result in almost seven months. The Coalition primary vote is also up slightly, from 34.5 per cent to 35.5 per cent.
Morgan also produced two sets of leadership ratings last week, one comparing Rudd to Turnbull and the other comparing them both with their party colleagues. Rudd’s approval rating was up four points from the previous survey of October 15-16 to 68 per cent, while his lead over Turnbull as preferred prime minister had blown out from 62.5-24 to 69-20. Worringly for Turnbull, his approval rating was down 13 per cent to 42 per cent while his disapproval was up from 24 per cent to 37.5 per cent, a much sharper turnaround than recorded by Newspoll over the same period (from 50-25 to 47-32). The preferred Labor leader results turned up no surprises, but the Liberal ratings interestingly found Turnbull tied with Peter Costello on 28 per cent. This compared with Costello’s lead of 31 per cent to 20 per cent in the previous such survey of September 10-11, when Brendan Nelson was still leader.
391 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 8 » Show All
ruawake
I am not a lawyer but if he (Haneef) doesn’t succeed in a claim for damages, or more likely receive an out of court settlement, I will be quite amazed. Just because an inquiry found that no laws have been broken, doesn’t mean that his treatment was fair, reasonable, or represented an ethical use of those powers. You can win common law damages without proving laws were broken, just that you were harmed. Under Australian law you can win a defamation case even when the defaimer was found to be telling the truth. If I am incorrect perhaps some lawyers present could give their views?
ruawake
Sorry I missed a critical part of your post – I agree that a review is badly needed. The terror and immigration laws have proven to be just as flawed as the Democrats said they were when passed.
Socrates, Howard certainly liked to give the impression that refusing to say sorry somehow protected the government from being sued. Maybe it helped him sleep better at night. But as those reading this as HM guests will testify, pretending innocence doesn’t stop you getting banged up. Indeed, the cost is usually greater than pleading guilty.
I’m with you, I think Haneef is at least as motivated by clearing his name as filling his pockets and that a full, unequivocal apology might go a long way to appeasing him. Even if it doesn’t damages will be awarded on the merits of Haneef’s case, not on whether someone used the ‘S’ word or not.
Socrates,
The response to the judicial inquiry in to the Haneef matter indicates that the Labor Government broadly supports the legislation. There will be some modifications as a result of the inquiry. However, if you think there going to be a holus bolus review then think again. It ain’t gonna happen.
GG
I fear you are right, but sorry to hear that nevertheless. Both philosophically and historically, I am very skeptical of the whole notion that tougher laws or greater powers ever defeat terrorism.
GG
I’d add Ron to that list with Mr Bowe.
Socrates
It’s not as simple as anti-anti-religious sentiment. The bishops included Blair in their criticism, and he was as pro-Christianity as any British PM. Personally, I can’t understand how the C of E works.
Socrates,
Hold on tight to your dreams!
However, I can assure you that dilution of terrorist laws or even the perception of a weak approach to terrorism by this or any government in the current world environment would be a “heroic’ stance. (In the Yes Prime Minister context).
I am sure that one mis-treated doctor and a mountain of mournful mouth from civil libertarians is a price that Rudd and Co are prepared to pay to stay in Government.
I mean, what have you done for him lately?
The answer to Haneef is ministerial responsibility, if the AFP or ASIO or DPP stuff up then the A-G takes the rap and heads to backbenchville.
If the Immigration minister gets dud info from his minions it his fault.
Under Howard “I did not know” became the standard excuse. The fact is “you should have known” is the only response that is acceptable.
Diogenes,
Perhaps Skippy, Phar Lap and Possum should all be stuffed and mounted as well. I’ll leave the order of ceremonies to you.
Diogenes @ 206
‘Personally, I can’t understand how the C of E works.’
It is a fairly chaotic organisation at the moment, only hanging together by the skin of its teeth. Bishops are entitled to have, and to express, an opinion. The rest of us are entitled to listen up or ignore.
It is good to see that some of them have got beyond fretting about other people’s reproductive zones and started fretting about social inequality and lying governments.
Ruawake – true about ministerial responsibility – perhaps that is what sticks in my craw most about this whole sorry episode. I dream of the parliament where PM’s realise again that defending indefensible failures makes the brand weaker, not stronger.
