Newspoll seems to have taken the week off, but there’s always Essential Research, which has Labor’s lead up to 61-39 from 60-40 last week. Also featured are questions on becoming a republic within the next few years (52 per cent support, 24 per cent oppose – the latter sounds a bit low), whether Australia should agree to allow Japan to conduct whaling if it limits its activities to the northern hemisphere (10 per cent agree, 81 per cent disagree), “how would you rate your loyalty to your employer” and “how would you rate your employer’s loyalty to staff”. Furthermore:
• The silly season endeth – Kerry O’Brien and Lateline are back, and parliaments federal, Victorian and South Australian resume today.
• The Australian Workers Union has released a comprehensive survey of workers’ attitudes to the global financial crisis, derived from 1016 interviews conducted by Auspoll. The headline finding is that 40 per cent fear losing their jobs in the next year.
• Parties’ disclosures of receipts, expenditure and debts are available for perusal at the Australian Electoral Commission, at least so far as donations of over $10,500 are concerned. Siobhain Ryan and Imre Salusinszky of The Australian and Bernard Keane of Crikey sift through the evidence; the latter also opens fire on the Coalition over its obstruction of legislation reversing the 2005 disclosure threshold hike. Keane notes that one travesty can’t be pinned on the previous government: that we have had to wait until February 2009 to find out what went on at an election held in November 2007. Anyone who imagines this has something to do with logistics should consider the practice in New York City, where donations have to be declared before election day and “made public immediately on a searchable, online database”.
• Antony Green returns from a fortnight in the wilderness (literally) with a belated post-mortem on the Liberals’ defeat in South Australia’s Frome by-election. As I suspected, independent Geoff Brock owes his win to a peculiarity of the state’s electoral system that saves ballot papers with incomplete preferences by assigning them the preferences officially lodged by their favoured candidate. Without this provision, 258 ballots that were thus admitted the day after polling day would have been informal, leaving Brock 38 votes behind Labor at the second last count rather than 30 votes ahead. Another issue has been brought to my attention by Kevin Bonham, who points to the fact that a certain number of Liberal voters harmed their candidate’s chances by voting Liberal rather than Labor. If 31 such voters had tactically switched to Labor, Brock would have been excluded and the distribution of his preferences would have given victory to Liberal candidate Terry Boylan. Public choice theorists call this flaw in preferential voting “non-monotonicity”, which is elaborated upon here (although Bonham reckons “some of their worked examples are wrong”).
• Antony also gets in early with a preview of Western Australia’s May 18 daylight saving referendum, which combines customary psephological insight with a keen eye for the state’s lifestyle peculiarities.
• Former Labor MLA Kathryn Hay will run as an independent for the Tasmanian upper house division of Windermere (extending from the outskirts of Launceston north to the proposed site of Gunns’ Bell Bay pulp mill), challenging independent incumbent Ivan Dean at the poll likely to be held on May 2. Peter Tucker at Tasmanian Politics reports that one of the the other two seats up for election, the Devonport-based division of Mersey, looms as a clash between Latrobe mayor Mike Gaffney and Devonport mayor Lyn Laycock. Mersey is being vacated by retiring independent Norma Jamieson.
• Staying in Tasmania, a recount has confirmed that the last remaining Labor candidate in Franklin from the 2006 election, Daniel Hulme, will assume the lower house seat vacated by former Tourism Minister Paula Wriedt.
• Mining magnate and former National Party director Clive Palmer is making himself visible as the Queensland state election approaches, having been profiled last week on The 7.30 Report and in a cover story for The Weekend Australian Magazine. The latest salvo in Palmer’s charm offensive is a demand of $1 million in damages for defamation from Anna Bligh, who said there was “something just not right about one billionaire owning their own political party” (the annual financial disclosures discussed previously list $600,000 in donations from Palmer to the Liberal and National parties). Sean Parnell’s Weekend Australian piece describes Palmer as a “notorious litigant”, who “once listed it as a hobby in his Who’s Who entry”. Palmer’s 18-year-old son Michael has been preselected as the Liberal National Party candidate for the safe Labor seat of Nudgee.
• Rick Wallace of The Australian reports that Nationals-turned-Liberal Senator Julian McGauran will face a number of challengers in his bid for one of the two safe seats on the Victorian Senate ticket, with other incumbent Michael Ronaldson “widely expected to claim top spot”. The field includes prominent Peter Costello supporter Ross Fox, barrister Caroline Kenny and solicitor Cate Dealehr. Other names mentioned by Andrew Landeryou’s VexNews are Terry Barnes, a “former Tony Abbott adviser”, and Owen Lysaght, who ran as an independent in Chisholm in 2004.
