The first Roy Morgan face-to-face poll to catch the full force of the OzCar aftermath shows Labor’s two-party lead up from 55-45 to 58-42. Conducted over the past two weekends from a sample of 1190 (smaller than usual from a poll covering two weeks), it has Labor up 0.5 per cent on the primary vote to 46.5 per cent and the Coalition down a sharp four points to 35 per cent. The slack has been taken up by the Greens, up 3.5 per cent to 11.5 per cent.
Here’s an incomplete sampling of the past week’s action. This site’s normal energy levels will resume in about a week or so.
• Monday’s weekly Essential Research survey had Labor’s two-party lead up from 58-42 to 59-41. Supplementary questions showed a spike in confidence in the economy, but a somewhat paradoxical increase in concern about employment; Joe Hockey favoured over Malcolm Turnbull as Liberal leader by 17 per cent to 13 per cent; and the Labor Party viewed more favourably than the Liberals on 11 separate measures.
• The South Australian Liberals have a new leader in Heysen MP Isobel Redmond. Redmond succeeds Waite MP Martin Hamilton-Smith, who was mortally wounded after accusing the government of doing favours for an organisation linked to the Church of Scientology using what proved to be faked emails. Hamilton-Smith called an initial spill last Friday after Mackillop MP Mitch Williams quit the shadow ministry, which was universally interpreted as an attempt to undermine Hamilton-Smith ahead of a future pitch for his job. However, Williams declined to put his name forward at the ensuing spill, at which the sole rival nominee was deputy leader and Bragg MP Vickie Chapman. After inital expectations he would comfortably survive, Hamilton-Smith emerged from the vote without the support of a party room majority: while he won the vote 11 to 10, one member had abstained. Hamilton-Smith called another spill to clear the air, but when Redmond (who had been newly elected in place of Chapman as deputy) said she would put her name forward he announced he would stand aside. The result was a three-way tussle between Redmond, Chapman and Williams, in which Redmond defeated Chapman by 13 votes to nine after Williams was excluded in the first round. Goyder MP Steven Griffiths won the vote for deputy ahead of Williams by eight votes to six (since only lower house MPs get to vote for the deputy, whereas members from both houses have a vote for the leadership).
• Antony Green crunches some electoral numbers to conclude that, contrary to widespread belief, Labor’s position in the Senate would be better if the next election were for half the chamber in the normal fashion, rather than a double dissolution.
• Against his better judgement, Peter Brent at Mumble enters the world of blogdom. He’s also written a piece on Inside Story which delivers on what I emptily promised a few weeks back, namely to review the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters report into the 2007 election.
681 Comments
Typo mate -: “shows Labor’s two-party lead up from 58-42 to 55-45″
This computer wall paper is for my friends G.P. and Glen:
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/5268/johnnyp.jpg
Today Peter Martin noted that in Australia female employment has actually increased this year while male employment has declined:
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2009/07/good-year-for-some-really.html
In the U.S., 80% of those who have lost their jobs are men:
http://business.theatlantic.com/2009/07/its_not_just_a_recession_its_a_mancession.php
Amazingly, employment in South Australia has actually increased.
I thought Redmond won the deputy position in the first spill, so how could she have stepped aside in the second?
BTW that comment was directed at William Bowe’s post.
Errors corrected.
from previos thread
It would IMO be double standards to criticise Turnbull for demanding Rudd personally intervene but then saying it’s quite allright for Brown to make the exact same statement. I don’t think Brown challenging Rudd to step in and making statements about how quick those evil Chinese are to execute innocent victims a steady principled approach. But that’s my opinion and we are allowed to have differing opinions here at PB
I don’t know if William cares to add it to his post, but MHS announced he would stand aside immediately after the vote, but Graham Gunn and Ivan Venning (conservatives) urged him to reconsider as that would have immediately handed the leadership to Chapman. He took their advice, kept the job, then announced the spill, then stood aside.
I will back Bob Brown on his human rights stance – he has held this view for yonks. If he called on St. Kev to call Hu about Hu he is a dill.
Turnbull is a dill on the second count and a hypocrit on the first.
2233 of the previous thread
House of Assembly of Tasmania.
And Stephen Smith puts Turnbull in his place
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/10/2622819.htm?site=news
2237 on the previous thread
What has that got to do with my argument over the meaning of winning a seat?
OzpolT from the previous thread, you obviously have a deeper knowledge that me in the area – I’ll happily defer to you. Betya the NEW ltd hacks are struggling with the concept though
Tom.
Under Australian law a person can also be detained without charge “for some time”.
Dill IMHO
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2009/s2622386.htm
I think that Labor should start to use the phrase ‘bull in a China shop’ to describe Malcolm. Should resonate nicely, all things considered.
Vera
Bob Brown is a dill.
Random reform idea
Amend the Constitution so that Albury-Wodonga can be in the same electorate.
Thanks Bob, I might well add that information if I had time and a more reliable internet connection. As you might have gathered, I am not entirely full bottle on these events just at the moment.
WB @ 19
Would that be full sauce bottle, or just ordinary bottle?
He might be a bit slow in responding as he’s probably busy giving it a fair shake.
Would Malcolm Turnbull be embarrassed if the Chinese authorities gave information to ASIC that results in legal action, against a company, being taken in Australia?
WB, BB, bob1234 Tsk tsl, all very ethnocentric. There’s always ye olde England’s
“bottle” Noun. Courage, confidence. E.g.”Johnny’s scared, he’s lost his bottle.”
Verb. To smash a bottle into a person’s face, very often a beer bottle after a drinking spree.
“bottle it” Verb. 1. To lose courage. Also bottle out. See ‘bottle’.
2. Shut up! Usually imper.
Tom,
2233 was about Highly Accomplished Teachers.
If you meant 2231, I will quote what I said:
“I remember the occasions on which the Democrats would claim that they were going to win lower house single-member seats, to no avail apart from in SA where I think Robin Millhouse held one after he moved across from the Liberal Movement.”
The Tasmanian House of Assembly does not have single-member seats.
OOps: the URL for this useful A Dictionary of Slang
OK so if the sharp drop in the polls is not going to convince Turnbull to change course, then nothing will. The MSM may like an opposition that simply opposes everything but the public sure doesn’t. Does he know he’s on the way out and trying to land a few blows beforehand??
I saw Turnbull on last nights news demanding that Rudd intervene and ensure this blokes (Rio exec) release. It was Turnbull’s opportunistic grandstanding at its worse. It’s just beautiful the way Turnbull keeps getting uglier and uglier with every interview. Keep it up lightweight!
Turnbull certainly does seem to be coming across uglier and angrier.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this bloke loses it and blows up before he gets the flick. I am not kidding! Remeber Bludgers you read it here first
BTW: did we have to pay for Howie and Hyacinth to be at the cricket?
Another shot of them on my TV, i will shoot my TV.
Centre, Turnbull is giving Merchant Bankers a bad name
What about our Rudd with Obama, hey! The Liberals don’t have to worry about the taxpayers getting their moneys worth with Rudd overseas. Everytime he is seen or opens his mouth, our standing in the world rises.
Masters of the dark arts – News of the World reporters used ‘toolkit’ of tricks
Don’t ya luv it when THe Guardian talks dirty!
And, while Scotland Yard might not be interested Three inquiries launched into News of the World hacking claims
This despite the clains in the Dark Arts story:
Paaptsef, my rankings of the worst professions:
1. Merchant Bankers
2. Ltd News Journalists
3. Liberal Party Politicians
4. Divorce Lawyers
Car salesman are honest and trustworthy human beings compared to the above!
Wow, vera if you are there, Bunnies 20 Penrith 0 half time.
Don’t start celebrating yet
Winners and losers.
William Bowe introduces this poll thusly:
“The first Roy Morgan face-to-face poll to catch the full force of the Ozcar aftermath ……………. has Labor up 0.5 per cent on the primary vote to 46.5 per cent and the Coalition down a sharp four points to 35 per cent. The slack has been taken up by the Greens, up 3.5 per cent to 11.5 per cent.”
Vera, you should be absolutely ashamed of your self. We are not impressed.
Now, fredex, if I implied that votes went from the Coalition to the Greens, bob would get very cross with me!
Centre, switching between cricket ,footy & betting on dogs and the bike race will be on soon!! Checking PB every so often between bets.
Just said to OH, it’s only half time we can still manage to lose
Can anyone say Fremantle ?
Tom, it ain’t over till it’s over
If the coalition drop 3, Labor doesn’t move, and the Greens gain 3, you’re a fool for thinking nobody moved in or out of the Labor vote.
Not what I said, bob, so obviously I’m not a fool!!
No, Zoomster I didn’t mean to imply that, altho’ I can see the numbers crudely suggest that.
I would assume, without evidence, that out of the total 100% some people changed their mind about their party of choice and the sum total was marked by a large, greater than MOE [?] gain, for the Greens and a loss, greater than MOE ?, for the COALition.
And very minor movements for the ALP, FF and Ind/others.
I would guess some amidst the to and froing that occurred some Libs went to ALP, some to FF et al, some to Greens.
But on the numbers from the poll we can suggest the Ozcar ‘effect’ overall was negative for the COALition, positive for the Greens and neutral/ very slightly positive for the ALP and ‘others’.
And positive for Rudd personally and the reverse for Malcolm.
OK, bob, so let’s assume (for discussion’s sake) that, of that 3% shift, 2.5 went from Liberal to Labor and 0.5 to the Greens. Simultaneously, there was a 2.5 shift from Labor to the Greens.
Given the events in the polling period we’re looking at, explain why there would be a substantial shift from Labor to the Greens.
I can understand why a number of Libs, disenchanted with MT and unable to face voting for unionists, would shift to the Greens. I can’t see any rational argument for a substantial shift of the Labor — Green vote.
Willing to listen.
zooms – the ALP currently holds the middle, people get disenchanted by b@llshit squabling which becomes white noise to many. General anti-politician feeling would inlflate any ‘other’s. Greens seem to be the other at the moment.
Vera, I hate you, I hate you and I hate you! That Howard fellow was right, you lefties are to full of hubris and you haven’t even started gloating yet!! Too many injuries and too much inexperience. See you tomorrow
Tom.
Pancho, agree, and that’s really what I’m getting at. Liberals are just as likely – and more likely, given the events of the past fortnight – to go for ‘A.N. Other’ as Labor voters are.
When you can explain why a block of voters would have moved from A to B but you can’t explain why a block of voters (at the same time) would move from C to B, then you use the Occam’s razor approach and assume that they moved from A to B.
I’m NOT anti Green (why some of my best friends are Green, and I got a lovely Christmas card from the local Green candidate, saying how approachable and helpful I was…) but I’m a bit puzzled by their reluctance to accept that some Liberal voters by pass Labor and move directly to the Greens, even when the figures suggest very strongly that this is what’s happening.
For the record: I have spent the last twelve years analysing booth voting figures across this electorate (over 100 booths). I compare State and Federal voting numbers. I identify local issues which may have shifted votes (and check with locals of all political persuasions to verify if these did have an impact). I know booths where the vote rises by 10% if we have someone there on the day handing out htvs; I know others which swing because of the weather.
In short, I have some knowledge of what I’m talking about.
And when a big block of voters move from point A and point B picks up a big block of voters at the same time, yes, it’s a generalisation to say they all moved from A to B but it’s a fair bit that most of them did.
No strutting, please, Vera.
zoom, getting insulted by Bob — that’s like losing a pawn in a game of chess. We have been insulted by experts. Remeber Steven Kaye and Nostradamus
Centre
I have a vivid memory of what happened on this site once when I suggested that people (who claimed to be Democrat supporters) were being a bit over the top in their criticisms of Hillary…
shudder..
Margin of error. Last 6 Newspoll Green primaries – 10, 11, 10, 9, 11, 9. Ooooooh.
Centre, Was that the Nostradamus who after the 2004 election(?) said he was a Labor voter all along. Got his kicks stirring, pretending to be a Lib? Think he was off overseas?
Zoomster, just did a little chicken strutt when no one was looking
nothing to ostentatious.
Zoom,
The Greens in general are quite happy to acknowledge that yes, some votes go straight from Lib to Green, not many, but some.
I know many Lib voters that have done this several times before settling to become solid Green voters.
I think it was sour grapes vera. I remember one day, after Howard called the Democrats the party of the terrorists, Nostradamus kept calling Obama “Barrack for Hussein Osama.
Many bloggers didn’t know Obama’s middle name was Hussein at the time, me included.
*I’m crashing, night guys*
Didn’t think we were talking newspoll, bob – the thread’s about Morgan.
But if you want to admit that your party’s vote isn’t growing, I’m willing to accept that.
Not only are you giving Morgan credibility, but you’re looking at the minor party polling of Morgan?
*laughs, gasps for air, then laughs some more*
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2009/07/08/greens-%e2%80%93-structural-change-or-parked-vote/
From Possum himself. Enjoy
Check – and mate.
Tomorrrow we celebrate Gough’s 93rd birthday. So delighted he’s still around.
I’m shocked that you’d support someone to the left of Rudd economically and socially – shocked I say!
No doubt tho, the vermin that are News Ltd will craft up some stories comparing the big spending government of Whitlam with Rudd.
Bob,
You think you know a lot about political theory but the reality is you know nothing. Sewerage for the outer suburbs, engagement with China and better educational opportunities are not and never have been left wing policies.
Gough was a hard centre (where the votes are).
Feisty!
So what’s Rudd in comparison?
If Gough was a hard centre, is Kevin a caramello bear?
Is Malcolm a nut toffee?
Is Bob Brown a peppermint cream??
Who’s in government and why is he in government?
Tom.
bob
of course I’ve read Possum. Don’t assume ignorance is catching.
I asked the question as a hypothetical – IF votes move from A to B and not from C to B etc (go back and read the post).
It’s interesting how much you avoid even approaching admitting that perhaps sometimes a block of Liberal votes become Green votes.
Were you scared by a Liberal as a child or something? (can imagine that happening. you might have seen Malcolm Fraser on the TV when you were alone and without protection).
There are nice Liberals, truly there are. They were brought up to believe in a party which no longer exists. They’re there for the wooing. Embrace them.
Economically, pre-Whitlam, Labor was left. Whitlam Labor was centre-left. Hawke and onward have been centre to centre-right.
Mitch Johnson will hit sixes to the centre left and the centre right and the centre centre right
Before i hit the sack, here are some photos of Rudd’s trip.
photo 4 is for Glen
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/gallery/0,26637,5058578-601,00.html#
I think they should have sent a bigger cart…
Well done to Leigh Sales hitting Southcott right between the eyes over the Libs hypocrisy re Hu and Hicks. He had nothing.
24
The Democrats were mainly an upper house party. They won only one seat in the HAT (which they lost to Bob Brown on countback when their MHAT resigned) and the Greens have won five and would win six if the Parliament had not be shrunk to reduce the number of Green seats. The Democrats won a seat in the HASA once or twice and the Greens have won one in the LAWA. The Democrats never held a seat in the HoR and the Greens have. The Greens have a better lower house record than the Democrats and a better Legislative Council record in NSW, Vic (partly due to electoral reform) and i believe WA too.
I did not say that the HAT has single member seats. It is a lower house and I was using it to point out that an attack on the Greens (saying that they were not going to win any lower house seat wherever it is) was likely to be factually incorrect.
I missed it Dario. What happened?
He started pontificating about how the FM and PM must be immediately contacting their opposite numbers in China to sort this out given that Hu was an Australian citizen being held without charge. Leigh just said wasn’t it a bit rich for him to be saying that after Hicks had been held in Guantanamo without charge for 2 years and all up for 5. Southcott started scrambling after that and babbled for a while. Hilarious.
The Greens are set to have 2 SA MLCs from the next election there. This would be from electing one MLC at each election which is what the Democrats did at most elections in SA. The Democrats got two in one election only in 1997. Given time the Greens will probably overtake the Democrats on longevity. They may overtake the Democrats for most Senators for a minor party and SA MLCs too.
74
It does sound funny. Maybe I’ll catch a repeat.
Russell Smith pointed out earlier today that the Chinese Ministry of State Security is way above the Chinese foreign affairs minister’s head and that Aus has nothing like an opposite number.
Why oh Why am I so bored…I did want Kev to win, but gee, I am not stimulated.
When will Julia take over?
I’m feeling much the same way about Clark at the moment Whitey. Sure he’s 67 not out and going along nicely but when will Johnson get a go
I’m NOT anti Green (why some of my best friends are Green, and I got a lovely Christmas card from the local Green candidate, saying how approachable and helpful I was…) but I’m a bit puzzled by their reluctance to accept that some Liberal voters by pass Labor and move directly to the Greens, even when the figures suggest very strongly that this is what’s happening.
Who’s reluctant to accept that?
It’s pretty obvious on the figures, no matter what state you’re looking on. The Greens do fairly well in seats like Nedlands, Vaucluse, and in the Liberal-voting inner-south of the ACT – places which Labor goes down like a ton of bricks – and where they haven’t already (they already have in Vaucluse), are probably likely to start running second within an election or two.
Given time the Greens will probably overtake the Democrats on longevity. They may overtake the Democrats for most Senators for a minor party and SA MLCs too.
…they’ve already just about surpassed the amount of state and federal MPs the Democrats ever had in their currently sitting MPs alone…
Hi guys. About the Hu affair, the latest report coming out of China is that he bribed a top Chinese official from one of the biggest steel producer in China. The official was in charge of negotiation with Rio Tinto. In return Hu was given access to the agenda and record of internal meetings of Chinese negotiation team. He also gained access to data such as production schedules, gross and net profit and average stock turnover time etc.
This is being described as an “earthquake” in Chinese steel producer cycles. Two additional executives (of Chinese producers) have been detained and several more from the Chinese Steel Producer Association are under investigation.
This was published on a influential newspaper. Take it however you like.
Robot
Do you have a link?
Funny how this transcript is sans the Foreign Minister while the video clip includes him.
http://english.ntdtv.com/ntdtv_en/ns_china/2009-07-10/838426739243.html
Bob.
Probably my fave bit from depressed England commentors, who cheered themselves by rejoicing in how badly the Oz women were performing in their Test …
Oh, and Oz.
From the horse’s mouth:
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-07/10/content_8405768.htm
The age thinks there is something wrong in building up Melbourne’s water reserves using the desalination plant and pipeline.
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/water-issues/desal-plant-to-run-until-dams-reach-65-20090710-dg3y.html
Is this Green party policy, or age whinging.
Re left and right, which, undefined, seem to have been thrown about with wild abandon (above): please do us all a favour and take time to read Left-right politics, noting in particular:
This is a quite comprehensive coverage of the continuum from its beginnings late C18 beginnings to the current era, and in some different contexts.
Technically (& by the most widely accepted definitions) the ALP is centre left – just how far to the left depends on the PM, which term and, in many cases, the year or less within a term if political and/or economic conditions change; hence Curtin, Chifley, Hawke and Rudd all changed (are changing, in Rudd’s case) in response to war, recession and, in Hawke-Keating’s case, to a major shift from Industrial to PostIndustrial imperatives like production and employment.
Note: For almost all of its history, the ALP has been, and been open about being, a Fabian Socialist party:
Thus cries of “I voted for Rudd, but he’s let us down” because he hasn’t gone far or fast enough on a range of social justice and environmental issues, are either pure (& over-emotional) rhetoric, or a reflection of one’s failure to understand the ALP’s & Rudd’s political nature & strategies (ie “not doing one’s homework” before voting). He’s a very Fabian Fabian Socialist. If you voted or preferenced the ALP in 07, that’s what you voted for!
The Liberal Party, from 1949-c1990, was centralist and, more often than not, extended in one or both directions – Fraser, for example, was socially left but economically/fiscally right. From 1990-onwards, it shifted quite a long way to the right, although it still retained central to slightly left welfare policies even before the post-Election 2004 Middle Class welfare tsunami. Howard’s desertion of the centre (and the GOP’s in the USA, and, until very recently, UK Tories’; but certainly not Angela Merkel’s or other W European Conservatives’) and Rudd’s rapid move into it make the Liberal’s recovery much harder – qv today’s excellent articles by George Megalogenis Laying foundations for a Kevin Rudd re-election and Peter Hartcher Forget the windbags and follow windfall theory of leadership
The Democrats, pre-Meg, moved into the central vacuum created by Libs’ shift to the right, although they had to share it with Hawke’s ALP.
The Greens show an interesting (from a pol-analyist point of view) dichotomy between far right environmental pæleoconservatism (becoming more so as some special interest groups gain more power) and socialist in its social justice policies. It’s increasing passion for pæleoconservatism, as Rudd incrementally changes Howard’s socil policy, poses the greatest threat to Greens’ continuing support.
The DLP, the post-Split political arm of CA Groups and the NCC, is and always was a RW mixed marriage of aspects French Revolutionary ideology (especially of Code Napoleon: Civil, which most Italian states adopted) and Vatican social dogma; oddly, the Code’s aspects it adopted had been dropped by the French (for their disastrous economic consequences) before policies of the groups on which CA was later based were formulated. Socially, rurally and industrially, it (in fact CA, in whatever political/union form in whatever country) is and always was Pæleoconservative.
FF, here and its equivalents in the USA & other nations, can best be examined as Evangelical/ Pentacostal versions of CA. Its colonisation of the GOP, “marriage” to the NeoCons Right, and the aftermath of the Democratic ascendancy, can well be compared/contrasted to CA’s colonisation of the ALP – a great PhD thesis in the offing.
Sydney is no longer voted into the top ten international destinations:
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/where-would-you-rather-be–udaipur-or-sydney-20090710-dg2l.html
A marketing guy thinks the solution is more marketing. What a surprise! I think the solution is changing the reality. Its a city whose economy is drowning under the weight of its own nepotism, the public transport system is corruptly run, under invested in and over staffed, and the state governmetn is still approving inappropriate developments in remote locations that will create huge future costs for services, even though they can barely afford to service what they have now.
I was glad that IA didn’t cave in to NSW on the stiimulus package; there is no point funding badly thought out ideas that are not a solution. But a solution is needed. As the rest of the Australian economy gets going again in the next few months, Sydney is the one city that could sttill drag the numbers down. Its hard to be growing well if 25% of the nation is still stuck in decline.
Dario surely Southcott must have realised being interviewed by Sales (who wrote the Hicks book) that she would bring up Hicks. Cant they see the hypocrisy?? And I love how Hu is an Australian citizen when Hui in the Fitzgibbon stuff was a Chinese businesswoman. Funny how the terminology changes to suit the story. What poor journalism we have
And oh, the Rudd scandal of the day is him being caught by a microphone expressing pessimism about Copenhagen. Surely THIS is the end for Rudd…
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/global-warming/rudd-gives-copenhagen-talks-little-hope-20090710-dg48.html
Nice read Ozpol.
Interesting article here on the Australia First Party.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/rightwing-genie-out-of-the-bottle-20090708-ddfk.html?page=-1
New home for One Nation, they ave always been around in one form or another.
Could go potentially well in a time of rising unemployment and home repossession.
Nice open pary also with a comment that members don’t necessarily have to be christians but should be white.
WOuldn’t surprise me if FF do a prefernce deal with them.
Boerwar?
http://www.21cbh.com/HTML/2009-7-10/HTML_MTCXDEIX0O98.html
Link in Chinese
don’t know how a colon turned into a question mark. Anyhoo…
Castle @ 93 It’s the same old, same old racist, sectarian fascism (tho that’s insulting Benito) with the same old same old mainly poor white sectarian racists masquerading as Christian Patriots. Some original AFs were involved in founding the League of Rights and have been in all its fronts & reincarnations (even Confederate with the Confederate flag, would you believe!) OH loves homing in on them and arguing; I used to, but can’t be bothered any more. I prefer targeting the Opposition!