Haneef is not just Haneef. He is all the other Australian people who felt threatened by the targetted response against a person who does not look like, or quite talk like, members of the AFP or the previous, (or current) Government parliamentarians. In this particular respect, the parliamentarians are, as an arch-wag once put it, unrepresentative swill.
For the sake of inclusiveness and the peace of mind of all the vulnerables, a ’sorry’ and an ex gratia payment is very important. It is also important for the rest of us because, ethically, we need to be able to live together well.
Gary Bruce
A minor point: The early members of the stolen generations have passed away, as you have indicated. I personally know several members of the most recent of the stolen generations. Earlier on I knew quite a few people taken in the forties and fifties – the ones I knew from that generation have passed away. Anyway, many members of the last of the stolen generations are truly alive, are much knocked about, but they survive and bear witness.
Thanks Boerwar. I must admit when I made that statement I was thinking about the instigators of that policy and wasn’t aware that the policy lasted upto the 70’s.
I’m not sure why but whereas I have no difficulty with the apology to the stolen generations I”m a bit uneasy about this government apologising to Haneef. I’m not sure the wrongs are of equivalent value. Maybe a government “sorry” should be restricted to extreme cases, I don’t know.
I still believe Howard and his cronies should apologise though.
We screw up in Medicine all the time. Patients die from preventable diseases etc. We certainly say sorry quite a lot. If it’s an individuals mistake they apologise, if it’s a system error the system should apologise at the appropriate level. People apologise on behalf of the Government all the time. It shouldn’t be a big deal for the AG to apologise, and it should be the current AG. His Department stuffed up.
I’m pretty sure that Gordon Brown is a son of the manse, which is why the UK clergy may feel inclined to try to influence people’s views about his Government, and of course Tony Blair was a public Christian, which perhaps makes him fair game for criticism on the “morals” dimension.
That said, I think that the clergy are ill-advised to get involved in political argy-bargy, and they must expect that if they dish it out, they are likely to cop it also. Ill-advised, I hasten to add, imho, because it’s not clear how much (positive) influence they are likely to have.
On a different note: for my many crimes and sins, I’m condemned to being a constituent of Kevin Andrews, so I’ve recently read his Christmas newsletter. His many fans on the site will be interested to learn that he has revisited his statements in 2007 about incidence of crime among recent immigrants from Africa. I suspect that many will share my amusement that “he felt vindicated when he read a Herald-Sun article ‘Race offence against truth’ by Andrew Bolt” (19 November).
The Bolt article is at: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24672971-5000117,00.html
KA’s press release is at: http://www.kevinandrews.au.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.getItem&t=NationalNews&id=18
What “should be” and what “is” are two different things in this case Dio and that’s my point.
Andrews?
The AFP?
Gary
My point is that probably quite a few agencies stuffed up. That makes it a system problem so I think someone like the CE of the AG’s Department should apologise. It’s all this political crap that whips this into a big deal. Someone dying because of a drug error or something is much worse than 3 weeks of an incarcerated person. That happens all the time. I’m endlessly apologising to patients for the public hospital system’s failings. It makes the patient and rellies feel better, they deserve it and none of them have sued yet.
The State stuffed up re Haneef and the State (that means the current Ministers) is smart to apologise as this is one way of reducing damages given that a stuff-you approach is surely a recipe for bigger damages. I suspect the Rudd government is playing some sort of game by trying to put the torch on Ruddick, Andrews and the whole miserable lot who supported them but they would be a lot smarter to just apologise for the stuffups and political interference of the previous government and get a few brownie points.
The problem for the government is that the moment they apologise the question then arises “So you think the system is wrong do you? Why are you still keeping much of it?” So getting brownie points for a simple apology becomes a long drawn out political headache. Of course you could argue “and rightly so” but governments don’t see it that way do they? As Dio says, “It’s all this political crap that whips this into a big deal.”
It is a very interesting issue. Bolt’s article would have a whole lot more credibility if it were a bit more balanced.
The first thing that Bolt does not recognise is that the Howard Government were expert dog whistlers. They were so good at it, and had done it so often that people on both sides more or less automatically responded to the ‘dog whistle’ regardless of the contents of any particular issue. In other words, it had become virtually impossible for a member of the Howard Government to make public, race or ethnic-based statements without getting a pavlovian response.