1,780 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 31 32 [33] 34 35 … 36 » Show All
Dovif @ 1599. I thought NSW would be a shoe-in for a big slice of the money for schools. Based on our brief sojourn into that state, the schools in Sydney are in appalling condition. Maintenance and building teams are a regular feature of Queensland schools, and teachers here don’t greet the parents of prospective students by apologising about the lack of heating/chairs or the condition of windows/paint etc.
#1600 TF
Mayne’s position is even more extreme than Turnbull’s. Turnbull is recommending a smaller package with tax cuts instead of handouts, but Mayne is recommending no action at all at this time. Mayne is poles apart from many economists, Ross Gittins for example, who consider the deficit small potatoes compared with the other problems we face in the next few years. Mayne (and on this he’s with Turnbull) considers the debt from the stimulus the biggest problem. What do these media commentators expect the public to make of such fundamental disagreements?
If he gets to talk on RN he can’t be called a failed commentator. If he supports Turnbull he can be called an idiot.
Polyquats
I agree completely, the rail link/metro link was first promised in (1997?) and after 12 years, they have not even done a feasibility study on it! This might be the most incompetent government of all time.
Not only did they not budgeted for it in 12 years, they begged the federal government to help them with it and cannot provide enough details to get it approved.
This is not a political beat up! It is federal ALP saying how incompetent the NSW ALP is.
These clowns at Macquarie St might not be able to run a money printing machine profitably.
Adam
Serious question: in what way does a FFP senator assist ALP strategy in the present parliament
I am horrified that a site of experienced politician-watchers has expressed surprised in about 200 posts that most of our politicians are ill-informed, incurious intellectual lightweights. These people aren’t chosen because they are polymaths with penetrating and sophisticated intellects.
Dovif, I spent 18 months in Sydney in 2002-3, and my daughter has just spent three years at university in Sydney. I was astounded at the bone-shattering incompetence of the state government even then. I suggested to my co-workers that Brisbane might lend them Jim Soorley for a while, but amazingly they seemed to think that there city/state was so superior to any other that no help was needed. Not surprisingly, it was Sydney’s access to things cultural (shows at the Opera House etc) that they most sited as reasons for the superiority of Sydney. But that becomes a moot point if most of the population can’t afford to go or find transport to get there!
If Queensland regional councils needed an overhaul, Sydney urban ones need it in spades. Health services were patchy (we had some wins and losses) but the school system is a disgrace! Especially for kids with special needs. Transport I know is contentious. About the only thing that Sydney can beat Brisbane on is proximity of services like schools, shopping centres, child care etc to transport services (in Brisbane urban railway stations are inconveniently located miles from any usable service), ad I’m sure that was a coincidence. Sydney – dirty, ugly, untidy, disorganised, chaotic; NSW – lost cause. Glad to be in Brisbane.
Originally from Melbourne are we?
So much for the ’splurge’ in December on the pokies being all down to the handouts
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/punters-back-on-pokies/2009/02/05/1233423405363.html
True Dario, the coalition’s demand to summon treasury officials to parliament could backfire badly. They will be quoting the same stats in support of the stimulus Labor would have, but it will look much more credible if career public servants do it.
Every school in the country will get some money. NSW has the most schools, so that state will get the most money.
What is the problem with these people? In 2011-12, our debt to GDP will be 1.8%. This compares with:
Canada about 22%
EU, about 42%
UK about 50%
US about 55%
Japan about 90%
What they are actually saying is that about a hundred thousand more people can lose their jobs now just so we can say we have no net debt. So a piece of accounting is more important than the livelihood of thousands of Australians.
The government cannot pass any bill which is opposed by the Coalition through the Senate without the support of the Greens, Fielding and Xenophon. The Greens are to the left of the government, Fielding is to the right (Xenophon is unclassifiable). If the Greens alone held the balance of power, all the pressure on the government would be to accommodate the Greens by moving to the left – away from the centre, where the voters are. Fielding provides a counter-balance on the right, thus forcing the Greens to moderate their demands and making centrist outcomes more likely. Having to deal with both the Greens and Fielding makes the Senate negotiating process more difficult, but it gives ministers more room for manoeuvre.
ShowsOn, you know you can’t argue with these people using facts…
I agree, I think in the long run it’s going to turn out to have been a very good Senate for the country
ShowsON
Exactly right about the debt – that was my point in an earlier post. When the economy is at full capacity again we can pay off the debt with 2-3 years of surpluses.