Wait for it – the OO has decided that Uteman or Utemen is to be the new name to be given to Labor’s aspirationals. Two mentions in headlines today, one being a Shanahan article.
The intention obviously is to associate Labor voting with cronyism and something vaguely improper.
Nice try, but no cigar.
This week in the Blue corner we have Terry McCann swinging wildly for News Ltd against bloggers Quiggin, Gruen and co.
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25753739-664,00.html
Xenophobia and racism always re emerge in times of economic hardship in Australia due to job insecurity and our culture of complaint about others getting a bigger “suck on the sauce bottle”. My feeling is that a lot of it is harmless as it is primarily ignorant people letting off steam.
The MSM seem to give some of these shadowy racist groups and personalities far more publicity and credibility than is warranted. Half of me says ignore the drop kicks. But half of me says that the press should be shining a light on these idiots as only by operating in secrecy will their obscene ideology be able to fester and influence the feeble minded.
PS Thanks Castle
To all: please excuse errors. I’m waiting (not very patiently) for a few brain fuses that blew out/retracked some neural paths to repair. Not an uncommon prob and there are now ways to speed repair. This is one of them.
steve,
Peter Martin gets the response to McCrann about right.
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2009/07/reading-terry-mccrann_10.html
OzPol @90
Thanks for this very interesting post. Can you point me to further reading on ‘far right environmental pæleoconservatism’ to which you refer. I am having difficulty in understanding this philosophy. TIA.
Thanks GG.
Peter Martin wrote “What next then? Setting up a government-owned home-buying service at the Post Office? ”
Hey, I remember such services, although one paid for the house by buying stamps at the PO & having them correctly marked; like War Bonds. Housing was then state, so it might not have existed in all states. That’s how most low-income working-class families bought their own little bit of Aussie heaven after WW II. Later, Commonwealth Bank deposits took their place; tho from memory, both co-existed for years. One could also pay most gov rates & charges the same way. The day after pay day (many paydays were deliberately moved to Mon-Thurs to discourage ‘blowing it’ on the weekend – during the war, I think) POs were crowded with housewives buying their stamps.
Can’t see how reintroduction would disadvantage people (although finding a PO might). Effectively, annual utilities & (state) insurance were reduced to more easily payable weekly sums. People tried to “get ahead, in case” using overtime, lottery/ other winnings, child endowerment … I remember that ‘2 or 3 years ahead’ was considered A Good Thing; thereafter one could save extra cash for holidays etc. Policies like these made Oz, on av, the world’s richest nation; and the family home a treasured asset.
On the other hand, few but tradies, savings banks/ BSs, insurance Cos, timber & hardware stores, and gardening supply shops made much money out of it. Not fertile ground for Capitalism Rampant!
Sorry by my read of the The Age articles chasing Fitzgibbon over trivia was that Ms Liu was not just a CHINESE business women, but one that knew CHINESE officials somehow, in fact I got the impression from their articles that Ms Liu was an evil CHINESE spy, planted here decades ago to trap the electrician Fitzgibbon in the knowledge he would go into politics and that after Howard was gone he would be made Defence Minister then she could be triggered by secret whistles over the phone and, then she could in her new robot mode get state secrets from him to give to the CHINESE because Australia’s vast military complex was a threat to the balance of world power.
You had to read behind the lines…or did I misinterpret their dog whistles.
This chinese AUSTRALIAN CITIZEN man….could actually be the real spy but The Age has missed the scoop…..why are the not dog whistling on this one?
Who knows who Hu is anyway?
Starr-Bowkett in NSW ran such a scheme.tho more on the lines of a Co-operative housing society.
dunno if its still around
An article worth reading by George Meglomaniac. He’s one of the best IMHO.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25763585-601,00.html
I read the Megalogenis article.
It’s real reporting.
He’s gone to the source data and drawn conclusions from it. Not all of them I agree with. For example, that “voters felt the $950 payment announced in February was wasteful”. I’m pretty sure “the voters” is far too broad a term. But that’s a quibble.
George didn’t have to illegally tap anyone’s phone. He hasn’t peddled faked evidence. He hasn’t gone out of his way to find fault. He hasn’t called anyone names, or ridiculed their language, their presentation, their wife, their religion or their associations. He’s used facts to construct a story that hangs together logically.
Why can’t the rest of his colleagues at News do that?
And speaking of ridiculing language, why oh why did George even bother writing that stupid column on the Sauce Bottle Saga a few weeks ago? I hope he’s asking himself the same question today. Today’s effort is far, far superior and much more interesting because of it.
I’m off to read it again.
I don’t know that the people thought that at the time considering most would have taken a popular government at its word. I would think there would be even less thinking that now given the resilience of the economy.
It of course wasn’t wasteful as we can see now that the money has been flowing through the economy nicely.
http://www.newser.com/off-the-grid/post/192/could-murdochrsquo3bs-love-of-gossip-doom-his-family.html
What I think a lot of people thought was that they deserved it, but the other person didn’t.
I got this a lot at a place where I worked until recently. They were all snarky about “bloody Rudd” and “running the country into debt” and so on. The $950 one-off payment came in for particular scorn and derision. But when I asked my colleagues (now thankfully ex-colleagues) whether they’d received the grant, and if so whether they’d spent it it was “Yes” on both counts to a man and woman.
A few tried bravely to say they’d used it towards their mortgages (saved it, not spent it) but most admitted to just blowing it. In their opinions they’d worked hard, paid their taxes etc, so why shouldn’t they take the perk? They deserved it, unlke those dole-bludging, tracky-dack-wearing bludgers who’d go straight out and splurge their stimpac money on drugs, grog and The Pokies.
In short, quite a few (in my opinion) saw the $950 as a reward for being a good citizen and a conscientious worker. This allowed them to both take the money and simultaneously look down upon others who did the same (nirvana for your average Aussie Wowser), as well as claim the government was being extravagant… but only with the other guy’s stimpac payment.
That the stimpac was not reward based and was designed to just get as much money out there and spent as quickly as possible completely escaped them.
It’s the same thing with the schools package, as George Megalogenis points out: it was not based on politics (as everyone got the same, rich or poor) and was not based on merit, or a means test. The aim was to keep the tradies in work, their families with food on the table and to do more good than shovelling sand from one heap to another (and back again) would have in the meantime. I thought this was very creditable on Megalogenis’ behalf. He reports that the original intention of the government gave no thought to scoring political points really at all. For sure there would have been a few hard-heads out there who figured it in terms of votes, but I believe Megalogenis that this was not the main intention.
Megalogenis also deserves credit for going against his own paper, who started off their School Stimulus Bootstrap Campaign by trying to get a bit of good old-fashioned class envy going, witth their mention of the rich schools who received grants versus the poor schools. This article was almost as much a manifesto of what Megalogenis thought of that campaign as it’s possible too imagine. Only George going mad, penning a total anti-Murdoch rant and then commiting seppuku in the middle of the Harbour Bridge would have been more impressive.
Just on use fo the word “tradies”. I find it amusing that Shanahan claims the government uses this term “self-consciously”. If any political party can use “tradie” and “sparkie” and “chippie” surely it is the Labor Party? This is probably much, much more a measure of how confused Shanahan is over how things are going for his team (which is not well at all) as it is a guage of Labor embarrassment. He thought the “tradies” were in the Libs’ pocket, across the board. Megalogenis points out that Labor is hopeful of winning extra seats, of widening their majority in the “tradie” marginals. How the worm has turned, eh?
I googled Pæleoconservative and got 34 hits, clearly not a term in common use. What is a Pæleoconservative?
Pæleoconservative: As usual, there are conflicting meanings, differing between countries. My first encounter with the term was as a descriptor for hippies, “drop-outs”, and those late-50s to late 70s “Lefties, though they’re not really; y’know, Nimbin types”; although they were then popularly nicknamed “new neolithics”. Wicki defines Paleoconservatism almost exclusively within the USA context.
In broad terms, wanting to hold on to, or go back to, or recreate the past – socially, industrially, or however – is intrinsically Conservative; ie Right Wing,
Although, in England, this sort of Conservatism has its roots in Jacobite Toryism, historically its greater impetus is post1763 Romanticism (more Rousseau’s “Emile” than anything else), religious revivalism (new Puritanism/ End Times) and anti-industrialism. Emile’s opening line, Everything is perfect when it comes from the hands of the maker & degenerates when it gets into the hands of man, usually expressed in English, as Everyone/ thing is created perfect and corrupted by society, sums it up well. William Blake is credited with creating its anti-industrial imagery (”Tyger, tyger burning bright” and “Did those feet in ancient times”). Coleridge and friends who planned (sort of) the original “drop-out” New Utopian colony of farmer-philosophers on the banks of the Susquehanna River in Pennsylvania (never happened) added NeoUtopianism a similar ideology.
England’s (then, half a century later, Prussia’s and Rhineland’s) industrialisation was swift, terrifying, demeaning to the millennia-old agrarian & guild middle classes it destroyed, and a massive shift in core technologies (& village social structures) established in the early Neolithic age – a very much greater, more obvious shift than those of C20. It’s probably the anti-Industrial / “back to things as they were before C18″ fervour that initiated Stone Age imagery in categorising those who wanted to bring down industrialism & everything to do with it.
“Leftist” categorisation belongs to Marxist/ Leninist ideology; industrialist, not pre-industrialist. While it set out to restore to pre-Industrial yeoman-guildsman classes the life-style, renumeration, enfranchisement & political power Industrialisation took from them (eg fully-qualified craftsmen pre c1800 earned a then good c2+ guineas ($4.20+) pw plus extras, enough to enfranchise them; by c1830, men doing the same job in a factory earned less than half that, and lost enfranchisement) and to extend to same rights to all workers, it did so within the Industrial system. It also adopted Romanticism’s sexual freedoms – women’s rights, free love … Byron & the Hellfire Club was about as wild as Romanticism got, and they were WILD …
Interestingly, Marxism/Communism did better in Catholic – Roman, English, Greek or Russian Orthodox – states/ societies than it did in Protestant/ Calvinist, possibly because, on the whole, they were historically less interested in Capitalism and “dirty” profit (ie based on trade), and more interested in Social Justice, than more protestant/ Calvinist ones. The USA’s predominant WASPism also explains why its conceptualisation of “paleoconservatism” is different from that of the UK (& OZ) and European.
OK, that’s enough historical background to grasp the gaps between what are essentially proto/neolithic New Utopian/ anti-industrial elements. A bigger sampling of Romanticism’s “freedom” elements applied to human relations, esp sexual, and agnosticism / atheism (late C19 to the present) will identify the heritage of “Leftist” human rights. If you add into those the Marxian v Democratic & Fabian socialists; Marxist v Frankfurt School & NeoMarxist splits, Stalinist v Trotskyite, spoon on surrealism, then drown them in PostModernism, you’ll either “get it” or be as confused as most people.
So, currently, many Green policies on carbon pollution are C21 anti-industrialism that has now found some theories to fit its claims, and Greens are currently chucking tans to stop/ close out equally effecitve alternatives that aren’t anti-industrial; ie, they definitely want carbon-reduction to close down mining & carbon-fired power stations ASAP not natural and other scientific methods which might achieve the same reduction using other methods. Increasingly, as the Green Movement (internationally) is colonised by groups with different agendas – anti-globalisation, vegetarian/veganism (& the huge multi-national ag companies which support it) “alternative medicine” (ditto)- anti-industrial policies are proliferating.
PS: I’ve had a few interruptions & OAP brain-fade’s setting in, so I hope the above makes sense.
Good old ABC, Top Story on their news site is
They can’t mention Rudd without having a negative after his name
Also links from that article to this
http://www.abc.net.au/news/
I saw that, Vera. It’s their ABC. And their News Corp. And increasingly their Fairfax.
Steve@98:
Christ, that is a confused and difficult article to read. And almost content free, once you remove all the sneering.
Vera: I don’t think this is an example of purported ABC bias.
If Rudd is saying one thing in public and one thing in private, and this has been indeed caught on tape, then the media is legitimate to bring this to attention.
It’s a news story. Pure and simple.
Tom (72),
You say that you “did not say that the HAT has single member seats”, “HAT” meaning the Tasmanian House of Assembly. But you implied that it was because after I said,
“I remember the occasions on which the Democrats would claim that they were going to win lower house single-member seats, to no avail apart from in SA where I think Robin Millhouse held one after he moved across from the Liberal Movement.” (2231 on previous thread),
you replied with,
“2233 of the previous thread
House of Assembly of Tasmania.”
As 2233 was about teaching, not Tasmania, your comment made absolutely no sense inrealtion to it. It is reasonable to think that you were intending to reply to 2231. After I had made a comment about single-member seats, you chose an example of a multi-member seat house to suggest that I was wrong. I then pointed out that I had not been referring to the Tasmanian House lf Assembly as I had specifically restricted my remarks to single-seat Houses and the Democrats.
The full sequence from both threads is below:
Reuters Thread:
2160. Chris Curtis
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 1:42 pm | Permalink
Greensborough (2142),
I feel I can call you by your first name as you live in the same general area as I do.
I am not connected with the DLP at all these days. I have met Peter Kavanagh once, at the launch of Noel Tennison’s My Spin in PR, and I catch up with friends from the old days (none of whom are members of the new DLP as far as I know). However, my membership ended when the party disbanded in 1978.
I doubt that the new DLP has the resources to run a serious campaign. Had I been advising it, I would have said that it should have run candidates in the federal seats in Peter Kavanaghs’ region in 2007 in order to help his vote in 2010, but it did not do so, suggesting that it could not.
2168. Tom the first and best
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 2:04 pm | Permalink
2160
The DLP vote in Northern Metropolitan was so high largely because they had the first spot on the ballot paper and many people who wanted to vote ALP were confused and voted DLP. Without the DLP getting a position ahead of the ALP, the ALP might have got the extra 2% they needed to get the first three of their candidates elected without preferences from other parties.
2202. Chris Curtis
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 4:11 pm | Permalink
Tom (2160),
The seat I was referring to was Western, not Northern Metropolitan.
2212. Greensborough Growler
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 4:18 pm | Permalink
Chris,
I’ve been chuckling about that little factual error all afternoon.
But, no matter. For our earnest Greens ’space cadets” it makes no difference. There is no pollling statistic that does not imply the Greens will win lower house seats at the next election wherever it is held.
2231. Chris Curtis
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 5:27 pm | Permalink
Greensborough (2212),
I remember the occasions on which the Democrats would claim that they were going to win lower house single-member seats, to no avail apart from in SA where I think Robin Millhouse held one after he moved across from the Liberal Movement.
Tom (2205),
I do mean “Western Victoria”, but I did not write “Western Metropolitan”, though I understand why you thought I did. I said, “The seat I was referring to was Western, not Northern Metropolitan.” If I had meant “Western Metropolitan”, I would have written, “The seat I was referring to was Western, not Northern, Metropolitan.” As an English pedant, I understand the importance of commas. I am anti-communist, not anti-commaist.
To be clear, I should have written, “The seat I was referring to was Western Victoria, not Northern Metropolitan.”
Chris Curtis
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 5:33 pm | Permalink
Tom (2212),
The “HAT”?! You’ll love today’s on-line story;?“An initial batch of 100 of the so-called Highly Accomplished Teacher positions will be advertised in NSW in October before the plan is rolled out across the rest of Australia.”?(NSW plan puts ‘super teachers’ in worst schools?http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25760627-12377,00.html)?I guess these HATs will be doing “The CAT in the HAT”. (Victorians may remember the Common Assessment Tasks of the VCE.)
Morgan Thread:
10. Tom the first and best
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 6:07 pm | Permalink
2233 of the previous thread
House of Assembly of Tasmania.
24. Chris Curtis
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 7:38 pm | Permalink
Tom,?2233 was about Highly Accomplished Teachers.
If you meant 2231, I will quote what I said:?“I remember the occasions on which the Democrats would claim that they were going to win lower house single-member seats, to no avail apart from in SA where I think Robin Millhouse held one after he moved across from the Liberal Movement.”?The Tasmanian House of Assembly does not have single-member seats.
Chris Curtis
Posted Friday, July 10, 2009 at 7:38 pm | Permalink
Tom,?2233 was about Highly Accomplished Teachers.
If you meant 2231, I will quote what I said:?“I remember the occasions on which the Democrats would claim that they were going to win lower house single-member seats, to no avail apart from in SA where I think Robin Millhouse held one after he moved across from the Liberal Movement.”?The Tasmanian House of Assembly does not have single-member seats.
This is the Liberal’s “last card” – The Govts. waste and mismanagement is their only response to the stimulus packages.
They can’t say where the would have spent less – so all they are left with is that the money was mismanaged and thus wasteful.
News Ltd is trying to help establish this theme.
OzPol Tragic (90),
I do not know enough about the Code Napoleon to comment on it in relation to the DLP, except to say that I never heard it mentioned within the DLP. Nor did I ever hear Vatican social dogma mentioned in the DLP either. I do not mean that no one ever put forward a view that was the same as that held by the Vatican, but that no one ever argued that because the Vatican had a view, so should the DLP.
The DLP was far from right wing. Its senators would have voted against so-called WorkChoices. The DLP supported refugees. It supported Aboriginal land rights. It was opposed to Melbourne’s freeway construction.
Its labelling as right wing comes from the fact that it was anti-communist. If you think back to the Split, the Victorians who formed the DLP were the same type of people who stayed in the ALP in NSW, suggesting very little difference between them on most policies.
Below is a summary of DLP philosophy. It is pre-internet, so I have had to retype it from the original document, and I won’t be retyping the whole thing. If anyone wants to read all the policies, they will have to make a visit to the Victorian State Library (which I understand is not so easy for anyone from interstate).
The terms ‘left’ and ‘right’ have their origins in the French National Assembly of more than two centuries ago: supporters of the king sat on the right; opponents on the left. The terms keep changing in meaning. The members of the Communist Club at uni almost 40 years ago regarded me as of the extreme right-wing right. Over at Andrew Bolt, I am regarded as a left-leaning left-wing leftist lefty member of the Left. But I am not the one who has changed.
SOCAL PHILOSOPHY
1. Democatic labor’s Social Philosophy
The broad goal of the Democratic Labor Party is to develop and modify the existing structure of Australian society to in order to bring it closer to being a free and just democratic society. The basic principles which form the foundation of Democratic Labor’s political objectives are summarised below.
2. The Primacy of the Human Person
Democratic Labor maintains that every human being has an inherent dignity and essential worth which is absolutely independent of all value or usefulness to society.
On tis principle rests the prime political goal of the Democratic Labor Party –
TO DEVELOP AN AUSTRALIAN NATION OF FREE MEN AND WOMEN BASED ON THE RECOGNITION THAT THESTATE EXISTS FOR THE GOOD OF THE INDIVIDUAL PERSON.
Freedom – Humanity’s Rightful Inheritance
Democratic Labor maintains that the dignity and essential worth of the human person can be best respected and preserved if each individual has the ready opportunity to participate in the making of decisions which affect him.
On this principle rests the second political goal of the Democratic Labor Party –
TO DEVELOP AUSTRAL AS A FREE SOCIETY IN WHICH EACH CITIZEN HAS THE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICPATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND MAKING OF ALL DECISIONS (ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND POLITICAL) WHICH AFFECT HIM.
Responsibility – The Corollary to Freedom – imposes on the individual correlative responsibilities to the common good.
On this principle rests the third political objective of the Democratic Labor Party –
TO DEVELOP AUSTRALIA AS A JUST DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY IN WHCH POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC INFLUENCE OR POWER IS DISTRIBUTED ON THE WIDEST POSSIBLE BASIS THROUGHOUT SOCIETY.
Establishing a Just Society
Democratic Labor pledges itself –
TO DECENTRALISE TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE THE OWENRSHIP, MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF THE MEANS OF PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION AND EXCHANGE.
Recognising the undue political power stems from a societal structure in which decision-making is remote from the individual, Democratic Labor pledges itself –
TO THJE BROADENING OF THE POWER BASE OF SOCIRTY BY DECENTRALISATION TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT EFFECTIVELY POSSIBLE OF POLITICAL AUTHORITY WITHIN SOCIETY.
DEMOCRATIC DECENTRALSM
THE IDEOLOGY OF FREEDOM AND JUSTICE
1. Defining Decentralism
The guiding political philosophy, or ideology, of Democratic Labor is DECENTRALISM, which may be broadly defined as the spreading through constitutional means of wealth, power and property on the widest possible basis throughout the community.
As a general principle, in a DECENTRALIST SOCIETY, the State should do only what individuals or intermediate autonomous bodies are not able to do. Further these autonomous bodies (regional councils, trade unions, residents’ associations, cultural societies, professional institutes and so forth) should only do what individuals or family groups cannot do well.
2. Political Decentralism
In the field of Government, this means that there are certain duties (for example, immigration, defence or international treaties) which are most appropriately performed by a central political authority – the Australian Government).
Outside this range of duties, the central government’s function must be to help co-ordinate, towards the common good, the efforts of those levels of government or the many autonomous organizations which are more directly controlled by their constituents or members.
3. Economic Decentralism
Economic decentralism means that the personal ownership of the nation’s wealth is equitably distributed on the widest possible basis.
Political decentralism without economic decentralism means that they employee is relegated to the position of a ‘wage slave’, and has little or no opportunity to achieve his destiny though the exercise of responsibility.
In order to bring about this free and just democratic society, the DLP is pledged to the following political principles –
The creation of a nation economically strong, nationally secure, fully employed, in which poverty shall have no part, with the greatest possible educational opportunities and the highest possible moral and cultural values, and dedicated to the principles of liberty and peace.
1) The establishment of the economic, social and political foundations of personal freedom by decentralisation to the maximum extent possible of the ownership and control of the means of production, distribution and exchange; by the devolution of power to the smallest units for effective decision-making; and by the decentralisation of population. The implementation of economic democracy by support for profit-sharing, co-operatives, worker ownership, small scale enterprise and employee and consumer participation in the control of industry.
2) Te maintenance of Parliamentary Democracy, the assertion of the individual and community duty to observe the rule of law, the assertion of independence in judgement and action of duly democratically elected political representatives.
3) The preservation and support of the family as the basic unity of society.
4) Te acknowledgment of the roles of Individual Initiative, Private Enterprise and the State in social and economic affairs.
5) The maintenance of the Australian Federal system wit a due distribution of power and economic resources between the Commonwealth, the States and Local Government.
6) The restoration and maintenance of effective legal authority of the Arbitration system as a means of determining wages and salaries and as the instrument for resolving industrial disputes.
7) The acknowledgement of the necessary and proper role of the trade union movement in society and the democratic control of trade unions by their membership.
9) The development and maintenance of an adequate Defence Force.
10) The closets possible economic, cultural and mutual defence alliances with friendly nations.
11) The adoption of electoral systems under both Federal and State laws to enable appropriate Parliamentary representation for significant minority groups within the community.
12) The establishment of the concept of pluralism in education, and that the principle of general per capita payments be adhered to in the distribution of Government assistance to non-Government schools.
13) The protection and conservation of our natural environment and the planned use of natural resources in recognition of the close relationship between man and nature and the finite nature of the earth’s resources.
Democratic Labor calls upon all citizens to join with us in achieving these goals, so that Australians may enjoy a better life.
(The DLP Looks Ahead, 1/5/1977, 1.1(1…3))
This is a very good, background article about the Hu affair.
http://business.theage.com.au/business/seeing-red-over-rio-20090710-dg4k.html?page=-1
I have no doubt the Hu affair is related to the Rio-Chinalco deal, but not in the way that hick like Barnaby Joyce has portrayed. It is not related directly the fact that the Chinese did not win the deal with Rio.