Secondly, Bolt is a shock jock and rule number one for a shock jock is frame the debate. The second rule is frame the debate and so is the third rule. So, Bolt says:
‘Andrews, cautious and deeply Christian, had been gradually cutting our intake of refugees from Somalia and Sudan for some time, and in October last year explained why.’
And here we have the ‘rules’. Andrew’s religion has got absolutely nothing to do with the issue – unless Bolt is seeking to reinforce the Andrew’s dog-whistle.
Thirdly, Bolt is right to question whether decisions by police commissioners are politically motivated. (It would be interesting to know whether he has had a close look at the AFP blunders in relation to Haneef, for example…). However, anyone who thinks the Victorian Police Commissioner is the only police persone in Victoria playing political games is clearly not a very good journalist.
The dog whistling, the police politics and the party-political issues aside, clearly some work is going to have to be put into provided improved support for Sudanese refugees.
Gary
Your point about changing the system is true. Most patients and relatives say that when they complain about something serious going wrong, they don’t want anyone sacked or whatever, they just want to make sure it won’t happen to anyone else.
some members of the stolen generation would be in their early forties, my son was part of a trio, the champ,{m.o.s.g.} the preacher and the spook {Alan} the weekend Alan was taken was one of the rare ones they didnt spend together, champ was taken by a pair of church elders and he was never happy with them, he became an indiginous youth counceller as an adult.he’d be in his middle fourties now.
Diogenes @ 222
I was about to make the same point but with the reinforcement that there are a whole swag of people out there looking to see what the Government does in relation to Haneef.
The answer to date is pathetic. C’mon guys, just say, ‘Sorry’. Just do it. Get a real life.
People understand perfectly well that where there are humans involved you will get cock-ups and that systems aren’t perfect. Just because the unrepresentative swill of parliamentarians contains a disproportionate number of legal persons does not mean that the Government has to go all legalistic and systematic. It could just go humane, and say, ‘There was a bugger up. You suffered significantly as a consequence – you were publicly humiliated, you were treated as a terrorist, you were run out of the country. We are sorry and we would like to make it up to you.’
Now, what does public humiliation, being branded as a terrorist, being run out of your job and your country cost? A pimple on the national budget’s bum and a large return in terms of the perceptions of the vulnerable who are watching all this with an eagle eye.
If the Opposition and a few rascist swine get their noses out of joint because someone in the Rudd Government says ‘Sorry’, so bl**dy what?
Let’s say I am charged with a criminal offence and held in remand until my case is heard by a judge. When committal hearings begin the prosecution withdraws all charges.
Am I entitled to an apology from the government and financial compensation?
I dont know the answer to this but believe Haneef would be entitled to the same compensation and response from the government as any other innocent citizen in Australia receives.
WHAT IF Palin did become President????
http://www.palinaspresident.us/never/index.html
Robert Sykes @ 225
Haneef is not the ’same as any other innocent citizen in Australia’. He is different from other innocents because:
1. His case was manipulated for party political purposes.
2. He was targetted because he did not look anglo saxon and he did not speak strine.
3. He was not just ‘remanded’. He lost his job and was forced to flee this country.
4. He embodies the fears of those in Australia who feel vulnerable – not to criminals, but to the arbitrary application of the enforcement apparatus.
The Haneef thing thing involved an original mistake that was cleared up in a matter of days: the ownership and relevance to a terrorism investigation of the SIM card. After that, the rest was – at various levels – a pathetic, politically motivated and stupid attempt to turn the original error into a matter of national importance. I have no doubt that it was politically motivated and self-perpetuating. The more the authorities involved – from Andrews down – were criticised, the more they got their backs up and dug in.
We had all kinds of people ringing the radio stations repeating the mantra, “Better to be safe than sorry.” We had Mick Keelty in the media at all hours delivering blow-by-blows of the case. We had journalistic commentaries on the body language, the nuances of language, the minutae of syntax of the Haneef 60-Minutes interview, mostly designed to “prove” he was guilty. We had (even after Haneef was released) the idiocy of “continuing investigations” into the case, investigations that dragged on, to no purpose, for months and months.