By contrast, the US debt is so large that after their stimulus packages they will need around 1/4 of their budget to pay interest on the debt. Our situation is incomparably better.
I took those figures from chart 4.2 on Page 46 of UEFO:
http://www.budget.gov.au/2008-09/content/uefo/download/Combined_UEFO.pdf
I just can’t handle people who think we should have a budget surplus ALL THE TIME, that is exactly the sort of extremist economic nonsense that got us into this problem in the first place. If the Federal budget was EVER to go into deficit, now would be it.
On economic issues Fielding sounds almost like Pauline Hanson, you know lamenting the fact we have an open internationalised economy that attracts foreign investment.
In the committee yesterday he was trying to get the treasury officials to say that the December ESS package was just going to end up in the profits of big companies and in particular the pockets of “foreigners”. Ken Henry had to explain to him that a significant portion of that money will be used to employ people in Australia.
Exactly, and this is a policy I would endorse, because – unlike what happened in the 2000/2001 financial year, I think it is BAD for governments to run deficits when the economy is going along at trend growth.
But we are facing the prospect of growing at less than 1% this year, with most similar economies going backwards. Now is not the time to pretend that Australia can grow at 3% when the rest of the world is going backwards, but that seems to be Coalition policy.
looks like Murdoch’s Newsltd is finally back to basics since they lost the $billions of Howard’s egotistial self advertising rorts.
http://money.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=741520
I’m amazed everyone is still so worked up about the 2004 Senate preference deals. The same deal was done in 2004 with Family First in South Australia and it elected a third Labor MP ahead of a Green. The same deal was done with Fred Nile and Glenn Druery in NSW and it elected a third Labor Senator ahead of a Green. The deal backfired in Victoria because Labor’s primary vote was too low.
Instead of going on endlessly about the preference deal, answer this question instead. Why did Labor do so badly in 2004 that it recorded the lowest primary vote in decades? Even if Labor had directed preferences to the Greens in Victoria, the Coalition would still have got control of the Senate because they won 3 of every six state senate seats, plus a 4th in Queensland. All this angst between Labor and Green supporters over a preference deal just ignores the point that in 2004, the electorate backed the Coalition with an increased vote and increased House majority and a Senate majority. Perhaps that explains why Labor took a distinct step back towards the political centre in 2007.
As for the disgrace of a party doing outrageous deals to get elected, I suggest people look at the Greens’ Senate ticket in NSW at the 2001 election which did some preference swaps with some distinctly right-wing micro-parties ahead of the Australian Democrats and came close to backfiring as badly as Labor’s deal with Family First.
I’d note that the Greens haven’t done the same thing since 2001, and Labor hasn’t helped Family First either since 2004.
None of this would matter if the current ticket voting system was abolished, as is Green policy. Both major parties are also interested in such a change to avoid getting micro-parties elected. All the larger parties now have a distate for the sort of preference deals that group ticket voting forces on the parties. Labor in 2004 and the Greens in 2001 only did deals with micro-parties because group ticket voting allowed micro parties to deliver on preferences deals. Get rid of the tickets and there is no point larger parties doing deals with insignificant parties.
Abetz is back quizzing Centrelink boffins. He’s even found a silver lining for Tasmania.
I agree with all Antony says, with the one caveat that ALP state secretaries would do deals again with FF if they decided it was necessary to help get ALP candidates elected. It’s not Labor’s job to help the Greens win seats, particularly while they are busily engaged trying to win Labor-held lower house seats.
Cossie has ruled out going after Bishop’s job but i noticed he never said anything about not going after Turnbull.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25015910-5005962,00.html
Costello in the media again:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25015910-12377,00.html
Beat me to it Judith!
And I also think people get far too agitated about Family First. I think that Stephen Fielding has had less impact on public policy than any minor party or Independent Senator since Robert Woods/Irina Dunn for the NDP in 1987-90. Harradine had more impact, though on issues affecting Tasmania rather than his pet moral issues. The Democrats and Greens had more impact. Even One Nation had more impact, though mainly because their level of vote showed that the major parties had to re-tune their policies on immigration.
This one’s for Adam, but even Independent Senator Sid Negus elected from WA in 1970 had more impact. His sole policy was the abolition of death duties, and within a decade they had been abolished in every state and territory.
The most influential independent ever to be a member of the Senate was of course Pat Field, who never even took his seat.