Doing business in Asia is not only related to WHAT has to be done, but also HOW it is done. In particular, the needs to preserve the relationship and to save face, especially for the “losing” side. This is true all over Asia, not just the Chinese and the Javanese and Japanese are particularly sensitive about face saving.
The Javanese has a way of describing the “Halus” (silky) or “Kasar” (coarse) way of doing business. Unfortunately, the way Rio ditched Chinalco and then shacked up with BHP falls into the “Kasar” way. And Barnaby’s is beyond the “kasar” way, it is no way. Ditto with Turnbull’s way of distant megaphone diplomacy and China bashing started with the Fitzy affair.
Poor Hu is a pawn got caught up by the stupidity of his Rio masters.
BTW: strictly speaking, Rio is not an Australian company:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_Tinto_Group
Greetings trots.
I’ve just returned from an ALSF conference in the lovely state of Tasmania. Must say, I quite enjoyed the scenery.
GP
Welcome back – hope you did not freeze your trunk off. Tassie in Winter no way.
No 122
After being to Europe many times in Winter, Tassie is certainly tolerable. I can somewhat understand why the Tassie people are so protective of the beautiful environment down there.
On a side note, it’s great that my fellow Liberal students did not have themselves kicked out of the accommodation like last year (an incident which landed us on page 3 of the Canberra Times).
GP
Did the ALSF come up with some spiffy policy alternatives? Malcolm et al seem a bit bereft of ideas lately.
Conversely, if he didn’t it’s not a news story. Pure and simple.
Are their any quotes from Rudd’s past suggesting otherwise?
No 124
I am not at liberty to discuss ALSF policy, but suffice to say, there was much debate and several alternatives.
GP how many in the ALSF still back Mr T?
BTW is Martin Ferguson going to run again, he seemed like a good chap sad to lose him in 2007.
Fair enough GP – secret squirrel stuff.
Surely there was discussion about empty vessels and garbage bins?
No 128
No, but there were some fantastic speeches from George Brandis, Eric Abetz and Sophie Mirabella.
117
My comment on elections to the HAT was directed at 2212 not your post. That post mentions only lower houses and not single member seats. It also, by means of (probably accidental) double negative, says that all polling statistics imply that the Greens will win lower house seats at the next election wherever it is held.
I mistook your post on Highly Accomplished Teachers as a misinterpretation of my acronym HAT. This was a mistake. Sorry.
Lets call of this I posted, you posted war.
GP
I thought Barry O’Farrell was condemned for his “league table” ban. That’s an empty vessel who’s idea was consigned to the garbage bin?
Yes, Fatty O’Barrel received no praise at all for outflanking Labor from the left.
No left thinking or outflankin’ allowed.
I should note that whilst the ALSF is closely aligned with Liberal Party values, it is not affiliated and our policies often greatly differ from those of the parliamentary party and young liberal organisations.
No 133
Exactly.
GP
Welcome back.
While there have been some good runs of posts, there was the occasional sound of many one hands clapping while you were gone.
Where is the oldest opera house in the Southern Hemisphere?
No 136
It’s always both amusing and flattering that you guys can’t get enough of me.
Alan Kohler in his weekly wrap up:
‘The only rational explanation for the arrest of Mr Hu on charges that are shifting from “espionage” to bribery to “finding out more than he should have about Chinese negotiating tactics”, is that the China Government wants to remind everyone that it is still in charge. It represents an assertion of control over Chinalco, the Chinese steel mills and the business world in general by the apparatus of the Chinese Communist Party.’
Kohler acknowledges that it is an inexpert view.
If it is correct then then the Party hierarchy must have a view that the command and control structures of the Party are getting fairly frayed. In terms of stability, frightening stuff.
Tom (130),
I wish you had clarified which post you were responding to in the first place. Think of all the typing, cutting and pasting it would have saved me.
Sorry my HAT joke was not so funny.
War – off!
119
The DLP may have opposed freeway construction but it directed preferences to the Liberals who built the freeways.
Chris Curtis wrote:
1. Surely you jest.
(a) Check the reason for the Qld Split. So much for “caring for the worker & his (sic) family.” Gair split his party over refusing to give QLD workers’ rights – the Nats got in partly on the promise to give them; which they did (from memory, almost immediately, because I’m sure we went on a 4 wk family holiday in 58.
(b) The DLP were to remain in control of one union throughout my working life; I know because some of those with whom I worked were members – the one most people called “Australia’s worst union as far as members were concerned” – the Federated Clerks’ Union. So notorious was it that, if we wanted mature people in jobs, they’d ask about union coverage. Before the end of compulsory union coverage, most people (mainly women) who found themselves stuck in it, and their colleagues, tried every which way to move them into one that would ensure they received the same wages & conditions as colleagues who performed the same work, but were members of different unions. If possible minor changes that allowed job reclassification / respecification to allow different award coverage were made: I was a whiz at rewriting job conditions so the unfortunates could apply for & get the rewritten job, and resign from the FCU (let’s face it, an unfortunate but apposite acronym). In some cases (especially in rural & remote areas) jobs themselves were transferred between authorities.
No one who has practical knowledge of the above would believe “DLP … senators would have voted against so-called WorkChoices” under any circumstances.
2. If you don’t understand the effect of the Code Napoleon: Civil, what’s wrong with using your on-line computer to check out? That’s what search engines are for! You need the sections on estate (esp land) division. Fancy believing in things when you don’t know their origin!
3. If you believe the DLP was “far from right wing” then there’s no such political group or person that was ever “right wing”, including Ghengis Khan. BTW: Psssst, I’ve got these shares in the Harbour bridge, going cheap because I need the cash … GFC & all that, you know.
4. As far as I’m concerned, (based on personal experience) I have more chance of reasoning with a JW or CoGoLDS than with a DLP. Besides which, as has been kicking around political blogs since it appeared in TheOz 18 January 2006 (a friend provided me with the text as I can’t make the link work on my new system), the DLP has some far RW allies.
As the DLP, during its on, off, & on again existence, has been the political wing of the NCC, and according to an embittered and very vocal (ex-NCC/DLP) classmate I’ll see at a reunion next month, legal action has not yet been resolved, I assume the extract below still applies:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,17857166-2702,00.html
As most of the “extremist organisations” named seem to want to align themselves with Australia First, I suppose the DLP will too.
Believe me, I will never be one of the under 2% who vote for the DLP, nor would I preference it above last. IMO, even Fielding is a preferable option.
This computer wall paper is for my friends G.P. and Glen:
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/5268/johnnyp.jpg
Alan Kohler admitted he did not have a clue what was happening in relation to the GFC.
Does he have a spiffy graph to show how he does not have a clue about Hu?
140
Good. Now we can get back to discussing the effects the DLP had and how much better Australia and Victoria in particular would be much better off if Calwell had won in `61 causing the earlier demise of the DLP.
Tomtfab
A little bit of IF for you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGTENfxd8M4
Aa mentioned, Today is Gough’s Birthday and here is hid finest political moment (oh and it’s a landmark in Political Advertising as well).
All together Now:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jykIqQxEOw
GP, snuggies did its job then,
No 147
Yes, all together: “Turn on the Lights”
And what was Renee Geyer thinking when she accepted that gig ?
Oh and speaking of old ads – found this ad promoting the benefits of Decimal Currency.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZVEEs-RJpw
ruawake
We may have a difference of opinion about Alan Kohler.
Alan Kohler was one of the very, very few who fessed up at the time and told the truth about what he did not knew about the GFC. He went up instantly in my estimation.
In relation to the HuGate, he has stated that he had an inexpert opinion. It is a pity that more journalists are not honest about what they do or don’t know. In this case, I believe that Hu No 1 left the G8 meeting to go back to Beijing (?not sure about that). I have read reports that incidents of civil disobedience in China run to the tens of thousands per annum. There are waves of executions of corrupt officials. There is smoke. The question (it should be exercising Australians a bit more than it appears to be) is: ‘How much fire?’
99.9% of the spivs (of whom I believe Kohler not to be one) who infest the so-called financial services industry actively contributed to the GFC, did not see it coming, did not, and do not, understand it, are back to pretending to be in the know, and are now back to their habitual parasitism with a human face.
Kohler stands out by being clear about his uncertainties.
Shows On @ 143
You should have had a warning on the label.
I was drinking a cup of black tea when I opened it. How black tea can go sour?
The Finnigans @ 120; Boerwar @ 139, Good posts.
From my rather limited knowledge of the way China now does business (but better of the way they play politics, both big & small “p”) my guess that this is a move in a high-stakes commodity-price game, with a need to regain face after the Chemalco (?sp) deal fell over.
I also trust my PM, more than any other world leader or past Australian PM, to understand exactly what is going on and why. I believe he will – using the right people and the right channels – negotiate his way around it to Mr Hu & Oz’s benefit. As many people have discovered, there are more nuances to doing business in China, that in the entire repertoire of the Beijing Chinese Opera during its entire existence.
I also assume both Bob Brown (who’s never stuck me as a fool) and MalT who, despite his impetuous nature etc etc, is an Aussie polly genuinely concerned for Mr Hu’s safety, also understands this. Whilst both may be grandstanding (probably are, at least “a bit”), both may know enough about the politics of Chinese game playing to be saying the right thing at the right time – may even have been asked to do so. At least that’s what I hope.
Boerwar @153 Some things curdle the milk; more terrible things curdle the blood; others, more ghastly than even a NZ specials effect unit can create, curdle the tea.
OzPOl Tragic @ 153
In another post somewhere I was not quite as kind to Turnbull.
My assumption is that if face is involved, then making intemperate loud shouts at the beginning of what will obviously be a lengthy process is not helpful. In fact, assuming that Hu is innocent, it will make it more difficult for the Australian Government to extract him from his predicament.
Assuming this analysis is more or less correct (there will be many other facets),
Either: Turnbull does not understand this and has demonstrated yet again that he is unfit to be PM
Or: Turnbull does understand this and has demonstrated that he is willing to sacrifice Hu on the altar of Turnbull’s ambition.
If it is more than just face and has to do with a major power struggle within China, then both comments still apply, but more seriously. I imagine, from reading between the lines, that HuGate is also more than a little bit about the stresses between Beijing and Shanghai. These stresses make Sydney V Melbourne look like kindergarden stuff.
Whatever, Hu’s luck has run out. Wrong place, wrong time, big time.
Rudd on 10 news was giving it to a reporter (don’t know who) at his press conference. It was to do with reporting that Rudd was saying one thing in public and another in private re CC progress, mind you the supposedly private talk they showed was out in the middle of everyone with cameras on him LOL and he was speaking clearly so you could hear every word he said, private my arse!
Rudd was looking super confident and seemed to really enjoy putting the media in their place.
Anyway Rudd more or less said if they wanted to print BS go right ahead, he supposed it might make good headlines.
Love it
vera
It is an interesting and refreshing approach.
The difficulty for Rudd may come if he stuffs up big time. He will have created somewhat of a double bind for himself.
Rudd has nothing to lose with the press. Hell, they’re getting into him no matter what he does. May as well put his side of the story forcibly.
Boerwar
We disagree – that’s fine
Kohler never really says anything – he gives hints. Unless you subscribe to his newsletter.
That is OK as well, but in regard to the Hu stuff, he is making it up.
The sound bite I caught.
Rudd to media: “Go and bark up another tree”.
Boerwar, like Gary said Rudd has nothing to lose. They write inuendo or downright lies about him now so I don’t know how it could get worse.
It seems the MSM don’t like leaders who call a spade a digging stick and they will do their darndest to undermine them – Alan Carpenter in WA, for all his faults was one of those who said it straight, and the local Meeja hated it.
ruawake
It is interesting testament to the nature of authoritarian governments that the lack of transparency sort of forces speculation. The article referred to by Finns @ 120 is (agreeing with OzPol Tragic) an excellent article.
The fact in the article that tends to support Kohler’s view is that Chinalco has been willing to come out publicly and refute a major state security organ.
I have been watching for some time to see how Chou En Lai’s deal would unfold. Essentially, the deal was, ‘You guys go out, do business and get rich, and let the Party do the politics.’
I always thought that it was a one generation only deal, for the simple reason that the second generation, wealthy, would want to play politics as well a business. I suspect, but do not know, that Chinalco’s public statements may therefore be much more than a minor public spat about ‘the facts’.
vera and Frank
I was not disagreeing with the approach which I described as ‘interesting’ and ‘refreshing’.
I was making the observation that if he mucks up he will have created a double bind for himself. He will have to agree that he has mucked up AND he will have to acknowledge that the media was right in publicising the stuff up.
The implication is that he will have to be on the front foot to fully explain stuff ups before the media can get to them.
150
If Calwell had won in `61 then maybe our currency would have a different name. Would we have metricated earlier?
Actually any good politician would do that. I believe Rudd has done just that in the past.
81
The Greens also have quite a few local councillors. I don`t think that the Democrats ever had many.
*goes* to rinse out cup of tea with cleansing acid.
Boerwar
How about this for a scenario:
Rio Tinto stuffed up in their BHP-Billiton takeover escapade. Ended up in deep debt just as the world went ga-ga and commodity prices tanked.
They flirted with Chinalco but due to regulatory problems in multiple countries it was too hard.
They need to maximise the price they get for iron ore – so they do some “creative” stuff to get info.
Maybe China is not the “bad guy” it could be that they were screwed by a multi-national mining company. Its not as if it has never happened before.
Now the Ruskie’s have arrested over 240 Chinese in Moscow following the closure of a market.
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90776/90883/6697540.html
Boerwar
St Kev make stuff ups! Never!
OzPol @ 112
Thanks for your response
Are you suggesting by your use of the term ‘anti-industrial’ that the Greens are advocating a society without technology? Aren’t the Greens supporting innovative, cutting-edge R&D policies and solutions that encompass a wide range of renewable energy sources as alternatives? An analysis of their policies indicates that the Greens are embracing technology and supporting industry. It’s just that they recognise that ‘business as usual’ is no longer the answer.
The following document is well worth a read, though some minor bits are out-dated:
Re-energising Australia written by Christine Milne in 2007
http://greensmps.org.au/webfm_send/40
Re the China spy drama, mark Crosby at Core Economics adds a little more info.
http://economics.com.au/
The old Dino used to croon:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYIDZfMWzps
i thought i heard the Pommy cricket commentators were praying for the rain in Wales today so the grass can grow and they can save the cricket match.
Go Mitch, go.
Finns,
The rain in Wales protects the Pommy fails.
Aussies bat hard for a score opf 600+.
Johnson, Hauritz and Katich do the rest.
From Mark Colvin’s Twitter re Unca Rupert on his own Faux News:
Sounds remarkably like Jana interviewing Kerry Packer all those years ago.
Gary Bruce @ 125:
I am not really across these stories, as they don’t particularly interest me. Political themes and movements play out across months and years, and day-to-day stuff is mostly noise.
I spose my feeling is that a lot of confirmation-bias is seen in the criticism of the media. Some of it is obviously wretched, such as our good old OO (née GG), but I am not of the opinion that the ABC swings too much either way.
People see the news as confirming their pre-existing bias – we saw this during the Howard years, and we are seeing it now too.
GG @ 173
Interesting link.
Ruawake @ 169
Plausible. I simply don’t know.
Vera @ 171
I was waiting for that one!
Time will tell.
There is a fascinating article in the online version of the China Peoples Daily at:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90002/96417/6628619.html
The tensions:
rich v the poor
the new policies on industrialization+commerce v the traditional focus on agriculture first
indirectly, a reminder of Chou’s deal: The Party does the politics – the people can go and get rich.
The timing may or may not be an accident in relation to the Hu incident.
#180:
The Emperor does the politics – the people can go and get rich – it’s always been like that for China for the last 3000 years.
When will they ever learn? China is China is China.
the gloves are off between Rudd and the media. I guess he now realises that there is nothing he can do to please them so may as well have a swing. I’d hate to see them though if some REAL crisis developed.
Rudd answers the issue well in our ABC’s article: Rudd denies hiding climate change scepticism (no comment about the headline…)
Mr Rudd was filmed telling his Danish counterpart that negotiations for an agreement were not on track and that he was “quite worried about it”.
Yesterday he was talking up progress on climate change, but insists he has not been trying to hide the fact that the road to Copenhagen will be tough.
“In my plenary remarks yesterday, I said we’re currently not on track to get to Copenhagen,” he said.
“That’s what I said in the plenary session with all governments there to see.
“Now that doesn’t mean that you can’t maintain a posture of optimism about your ability to break through those obstacles.”
Next issue/beat-up???
Any hope that Abbot could become leader or deputy of the Liberal party has/will evaporate with his most recent flatulence:
Women of the Liberal party speak out.
Link for 184
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25767454-12377,00.html
Silly Abbott. Hope he gets lots of bad press for his bad idea.
SAD!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/cricket/england/8143340.stm
Abbott is addicted to demonstrating that he is an absolute joke.
He is completely stuck in the dark ages. People should be allowed to get divorced whenever they like, the Government should have absolutely nothing to do with it.
I don’t know if this has been mentioned earlier but Shaun Carney’s article on Rudd makes for interesting reading.
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/proceed-with-calm-20090710-dfzp.html
Good old People Skills. Hello, Did it not sink through his thick skull, after not one but TWO all-party “Women’s [and men's] revolts” over the so-called “abortion drug” & stem-cell research, that his “straight down the Vatican line” policies were lead-ballooning? Now he wants to turn the clock back to the pre-Whitlam Era and re-start the divorce blame-game. Does he have an interest in private-eye firms with their “gottcha” pics & lurid court cases the Sunday papers used to glor …
Hang on, Folks. He might be doing it to boost Rupe’s salacious scandal sheets’ sales. Circulation for a few of them has been plummeting.
What is the status of Abbott’s views?
Is he speaking as Shadow Minister for the Opposition on this topic? If so, is he accurately reflecting Opposition family policy?
Or is it the case that the Opposition is having a public policy discussion on the topic and the Shadow Minister is putting in his two bob’s worth?
If neither of the above, what is he doing? Is he talking as if wearing the hat of an individual private person?
How are voters supposed to sort all this out for themselves?
Abbott is a rabble of one.
I think Swannie takes the cake in that department.
GP
Would you happen to know the status of Abbott’s comments?
No 193
He’s the Shadow Minister for Families, so his comments were presumably made in that capacity. Making it harder for married couples to divorce is certainly in line with maintaining families.
Although, it would have been better if he advocated that marriage be deregulated and governed by private contract.
Remain bored..more or less. And how more than boring is Abbott?
Footy, interesting but my tipping is crap. Cannot win the thing. Not really au fait with the Ashes, though we seem to be ahead. Tour de whatever, well cannot keep up.
Politics is..well, too….
Resorted to my once yearly refuge, the video shop.
Got to watch then, Gran Torino, while our Crows thrashed, trashed the poor fishers.
Not that I don’t love Freo, but gee!
Urgh – Dockers fan over here. I was expecting a loss, as I always do, but roughly once a season Freo do something truly shocking. The only bright side is now I can forget about the Dees winning from 50+ pts down last year. And to rub salt in, my second team lost to the Pies by a point.
To weakly tie this post to politics, Frank blames Adele Carles for the latest disaster (she won a certain by-election while the local team ‘led at three quarter time’), but I’m not so sure. They’re reminding me more of the Democrats circa 2006, or the current NSW govt. Whatever it is, it can’t be allowed to continue. Folk are waiting on South Tce with baseball bats.
Little straw poll: what do PB’ers reckon will happen first – a Liberal federal government, or a Dockers premiership?
On the other hand, whilst Tony is boring on the surface, underneath he is hardly that.
A true zealot.
In the mold of the late Bob Santamaria.
Woe the Libs if they were to let him loose as some kind of leader. I wonder why they let him speak as he does.
Quite scary actually.
Yep. Dockers always, BP.
Sad about Freo tonight. Can be so great a team!
You guys must insist to the club that they get to wear the tops with the solid, traditional colours. I am pretty sure that to look effete makes one feel so.
Freo is always gorgeous and winning in their trads.
Don’t you love meta Facebook posts
Mind you the Massacres nearly always occour at Away Games – Home Games are very close scoring games – I still reckon the travelling and the changing of time zones buggers WA Teams up.
Could not resist looking again before bedtime.
Dunno about Facebook, Frank.
And. of course, time matters. In zone terms. My advisers, that is I say laughingly, tell me that home and away makes a difference. Mind you, I should say that they are way ahead of me in the footy tipping. Tcch.
In between blog bits, I was watching Rage. Yothu Yindu et al.
No question that their colours matter. All the ochres, the fantastical, defiant, courageous, we live, stuff. Inspirational, in any one’s language.
Mr Bird and Myself are Facebook Friends and I commented on his Status
Frank, only mean I have no idea about Facebook, have not got into it. Probably won’t.
Don’t even have the faintest idea what or who Mr Bird is, or how Mr Bird flitted into this conversation.
So, okay?
Regards
Crikey
xx
For a blog with a different style…
http://posts.people.com.cn/bbs_new/filepool/htdoc/html/fa55b84865e12e8cfed39984b53db6282017122b/b3594639/l_3594639_1.html
Had some old friends over last night for dinner. They used to be our next-door neighbours. We still don’t live far away (same suburb) but hadn’t seen them for a while and missed them.
We always used to have a light-hearted banter about politics. They’re very Liberal and we’re on the other side. But it never got angry or nasty. That was before 2007 and the election.
This was the first political discussion we’d had at length since then. Their attitudes have changed markedly. They hate Rudd. It got quite uncomfortable until I changed the subject.
The stimpac didn’t fix anything, because nothing needed to be fixed. The GFC is all a con so that Labor can pork barrel. We’ve borrowed too much and will never pay it back. The schools scheme is a crock. Tradies they know (he’s an accountant) aren’t getting any work. They’re going broke because all the money for schools is being wasted on bureaucracy and isn’t filtering through. The $950 one-off paymen mostly went to bludgers, dead people and overseas residents and hasn’t had any effect on either employment or the retail sector.
Rudd is a nerd and a chameleon: many things to many people, but has no set personna of his own. A complete fraud, and his front bench are a bunch of no-talent socialists who want to take everyone’s homes away from them and give them to the Chinese.
His face was reasonably controlled, but her face was a picture of disgust: curled lips, heavy sarcastic expressions, almost spitting hatred.
I couldn’t work out whether it was tghe Akerman line, the Milne line or what it was… maybe their own line or argument. They were absolutely incapable of seeing anything good at all in anything Labor has done, or will do.
It was quite disturbing to me that these really good people who you could have a laugh and a drink with and a toss around of political ideas from time to time had become so fixated on their hatred of Rudd.
Missing in action, MSM’s headline:
China born Australian Chinese businessman caught up in spy case
I have friends like that as well Bushfire and they to absolutely hate Rudd. I wonder if this anger comes from fear, the fear that they know in their heart of hearts that this Gov is likely to be in power for some considerable time.
Bushfire Bill
If you believe politics is a blood sport instead of a method to allocate scarce resources it is a lot easier to be rational if your team is winning.
You need to be sad for the Liberal party, people in that state will not be able to do the rational things that need to be done to sort it out, and the problem runs a lot deeper than a couple in the suburbs, for proof read the rubbish printed as opinion pieces in the Australian and the comments they attract, look at Turnbull’s behaviour.
For why you should be sad for the Liberal party consider the result, the editors of the Australian are destroying a once great paper and Turnbull is getting the party into a bigger mess.
PS
Love your writing.
Bushfire Bill
You should ask them why they vote for the Liberals, knowing the agenda is to screw their grandkids at work.