Thing was, the Howard government was so desperate to claw back some ground from Labor, that something like the Haneef affair was three-quarters expected. The other quarter of the four said, “Nah… they wouldn’t be so stupid as to try a terrorism scare on just before the election.” That’s why it did no good. It was too pat. I think in the end it did the Howardistas no good at all.
The original arrest was plausible. The early parts of the investigation needed doing. After that it as sheer bloody-mindedness, carried out in public in order to save personal, reputational and ultimately political skins. That’s why Haneef should be compensated.
Haneef was fortunate that the AFP/Howard Party desire for publicity and that he was a foreign national meant the worst of the ‘anti terrorist’ laws weren’t invoked. The ones that allow suspects to be kept under wraps for years in absolute secrecy and unable to tell anyone of their ordeal even when released. He could still be languishing in one of our prisons to this day!
Aussieguru01 @ 226 -
WHAT IF Palin did become President????
I thought the dinosaur was a good touch. So is what happens when you mouse over her beauty queen sash. But clicking on the red phone takes the cake, even if it is a bit predictable. If only we could do that in real life with the impact confined to the Oval Office!
again we’re getting chickens and hatchings, i somehow dont think the outcome is as cut and dried as they think, many a slip between cup and lip so the old saying goes.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/the-new-face-of-the-liberals-charm-offensive/2008/12/29/1230399131583.html
Another “Bogan” arrives in Alaska.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24855760-2703,00.html
Cricket fans will be amused at the name given tyhe poor beggar.
looks like she’s carried on the odd family name tradition, that is unless Sarah named him for her, the way the young couple was scrubbed, uncomfortably suited and dished up to the media i wouldnt been surprised.
I personally can’t wait for Jan 20th to see Hillary step up to the plate and bring peace to the Middle East. What big Ferragamo shoes she has to fill! Sorry Amigos but I’m guessing she is going to be about as effective as Condi. She’ll need to spend too much time ducking sniper fire.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N29319898.htm
#233 Diog, i am too hurt to laugh and too old to cry and to pussoff to argue with you at the moment.
Australian cricket has been buried. But what do you expect when you got:
1. A captain who cant captain
2. An opener who cant open
3. A Mr. Cricket and Vice captain who cant stop eating the oily chooks
4. An allrounder who cant go around
5. A lethal fast bowler who cant bowl a maiden but lost a maiden
6. A commentator who is an Australian, Pom, and South African, depending who is winning.
Wow, abusing babies! Classy.
Diogenes @ 233 -
Obama has already signalled that he will continue the U.S. stand alongside Israel no matter what and stuff the inhabitants of the
WarsawGaza ghetto.If anything, I expect Hillary will do even less than Rice…i.e. wave less enthusiastically at the airport. Remember hubby comprehensively shafted Arafat during and after Camp David in 2000.
The Finnigans @ 234 -
The first ones to get the boot should be the selectors…followed in short order by most of the team, including the captain except he’s the only one that can bat better than an under 12s middle order!
Amigo Finns
Time for a song to get you dancing again
OHH for the good old days, rolling around the Hill at the SCG, pissed outa your brain with a pack of sailors, and cheering on the mighty Dougie Walters!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL6mWgioXyA&feature=related
Rudd or the Labor Party should not apologise to Haneef. They had nothing to do with the debacle. The Haneef affair was used purely for political wedge purposes to score, cheap as a whore, votes.
Howard, Ruddock, Andrews and the current leader Turnbull should have the courage and decency to say sorry to Haneef. I know that would be too hard for Howard, he was such a little wimp! As for Keelty, well he should resign, or better still, get sacked.
What about that other debacle in the middle east? They call it self defence? When it comes to the middle east, NOBODY is more unbiased, open mined, and independent than myself. Israel’s behaviour is a disgrace! The UN has said to them to put away their weapons. Obviously the Isrealies want to give them one good last hiding before Bush is shown the door. Obama should put the Israelies in their place as soon as he takes the role as president.
I reckon I could get peace in the middle east in one week? Give the other mob the same amount of weapons.
vera @ 237 -
OHH for the good old days, rolling around the Hill at the SCG, pissed outa your brain with a pack of sailors
Sailors, huh? Didn’t your Mum warn you about them, Vera?