Fielding might have more influence if he wasn’t so stupid.
Abetz seems to be playing the whole thing for laughs.
This guy Thune from PM&C is a tough cookie.
from article you posted
those unnamed sources who made the claims couldn’t be libs would they?
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/submission-bungle-is-rubbish-says-rees-20090206-7z93.html
Adam,
What about Colston?
Why doesn’t someone tell the ‘expert’ Peter Costello that Australia is facing a depression if nothing is done. Also there is a Tax reduction in July this year.
Antony 1619
Thanks; I didn’t know that. OK in that case sorry Adam – if these deals are part and parcel of the game every time then I agree it is not fair to pick on the 2004 case. I suppose Fielding gets my goat because I am particularly cynical about some of the groups he represents.
If you drive up blackburn rd Syndal, on the left you come past a big billboard advertising Bar 20 mens strip joint, and then 1 block down Steve fieldings office sign- family first senator.It always gives me a chuckle
The name C*lst*n arouses such feelings of disgust that I feel it better not to comment.
Adam,
Disagree. Colston showed complete moral rectitude throughout. Once he was bought, he stayed bought.
Is “Quisling Quasimodo from Queensland” any better?
Socrates thanks for that comment.
I think the real problem with Fielding is not so much that he is reactionary, but that he is stupid. Harradine was probably just as conservative, but he was a very smart man (as you would expect given his NCC training) and could grasp the key points of an issue and come to an agreement. Fielding is just a thicko who has to have everything explained to him in primary school language. The lesson is that right-wing Catholics are preferable to right-wing Protestants, because the Catholic Church values intellectual rigour in a way that fundy Protestant sects don’t.
If you want to listen to Cossie big noting himself and blocking difficult questions go to –
http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/costello-our-next-prime-minister/20090206-7z9v.html
I’ll say this for Neil Mitchell he at least asked the difficilt questions but failed to push Costello far enough.
So Adam would rather see DLP members instead. Vote Mac back and get the trains running on time.
Adam,
Seriously? Tony Abbott, Kevin Andrew and Christopher Pyne??
Watching Bob Brown and Mr Thune from PM&C exchanging intelligent questions and intelligent answers shows how useful this inquiry COULD be if it wasn’t dominated by clowns like Abetz and Joyce.
I would prefer DLP Senators to FF Senators, yes.
Got to love the Greens. Bob Brown is currently asking questions about bike-ways that he asked Treasury about yesterday.
I want him to ask ATO, Centerlink, EVERYONE about bike-ways.
The Greens are going to ask for some Green concessions in the package, which seems like a good use of the funds and an investment for the future. These were conspicuously absent from the package, as I’m suspect Rudd knew the Greens would ask for them so he’s got a bargaining chip up his sleeve and he’ll look reasonable in the bargain. I just hope Fielding votes for it. I doubt that Mr X will vote against it.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25016010-601,00.html
Abbott, Andrews and Pyne are reprehensible in many ways, but I don’t think you could fairly call them stupid.
GG
I know it’s hard to believe but Pyne is actually from the wet end of the Liberal Party, not the dry-right.
No, they’re just politically inept, which is funny considering they all hold quite safe seats.
Adam
Thats true. Similarly Xenephone – despite all the tacky publicity stunts – seems to have a calculating brain and it is therefore possible to negotiate with him. My concern with Fielding (and those behind him)is not only religeous fundamentalism though. Hence he concerns me much more than Harradine.
As for catholic education, it is interesting that I am a product of it to. They taught us how to think and question, except for religeon, but sooner or later most of us got around to questioning that too. Still, they did introduce me to philosophy, or at least edited highlights of it.
Pyne is getting more ept with time and experience.
On social issues he is as conservative as the Pope.
You’d like to think so after nearly 16 years.
The problem is, he has never had an original policy idea in his life. He is a consummate political hack.
Regarding political studipidy and ideology – that is the trouble with all absolutist doctrines. They are a trap for peopel who like to think they are clever. It doesn’t matter how clever you are, if you believe in a doctrine that teaches you to ignore some logical possibilities (eg that government spending might sometimes work, or at least be the lesser of two evils) then sometimes you are going to ignore the correct answer.
In this respect the modern “hard right” economic rationalists are very similar in mindset to some of the cold war communist left wing intellectual warriors. Too busy fighting for their position to stop and consider if it is correct. Interestingly, some current right wing political commentators were in both camps!
Pages: « 1 … 31 32 [33] 34 35 … 36 » Show All