Perhaps you’re right Keith (if I may call you that). The change from bemused dismissal to outright nastiness was palpable. It had finally happened. The Libs had been turfed out and they couldn’t afford to be as dismissive anymore.
They’re not actually Liberals, either. They’re further to the right than that. They have their own brand of right-wing thinking that is mixed up with xenophobia (a great dislike, in particular of Asians, but the Lebanese get a big serve too) and extreme anti-unionism. They hardly ever talk politics, believe it or not, and have to be nudged a bit to do so. But when they get going, stand back!
We love them for their “other selves”: their willingness to be good neighbours, always welcoming, generous with a “nothing’s too much trouble” attitude. And of course we’ll continue to do so, because they’re good people with some weird ideas (well, weird to me). As long as we keep of politics. I’ll remember that next time we see them. I needed reminding.
I just re-read George Megalogenis’s article. Did anyone else get the idea that it was almost obsessively factual in nature? As if George had decided to try to rebut some of his colleagues’ ideas on the government, but in order to do so had to marshall a container load of bare facts and drop it on them from a height. There didn’t seem to be the usual Megalogenis style about it. The writing was almost in bullet point format. I got the feeling that he was worried about getting into trouble if he dared to express an actual opinion, which is what most of the others do at News, without factual backup.
Don’t get me wrong. It was a change to read this kind of stuff inthe OO. A real sort of “Emperor has no clothes” article. But I got an inkling that George felt he needed to be especially careful with what he wrote.
BB it will take a few terms from many to come to terms with the demise of Howard. Some proceed through the stages of grief very very slowly.
The hatred of Rudd fuels the belief that it is only a matter of time before the majority feel that way and shows a total ignorance on the polls. This hatred is what will keep the opposition from internal reflection and change, and ironically help keep Rudd in power.
Me thinks too much Alan Jones. I too have a very good long time family friend who hates Rudd. She always listens to Alan Jones and repeats things she could have only heard on his show. Oh! and knows someone who voted for Rudd in 07 but want ever vote for him again, never told me why.
Another bark from the the Liberal cheerer Peter Van Onslen. Point 3 demonstrates he reads PB?
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,25765315-5001030,00.html
The MSM will get all their ideas from PB.
Bushfire Bill 204
Old friends or not Bill I thought you would wuld have given them the ol’ BBBB
i.e. Bushfire Bill’s Both Barrels
Sounds like they deserve it.
Yeah, I’d forgotten Jones. Perhaps that’s where they got the seeds for their ideas from. Of course I’m assuming they got their ideas from somewhere. It’s quite possible they thought them up completely by themselves. Does that last statement asound patronising? I think it was, but it’s based on the fact that in Australia just about the only mass audience opinionation is right wing. When was the last time we had a mad Lefty raver with a decent crowd listening to or reading him? It just doesn’t happen here.
I can’t think of one Left wing radio or press personality with a good following. They’re all Akermans, Milnes, Joneses, Hadleys and the like. Maybe Mike Carlton in Sydney could qualify as at least non-partisan Liberal, but he keeps his head down nowadays. He actually lost his writing job at the Herald for refusing to cross a union picket line. He used to be a good read on a Saturday morning. Sadly missed now.
What I’m getting at is that it’s easy to typify a remark made by a right wing supporter as coming straight out of Jones’ mouth, or Akerman’s column, or Hadleys talk back show. But for Lefties we have no such ready source of popular input. We just don’t have the bums on studio or press room seats out there writing the kind of opinionation that is amply supplied by the right, everywhere you turn. Just about the most the right can accuse Leftie journalists and presenters of being is insinuating, or closet Lefties. They have to read between the lines of so-and-so to pick them as a Rudd Lover.
Meanwhile, on the other side, there’s Albrechtsen – amazingly a critic of bias at the ABC when she herself is a Board member! – writing directly that Howard should not be forgotten. There’s the incessant talk back right wing chatter, the union bashing, the xenophobia and so on, draping itself in the flag like Jones did during the Cronulla riots. The Lefties have to be more subtle, or else there’s hell to pay.
Yet we have an extremely popular Labor government that is on track to increase its majority next election. That, to me, seems to be a paradox.
Another thing BB, many of us hated Howard with a similar passion (and look how many terms he won) but it wasnt until Labor accepted that he was relatively popular in the electorate and that they werent going to wake up one day and hate him, that they were able to develop their own strategy and policies and agreed with him where necessary
There were good reasons for that, not the least of which being they were our invited guests and we do truly love them for themselves, just not too keen on their politics. When it looked like it might have gotten to the “Come on, let’s go home, we don’t have to put up with thi bull$hit” stage was when I changed the subject. And I’m really glad I did. We go back too far to let politics come between us.
Gee… I just noticed… a dozen comments responding to each other and not one Labor v. Greens flame post, not one mention of the DLP and nobody shouting at anybody else, trying to skewer them with their own words. This must be a record.
The couple you write about BB sound very much like my friends who hate Rudd because he hasn’t lived up to their expectations that he wouldn’t and couldn’t run the economy and be successful on the world stage. To make it worse, Rudd and his team have shone a bright light on the myth that Lib/Nat are good and Labor is bad. Like your friends, mine are also xenophobic, anti those less fortunate because they are ‘bludgers’, and are anti unions. And like your friends, they rarely discuss politics outside their family, but on the occasions when they did ask for my views, there was never any angst or hostility towards me for my opposing views – until after the 2007 election that is.
Sadly these good friends now avoid me like the plague as if I might contaminate them because I voted for Rudd. I think that because the Coalition is in a state of chaos and their leaders, post Howard, are more than disappointing to them they have transferred their disappointment and disgust onto Rudd.
Why would you want to associate with racist fascists at all? Beats me …
213
What is ‘wuld’? I have no idea.
Just a comment on Megalogenis’s latest piece. To me he sounds like a Stranger in a Strange Land. Gosh it must be difficult to maintain self respect and integrity whilst working for Murdoch.
BB I dont think its the differences that are the problem, its the blind ignorance and lack of a convincing argument that is annoying. I have friends with similar leanings to your own, and when you ask them about substantive issues like the stimulus spending, infrastructure, the environment they are so convinced that Rudd is doing the wrong thing but cant come up with any meaningful justification or alterative. Irritating.
i meant similar leanings to your friends not yours
Because they’ve always been particularly good to us and to evryone else I know who knows them. They’re a very giving family, strong, bonded to each other and generous to a fault. I have no reason to keep away from them. Having said that, the reason for the dinner was to catch up, as we hadn’t socialized for a while.
One particular incident – a random, dreadful accident – that has happened in their lives has tried them like no people should be tried. They were exemplary in their response to it. I don’t think I could have ever recovered enough to even go out the front door again. But they’ve accepted what happened as a fact and although I don’t think they’ll ever forget or forgive, they are a lesson to us all that I, for one, hope never to have to learn directly. Perhaps this had something to do with their apparent hardening. But I didn’t probe or ask. I was better to change the subject and get onto a subject we could discuss without rancour.
Why would you want to associate with racist fascists at all? Beats me …
Because they’re friends with many good qualities. In my book, a friend is someone you love despite those things you perceive as faults.
Peter Van Onslen first suggestion is for Turnbull to spend his own money to get elected. No doubt the Labor party will be kind and not point out that the Liberals are in such a mess they can’t attract funding; that rich members of parliament have to put up the cash.
Most of us either work or own businesses that we work for, so I suspect most think business is important, but I would be willing to bet a majority of voters consider life/work balance important, I’m not sure point 3 is a clear winner. Of cause the Liberals need business cash, but does business really want work-choices, do the really care about unfair dismissal one way or the other.
What can the Liberals offer that business want. Ya; for sure the coal industry wants loads of cash to pollute, but there is an alternative energy industry that will employ a lot more people waiting to be built. Will Labor be kind enough to keep quite about coal industry funding?
The Liberal party is in a mess because there demographic is dying, but it’s funding that is really going to kill the party.
GG, i demand royalty.
Thanks for the link GG – when the Number 1 thing the Liberals need to do is improve fundraising yuo gotta worry. I would’ve thought coming up with some policies might be a bit of a higher priority…
Interested in BBs comment 204 and this piece from Abbott in the Age today:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/abbott-foresees-coming-out-for-conservatism-20090711-dgrj.html
So Abbott thinks they need “to bring the doctrine of conservatism back to the mainstream of Liberal Party politics.” ROTFL – as if it was anything else in the Howard era. This isn’t politically clever either. With Howard taking the Libs too far to the right for most Australian tastes, Labor has claimed the middle ground. Taking the Libs further right will not help that.
I think the psychology of Abbott is parallel to many Howard type conservatives. They like to be in control but still want to think of themselves as “nice decent people”. So they will be polite to those who think differently, as long as their authority isn’t challenged. Anyone who challenges that (eg Rudd) threatens their security at a deeply personal level. Hence they hate them. I find a lot of conservatives are basically control freaks. (I don’t mean the James Killen type principled conservatives here but those who simply want the current status quo preserved at all costs). Howard pandered to these people’s prejudices for too long and made them feel that not ponly were they correct in their views but that the majority agreed with them. They now face a painfull reality check.
Ironically, I think a lot of people on the extreme left are the same; that is why they are so vitriolic. You see examples of former communists switching over to the extreme right after the end of the cold war or their own student days. In both cases, they can’t see why anyone else would think differently to them, and don’t like it. Our three cats have more mental flexibility.
Later in the article Abbott refers to recovering “conservative values” and focusing on issues like gay marriage. It sounds like he is reading from the Karl Rove political playbook. He obviously hasn’t read how that has turned out for the Republicans. The liberals don’t need to recover their conservatism; they need ot recover their liberalism. In case Abbott hadn’t noticed, Australia isn’t the USA, and we don’t have over 50% of the population being fundamentalists (thank god, I mean thank the atheists
)
Anyway thats my rant for the day. If Abbott succeeds in taking the Liberals further to the right then Rudd and Swan should do all they cn to keep him in parliament for ever, because that is how long Labor will be in government.
“not one mention of the DLP”
Since everyone is being rational, the DLP is history, why does anyone care?
Hitler was generous to his friends too. So he must’ve been alright then …
Crikey whitey: that would be me. By my online name, anyway.
its funny how the media has shot themselves in the foot. after banging on about Helen Hiu and the implication that she was dodgy, now they are jumping up and down about Stern Hu. Cant have it both ways
mesmeralda on insiders. just wish Cassidy would bring up Hicks…
When did Mesmeralda become an expert on China? David Hicks must be staring open mouthed at her demands that if not charged Hu must be released immediately.
and she’s worried that we have offended China over Tibet- what about her and her party’s comments over the past few months. Breathtaking hypocrisy
Where was her protest about Tibet during the Bush visit?
Andrew @ 232
It depends on who they want to stomp on when they jump up and down. Helen Liu was the ‘chinese’ woman friend of a Labor Minister so of course she had to be dodgy, whereas Stern Hu is an ‘Australian’ employee of Rio Tinto whose incarceration might throw a bit of dirt on Rudd and Labor.
The Mesmeralda Razor Gang is being set up this week, that should be a hoot.
Why are the libs so concerned with chinese born stern hu not being charged yet but were happy to let australian born david hicks sit there for yeard without charges being laid? Very odd.
TPD – “China is turning out to be one of Kevin Rudd’s weaknesses”.
More tests…
Milne:
“This is a test for Kevin Rudd.”
The political hypocrisy is rampant, but you can guess that Hu’s family and company might be a little worried, as they shoot economic spies over in China (and their family has to pay for the bullet).
The best thing is for everyone to calm down. The Chinese won’t listen to bluster and demands.
Speaking of media bias, here is a really serious case that we shoudl be concerned about. In Brisbane the mighty Lions had their best win of the season last night over Geelong, in front of a good crowd of over 35000. Where did it come on the Courier Mail/Sunday Mail website this morning? Nowhere; zip; not even on the page. You have to click the Sport tab and then go to AFL to find the result. By comparison it was one of the lead items in the Age website.
It isn’t true that Brisbane is only a league town these days, but that is what the Courier Mail’s sport editors want you to think. Completely impartial of course.
Ah….Tony Abbott.
Such gems in that article.
I didn’t realise that, for the 12 years under Howard, conservatism was a hidden movement that dare not speak its name. (In fact, I remember an article by the beauteous Janet entitled something like “It’s cool to be conservative). But according to Tony, he and his fellow travellers have been shy little violets, hardly daring to raise their voices.
This is, of course, why it’s such a shock to us all to find out Tony Abbott is a conservative. Gosh, golly, I never noticed. How brave of Tony to, sans Howard (who obviously must have been the one suppressing conservatives all these years), throw off the shackles which have been binding him and speak out, in ways which he knows will be deeply unpopular with the rest of his progressive party.
And it hurts that the Howard government lost to an unworthy opponent.
Keep believing that, Tony.
Honestly, the Labor party should PAY him to stay in politics.
Never forget that Rio Tinto is a MNC (Multinational Corporation).
By definition a MNC is a bottom feeder. It’s only concerned and motivated by profit and lowest costs, not moral, social, environmental, human rights, health and safety considerations. It has no qualm in behaving corruptly and in politically Skulduggery. It would use its employees as such. It is no Snow White.
Remember James Hardie and Bernie Banton. JH moved its HQ to Holland to avoid its obligations and now it is moving again to Ireland likewise.
Finns,
“GG, i demand royalty”.
OK, you’re a Prince.
Sigh, yes. It’s all Rudd’s fault. Surely Rio Tinto has a few heavily paid people in it’s organisation who could also do some of the lifting on this?
The striking thing about the Abbott piece is the photo, the guy hasn’t even got the self control to keep his feet off the furniture.
Interesting that Chinalco bought into Rio to stop a BHP takeover of Rio Tinto. Taking up the latest rights issue will mean that Chinalco is also paying off a huge slab of Rio Tinto’s massive debt.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124635339097572377.html
So let me get this straight, rusted on conservatives hate Rudd? Really? Surprise, surprise, surprise!!
A swing of only just over 1%, away from the Coalition, is needed for the Greens to take an ACT Senator from them.
Yes Grog, where are the Rio Tinto bosses, why are’nt they speaking out to defend thier man.
Re the left hating Howard, there were many reasons to hate Howard 2 main reasons, taking away our Republic and givingh us the GST.
Then of coarse the racism dog whistles in particular remeber seeing Howard in front of the map of Australia pointing out the land the Aborigenies have under thier control and how they want to take our backyards.
That article by Abbott is very astute and clever for the message it sends out and the dangers that Tony sees for the libs.
The registration of an Australia First AAFI type party for the next election with its family based values and old style conservatism could see voters move away from the libs and not all the the votes come back through preferences.
It is those that Abbott is speaking to especially with his comments on marriage, the libs do not want a repeat of the Hanson years where they were shamed in some instances to disassociate themselves from her views and preferences.
I’d expect another lib or nat to next voice concerns over immigration and multiculturalism to further gently reinforce the message that they are still there for them.
There clearly are Rudd haters as there were Howard haters.
The difference, I’ve found is this:
Whenever I spoke to a Howard hater and asked why, politely, the response almost always related to a policy decision or actual incident. Too many to list, but the hatred was specific to something he had done.
With the Rudd haters, I don’t find that clarity. It’s usually some vague reference to unions or debt, but there’s no clear link between an action by Rudd and their hatred. Except for one action, which they never admit, but in my view is what drives the hatred – he beat John Howard in 2007 and in the process helped Howard to lose his seat.
They hate him because he humiliated Howard.
castle,
The party that Abbott is pining for is the DLP.
Which is probably why he is for bringing in pre-1975 type policies.
The ALP should buy copies of his book for every voter in Wentworth…
A rather soft interview from Barry C on Insiders this morning, but Julie Bishop did well nonetheless….
on a scale of one or two…I’d give her one
I, like Tony Abbott, would also like to see changes made in marriage laws.
I reckon men should be allowed to have as many wives as they like
Oh Squig you are one sick puppy. LOL.
# 254
I wouldn’t draw parallels between the pathological Howard hating we saw in the past and today’s strong dislike of Rudd. These are two very different things. The former has stronger connotations with passion, emotion and illogicality – words that do well to describe the centre-left in general.
My strong dislike of Rudd stems from the fact that apart from being a nasty piece of work, his administration is one of the most inept, vacuous and spin-driven since the post-war period. Destroying our envious fiscal position, shameless pork-barreling, budgetary and foreign policy incompetence and the free ride he receives from a vast majority of the press most likely turned me away from ever supporting his party in the future, no matter how uninspiring the alternative is.
Centre,
The penalty for multiple wives is multiple mothers in law.
Patrick,
You really are in to ironic satire. Love your work.
G G,
I’ve noticed that most of your contributions to this site consist of one or two sentence posts void of any degree of wit. Keep it up, mate. I enjoy idiocy in very small doses.
Good one Patrick, I almost cry when someone is most likely turned away from something they never supported ever.
Patrick,
“I enjoy idiocy in very small doses”.
Served from your large vat of fermented bile.
Growler, multiple mother in laws? Yes I admit we would need to iron out a few problems
Pat, I enjoy your work. We really do need someone like yourself around here to remind us just what it is like to hate with passion and without good cause, the very thing you accuse people here of doing. Well done.
Oh dear, Rudd and co are our creating jobs again. Bastards.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/12/2623366.htm
Aristotle 254
You’ve nailed it! Especially that last sentence.
Of course you hate Rudd, PF. Oh he is good, real good. And unfortunately you blokes are going to be in opposition for a long time, a very long time.
Interesting point Patrick
For myself, I was turned away from ever supporting Labor by PJK (1993-1996)…he gave a deep insight into the double standards that are a cornerstone of ALP politics
Truly, ruly, for trillions and billions of years…I swear, I’m never never going to vote labor, might even tell my mum about it etc
But look what I’m missing out on now….Rudd is so shiny and media perfect, even his lips are all glossy,
he’s apologised, he’s borrowed money and is throwing it all over, he speaks gobbledy-(insert politically correct word here)…Gosh, aren’t these things that define leadership?..
but look there’s more, he’s canned grocery watch, delayed ETS, reversed his econimic conservatism, accelerated the queue of boat people…
All within two years of winning office,
says it all really
# 271
Yeah, he’s Australia’s greatest ever PM!
Sounds like the Bills, the Squiggles and the Fogartys did Lunch the other day …
271
Maybe your mum will tell you to grow up.
Interesting that the Lions beat Geelong last night. I wonder if the West Coast could beat St.Kilda as well, given their undefeated clash the week before?
Btw, like Socrates pointed out in Brisbane, there was not one word spoken in Sydney of the big clash between Geelong and St.Kilda the previous week, not one word. The MSM are real worried that their Rugby League is going down.
Maybe your mum will ask, “Why can’t you be more like that nice Kevin Rudd in the Government”.
Have noted over recent months that there have been quite a number of comments arguing that the ABC has taken a big step to the right. I have tried to put these arguments aside believing that the national broadcaster should be running negatives stories of the Government for no other reason then they are the Government and accordingly are the ones making decisions.
However, this morning on Insiders my current view was undermined with the segment where they ask a particular group about something that happened during the week.
Today the Insiders crew went to a cattle sale in North Queensland and asked the “punters” what they though of Kevin Rudd. Now anyone whit only 2 grey cells in their head would know the answers they would get from such a population. Negative comment after negative comment was the order of the day.
I cannot see any value in such an exercise. We all know what the answers would be and of cause there could not be any balance in the segment.
It appears to be 5 minutes of Rudd bashing.
I look forward to the Insiders programme going to the ACTU Congress and asking the delegates what they think of Mr Turnbull and the Liberal Party.
I don’t intend to hold my breath waiting.
Tom (119 and 140),
The ALP builds freeways too – and a good thing it is too!
You seem determined to discuss the consequences of a Labor victory in 1961. Had Arthur Calwell won, he may have had a one-seat majority like Robert Menzies, and he would have faced a hostile Senate. He may therefore have called an early election to increase his House majority, thus putting the House and Senate out of synch, or he may have called a double dissolution election, the lower quota in which would have led to even more DLP senators being elected. The DLP was the centre party of the era, between the Liberals on the right and Labor on the left, so it was well positioned to capture votes from either, just as the Democrats were decades later.
Had Don Chipp not formed the Democrats, the DLP would have remained the party in the centre and it is even possible that won a Senate seat in 1977 in Victoria. Its vote increased from 1975. Who knows? We can play ‘what if ‘ games forever.
Had John Cain snr not expelled the later DLP ministers form Cabinet or had those later DLP MPs not voted no confidence in the Cain Government, there might have been no Split and thus no DLP. Who knows?
And over here in the West we get not one word in the weekend press about Rugby League or Union – just incessant fatuous nonsense about AFL, a game as significant on a global basis as tiddlewinks.
Better we stick to politics.
Notice that Rudd on the World stage, is not treated as a Deputy Sherrif but with respect.
Yeah, Gary. Not. RE BB’s main post & your response:
When the aging, seriously sleep-deprived brain gets over last night’s cheering, laughing & reading aloud The G & Beeb commentators’ Pythonesque self-flagellation, I’ll reply to this topic & Pegasus’s; but, in short, Libs are still in the anger and/or denial stages of relevance deprivation syndromeand, if Greiner’s & Kennett’s losses are any indication, will stay there at least until their second election loss.
OK, Whitlam’s cheer squad did anger (in fact ANGER) and enough denial to let Gough stand again; but it regrouped fast and far enough to take advantage of Fraser’s diminished legitimacy and, in retrospect, two dreadful decisions, picking Howard as Treasurer, and creating the Painters & Dockers RC (probably at the union-basher’s urging. Fraser was man enough to admit to those mistakes – though he & Gough (& their supporters) will always differ on 1975. I don’t remember too much anger over the Hawke victory; possibly because of Fraser’s errors and Hawke’s famous charisma. Keating was furious for years after 1996, and paid a huge personal price, especially since most of his party & supporters knew that his personality was the problem.
Howard’s hold on power was never strong, and only the very risky ALP decision to make Latham leader (the reason I heard most frequently was that if Hawke could swear off grog, Latham could off aggro) changed that. But Howard (failed Treasurer, failed Oppo leader 87, intensely disliked by his own party) played politics, not by trad Australian, or even trad Oz Liberal rules, but by different ones, especially cult of personality politics beyond we’d seen even from Whitlam & Hawke (both of whom were widely regarded by the general public as well as in their own party) at the time Cheney, Rove, Buchanan & Co decided that they would create ways of making the GOP unbeatable. Not only did the Libs adopt them – inc. Tax cuts & welfare for the rich, culture wars, propaganda the Joe Goebells would applaud, tactics to activate tradies and the RW evangelical religious vote – their media cheerleaders imported eds, promoted journos to make Liberals unbeatable. I won’t repeat the tactical episodes; we all know them.
We know Howard alienated, even removed, traditional liberals like Fraser & Cheney. The well-educated, arts-friendly, socially-responsible, well-heeled – long the Liberals’ core constituency – retreated, and devoted their fundraising efforts to more worthy causes, waiting for another Menzies, Holt … Malcolm was their Great White Hope.
The more intelligent Liberals, having taken notice of USA trends, esp Election 06’s results and GOP’s falling popularity, and of the Sub-prime crisis’s possible repercussions, began to batten-down, moving & securing financial & political capital – Liberals’ 07 campaign was cash-strapped as ever more big backers drifted away; however Howard’s Liberals & their tacticians’ and MSM backers didn’t, until their house of cards came tumbling down in late winter 08. Since then, their Great White Hope did himself, the party & its MSM backers a very nasty injury they knew killed off any hope of a 2010 victory.