Centre I don’t know anything much about Middle East politics but watching the news coverage there isn’t too much outrage especially when compared to Mumbai when the death toll and injuries were less. Yanks say it’s OK ,that they brought it on themselves.
Sickening to see the fuss made over one Israelie death after Palestine retaliated and yet no tears for the slain Palastinian hundreds just a lot of bending over backwards trying to make excuses for the slaughter.
Seems Israel can bomb to their hearts content murdering hundreds of men women & children and injuring a thousand more and no one calls them terrorists, Why not?
If the arabs blast them off the face of the earth they won’t get too much sympathy from me.
Mayo Feral, I used to be an old salt myself once, no funny business on the Hill at SCG, I was just one of the boys.
Yes Vera. They call the Palestinians terrorists because their only possible form of attack is suicide bombing.
So I say give them the same amount of weapons so they don’t have to rely on terrorism. I would like to bet on peace quick smart on a level playing field!
I’m starting to think Mel Gibson was right.
The general ratio of deaths is usually Arab:Israeli of about 100:1. If it gets more than that, the US think Israel is being a little heavy-handed. Less than 100:1 and the US say the Arabs were asking for it. I’ve just started reading Fisk’s book about the Great War for Civilisation. It’s all very ugly.
Finns,
Don’t despair. Australian Cricket is in reasonable condition. Agree that a few of our champions have grown old more quickly than anticipated. But that is just the circle of life. We have been blessed with an era of champions that we are unlikely to see again for some considerable time.
I would argue that Hayden, Ponting, McGrath and Warne would be in any all time greatest teams for Australia. And, the supporting cast over the last twenty years more than hold their own as great Australian Cricketers.
The answer is youth. The Proteas have a young team of champions that have been given a go. It is time for Australia to do the same.
The Australian way has always been to give the young ones the opportunity if the older ones are not performing. Bringing back Hayden after a serious injury, playing Symonds when knowingly injured and casting off Kreja after one bad innings with the ball is the reason we are suffering.
I would be making 3 or 4 changes for Sydney.
Hughes,
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey M
McDonald
Haddin
Johnson
Kreja
Hilfenhaus
Bollinger
12th David Hussey
Katich might be due for a move down the order as his appalling crease footwork seems to have been sorted out by the bowlers. Mike Hussey needs to get rid of his new nickname Mr Crockit. Haddin is a fair batsman but an “iron gloves” as a keeper and probably has 12 months to go.
Ricky Ponting now becomes the mentor for the new era of players. If he can’t handle that, then time for Clarke to take over for England.
I will tell you something else that’s a load of crap. Iran being a threat to the west if they are allowed to develop nuclear weapons. That’s like saying I’m going to be a threat to Mike Tyson if I start doing boxing.
If Iran developed nukes, you may end up with peace in the middle east. The only reason they don’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons is to maintain Israel’s power. Well, as far as I’m concerned Israel has abused its power.
You will NEVER have peace over there the way things have turned out. Give the other mob the same weapons I say.
The hill was a great place for the one-dayers, I was there in the 80’s when a bunch of sailors used the scorekeepers window for target practice with their empty cans, aim was quite good. Cops came over and got swamped by the hill fans who grabbed their hats and threw them, eventually settled down.
And finally a policy of Fred Niles that I agree with.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/niles-bid-to-protect-sydneys-muslims–a-hrefhttpwwwsmhcomaupollsnationalformhtmlbpollba/2008/12/30/1230399185957.html
Don’t know about others but the sight of hairy chested blokes on the beach is a real turnoff, the sooner they force them to wear a t-shirt the better or force them to get a wax job. When they come out of the surf its worse, looks like they have a great bunch of seaweed stuck to their chest.
GG id make different changes…
Rogers
Katich
Ponting
Clarke
Hussey M
Hussey D
Haddin
Johnson
Hauritz
Hilfenhaus
Siddle
I agree Castle. I think it’s OK for the fillies though.
If Nile has got a problem, he shouldn’t look.
GG must be a selector. Bollinger, Hilfenhaus and McDonald in. Lee and Symonds out.
Pages: « 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 8 » Show All