So, BB, Gary, to get to the conclusion ask yourself why your friends are so angry and bitter; if they’re your friends, they might need to talk when they reach that stage of grieving (as one with a dear but rusted-on Tory sibling+ kids, OH & family, I’m on the receiving end of long silent bouts)
* Did they, Under Howard’s generous new provisions, pay all available money into super funds, especially through financiers who played silly bu#gers with their money and went broke; risky investments like ABC learning, Storm and others that were crushed under huge debt; non-bank financing that Rudd didn’t guarantee? Worse still, did they sell out off, or borrow against, more secure investments (inc family homes) to pour into super funds?
* Did they buy the GOP-inspired “Liberals will rule forever” meme? Did they buy the personality cult, the unbeatable leader? If so, is their loyalty so strong that they see his assassination as PM & parliamentarian as akin to Cæsar’s assassination?
* Did they buy the MSM’s “Australia will never vote for Rudd” meme?
Chris,
“If” starts every post by Tom. It’s his way of sidelining the reality of what actually happened or an excuse to engage in a flight of whimsical speculation about the prsopects of the Greens.
260
What an immature chap you are. The other reasons you go on to state on debt etc demonstrate a very shallow thinking process. Grown ups know that debt isn’t bad in and of itself. And those more familiar with economic cycles understand that responsible governments save money during the good times (e.g. Hawke in the 80s) and spend it in the not so good times (e.g. Rudd now).
I can only assume that Liberals like yourself would have increased taxes and decreased expenditure in the last budget. Even a 10 yo could tell that would jack up unemployment. Is there some reason that Tories are opposed to Australians having jobs jobs jobs?
Tres amusing that you demonstrate the immaturity and emotional blathering in spades which you happily accuse the Left of. Keep up the top work, Pat old son.
271
I’m locking myself in my room and never coming out. *LOL*
Mature people tend to evaluate circumstances and make an informed decision based on the best option at the time. Neither political party is perfect, so wouldn’t a rational person make a case by case decision?
Perhaps you could let me know your thinking when you’re finished chucking a tanty.
And the lead story on “Their ABC” is:
[The Federal Opposition says Australia's relationship with China has fractured over the detention of an Australian mining executive.
Senior Rio Tinto employee Stern Hu is being held without charge in Shanghai on suspicion that he stole state secrets and tried to bribe staff at local Chinese steel companies.
The Federal Government has expressed frustration that China has given it little information and that consular officials were blocked from visiting Mr Hu for almost a week.
Australian consular staff met Mr Hu in Shanghai yesterday, saying he appeared well and raised no health or welfare issues during the meeting.
But Opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Julie Bishop has told ABC1's Insiders it is an issue for Government ministers, not diplomats, to handle.
"So far, the Australian ministers as far as we are aware have not even picked up the phone to their counterpart ministers and raised this issue," she said.
"There appears to be a major fracture in the relationship between Canberra and Beijing. There's been a lack of cooperation, no response to numerous requests for information and no info coming from Beijing.
"Our Foreign Minister Stephen Smith has been reduced to scouring Chinese Government websites to find out information on Mr Hu.
"Mr Rudd claims to have a special relationship with China - what benefit is this Australian citizen getting from that so-called special relationship?"
Ms Bishop says the situation reflects a broader problem with relations between Canberra and Beijing.
"I don't think these events occur in isolation," she said.
"I think this may well have been a build up of concerns on the part of China about the way the Australian Government has been treating China.
"We know they are deeply troubled by the Government's [Defence] white paper, we know they were deeply insulted by Mr Rudd’s raising of the human rights issues in Tibet.”]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/12/2623361.htm
And in typical keeping with Paddys usual liberal line, he cannot name specific causes for his dislike of Rudd – just peddle out the standard generic line. But because the libs say Rudd’s no good, then it must be true. Poor Paddy doesn’t seem to be able to reason why (or, shock, horror – why not) on his own, just blindly follow the lib line. Now all you lemmings, follow Malcolm, he wouldn’t lead you astray…
Tom.
Today is the first day in 3(THREE) weeks that my house has been M/inlaw free. Every hour, every day, a “concern” has been pointed out to me for 20+ days straight…in my house.
I hear you brother, I hear you
Patrick Fogarty
Mr Rudd has returned to employees some of the workplace conditions stolen from them by the Coalition. If you’re in the workforce, or have children / grandchildren who are, I’d have thought you would be grateful.
That is, of course, unless you’d prefer to not have have those rights and / or your offspring not have them?
FS @ 280. There’s usually nothing in Rugby League to report about. Well not about the actual game anyway!
In the AFL you had two undefeated teams after 13 rounds clashing for the first time in the history of either code. And not a word about it in the MSM!
As for Rugby League being a global game? Please, I’d rather argue with Squiggle and PF.
Err, OzPol Tragic, I’m not sure why you are lumping me in with this “friends angry thingy”. My response to it was “So what They are only conservative rusted ons saying they hate Rudd” and, by the way, I didn’t say I had such friends.
The point I’m making Centre, is it’s not a plot, it’s what the punters want, or are perceived to want by the msm.
It’s OK to be parochial if you live in the parish. It’s too bad if you don’t.
Well PF, you are in the small minority. 70%+ of voters find Rudd trustworthy and likeable. Be prepared to suffer your delusions for a long time.
OzPol Tragic – on second reading I see where you are coming from. Clever posting.
Nice one Fulvio
Meanwhile Julie is getting her claws out for Abbott, can you feel the love, fsssttt.
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/abbott-plugs-faultbased-divorce-option-20090712-dh2o.html
GG
I think Abbott just does not want a repeat of 98.
The ABC, “Insiders”, Milne, Akerman etc do their damndest to put people off Rudd. Just take one look at the opinion polls and ask this question – how well is it working for them? Then don’t worry about it.
OzPol Tragic (142),
1. There is no doubt that the DLP senators would have voted against the Liberals’ IR polices, both versions too, unlike the Democrats:
the Liberals wanted AWAs – not DLP policy;
the Liberals wanted a minimum of 4 hours pay docked for work ban – not DLP policy;
the Liberals wanted the end of the Conciliation and Arbitration system – not DLP policy.
A quote from the DLP’s IR policy-
“”Union organisation as such should not be weakened by legislation, not merely because unions are the expression of the basic right of wage earners, but also because they are the necessary foundation of the conciliation and arbitration system.”
Brian Harradine is the best example of what the DLP senators would have done, and he voted against both lots of Liberal IR policies.
Vince Gair refused to implement ALP policy on three weeks annual leave, and this was used to expel him and nine of his ten Cabinet members form the ALP. The real issue, however, was payback for Queensland delegates’ boycotting the illegal 1955 ALP Conference. Had he been Anna Bligh or Morris Iemma 50 years later, nothing would have happened to him for going against ALP policy. That is a telling example of how the ALP has changed.
If the FCU was so bad, its members could always have elected a different leadership.
2. Your comment “fancy believing in things when you don’t know their origin” makes no sense. I do not know what thing whose origin I do not know I am supposed to have believed in.
3. The Democrats were right wing – they voted for the first lot of Liberal IR policies. Family First is right wing. The Republicans of the US are right wing. I have given a long quotation of many left-wing statements from the DLP. Then there is their voting record in the senate, with a fairly even split between supporting Labor and supporting the Coalition.
4. I have no idea if the extract re the NCC still applies. I do not see the connection. I am giving evidence that the DLP of the past was a moderately left-wing social democratic party.
Your suggestion that the DLP might ally itself with Australia First is ridiculous. The DLP was the first party to oppose the White Australia policy.
Putting FF ahead of the DLP is your right. To me, that is just like saying putting FF ahead of the Democrats is your right. But, if you really would put the DLP last, behind the Socialist Equity Party, the Nazis, the CPA and the like, you have a serious misunderstanding of which parties are democratic and which are not.
I am not saying anything was a plot Fulvio. The Lions draw the same crowd numbers as the Broncos, yet attract no MSM coverage. If the Western Sydney franchise becomes a success, the AFL will no longer be able to be ignored.
I grew up following Leage and I still do. But now, that the game is owned by News Ltd, I call it as it is!
I posted a piece last week relating to the media’s inability to understands Rudd’s success, if you haven’t read it, it’s here:
http://www.ozforums.com.au/viewtopic.php?id=5832
Greensborough (283),
Don’t be too harsh on Tom. When I was young DLP candidate (for Greensborough too, though I guess you didn’t vote for me), I used to think ‘if’ a lot, but it was not to be. The Greens will be a third party for a while yet, just as the DLP and the Democrats once were. Let him dream and hope.
Does Tony Abbott’s proposal of at fault divorce mean that we can get to have a private detective stationed under every bedroom window to prove fault? Maybe they could bring back the Sunday Mirror which used to fill it’s pages with news from the divorce courts.
And this one, a couple of weeks ago, on the Coalition’s inability to understand Rudd’s success:
http://www.ozforums.com.au/viewtopic.php?id=5816
Greensborough (255),
Tony Abbott has, on more than one occasion claimed – falsely – that the DLP is alive and well inside the Liberal Party:
Santamaria’s influence still survives
Tony Abbott
The Age January 30, 2007
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/santamarias-influence-still-survives/2007/01/29/1169919271439.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
I sent in a letter:
‘Tony Abbott insults the thousands of men and women who sacrificed so much to found the Democratic Labor Party when he says the DLP is “alive and well and living inside the Howard Government” (“DLP lives on in Coalition: Abbott, 30/1).
‘It is certainly remarkable that Catholics would join the Liberal Party. That fact says something about modern-day Catholics but nothing about the DLP. The DLP was a Labor party committed to social justice and human rights – from the right to life to the right to be treated with human dignity as an employee.
‘The DLP senators would have rejected the Howard government’s industrial relations legislation out of hand. They would have been equally critical of the treatment of asylum seekers. They certainly would not have joined in the kow-towing to the Chinese president.
‘Bob Santamaria’s idea that the DLP should amalgamate with the Nationals was also a denial of the DLP’s Labor tradition. The DLP unions re-affiliated with the ALP twenty years ago, and that is where the DLP belongs, not in the anti-worker, anti-family Liberal Party.
‘Yours sincerely,
Chris Curtis
(Vice President, Victorian DLP, 1976-78)
‘e-mailed to: letters@theage.com.au
as Tony Abbott is dead wrong’
I sent a similar one to The Australian, which was published:
‘A Labor party, nevertheless
The Australian Thursday, February 01, 2007
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/letters/index.php/theaustralian/comments/a_labor_party_nevertheless/
‘TONY Abbott insults the thousands of men and women who sacrificed so much to found the Democratic Labor Party when he says “the DLP is alive and well and living inside the Howard Government” (”Abbott’s tradition warning to Libs”, 30/1).
‘The DLP was a Labor party committed to social justice and human rights – from the right to life to the right to be treated with human dignity as an employee.
‘The DLP senators would have vehemently opposed both lots of the Howard Government’s industrial relations legislation as attacks on the union movement and the family. They would have been equally critical of the treatment of asylum-seekers. They certainly would not have joined in the kow-towing to the Chinese president.
‘The DLP unions re-affiliated with the ALP 20 years ago, and that is where the DLP belongs, not in the anti-worker, anti-family Liberal Party that even Robert Menzies stopped voting for. ?Chris Curtis ?(Vice president, Victorian DLP, 1976-78) ?Langwarrin, Vic’
I sent a third one later the same year:
‘Contrary to Mick Hawkins’s assertion (“Voters should look behind the façade of political slogans”, 20/11), Tony Abbott would have been completely unacceptable as the leader of the Democratic Labor Party. There is no doubt that if the DLP senators still held the balance of power, they would have used it to block, not only Work Choices, but also the first lot of Liberal IR laws passed with the help of the Democrats in 1996. Almost all the former DLP officials that I keep in touch with can’t wait to see the end of the Howard Government.
‘Yours sincerely,
Chris Curtis
(Vice President, Victorian Democratic Labor Party, 1976-78)
‘e-mailed to: letters@theaustralian.com.au
as Tony Abbott and the DLP- – no way!’
I really do not want to go about the ancient history of the DLP, but I will not allow certain claims about it to go unchallenged.
aka ‘whose up who, and whose paying the rent’
Gusface, I think that Abbott was sent out to announce the Liberal’s stimulus page.
This has not been widely reported in MSM:
http://www.chinamining.org/News/2009-06-24/1245827354d26135.html
This could very well be the partial explanation to the action taken by the Chinese against Rio. The Comrades behind the Gate of the Heavenly Peace are saying to Rio and the likes:
1. Dont farq me up again like what you did to us. We saved you from BHP, then you ditched us suddenly and shacked up with BHP.
2. Dont mess with us. We might not need you as much as you think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFl2CVuM3No
(Hugh is better looking)
Finns, Africa must be looking good to Chinalco at present too.
http://allafrica.com/stories/200907060042.html
Rubbery Figures advertising Mutual Community Money Savers Account.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukd4ehqggGI
Chris,
One thing about Abbott is there is no subtlety in his approach to vote grabbing. He wants your vote and he wants it now. Abbott sees himself as the spear chucker for socially Conservative Liberal cause and is more than happy to cast his net far and wide to attract votes to this banner.
My comment about the wish for a DLP connection is that he perceives a need for a Party like the DLP to act as a preference collector for the Libs much like the Greens appear to do for the ALP. He appears to think there is a proportion of the protest vote parked with the Greens. If that were instead going to a right of centre minor Party, there would be a fair chace the Libs could get a larger preference flow. I don’t think Abbott is interested in the more traditional Labor values that you have espoused were a core part of the DLP.
Your comments about Catholics and the Libs are a bit quaint given, Abbott, Turnbull, Nelson, Pyne and Andrews are all Catholics. I put it more to a side outcome of the growth in prosperity that has occurred in Australia since WW2. (People, regardless of their background can become rich enough to vote Liberal).
Steve, i was talking to a business associate from Mozambique few weeks ago. He said very few people really realise how much investments China is making in securing resources and business/political influences in Africa. He said it is simply in a staggering scale.
Australia should not assume it is the only starfish on the beach.
Yep, Julie Bishop standing up for human rights…
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/12/2623361.htm
Greensborough (309),
Chance plays its part in politics. Had Tony Abbott been president of the La Trobe University Democratic Club in the early 1970s instead of president of the Sydney University Democratic Club in the later 1970s, he could very well have ended up in the ALP. It was his misfortune to be a New South Welshman.
Family First could serve as a preference collector for the Libs, but it will never be very strong. Society has changed too much. The Liberals have to straddle the great divide between liberalism and conservatism, and they are finding it hard.
It is a sad truth that as Catholics have become more middle class they have forgotten the social justice concepts of their church and moved to the right in politics. Thus you have people like Tony Abbott and Andrew Robb actually in the Liberal Party.
However, they are insufficient in number to give that party predominance in Australian political life. Labor plays that role, with only one election loss at the state or territory level in the last decade and a quite a few more victories to come. Come 2014, the Liberals will be wondering why they have governed Victoria for only 7 of the previous 32 years. Come 2016, they will be wondering why that have governed Australia for only 11 of the previous 33 years. (I know, I should not fall victim to hubris.)
GG @ 282 posted
Vortex @ 285 posted
“IF” indicates one of a number of alternatives; and I’ve yet to find any political issue in a democracy that does not have more than one alternative, that’s the point! Our democracy is set up with the expressed intention of making people debate alternatives – hence Government & Opposition.
The moment you cease entertaining alternatives, you move from possibility to absolute truth, and truth is difficult enough to find in hard sciences – and most ‘truths’ come with a rider of the under normal circumstances type, even mathematical ‘certainties’ like parallel lines are lines which never meet (they do in nonEuclidean mathematics) … in fact, according to very recent scientific reports, science is on the verge of proving Einstein’s non-normal circumstance. How much more so, then, if the qualifier is unless no god/s matching the characteristics of the one or more I believe in exist/s or unless the assumptions on which the computer simulation and/or programme prove to be incorrect.
So, GG, if you don’t consider every possibility, you are the one “sidelining the reality of what actually happened or an excuse to engage in a flight of whimsical speculation” – and that’s before one even get’s to what is ‘reality’?, a varitation of Socrates’ question/s What is ‘truth’? Is my ‘truth’ the same as yours? Ask any police interrogator trying to get at what witnesses ‘actually’ saw, what chances are of their answers’ being indentical, and the answer (with the rider ‘unless they’re all trained observers with near total recall) is ‘none’.
Truth, justice, reality and similar concepts are individual constructs, reflecting individually constructed reality etc. Accepting one ‘reality’ without understanding that, crosses the line between rational “accepted on current evidence, but I’ll revisit it if evidence changes” and “I believe.” If “I believe” involves taking up the fight to force others (esp all others) to accept & act in accordance with the same belief), the line between rationality and fanaticism has been crossed. And indulging in ad hominem, “poisoning the well” and ad hominem, “guilt by assertion” does nothing for the credibility of your case.
If you study sociology, you’ll very quickly encounter a taken for granted:
http://74.125.153.132/search?q=cache:3zas_L6fyi8J:arts.anu.edu.au/sss/SOCYEssayGuide.pdf+sociology+challenging+%22taken+for+granted%22&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au&client=firefox-a Nor does such study occur only in sociology. Every science student undertaking research is urged to choose one historical or current “taken for granted” and examine it from its origin to the current day. You’ll do it in all social sciences, in philosophy & religion, and other subjects. Mature people, as vortex argues, have lived through enough changes to accepted taken for granyed “reality” to add riders like “As far as I know”, “to the best of my ability”, “according to what’s currently known”.
My best memory of the folly of believing something endorsed by physicists of great repute was a 1957 statement, on an ABC radio science programme (& the ABC was then not given to speculation) celebrating International Geophysical Year (IGY). Asked about science exploration and the possibility of some big breakthrough during IGY, the interviewee (USA male) answered that this would probably never be possible because of the Van Allen Belt/s. The reason I can still hear the question & the answerer’s voices war that, within days, Russians shot Sputnik into orbit (October 4, 1957). For years it was discussed as the perfect example of why a rider such as “based on what we currently know” should always be added.
Nor was it the only such example. We heard the same about transplant (esp heart) surgery, cloning, miniaturising electronics (computers, even SciFi ones, were always supposed to get bigger & bigger). That’s why mature, rational people start with “If” and consider a range of conditions. Been there, done that, learned the lesson.)
OzpolTragic,
“So, GG, if you don’t consider every possibility, you are the one “sidelining the reality of what actually happened or an excuse to engage in a flight of whimsical speculation”
Your blustering admonishment leaves me underwhelmed but highly amused.
I definately rule out any chance of Arthur Caldwell winning the 1961 election. I further rule out the likelihood the Electoral Commission is ever going to gerrymander the electoral boundaries to (allegedly) make it easier for Greens to win seats in the HOR. I also reserve the right to form an opinion about the contributions of particular posters based on them posting the same arrant nonsense on a regular basis.
Tom can post what he likes. I can use my judgement to point out the basic nonsense that underpins much of what he says.
Collingwood winning the AFL Premiership is a concept that I will never countenance.
BOB1234 @ 67.
This is correct.
The Australia 1st Party will not do well at all. Before them there was Australians Against Further Imigration and they didn’t get good results. Its true that the GFC will help Far Right extremists a bit but I think its still unlikely that they’ll surpass the 4% threshold for electoral funding in any federal seats.
The Australian Greens are not primitivist. There is a strain of thought within small ‘g’ green thinking which is primitivist but it does not have popular support and is not supported by large ‘G’ Green policies or politicians. For a good debunking of green primitivism by a pro-technology green read anything by Murray Bookchin. If you want a return to the ’stone age’ your best bet is to vote for a party that wants to do nothing about climate change, nothing about peak oil and other resource depletion and nothing about environmental pollution and destruction.
Chris Curtis @ 303 cited:
Greensborough (255),
As does every serious Oz political commentator, historian, political analyst etc since the 1950s. In the last year, one NSW MSM journo commented (from memory, over the stouch at an Art gallery function) that the real problem with NSW’s major parties is that The Split didn’t extend to NSW state politics, so the right wings of both Liberal & ALP still contain old CA/DLP elements, adding that different RW usually (but not always) RC racial groups gravitated to different parties, and the Libs tended to attract those with personal contact with communism (E Europe, Greece, E Mediterranean inc Lebanon and SE Asia, esp Vietnam). It was certainly discussed extensively, especially with regard to Liberal pre-selection brawls in the lead up to the 2007 NSW & Federal elections.
Colonisation of major political parties by the remnants of the DLP and others of like mind has been discussed since Tom Truman’s “Catholic Action and Politics” was published (1959/60) There’s some more recent commentary on Ambit Gambit during 2004’s Bankstown brawling: http://www.nationalforum.com.au/blogs/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=272 A proper electronic search at a university library will turn up every article, book review etc.
But as I’ve yet to encounted a DLP poster on any blog/board that was as open to reason and discussion than a dyed-in-the-wool JW, I’ve yet to find that poster.
GG @ 314 Do yourself a favour and get your head around logical fallacies through The Fallacy Files, by far the best & easiest to read I’ve found on the web. As most of the fallacies used in argument are “informal”, the best place to start is with the list of Subfallacies on Informal Fallacy
Why not take your post @ 314 and identify all those that appear? Many of us oldies went to schools where logic was a compulsory, especially for those aiming for non-science faculties where advanced logic was also a requirement. Good secondary & uni teachers in still teach it as a component of valid debating and argumentative essay writing.
It never does one or the cause one is supporting any good whatsoever of someone can take you apart as illogical.
There are also sites where fallacies are initially identified by well-known quotations; in your post, after a flurry of loaded words (fallacy begging the Question bursts into : “The flowers that bloom in the spring, Tr La Have nothing to do with the case.” and question-begging epithets.
Not a good advertisement for your cause GG. You can do much better than that!
OzPol Tragic,
I should make it clear that “Santamaria’s influence still survives” was the heading of Tony Abbott’s article, not my words.
If when you say “As does every serious Oz political commentator, historian, political analyst etc since the 1950s”, you are referring to the line “Santamaria’s influence still survives”, I would agree. I don’t think anyone, even the non-serious could disagree.
If, however, when you say “As does every serious Oz political commentator, historian, political analyst etc since the 1950s”, you are referring to the line “that the DLP is alive and well inside the Liberal Party”, I do not agree. The Liberal Party is anti-worker and anti-social justice, and thus has no “alive and well” DLP in it, despite the presence of some members who come from DLP families. The only person I know of who has made this claim is Tony Abbott. I am not sure if you are making it or not.
Is your use of the term “colonisation” meant to imply that people with a particular view of the world that you don’t like are not to be seen in the same way as the others with views that you do like when they join political parties?
If your last sentence is meant to refer to me, it is wrong as I am not a “DLP poster”, just someone who wants to keep the historical record accurate. Your debating tactic of dismissing those who disagree with you as “not open to reason and discussion” is particularly weak, especially given that I am engaged in a discussion with you at this moment. I am unable to persuade you with reason (which is what I am using), but I would not conclude that you are not open to reason, just that you can’t accept what I am saying on this particular topic.
It is easy to dismiss Tony Abbott as being a barking mad loony – but his socially conservative views resonate with a section of the community.
He knows that if these socially conservative people decide to vote for someone else the Liberal Party is toast.
His role in One Nations demise has never been fully explained but it was not insignificant.
If Turnbull and the moderates alienate the sc mob, Tony will be there to pick them up, within the party and without.
Poll movements are fluid rather than block. I think we all can agree that when the Greens go up and the Libs go down it is partially Libs to Greens and partially Libs to ALP and ALP to Greens. The issue is just, to what extent either is happening? Some would be protest votes from anti-ALPers or conservatives, some would be genuine coversions as former Libs ’see the light’ however it is my belief that the Libs to ALP + ALP to Greens phenomonon happens much more. Perhaps at a rate of 5:1. This is because Lib to Greens though not impossible, it is a significant leap and I give the voter a bit of credit.
Afterall, the Bulk of Greens supporters are ex-ALP supporters – we can agree on that, right? So why shouldn’t swings to the Greens mostly be from the ALP? That would make sence. Unless of course we sort the voting public into two classes, one politically educated and rusted on and the other easily swayed by propoganda and able to flip-flop all over the ideological landscsape. Again though both this argument and the one that Lib to Green or Green to Lib is just too great a gap to happen much in a credible electorate would both be true to an extend, so we are talking in degrees once again.
I don’t really know why the ALPers here (actually just Frank) think that Libs changing to Greens is something to attack the Greens over anyway. Its not as though they’re not trying to ‘convert’ Libs also.
Maybe if Tony Abbott ever gets the snits with his beloved Liberal Party – he could form the “Australians for Honest Politics” party?
He would probably win a Senate seat in NSW and with fellow “high profile” nutters maybe more.
Just a thought.
He is the guy who advised Jackie Kelly to call the racist leaflet affair just a Chaser stunt. I guess that qualifies him to lead a party called “Australians for Honest Politics”.
“Australians for Honest Politics” was Abbott’s slush fund to pursue One Nation in the courts.
Surely a fitting name? In a newspeak kinda way.
HM
when I make the comment (as I have more than once) that there’s a block of votes moving from the Libs to the Greens, it’s not an attack. I can’t understand why it would be. Certainly, some Greens react as though it is, and that’s perplexing.
They rarely (as you have) try to justify why this can’t be happening.
With all respect to your good self, however, your argument appears to be that a Liberal who changes their vote to Greens does so in full knowledge of Greens policy and that therefore a dyed in the wool conservative is making a huge jump to go from conservative politics to left of the ALP.
To me, this is a case of not knowing your constituency.
Firstly, your average punter knows stuff all about the Greens policy positions. They know that the Greens are ‘pro’ environment and that’s about it. I don’t -and many of them don’t – see being pro environment as being a left or right issue, so shifting their vote from Liberals to Greens in this circumstance isn’t seen by them as a shift from the right to the left, but as a decision to be more consciously supportive of environmental measures.
Some of the above do it for the same reason that many of the uber rich support charities and the arts – they recognise their own lifestyle isn’t as environmentally friendly as they would wish, and vote to compensate.
Secondly, the Hamerite Liberals are economic conservatives/social progressives. They’re anti union, pro individual choice and follow through on the second by being supportive of policies such as a woman’s right to chose, assisted euthanasia, refugees etc. Indeed, with the latter beliefs they are often further left than Labor to begin with. These ’soft’ Hamerite Liberals (Petro Georgiou types) are increasingly made to feel unwelcome in the modern day Liberal party. Again, it is actually easier for them to move to the Greens than Labor for a number of reasons – it’s too much to swallow suddenly shifting to the ‘team’ you’ve spent all your life opposing, and secondly, they’re actually more comfortable with Green policies as more representative of their viewpoint.
Hamerite Liberals are the ones I know best, very nice, decent people who loathe unions, believe that Labor is too much of a ‘nanny’, and are pro individual freedom.
Thirdly, you have the children of Liberal voting parents. The polls clearly show that the ALP and the Greens have the ‘young’ vote pretty much stitched up, which suggests that there is a ‘missing’ cohort of Liberal voters – the children I am referring to. Again, I would suggest that if you come from a pro-Lib family, it is easier to shift to the Greens than to the ALP (for the reasons I’ve already outlined above) and easier to explain to your parents.
Finally, there is the protest voter. They dislike and distrust both the majors and therefore vote for ‘A.N. Other’ and don’t particularly care what policies the alternative supports.
I would also argue that the perception (I stress that word) that the Greens are purer and more moral when it comes to politics gives the label ‘Green voter’ a certain panache in some circles – it demonstrates to others that you care more about the environment than they do, you are more concerned about ethical standards and moral rectitude, unlike the hypocritical, compromised and cynical people around you who vote for the majors ‘cos they don’t know any better.
Bird of Paradox @ 196:
Good question? What will we see first, a docker flag, or a lib PM?
Ok, so Kruddy will win the next ‘lection. And Kruddy/Gillard will win the one after that. Then all bets are off.
So, can the Dockers win the flag in that time? Simple answer, no.
So, looking 10+ years out, I am gonna have to say a Lib PM is more likely than Dockers flag. And I am a member. Pity me.
Following ruawake’s thought in #323.
The most likely candidate I can see for a change of party affiliation is Steve Fielding.
Not exactly a party change but a more open declaration of who his party will ally themselves, and therefore him, in the future.
Family First cannot win a Senate seat on its own primaries.
Nor with the second preferences of its usual allies. Such as Fred Nile and other Christian right wing groups. I have checked the FF ‘how to vote cards’ for 3 states and basically Fren Nile, FF and the other mob whose name I forget, preference each other with a little bit of shoving some independents in the mix.
That is getting them nowhere.
But enter the ALP and they managed to get FF/Fielding in at the ‘04 election.
I assume that is unlikely to happen again.
So bye bye FF and Fielding and his like in other states.
Unless ……
He /they can get a surrogate for the ALP and repeat the 2004 ALP/Fielding scenario with a different party.
And I reckon the Liberals would possibly be in that.
A preference swap between FF and the Liberals.
Where the aim of the Liberals is to get Fielding [or a FF person in another state] in before the Greens.
While it irk me to admit it, a “Conservative” party would find support.
Yearning for the “Good old days”, white picket fences, kids playing in the streets, no new fangled gadgets, no mucking around with genes. The simpler life for simple people.
My hunch is that someone will try it. But it will only succeed with a strong leader who has the sense of what to avoid.
OzpolTragic,
If only I’d taken notice of the “Molly Meldrum” cliched pearls of wisdom from mentors like yourself I’d have ended up an old tosser endeared with his own intellectual inadequacies.
Thank goodness for common sense.
279
Freeways are bad for various reasons outlined in this link.
http://www.ptua.org.au/myths/
Yes I am determined to discuss what would have happened if Calwell had won in `61 as it is a topic that interests me. From the 1st of July 1962 the Senate balance of power was held by the DLP who would have been less obstructionist than the Coalition. There may well have been a DD but this probably only led to the re-election of the DLP Senators elected in 1958 plus maybe one or two more in other states. All separate Senate elections occurred under the 1949-72 Liberal and Country Parties` government. The only separate house election not under the same government was in 1929 after the Bruce government lost the vote on its industrial relations legislation. I doubt that Calwell would have called a house only election. To increase the House majority Calwell could (Senate permitting) have given one or both of the Territory MPs full votes (they were both ALP). The DLP was mainly centre left voters who would have been voting ALP if not for the split.
I doubt that the DLP would have made a comeback if not for the Democrats because the Whitlam Government and Vince Gair finnished the DLP as a political force.
Had the spilt occurred after the 1955 Victorian election then the ALP may possibly have won a majority in the Legislative Council (I don`t have figure for the Legislative Council election before 1988 and I have googled it) and may have abolished it and entrenched one vote one value.
OzPol @ 313
Great post
Zoomster
Agreed, its not an attack – its psephology. What I stated was that its “just Frank” C that seem to think its something to hold against the Greens. I shouldn’t have confused things by mentioning the ALP because it’s just him.
If you look at my post, I cover all bases so as not to be wrong. Since I mentioned lots of voting types that occur it accidentally came across that I was advocating some factors to a greater extent than I actually am so I’ll rephrase:
Of the swing to the Greens:
• Some is caused by swing from Libs to ALP and ALP to Greens. I now guestimate 80%. This includes both protest votes and those moving due to policy/ideology
• Some is caused by unengaged Liberal voters shifting all over the place that don’t have much awareness of policies/ideologies. I guestimate 10%
• Some is an increased protest vote from ex-Lib caused by more bitterness with the major parties over the Grech Affair. I guestimate 7% (This overlaps with the second dot point a bit)
• Some is educated voters making a move from Libs to Greens. I guestimate 3% (how do you measure “educated” though?)
If there are two types of Green supporters: Those ideologically aligned and those that just don’t like the majors for whatever reason, protest voters etc. then I’d say that the vast bulk of the consistent Greens vote is from the ideologically aligned group. This is because the Green supporters are known to be the most engaged. I suspect that those that swing to and from the Greens will have more protest voters within them than the consistent supporters. However the increased Greens vote is not just caused by more protest votes but also from more people becoming supportive of their policies instead of the outdated ALP/COALition policies. Anyway protest votes do not just come from ex-lib voters but also from ex-ALP voters.
It is certainly true that the vast, vast, vast bulk of core Greens active supporters are former ALP/democrats supporters. This would imply that swings to them would mostly come from the ALP.
Pull the other one it plays Greensleeves
Oh and Are you discounting what happened in Fremantle as just political noise ? It is a FACT that withj the lack of a Liberal Party Candidate the bulk, if not all of thier vote went STRAIGHT to the Greens.
If you want to deny that political reality then keep dreaming that it will be repeated in a General Election.
Tom,
The numbers following the 1961 Senate election were:
Coalition 30
Labor 28
DLP 1
Independent 1.
Thus, the DLP did not hold the balance of power. The Coalition had sufficient votes to block anything on its own, including any attempt by Arthur Calwell to give voting rights to territory MPs. It could carry anything it wanted with the vote of the either the one independent or the DLP – though Senators Wright and Wood were well known for crossing the floor.
The one DLP senator, George Cole, would have supported a number of Labor policies, as would Senator Turnbull, but even the support of both would not get anything carried.
As for freeways, they are great in off-peak times.
THM,
The only point I want to add is that not all voters are ideological. Frank McManus of the DLP got 19.1 per cent of the Senate vote in 1970 (still the third party record). Don Chipp of the Democrats got 16.1 per cent in 1977. There is no doubt in my mind that a considerable number of DLP voters from 1970 switched to the Democrats in 1977, despite the differences in the two parties.
Hence the animosity between some sections of the ALP and the Greens, as was the case between some Democrats and some Greens. Fightng over the same potential voters.
Or one Democrat leader who joined the Greens.
DLP: Splitter
Democrats: Splitters
NDP: Grassroots single-issue party.
Australian Greens: Grassroots movement.
One Nation: Politically centralized flash in the pan oddity.
FF: Political wing of the Assemblies of God churches.
The NDP, ON and FF were not major players. The Greens arose out of a need: as an effect of the transition to the new era and cannot be easily replicated by the conservative side of politics. If they want to have a conservative party (as if the Liberals or Natonals don’t count) then the easiest way would be to split from the Libs, this could give them DLP/Democrats level of support rather than ON/FF/NDP short lives.
Of which Jo Valentine eventually joined The Greens
http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-raises-xinjiang-death-toll-to-184-20090711-dgoh.html
Please excuse me from laughing as I fall-off my chair and puking. Is this the same Turkey that denied the Armenian Genocide.
And the consistent use of the State Terrorism to punish those who dare to criticise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_Genocide#Republic_of_Turkey_and_the_Armenian_Genocide
Oh dear, how many Kettles, pots, kettles, do you need to cook the Turkish Delight.
Molotov
One Nation had 11 seats in the Qld Parliament. With a Primary of 22.7%
The stuff Green dreams are made of.
St Bob would have an Orgasim with numbers like that
One Nation were so popular it must have really affected the Liberal vote for them to react in the way they did.
ON certainly were in Queensland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Nation_(Australia)
Admittedly, that 22% in Qld was predominately at the expense of the Nats who also foolishly, against the wishes of the Feds, preference’d ON in that election.
If they hadn’t subsequently imploded, they certainly could have been players for quite some time and eroded even more of the RW National and Lib vote.
With slightly better candidate selection and better central control, the ON Party could have been a big player in both State and Federal politics.
Howard of course neutered them to a large degree by taking on board many of their policies and forced the Qld Coalition to cease preferencing them.
Tom tfab, here’s a bit of light reading from the era you’re interested in.
http://dspace.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/46052/2/02whole.pdf
They also turn off a much larger section of the community
Which is what the ALP need to do to neuter the Greens. How likely is that?
Frank Calabrese
A while ago I made a really long post, which listed 1000 reasons why you are wrong to attack the Greens for receiving votes from former Libs in Freo but you never replied so I don’t know if you saw it. I can’t be bother saying it all again but I felt it was convincing to a rational person (ie anyone here except you). I have no idea how to quickly scroll through the archives for it but if you have all the time in the world then check back a fortnight or so.
Reading your post I have to again say what I always have to say – I don’t follow. You should always put one more sentence in to clarify what you are talking about. However I think I gather enough to confirm what I was saying to Zoomster that you do think that former libs moving to the Greens is something to attack the Greens over, which Zoomster and I do not think is valid.
It is not a FACT that “the bulk, if not all” (I mean really! If not all! As if every single Liberal voter moved to the Greens?!!! I suppose included the conservative independent candidates that personally voted Green. Why make such comments?) Liberals voted Green. This is contested by many including um either Antony Green, William Bowe or both I think.
It all seems so “yesterday” discussing the DLP. And before you accuse me of being a young wipper-snapper too wet behind the ears to know any better etc. etc. I can still rmember Father Kennedy reading out Cardinal Gilroy’s wannabee encyclicals on the evils of Labor. I was an altar boy at the time and old Paddy Kennedy confided in himself (with Eager Ears me overhearing) that it was all a lot of garbage. All he wanted to do was go back to Ireland and retire (which the Fathers eventually took up a collection for and made possible… poor Paddy died on the Oriana on the way over).
Anyway… as I was saying… what was I saying? Oh yes… Calwell didn’t win in 1961 (”Killen, you are magnificent!”), Menzies continued on, then Holt then Gorton then the Weasel McMahon (whom I shook hands with once at ANU’s Garran Hall in 1971… a hirsute moi had been intending to spit in his face but couldn’t summon up the courage when it came to it) and the rest is history, with the emphasis on history.
I had done my schooling at St. Pat’s, Strathfield, thinking all the time that it was a breeding ground for real estate agents, doctors and motor trimmers. It wasn’t until years later I realised it was a hotbed alright. Yeah sure, some of my alma materites did become doctors (and damn good ones too, I’ve since concluded), and there was one who now owns a chain of pubs, another who was a pain inthe ar$s captain of the footy team who had a retarded kid and became probably the most human of them all, and yet another who always had pies stains down the front of his tie but who’s now the nattiest dresser you’d ever want to see.
But the hotbeddery came from the number of Labor ministers the place produced. The Ferguson brothers, for one (or is that two?), Tony Burke’s another, and Craig Emerson to name four (and let’s not forget John Brown, plus of course John Brogden who batted for the other side, contrary to his Balmain background).
The point is that despite the Gilroy Letters from the pulpit, despite many of the kids I went to school with being not quite the idiot sons but at least the sons of the Strathfield small business gentry, old St. Pat’s produced much more than its fair share of stick-it-up-to-the-Libs politicians, for which I am truly grateful. After all, Eddie Rice made his bone among the slums of Dublin (or so the legend goes).
My conclusion? The DLP was waste of time, didn’t really affect anything but caused a lot of trouble doing precisely zip.
So why are we dreding all this up… again?
I don’t think that the ALP feels anyway near as threatened by the Greens an the Libs and Nats did by the rise of One Nation.
Especially the Nats as that is where most of the ON votes came from.
Besides that the ON preferences went everywhere and didn’t return to the Coalition in the same levels as does Greens preferences to Labor.
It IS a fact because the ALP Vote was the same as what was achieved in the State Election WITH a Liberal Candidate.
Oh and I’m sorry you csnnot follow my posts, I state SFACTS, you say nothing but Green Talking Points.
My Comments still stand, if you don’t like what IK write – DON’T bother reading them – you are not forced to you know !
And it was One Nation preferences in WA which gave the WA ALP Government in 2001.
ON were as I said “flash in the pan”. They did well for a couple of years and then died. They got a high primary for a short time but were not in the same league as the DLP Dems or Greens.
Frank Calabrese
Yes, I know. Whats your point? As always Frank: WHATS YOUER POINT? Please don’t claim she’s a Trot due to her associations with the NDP because she isn’t but then again you don’t ever let the FACTS get in the way of an incomprehendible and unhelpful comment or pots and kettles reference. She became a Green as did many NDPers as it was pretty much the precursor to the party.
It was weird how Borbidge lost support so quickly.
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/CIB/1998-99/99cib02.htm#INTRO
Bushfire Bill (349),
We are “dred[g]ing this all up…again” because on Reuters Poll Trend: 55.8-44.2 thread, OzPol Tragic (1488) described the DLP as “paranoid, embittered, divisive, obsessive, hate-spewing political group” that “[didn’t] last long” and I wasn’t going to let him get away with it.
Given that Cardinal Gilroy acted to keep the Groupers inside the NSW ALP, it is rather strange that he would be writing something telling voters not to support it.
Geez, who said I was attacking her for being a Trot ? I was just pointing out the bleeding obvious that once the NDP imploded, one of their number joined the Greens. Cheryl Kernot was wooed to the ALP ?
Is that a crime to do so ?
Oh and it seems the Greens ALWAYS have some sort of Guilt Complex when ALP supporters quite rightly question their motives and policies.
THM
I hope your frustration (?) with Frank does not deter you from posting here. I always read your posts, as I do Frank’s.
As Frank suggested:
Let the silent audience ‘judge’ who they will
Yeah, Pauline & Co sucked up all the far right wing of the Nats as well as picking up all the rest of the wacko’s looking for a home with some influence.
If it wasn’t for the internal power struggles and subsequent implosion, they would still be a major force today.
Many of these people still feel disenfranchised and it is possible Abbott is looking at ways of bringing them into the Lib tent, but how they could exercise any degree of control over them I have no idea.
It depends how you define ‘ideologically aligned’, doesn’t it? (and ‘engaged’)!
One of the problems of being a member of a political party (rather than just an average punter without much interest in politics) is that it’s easy to believe that the people who vote for your party think the way you do and vote accordingly.
If ‘not engaged’ means voting the way you always have because your parents voted that way etc etc, never listening to the radio, TV or reading a newspaper (and believe me, it’s scary how many of them there are out there) than ‘more engaged’ can mean simply that you have some idea of what the party’s on about.
The Greens voters I know (and know well) fall into either the ‘both the majors are bad so I’ll vote Green ‘cos they’re for the environment’ or the ‘the Greens offer a different style of politics’ camps. Very few of them show much awareness of actual Greens policy (probably less than your average Labor/Lib voter, given the amount of info about their policies available during election campaigns compared to the Greens).
It can also be argued that, the smaller your party is, the more likely it is that the bulk of your membership is ‘engaged’ – so my ALP branch is very small, but each and every member is very engaged with it, simply because they know that there’s noone else to do the heavy lifting.
I KNOW it’s broadbrush, but I still stand by the Occam’s razor approach – if the Liberals lose 3% and the Greens gain 3%, the simplest explanation is that these votes moved from Libs to Green.
So we can argue about proportions – 100%? 80%? 50%? – but the most sensible explanation is that the majority of that 3% was a direct transfer from Libs to Greens, especially in the context of this poll, where there are plenty of reasons to explain the loss of votes from the Liberals but much harder to explain a loss of votes from the ALP.
Frank
But you didn’t. No where in your post did you question the Greens “motives or policies”. I just don’t follow you man.
Thanks Pegasus. I think I will stop reading Franks posts its just I’m CST and a night owl and he’s WA time I think so we often post when ESTers are tucked in bed.
The Greens voters I know vote Greens because of their policies supporting human rights and social justice. They are committed Christians who vary in age from 20 something to 70 something. They certainly are aware of Greens policies and have reflected long and hard about them.
Boerwar @ 137
“Where is the oldest opera house in the Southern Hemisphere?”
Port Elizabeth, South Africa. c1892
Pegasus
…and, with all respect, I don’t think ‘Christians between 20 and 70′ are a huge subset of the Greens voter demographic.
I’m really not talking about the committed Greens voters here (as I hope I’ve made clear) but about those who are shifting from one or other of the majors to the Greens in recent times – swinging voters by definition, who tell you prior to the election that they haven’t made up their mind and afterwards that the voted Green.
An example is a couple I know well, who have argued with me long and hard about issues such as the North South pipeline. It’s clear from their arguments that they don’t have much understanding of the underlying factors and aren’t much interested in them – there’s the simple belief that it’s wrong to pipe water from one place to another and an inability/unwillingness to consider why it might be necessary. If backed into a corner (and I’m usually not that merciless, having learnt long ago that some people simply can’t grasp the complexities of policy) they simply revert to ‘well, if you BELIEVE what the government says about it….’ and imply that I am a simple soul whose acceptance of the government’s actions comes from not knowing any better.
They vote Green not because they know what the Greens policies are, but because they think the majors are not environmentally friendly.
And, honestly, that’s all they want to know – they don’t want to do a policy by policy comparison between the majors and the Greens. They don’t want to vote for the majors (to demonstrate that they’re more perceptive than the ordinary voter) and the default position is Green.
And BTW – I would say the general feeling within the ALP re Greens supporters, especially the more engaged ones who are politically active, is that we’re pleased that there’s an alternative party that they can go to.
steve @ 354
Not really
1. The Waterside Dispute: Rob Borbidge. Queensland National Party Premier
Rob Borbidge has invited the National Farmers Federation to set up a non-unionised stevedoring operation in Brisbane. Rob Borbidge is trying to inflame the confrontation between the Maritime Union and Patricks to use against the Labor opposition in a likely state election this year.
http://www.takver.com/wharfie/who.htm#borbidge
2. Queensland Workplace Agreements: “The Borbidge government also initiated changes to the industrial relations system by introducing Queensland Workplace Agreements (QWA’s), similar to the Australian Workplace Agreements later created under the Federal Liberal government of John Howard.”
3. QPU “Memorandum of Understanding”: “it was revealed that during the Mundingburra by-election campaign, Borbidge and Cooper (now Minister for Police) had signed a secret Memorandum of Understanding with the Queensland Police Union guaranteeing the QPU the repeal of unpopular Goss government measures, the power of veto over senior police appointments, and increased police funding in return for a donation of $20,000 to the by-election campaign. This close relationship evoked many memories of the Bjelke-Petersen era, where relations between the executive and the police service were frequently close.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Borbidge
4. One Nation (Pauline H)
In power for less than 3 years and those were the highlights.
That enough, Steve?
KP had a beefo with Mitcho but then smashed by Hilfo. What a sound.
OzPol Tragic, I thought they must have been responsible for an infrastructure freeze or something equally nasty.
Zoomster,
And I wasn’t suggesting that they were. I have no idea what Greens voter demographics are.
I was simply responding to your comment:
[The Greens voters I know (and know well)] with my own anecdotal evidence, the same type of evidence that your post @ 363 largely consists of.
Bee-uuuuuu-ti-ful sound, The Finnigans.
Beeb’s Steve Pye. “I’ve had enough already and it’s only 11.21.”
In the 2004 federal election I voted Greens 1. Latham 2nd last and of course Rodente last.
Maybe that may help some of you guys LOL.
Allan @ 362
I actually don’t know for certain but I was told by several Tasmanians that one of Hobart’s main claims to fame was that it has the Southern Hemisphere’s oldest opera house.
@370 that’ld be oldest theatre,, as in “The Theatre Royal’
Off topic, well off topic…
So you want a Social License… What is it? What’s it good for? And where can you get one?
The all powerful, very cool. and dare I say it, mystical Social License!
Not everyone can have one. But more about that later.
So what is a Social License?
A Social License gives you permission to comment on subjects that you have no training in but feel your opinions are better than people who’ve studied and researched the area for 10, 12 or even 20 years. So, you might feel strongly about Tasmanian Devils, and with a Social License your views are given equal weight with those of a Professor of Zoology! How cool is that?
What’s a Social License good for?
Aside from the obvious power, you can use it just about however you like. In essence what you say becomes “reality”! Imagine you really hate Gunns. When they say they want to make clean Green electricity with a Biomass Generator your Social License allows you to say “Gunns should leaving saving the Planet to the people who care about it” and get it published in National News Media. That is amazing you say? Well, Gunns doesn’t have a Social License and you have. So even though you know nothing about anything other than feel-good mother-craft statements you’re in there, instant power!
How to get a Social License.
Not everyone can have a Social License. Obviously, you have to be “better”. And that’s the secret to getting a Social License. You have to be special, have special powers and knowledge. But not real knowledge, that’s for intellectuals. The best way to get a Social License is to join a pseudo-political group that’s got a few spare. We’re talking Australian Conservation Foundation, The Greens, The Tasmanian Greens (they have heaps, just lying around), The Wilderness Society etc. But you don’t just get a Social License, you get access to dozens of slightly woolly brained potential sexual partners!
Score!
367
…and fair enough, too, Peg.
Back in my box.
Allan
1834 Theatre Royal, Hobart.
They also did cock fights in there, so it might not count, strictly speaking, as being a pure opera house.
Hamer had dignitas, and would have appreciated the compliment.
I suggest that there is an alternative way of looking at some of the Liberal/Green/Labor discussions above.
The suggestion is that there are many Green voters, currently parked in either Liberal or Labor, who cannot bring themselves to vote for the Greens because they cannot actually imagine the Greens running the country.
Please tell me that the interminable Greens vs Labor slugfest hasn’t been going continuously during the whole week I’ve been away…
The only news I’ve been exposed to for a week has been the OO every morning. When is the popular uprising going to take place to overthrow the hopelessly incompetent Rudd Government I keep reading about. It seems that we are in the last days of the Empire and the brave media has escaped the censorship to reveal the truth about Rudd’s dictatorship.
The only other thing I noticed was that some Rio exec got caught spying and sorely needs the book to be thrown at him.
Diogenese
Welcome back.
You must have been very fortunate to have been stuck on a desert island with only the OO for company. Very informative journal of record.
There have been several dozen posts here on whether the 3% of those polled who left the Liberals are the same 3% of those polled who went to the Greens. The delightful thing is that since no-one can actually know what really happened, everyone has social licence to comment.
Nevertheless there have been some excellent posts, actually.
There have also been several zillion posts on ‘What really was the DLP and what did it achieve?’
There has been a bit of interest in wat hu did wen.
Oh, and Rebecca said some bad things about Rudd and Therese, and then refused to resile despite several zillion posts pointing out to her the error of her ways, and comparing her with a caterpillar.
Diog
you will be surprised to learn that Tony Abbott is a conservative.
Apparently he has only just escaped the vicious clampdown on conservatism which has been happening for the last decade or so, and is now free to talk openly.
Oh and a few of Tom the first and best along the lines of ‘If Churchill had been killed in World War I, would we have more Green senators today?”
Boer — yes, it’s been fun.
tonight’s tv is so hard to pick
The Ashes? – five for by lunch
Mark Webber on Poll in Germany, ready to cream the Germans at their home grand prix
Cadel Evans doing a champion’s job against the Astana team
Thank god the winter break is on, I’m just sooo conflicted about what to watch right now…
our greatest politicians aren’t in their local electorates, they are overseas representing Australia on the world stage//
C’mon aussie c’mon
From The Worst Of Perth’s Twitter Feed – note this is a Satirical post
and
Diogenes,
Possum also has some spiffy new charts which show the biggest swing to Labor since the election appears to be in SA. Obviously, you croweaters are delighted with the hard work and results being produced by local Labor star Penny Wong on ETS and water.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/
Poor Mr Abbott- held back all those years by the left wing radical John Howard…Isnt it amazing though that after all the Howard years (and their loss of government) he still thinks the party needs to go more CONSERVATIVE- Huh???
351
The number of Liberal voters who went to the ALP was approximately matched by the number of ALP voters who switched to the Greens.
Cool, Bird of Paradise. Thanks to you. Still have not worked out who Frank’s Mr Bird is.
Then, subject other, about Tony Abbott. Again. Did I mention his santamaria leanings? Yeah, for sure I did.
Tony should shutup and hope that Kev appoints him as successor to Tim Fisher as Ambassador to the Holy See.
And Kevin Rudd should shut up and get back to Oz quick smart before he loses all credibility with the Ozpop. As I said, bring on Julia. G, that is.
Have been loving Master Chef, great show. How interesting that Matt Preston commented that Kevin’s appearance on Rove is associated with Bruno, for one.
In, as Matt P put it, according to the press, a wish on Kev’s part, to remain or be or whatever, connected. Not for one second is politics or personalities ever referred to, on the show. Nor do I think they mean to. Just talking about stuff.
What that type of comment implies is a certain cynicism about Kev. And these guys and the younger followers are indicative about the voting future.
So, Kev, nota bene, as some among us commented quite a while ago.
Actually, Bruno may teach you a thing or two. Not least what shorts to wear.
Mr Bird and Bird of Paradox are one and the same – he posts on Facebook under his real name, but I won’t reveal it
Newspoll tomorrow. We’ll get to see whether the surge to Labor is a Turnbull dead cat bounce or just faulty shockers on Kev’s ute.
Well, Frank and companions.
I thought later that maybe Mr Bird could be a Freo high flyer.
Asked around, but no one had heard of such a moniker.
Whatever, I am not going to muck about on Facebook. Isn’t pollbludger enough?
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/janetalbrechtsen/index.php/theaustralian/comments/how_do_you_say_get_up_in_mandarin/
Planet Janet plumbs new depths in partisan journalism with the potential to actually hurt real people.
Doesn’t seem to care that people having silly hysterics in public over this is only going to make things more difficult for the Government to deal with ( their obvious and political objective) and that the consequence of that will be that things could go worse for the poor bugger Hu whose in jail in China than they otherwise might.
Her equating the treatment and situation of Hu with that of David Hicks is really quite sick.
Liam Bartlett with another Anti Rudd Rant – btw before joining 60 Minutes, Liam was the Morening Announcer on ABC Local Radio Perth before joing 6PR where he lasted all of 6 weeks before getting the 60 Minutes gig.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,25766623-5005374,00.html
Janet A. is either terribly deluded, mindlessly partisan or extremely jealous of Rudd. Rudd destroyed Howard and has since shown him to be a poor PM with his government trading on fear, racism bigotry etc – so I can understand the jealousy if it is there. But I reckon she lives in a world where self delusion reigns, she really believes a lot of her extreme nonsense, she is a female Ackerman.
I am surprised anybody who isn’t extreme right wing is still actually reading her. You know what to expect as you do with Ackerman. She writes for the faithful lost tribes of Howard, that are waiting in the mountains of South America for the coming of another Liberal Party messiah.
I read her (JA) because there is usually some entertainment value in whatever the rabid right is frothing at the mouth over at the moment. I suppose that to be fair though one has to remember that what she does isn’t journalism. Its opinion piece partisan trash.
Compare her amateur and blatantly partisan doodlings to some of the analysis and pertinent comment from George M in the same paper and she really shows up as a lightweight. I really hope the Libs giver her pre-selection for somewhere. They deserve her.
Turnbull and any other commentator saying the Government should confront the Chinese government and demand this and that are either extraordinary stupid or willing to trade Mr Hu’s well being in the hope of some political points for the Liberal Party.
We know the Howard government didn’t mind causing people to suffer in exchange for political points. The possible manslaughter of 300+ of the SEIVX, the turning of refugees into political cattle to be demonised and mercilessly punished, burying Hicks for years without charge to make sure a mate didn’t lose any political points.
Turnbull then has to say what he would do after having demanded China do what he said and they simply said back to him, ‘no’. What a total turkey he would seem and what damage he would have done to Australia’s relationship. And he would guarantee that no Australian get fair treatment in the future.
The only outcome of a Turnbull approach would be to ensure Hu gets found guilty and gets a prison term. This is probably what the Liberal Party want, to force Hu to be persecuted so they can have some political point to make. Turnbull and supporters have been reduced to hoping for the suffering of someone else to get some temporary political issue. They have a history of easily trading the well being of other people for politics.
China is a regime, it does what it wants and what it thinks it can get away with, especially with minnow countries. China’s government would never ever accept losing face on any issue, especially if witnessed by its own population.
Rudd knows exactly how to deal this issue. That it is – shut up, treat it as a genuine charge, let them make their point, deal quietly behind the scenes and don’t turn it in to politics. Time will pass and, if it was just a matter of residue anger, the guy would be released eventually.
AND if there really is a genuine crime of significance the guy will get charged and etc.
And in reality Australia doesn’t have much of a bargain position in any case.
Inadvertently the media and Turnbull in their ignorance and trying to make it into a domestic political affair with a bit of dog-whistling are behaving in a way that might help Hu’s cause.
If China was striking back because of Rio Tinto then they wanted it to be between Australia and them, the don’t want to escalate into a wider international issue of who can be safe doing business with a China that can act in an arbitrary way at the drop of a hat. This would hurt them in the longer run as it would cause the multinationals to seek sterner up front agreements and also get people to thinking that all arrests are simply political.
Issues like this if they get out of hand can turn international public sentiment against China, making it easier for domestic politicians to be harder on China even if it sacrifices business.
And I tend to think that it is better to suffer a few years of recession than to sell off the farm to China or any other country.
If in refusing to let China control a number of our resource companies it costs us business in retaliation then so be it. That would be only a short term sate of affairs as demand and business would increase again from some quarter. But if you sell off the farm then it is sold forever. Our resources are meant to generate revenue for generations to come so it is something we should exercise caution and control over. We should be maximising our revenue from our assets and the longevity of our assets.
Garnaut writes article critical of Rudd in context of Hu:
http://business.theage.com.au/business/how-we-got-china-so-wrong-20090712-dhfw.html
Well done to Mark Webber for winning his first GP!
You saw it here on Pollbludger first, folks. Garnaut and Grattan basically take up a theme I suggested on poll bludger the other day: that the Hu case is at least partly about a re-arrangement of power in China. In particular, I drew attention to the telling behaviour of Chinalco publicly going to bat against the secret police mob.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/president-backed-rio-tinto-probe-20090712-dhdw.html
I also drew attention to Shanghai/Beijing tensions, and also to the struggle between the Party and the second generation wealthy ones. I suggest now that the steel factory managers may be the second generation wealthy ones here.
I will suggest something else: At least part of the heat here is because of a need to draw attention away from the very serious embarrassment caused by the Uigers. Hu felt that he had to leave the G8 meeting to deal with this. How embarrassment. The fact that Hu has been reported as personally approving the investigation into Hu is particularly significant.
Meanwhile back in the OO, the hamfisted ones are pretty well suggesting that Hu is innocent and that the Chinese Government is guilty and that Rudd is to blame. They do not seem to have cottoned on to the fact that something bigger may be going on here.
As usual, there are some truthes here but today’s OO lacks something I suggested was needed the other day: a nuanced appreciation of what is happening.
Firstly, is Hu ‘innocent’? Who knows? But, as I suggested the other day, yesterday’s ‘normal’ corruption can become today’s official breaking of anti-corruption laws. (Again, you read it first on Pollbludger, folks). The Party has organised the secret police to haul in large numbers of Chinese-born Chinese (like the irony?) Steel Factory executives. If they can’t find some real evidence of real corruption amongst all that lot, I would be very surprised.
BTW, the Chinese routinely execute hundreds of folk for corruption. It is not as if they have suddenly made corruption up.
It seems to me that the Party has decided that it needs to remind everyone that it is the Boss and, as I suggested the other day, given that it is feeling more threatened than we might think, that stability must in some sort of question and that Australians should be giving all this a good hard think. Instead we have the OO braying away, supporting Turnbull and Bishop who are also braying away.
Some further thoughts:
1. The Rudd Government has given somewhat conflicting signals to the Chinese Government on several issues. These are detailed in the Australian. The signals issue is not helpful at this stage.
2. Crean should never have agreed to meet with a junior chappy from somewhere or other. He should have refused the meeting. The appropriate next step would have been to keep seeking a meeting at equal levels. (Again, as I pointed out the other day in the blog, the issue of time and timing is important here. If we appear to be in too much of a hurry, this plays into the hands of the hardliners in Beijing/Shanghai. The failure to appreciate this would be one of may main criticisms of the OO).
3. Rio has behaved in Rio’s interests. Arguably, from a Chinese perspective, it has behaved in bad faith in a big way. The results have not been in Australia’s interests. The problem is that the Australian Government, through FIRB decisions, has behaved in a similar way to that of the Chinese Government – it has interefered in purely commercial decisions. From a Chinese perspective, there is a whiff of hypocracy here.
4. While Australians may be surprised, this is not the first time that there has been an arrest of a senior business person during a period of business negotiation: (Areva/nuclear power plants).
What to do?
1. Relax about the time and timing bit. The Opposition has a legitimate role here – it should stop braying and bulling at a gate.
2. Work behind the scenes. Play the diplomatic game.
3. Publicly state that we condemn the rioting etc of the Uigers and that we condemn any corruption wherever it might happen.
4. Insist publicly that we are interested in seeing due process take place and that we are sure that fair, transparent trials will happen. In a way that is not linked specifically to the current case, we should continue to assert publicly our values of human rights.
5. There should be public Australian Government protests when we can demonstrably see that reasonable judicial standards are not being met. (BTW, we set these standards in Guantanamo Bay, and in the way in which we apply refugee laws, Right?)
6. Business will need to factor in a risk premium for doing business in China arising from the lack of arms-length between Government and Business there.
7. The Australian Government’s approach to ownership by Chinese entities of Australian businesses will also need to factor this in.
The Communist Party in China is facing monstrous challenges – it lured 150 million chinese peasants into the cities, it has created a mass of millionaires who are hungry for a finger of the political pie, it is reaching the limits of fresh water, it has an aging population, its information-control walls are being breached by millions of networked digital channels, its command and control processes are under major pressure. Thare are tens of thousands of cases of civil disobedience every year.
I wouldn’t want to be managing all that lot.
The arrest of Hu in this context is both small beer and sigificant. Australia’s response should be deliberate, well-paced and determined.
We should not be braying.
imacca @ 389
Planet Janet has always been full of sound & fury. Only when John Howard was PM did it seem to signify something other than nothing.
And for today’s little
vindication:
Have fun defending the undeleted expletives!
384
Tom, that’s a statement, not an argument.
You need to justify this: do you have ANY evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, which indicates this is so?
Secondly, how do you explain this poll? Why (given utegate etc) would the ALP lose votes to the Greens over the last fortnight? (Easy to imagine why the Libs would lose 3% — which, BTW, was my prediction – but I don’t think you can explain why the ALP would).
But, as I repeatedly say, if you don’t want to understand what is happening, so that your party can take advantage of it, then that’s fine with me.
Boerwar
Very nice summary.
They didn’t arrest an Australian, they arrested a lot of people. This is bigger than Rudd. Like it or not China is a very unstable country. To date the behavior of “The Australian” has done considerable damage to “The Australian”, they are now getting to the stage where they are doing considerable damage to our national interest. They are putting political pressure on the government to do stupid thing. They are printing rubbish.
It’s a great pity our international reputation was so sullied by Howard, and the USA by Bush, but we have to live with it.
Hu may or may not be guilty, he may or may not spend some time in jail ( being china he may get shot). A much bigger worry for Australian is the political instability that underlies this. Economically it is not a good time for China to be going through or fighting a revolution.
I think Adam wrote a good line the other day.
The power of democracy is it’s ability to run a revolution without bloodshed. Yes some democracies had/have governments that ignored international law, but almost to a man the coalition of the willing have been chucked out of power by their citizens.
China does not have that safety valve, and that is the weakness of non democratic countries.
Hey zooms,
First, I’d like to state I have no horse in this race. But your argument seems to ignore ideology and the existence of a political spectrum, and have a bit of the not-seeing-wood-for-the-trees about it.
If, over a longer period, votes have been moving from Lib to Lab, and over a longer period still, the Greens have been growing, that indicates to me a bit of a steady leftward ho. On the face of it, your argument assumes that there are a lot of ungrounded mugs out there. Which of course there may be, but the stability of the Australian system suggests otherwise. And I have no figures here, but doesn’t something like 3/4s of the Green vote go back to the ALP?
In any case, both of your lots have Libs and ex-Libs among you (insert Nelson Muntz laugh). Hence the being in Government and growing stuff.
What an utter pile of crap. Why some people continue to work in gross swings rather than net swings is beyond me…
GG
The pile-on continues. Penny Wong is struggling with her Water and CC portfolios and desperately needs to be relieved of Water, which requires someone in charge who can make a decision, perhaps Greg Combet. Half of the water allowances she has bought back won’t put any water back in the Murray except in flood years, and the NSW and Vic governments continue to ignore her as an irrelevance.
It must be humiliating to Wong to have Mike Rann taking the Vics to the High Court and highlighting that Wong is NOT in charge of the MDB, despite all the announcements that she is after interminable meetings.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25770182-5006301,00.html
I want to know what fingers she has in the pie.
Why is this sentence ungrammatical? (Typical News Ltd, can’t even write proper English, let alone tell the truth.)
An encouraging summary article by Ross Gittins in the SMH on the recession we aren’t really having:
http://business.smh.com.au/business/this-recession-isnt-looking-as-bad-as-we-feared-20090712-dhd2.html
If these figures continue the number on Turnbul’s debt truck will wind up looking more inflated than his ego. No wonder he needs to provoke a trade war with China. There seems almost no hope the people will be dissappointed with the government’s performance otherwise.
Barlow is a famous water expert (Mrs D used her book, Blue Covenant for her essay). I’m pretty sure she is American. It would add more to the debate to read the article to criticising the illiterate News journos or questioning her motives.
This comes from the article she wrote. The whole article is pretty damning.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25770220-2682,00.html
Digenes,
Your compatriots don’t seem to agree. They’re giving the Federal Labor a big tick over there in SA land.
I agree with Dio on Barlow and the Murray. In hindsight a lot of people within govt (not just politicians) are guilty on this one. I remember reading years ago a lot of ABARE analysis on what crops got farmers the best $ return per hectare. But that is the wrong sum – it assumes we are short of land, not water. The real sum should have been how much water could be allocated without long term environmental damage and what crops gave farmers the best $ return per litre of water. We have wasted a lot of money building more irrigations schemes than can be supplied with water. ABARE is a captive stakeholder and has been for a long time.
GG
Here in Adelaide I would offer some personal observations: Fed and State govt policy is working for most people. Projects like the defence base and schools work are underpinning employment (still growing) and they are supporting electrification of the railways after Howard refused to include public transport in Auslink. Adelaide’s economy is basically doing OK now, probably better than it was in the stagnant 1990s. Employment is growing. Our firm still hired extra new graduates this January. House prices never spiked as high here as interstate in the first place, so they have’t really fallen since, just held steady. The biggest threat is water supply, but the State is building the desal plant and Rudd is supplying half the cash. Plus the State opposition was run by a moron. No wonder the govt is being perceived well.
It’s not the “commentators” demanding action. It’s “expectations”. Milne this morning:
Expectations as to what, and by whom? I smell another OO bootstrapper in the making.
A man has been arrested for alleged corruption. It may or may not have something to do with a failed deal, and/or government intervention in it…. from either side, China or Australia, or both. It may be a simple case of criminal activity. Yes, Chinese laws are often enforced randomly. No, China is not a democracy. Yes, the man is still in custody. No, Rudd hasn’t done anything publicly about it yet. Yes, confusion reigns, mostly because the incident is only about a week old.
Milne lists a long litany of “failed” diplomacy, alleged spin, deception of the voters, supposed corruption etc. etc. Most of the anti-Rudd-on-China theses from the past get a run: Mandarin speaking, forgetting to go to Japan first before China, advocating for China to be part of discussions on the GFC in New York, the Defence White Paper, refusing to sit next to Madame Fu Ying in London, Joel Fitzgibbon, the APEC speech, the phone chat with George Bush… they’re all now put into context by the master journalist, Milne, a cut above his peers (unless the grubby story is his leak, and then it’s gangbusters).
I’m bewildered why Rudd hasn’t appointed Milne as a roving ambassador to China, or onto the government’s ethics committee, or even as his press secretary. The man seems to have a Rudd Blunder to hand for every situation.
What would little Glen have us do? Go to war? Send in the SAS? Break off diplomatic relations? Refuse to trade with China? Rudd resign in disgrace? Walk up to President Hu and job him one? (a Milne specialty).
Again at the OO it’s Kevin Rudd in Blunderama, Spin-O-Vision and Super Pana-Gotcha-Scope. Milne’s article does not make one concrete suggestion, prefering to lay on the hatred thick, with a trowel, Milne’s curled neurotic lip dredging up all the furphies from the past as if they were real, which they probably are in his tiny mind.
These experts in international relations at the OO know that China is a different place to Australia. They do things differently there. They do not use Miranda rights or the Judges’ Rules in the apprehension of suspected criminals. They do not have a quick magistrate’s hearing followed by nominal bail and release the prisoner. Yes, their economic policies are mixed up with politics and state security. If anyone should know this it’s Murdoch employees, who have been kow-towing to China for a couple of decades now.
But, so what?
We take it step by step, one day at a a time, preferably without the sniggering from the sidelines, especially the smartar$ed comments from the likes of the pimple, Milne.
Dio at #408
I think Barlow is Canadian.
She was on Radio National some time ago with John Quiggin and someone else.
Spoke a lot of sense.
I think the programme was Australia all over, a few months ago , there may be a transcript available.
Socrates,
Thanks for the local perspective which is always interesting. However, voters have the ability to separate the Federal and State scene in their judgements. (See NSW for corroboration). The 5% swing to the Feds must be indicative of broad support for Rudd and Co and by extension the various efforts and decisions made by the Federal Government including Wong.
Diogenes rants and raves about Wong all the time. However, the evidence seems to be that voter support is inversely proportional to the amount of whingeing about Wong and her performance as Climate Change and Water Minister.
Yeah well I was close. Sort of.
ABC Rdio National “In the National Interest.” Nov. ‘08
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/nationalinterest/stories/2008/2426405.htm
Worth a listen.
Dunno if they have transcripts.
They have.
Transcripts that is.
Here is some from maude, who was the best of the panel.
“One of the problems with water is that it has not been managed. We have not seen it as something that’s collectively ours, not only to use, to access as a commons, but that we need to have collective control over, and the less water you have – and you don’t have a lot of water in this country left – the more important it is to take public control to say that water is a public trust, it belongs to all Australians, it belongs to future generations, it belongs to the ecosystem and anyone who accesses it must be paying for it only in a way that’s done sustainably.”
And here is the crux:
“Who is making the decisions here around this precious water? The people of Australia are in charge and you guys have got to take over!”
APPLAUSE
GG
I agree with Dio on the water issue; but I don’t think the water issue, though serious, has really impacted on most urban people here yet. Also I think the biggest villain in the water problem is Victoria, not Canberra. So yes overall Rudd is doing a good job here, but that doesn’t give Wong a free pass on her portfolio.
GG
1. There is no evidence that the people of SA support Wong on Water.
2. Even if they did, the people can be WrONG.
The people of SA are the last people competent to judge Wong’s performance. SA wants other people’s water at no cost to themselves. SA should stop taking water out of the Murray, and drink recycled sewage and desal water. If they can’t bring themselves to do that, they should move to Qld.
Trolling psephos?
Does it even need to be asked fredex?
Psephos
The SA government has just passed planning regulations that will make water recycling and stormwater reuse mandatory on new subdivisions. You must know that SA takes far less out of the Murray than historical/natural drainage patterns would have seen happen anyway. The mismanagement of the Murray occurs long before the remaining trickle dribbles across the SA border. But assuming you are just winding us up, why don’t you by a NSW or Qld cotton farm, and see how sustainable that is.
So, anyone opposed to Greens’ doctrine is now a troll as well as a Labor hack?
You’re saying that Psephos’ remark was not a stupid trolling remark but was meant to be a serious and thoughtful contribution to discussion?
400
My statement is a reply to 451 (as it mentions) and is about the Fremantle by-election. That by-election was before the ute-Ozcar-email-Grech mess. There is no proof for the claim, argued by the Green down shooters on this site, that the approximate sameness of the ALP vote at that election, compaired to the previous election, meant that it was almost entirely the same voters who voted ALP in both elections. Since where the Greens get ahead of the Liberals, many Liberal voters ignore the Liberal Party`s recommendations to preference the Greens and preference the ALP (evidence for this is in the election results for the ALP versus Green seats in Victoria), it is fair to assume that those same people would vote for the ALP (either on primaries or preferences) in a ALP versus Green contest where there is no Liberal Party candidate.
I approve of these measures. My comments were aimed more at Xenophontic populism than the SA government, although Rann doesn’t mind a bit of populism when it suits him.
Not sure what that means. Last time I checked there were two major pipelines from the Murray to Adelaide, and one to Whyalla. Plus the whole Riverland irrigation area lives off the Murray.
I’m favour of shutting down most irrigation in the MDB – it’s dying anyway. That won’t help the Lower Lakes much, because most of it evaporates along the way. What SA needs is (a) rain in SA and (b) not piping water to Adelaide.
The SA’s are always very parochial with their views regarding progress on the management of the MDB. I agree with psephos that they are hardly an unbiased or rational source of information. I have already pointed out that the more hysterical claims that are often made from our Greens supporting PBers in SA regarding Labor Governmennts and personalities don’t seem to be backed up by the only unbiased measurement tool (ie the polls) we have at our disposal. This of course, has been discounted by the ranters.
Reasoned discussion will always be impossible with Greens supporters as they disregard any evidence that upsets their alarmist outlook on the world.
We are building a big desal plant so we don’t have to drink Murray water.
If our federation was fair, the federal government should’ve paid for all the costs of the desal plant as compensation for the state the lower lakes are in.
Is this official Labor Party policy or is it just another way of dismissing an argument that shows how poorly Labor is performing on Water, as this issue creates such horrendous cognitive dissonance amongst Labor hacks that it has to be dismissed somehow?
The state the Lower Lakes is in is SA, and if SA wants to have nice lakes, it should stop taking water out of the Murray. Shutting down irrigation up stream won’t make much difference, because most of the water in the northern tributaries evaporates long before it reaches SA. Australia has one of the highest river evaporation rates in the world – which was why the Murray never had a proper estuary in the first place.
Of course it’s not Labor policy, which shows that I don’t just recite Labor policy here, but come up with brilliant ideas of my own, like the above cited. If everyone listened to me, the world would be a better place – except the bits I think should be nuked of course.
Psephos
“My comments were aimed more at Xenophontic populism than the SA government, although Rann doesn’t mind a bit of populism when it suits him.”
Fair enough; I don’t support either of those either.
“Not sure what that means. Last time I checked there were two major pipelines from the Murray to Adelaide, and one to Whyalla. Plus the whole Riverland irrigation area lives off the Murray.”
Natural flows means that water from the Murray woudl naturally flow into SA at a certain rate, and not all of it reachs the sea. SA doesn’t take out much more than that loss. The whole of Adelaide’s water supply take from the Murray is less than six large cotton properties near Deniliquin. I wouldn’t defend everything SA does with the Murray, especially the pipeline to Whyalla (which was a Commonwealth bright idea back in the Menzies era I think), but really, the main problem is over allocation in NSW and Victoria.
The Riverland is over-irrigated, but not so much for the part of it in SA. They have done a lot of conservation measures, drip irrigation etc. Yet they get virtually no allocation anyway. This area is also an example of a place which would naturally get a lot of Murray naturall flows if we still allowed teh river to flood as it once did (overland flow) but we stop that with a heap of weirs and dams upstream.
Your comment on MDB irrigation is generally valid (although I think limited and localised irrigation as listed above woudl not be a problem), but the lower lakes would be a lot more saveable than people assume with less over allocation. The faster and higher the Murray flows, the less % evaporation. So the lower lakes would be fine if overall flows were reasonable. Current practices make the impact of evaporation worse.
Mike Young’s website is an excellent source on this issue:
http://www.myoung.net.au/water/
Socrates
“the remaining trickle dribbles across the SA border.”
You know Socrates it really wouldn’t take that much to take a trip to the border and see how silly that statement is. The irrigation system after the South Australian border is large, too large to be sustainable.
The allocation was 18% last year, at this stage it’s 2% next year. If we don’t have good rain on the Victorian and NSW alps this winter it’s crunch time. Lower lakes be dammed, there is no water left in the Victorian and NSW dams to keep the NSW, Victorian or South Australian Irrigation system running, like it or not preference will be given to keeping the cities going. Winging won’t change the facts.
Water trading has created problems but it has created a tidy way to close the system down, things that survive will be things that can afford to pay for the water. Don’t be under any illusions water from the MDB is going to get very expensive. There is in my view only one negative to the current situation, there should be no limit to water trade between areas. I suspect it would stop irrigation below Renmark very quickly, the water loss is too great and the delivered water too salty. But it needs to happen, the sooner the better.
The agreement between the states was never a secret, if you build a irrigation farm in South Australia you shouldn’t have built it expecting the states that supply the water to close down their irrigation systems first, or to let their capitals die first.
Try and be a little bit realistic.
The opposition is so confused about the Hu situation. After complaining that Rudd is so close to China, they now say he’s not close enough. After complaining that Hu’s human rights werent being respected, they criticise the government for bringing up Tibet. What’s most worrying is their blatant disregard for the relationship with China and the potential damage it may cause, not to mention their rush to judgement without information, so desparate are they to lay a glove on the government.
My wife who is very politically disinterested heard a bit of Memseralda on Insiders yesterday and remarked about the damage her remarks and attitude may cause. I’m not suggesting that the public is necessarily going to care, but its interesting that she noticed. Have we ever had an opposition that has reacted so hysterically to virtually every issue?? I appreciate that they are desparate as they are the worst performing opposition poll-wise (I gather) but they really lack leadership and political judgement.
That may be so, but Mannum and Murray Bridge, and even Renmark and Berri, are much closer to the Lakes than Deniliquin, so water taken from the Murray at those points takes more from the Lakes. Water saved at Deniliquin will have mostly eveporated before it gets to the lower Murray.
It is worrying times:
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Chinese-business-in-chains-pd20090713-TVT2N?OpenDocument&src=kgb
Apparently, Turnbull is now a “Red Tory”
” someone on the very left of a right-of-centre party. In fact, if you divide up issues into three broad categories, economic issues, social issues, and constitutional issues, then Turnbull doesn’t really even qualify as a Tory at all on two of them. His strength, indeed the only count on which he looks to be a real Tory, is when it comes to the nation’s finances”.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25768340-27197,00.html
that’s debatable
Been a long night with all the sports to be watching so I don’t know if I was awake or dreaming (after the cat licked my ear this morning to get me up to feed him and let him out) but I thought I heard on ABC news that Al Gore has said if Rudd’s ETS was passed it would be a step forward and good for the world
Hmmm, that’s wierd… I can no longer copy text from this page. Anyone else having the same problem?
I just copiedand pasted your post Dario, so no problems here
vera,
Gore’s comments could be one of those inconvenient truths for the Greens and their fellow travellers that won’t support the Government’s ETS legislation.
Ahh, working again. Well I dunno what happened, but it doesn’t really matter now anyway
How long do you think before the Greenies turn on Gore then?
GG, the Gore comments and the way Obi was treating Kev like his bestest mate in Italy won’t go down well at all
Which means we should see Brown and his mob criticising Obi and Gore for agreeing with Rudd, but I won’t hold my breath
Dario, too fast for me (it must be that superhero suit
)
My special ability is super fast fingers
By the way, I won the Toronto race today
http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/motorsport/2589258/Franchitti-wins-Toronto-Indycar-round
vera,
My guess is it will be discounted as “false conciousness” from a false prophet.
Fred 432
I admit my remark was exaggerated for effect but in fact the flow is very small. What the Murray looks like as it crosses the SA border is deceptive. The level in the Murray is largely due to a weir, and the volume of water flowing downstream is very low, despite the apparent volume. I am not a farmer and don’t particularly defend any irrigation farmer, but I do think those in SA have been shafted by some quite unreasonable water allocations upstream (in NSW and Vic). A lot of those allocations were only made in the 1980s, wheereas the Riverland has been farmed a lot longer than that. I don’t think you can blame those farmers for failing to predict the incompetence/corruption of upstrema governmetns 20 years later. What NSW and Vic are doing to SA farmers now is no fairer than what Cubby Station in Qld does to NSW farmes on the upper Darling. i.e. not fair at all.
Congrats Dario! the bloke who came 3rd Will Power has a good name for motor racing
GG you will be no doubt be proved right again amigo.
Psephos 434
That is quite false; read Mike Young’s material at the website I linked to. Evaporation alone can’t possibly explain what happens in the Murray now. Deniliquin is just one (huge) example. In total the irrigation allocations in NSW and Vic far outweigh evaporation losses. They also far outweigh Adelaide’s drinking supply, which was my point.
Can someone briefly explain how to copy text so that it appears in italics?
Psephos
“The state the Lower Lakes is in is SA, and if SA wants to have nice lakes, it should stop taking water out of the Murray. Shutting down irrigation up stream won’t make much difference, because most of the water in the northern tributaries evaporates long before it reaches SA. Australia has one of the highest river evaporation rates in the world – which was why the Murray never had a proper estuary in the first place. ”
I think perhaps you should think more deeply about this.
Shutting down irrigation will make an enormous difference as typically in most hydrological systems transpiration represents the biggest loss of water to the atmosphere. The evaporation from the surface of a river is actually quite small in comparison. You also need to consider the groundwater system, as it is far bigger than simply the surface flows. As you draw more from the river, you end up drawing more out of the groundwater (the river is simply the intersection of the local topography and the water table). By progressively drawing from the water table you lower it and then begin to dry nearby lakes out – causing acidification. This is due to irrigation and use of water by plants. It is not true to say that the water would just evaporate anyway.
The Estuary is a different point. Being an estuary means it is tide dominated, so seawater will move in as freshwater lowers, this was the case originally. The apparent failure of the Murray River to have a ‘proper’ estuary is more to do with sediment transport. To stay healthy the estuary doesn’t need to be underwater, it just needs to not dry out. Once it dries out the sediments move from a reducing state to an oxidising state producing large quantities of sulphuric acid and potentially releasing large amounts of arsenic.
Socrates, do you mean:
italics
or
Psephos sometimes you make good comments.
Sometimes you don’t.
This is one that is not good.
“Water saved at Deniliquin will have mostly eveporated before it gets to the lower Murray”
You said a similar thing once before so it seems to be something stuck in your head.
It’s wrong Psephos.
Here’s why.
Evaporation occurs according to weather/climate conditions acting on the surface area of the river [including the associated wetlands normally, but we can ignore them currently because they essentially no longer exist.]
So water lost by evaporation is a function of climate and surface area.
Add a quantity of water to the river and nearly all of it simply piles up on top of the previous increasing the depth but causing little increase in the area.
So the quantity evaporated is pretty close to the same as before.
Do you understand? I’m trying not to be condescending [probably failing at that] but it is a basic misunderstanding you seem to have.
Put it another way.
Get 2 identical buckets.
Half fill one with water. Say 100 litres.
Depending on the climate a certain amount will evaporate over a year. Let’s say half of that bucket.
That leaves 50 litres in that bucket of water.
The other bucket of water is full, say 200 litres, and is next to the first one.
The exposed surface area is the same.
Because the climate and the surface area and the time are the same it will lose the same amount as the previous bucket.
That’s 50 litres.
Leaving 150 litres.
OK its a bit more complex than that but simply put, most extra water put into the river will flow to the mouth [because it is taking up no extra evaporative area, or very little].
http://www.lakemokoan.com/CMOCMS/Newsletters/Docs/Fact%20Sheet%208.pdf
“The volume of water lost from a storage is obtained by multiplying the net evaporation by the storage’s surface area”
Pancreatic carcinoma is one of the worst to get. Steve Jobs and Patrick Swayze are reported to have it (although I’m not convinced about Jobs as you don’t have a liver transplant for it). Don Dunstan died of it.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25772077-601,00.html
Dario,
I’ve just watched the footage of Mark Webber winning in Germany…..his shouts of delight are too colourful to broadcast uncensored
I think this will be the first time Advance Australia Fair was played at an F1 event for a winner.
Last Australian winner in F1 was so long ago, God Save the Queen might have been played
From that Ross Gittin’s article:
http://business.smh.com.au/business/this-recession-isnt-looking-as-bad-as-we-feared-20090712-dhd2.html?page=-1
No wonder the Chinese are getting really pissed off with Australia. If they are filling our rice bowls here, why should they have to put up with the kind of china bashing that have been happening here lately:
* the overall anti Chinese investments here in Australia.
* The Australian Govt Defence White Paper that portrayed China as a potential military threaths to Australia
* the particular humiliation dished out to them by Rio and BHP
* the china bashing via the Fitzy affairs
* the ongoing bashing via the Tibet Shangri-La, especially the Parliamentary Team visit to the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala
* and now the bashing via the Hu affairs, especially the stupid Opposition hicks that still think China can be bullied and pushed around using the megaphone diplomacy or the gunboat diplomacy up the Yangtze.
Maybe the GFC made the Chinese Leadership to stop and think. It’s a question who needs who, who is going to blink first and what the Chinese are prepared to put up with.
Psephos
Further to my comments, from Mike Youngs paper, total evaporation and other losses from the entire MDB system are about 1800 GL/year. Median inflows are 9000 GL/year. Total water allocations in SA are 500 GL/year, of which less than 200 GL/year is for Adelaide. So pretty clearly, evaporationd oesn’t explain the problem. Overallocation to irrigated farms in NSW and Victoria IS the problem. The rest is trivial by comparison.
See
http://www.myoung.net.au/water/publications/A_future-proofed_Basin.pdf
and
http://www.murrayriver.com.au/about-the-murray/water-use-and-consumption/
Dario
tell me both, I am eager to learn, thanks
Brought a tear to my eye in the early hours this morning
Yes, it didn’t come in until 1984, so Alan Jones would certainly have had to suffer God Save The Queen when he won in 81
Ok Soc for italics you do the following:
<this is in italics>
and for a block quote you just surround the text you want to quote with the square brackets like this:
Sorry, italics was wrong, it should be this:
<i>italics</i>
Mr Squiggle
The last time was Alan Jones in 1981. Advance Australia Fair only became the national anthem in 1984 so today would be the first time for the “new” anthem.
Yes but none of the ‘bashing’ is coming from the government. It would be strange for them to punish us when it would be giving a leg up to the Opposition party of the day, who might then get in as a result and make things worse for them
#465, The Labor Govt has not done any bashing, but it has sent many a confusing signals about China.
Which are…?
Psephos (406),
The sentence is ungrammatical because it is missing an “and”. It should read:
“Ms Barlow has criticised the State Government’s plan to build a desalination plant and the weir near Wellington, and for not recycling more stormwater.”
The comma is arguable.
Socrates,
the answer is transpiration. Plants use enormous quantities of water – especially ones that produce food.
Finns, I think by confusing signals you mean a nuanced position which the opposition and the MSM simply cant fathom- its black or white to them
Speaking of Anthems ours really blows IMHO…
I think we could of created a much better Anthem based on the tune of Waltzing Matilda.
Our Anthem doesnt fire us up or make us proud of our country or want to make us fight to preserve and defend it, its really whimpy compared to others around the world.
BTW will Rudd bring in the Republic debate after he wins in 2010? I want to know when to vote against it
Dario
Thanks. So if I want to add emphasis I type Turnbull is an egomaniac whereas if I want to do a quote I say:
[Well, and you may well ask why I am personally named. A cynical observer might think I'm personally named in order to get a little bit more publicity for the claim and put a bit more pressure on Goldman Sachs. Does anyone imagine Goldman Sachs can't afford to meet any claim itself? You know, this is a - there's a bit of - there's - politics doesn't just occur in Parliament.] – Malcolm Turnbull to Lateline, 2006.
Love our ABC’s coverage though. This morning they were “mounting calls” and “increased pressure” to intervene, when the only evidence was the opposition having another round of their hysteria this morning.
Sound like their ABC has been on the horse again
when in fact the only outside opinions I have heard have cautioned against taking the oppositions approach. Maybe it should be “opposition faces mounting calls to be cautious” etc…
Astrobleme
The problem is more the amount of water we pour on plants that produce cotton. Pouring it on paddocks to produce rice in the SE Australian climate is also pretty stupid IMO.
I think our Government should intervene after exactly the same time it took for Howard to intervene over Hicks.
There are literally hundreds of Aussies locked up in much crappier countries than China and the faux hysteria from the MSM over a single executive from on of the MSM’s favourite companies joining them is nauseating.
Oh dear, how low can the Pommys go.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5juOwDYauhBraeNzPZsLdhbkbokLw
Not to mention the blatant time wasting by sending the trainer and the 12th man to the centre for doing nothing. Oh yes, the 12th man spilled the drink, so he has to go back there again.
Not to mention KP smacked a ball to Mitcho and Mitcho promised to smack him back to Pretoria.
Bring back Dunkirk!!!
Of course China is a potential military threat to Australia, as is Indonesia. Just because it is highly unlikely doesn’t make it impossible.
Maybe they should give them knighthoods. Honestly, they are a joke.
I didn’t see the cricket this morning but heard about it. Did the umpires try to stop the timewasting? That sounds like a fairly blatant rule breech.
At least the mightly Lions put the Geelong B team in their place on Saturday night
I have given up hoping to see the Lions on Free to Air TV in Adelaide though.
Has this been posted here before?
http://business.theage.com.au/business/how-we-got-china-so-wrong-20090712-dhfw.html
“WHEN Rio Tinto holds press events in China, its public relations firm sometimes hands out red envelopes of cash to Chinese journalists who are kind enough to turn up.”
The poms had been wasting time all game. As if the umpires were going to start cracking down on it then.
Dario
I see. So ball-tampering is naughtly but time wasting is OK?
Thanks for the Italics hints too. Can you se what I did wrong on the quote example at 473?
Dario,
That’s the problem with professional sport. The spirit of the game and sportsmansip are always secondary considerations to winning/not losing. If something is not specifically outlawed it is permissable.
Dario also remember when Swann got the trainers out when he kept closing his eyes and not playing the short deliveries from Siddle when he was getting Hit that wasted alot of time too.
How good was Hauritz a break out game for the lad he may even get a start at Lords
?
This is a copy of a post I tried to send in response to a piece by Madonna King in the Courier Mail on-line.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25761603-27197,00.html
It won’t let me send it because it says it is too long, yet there are “NO” comments posted so far. It suggests I e-mail it to them. Wow, it will get the same treatment that all my previous ones got. Totally ignored!
Didn’t say it was ok, just that the umpires had been ignoring it all game
Missed most of last night’s action as I was watching the GP. Sounds like we will have the upper hand for the rest of the series should things continue in this way.
I reckon they’ll bring back Lee. Was just the type of performance he needed though.
Family First MP Dennis Hood wants to scrap compulsory voting
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25772711-2682,00.html
M. Johnson was woeful i wouldnt be surprised if we drop him for Lee.
What happened between SA and now?
Hear Hear Mr Hood
I love this bit…
That’s because OF compulsory voting! What an ignorant tool.
That’s because we force people to vote Bob1234…
Democracy is about choice…no body has the choice whether to vote or not…we are out of step with the rest of the world…
You use that argument only when it suits your agenda.
Everyone can choose not to vote if they so wish.
Really? I think they were playing Advance Oz Fair at the Olympics well before then.
Family First MP Dennis Hood wants to scrap compulsory voting
He probably wants to drop compulsory education too if he got his way. If he’s all for the ending of State paternalism then I trust he won’t mind ending tax exempt status for his churches too? Not to mention state funding of church schools.
bob1234 and Glen,
I’d like to know what “English-speaking” has got to do with it.
There are 32 countries in the world with compulsory voting. See:
http://www.aec.gov.au/pdf/voting/compulsory_voting.pdf
Most of the rest of the world is out of step with us. Just as we were first with the secret ballot and the rest of the world followed, we can hope that the rest of the world will follow with compulsory voting.
Democracy is more than choice. It is your duty as a citizen to vote.
No, we only force people to attend a polling booth and get their name crossed off the roll, once they get their ballot papers there is no compulsion to fill it in.
But then again if people want to waste their vote, then they hve NO right to complain about any Govt Desicion or to make representatrion to their local member.
scorpio, why not say how you really feel??!!!
i would suggest a briefer comment and less vitriolic. They may not let it through if its too negative although I’ve been surprised in the past
Chris firstly we based our system of governance on the British/US model…both these nations and our common friends and nations in NZ and Canada do not have CV.
We shouldnt have it…
Complusory voting was a Benite solution to voter apathy, people are still apathetic about voting and many would not vote if they had the choice.
Why should elections be decided by people who know nothing about politics, the policies of the political parties?? If people dont care that is sad and we should do something about that in our education system but we shouldnt force people to vote, we’re a democracy for crying out loud.
Also NCV would make political parties actually have to do something to inspire people to vote ala Obama.
DFAT tells – seems like it might have been the first time it would have been played after a Grand Prix:
http://www.dfat.gov.au/facts/nat_anthem.html
How many people here Glen, do you think know who Tony Benn is?
Text after the bracket. it doesn’t like that.
There’s something quite ironic about Dennis Hood accusing anyone or anything as being out of step with the rest of the world.
Glen,
Compulsory voting predates Tony Benn. You don’t mean “Benthamite” do you?
I do not see the relevance of the system on which we based ours as we should not close out minds to ides that come from elsewhere.
People should be better educated about politics, but I don’t think we really want a stated education standard before the right to vote, so I am not willing to leave it to voluntary voting, which simply cuts poorer people out of consideration, the real reason certain people, perhaps not yourself, advocate it.
Not many Grog but I like using that Applebyism whenever i can
Glen,
I must admit that I haven’t seen any definitions of ‘democracy’ making specific mention of the compulsion (or otherwise) to vote…
Julius Caesar closed his mind to “ides”, and look what happened to him. We should not close our minds to ideas either.
I am a supporter of compulsory voting. Well it’s not actually compulsory ‘voting’, more compulsory ‘turning up and having your name checked off at a polling booth’.
But internationally, parties spend so much time and money getting people out to vote. It lends itself itself to more extreme appeals to motivate ‘the base’ to get out and vote.
My view is, voting is like jury duty, a necessary part of a functioning democracy. You don’t have to vote, but you are forced into making a conscious decision not to vote. To me, that’s more responsible than not bothering to register and turn up at all.
For a democracy to work properly it needs all its participants actively involved, even if it means giving a a few of us, bit of a boot in the date.
I’ve played over Webber’s joy from the cockpit, his words as follows:
“WaaaghrHoo Hoo HOO! Yeeehah!!!
PHARKEN BEWDDY !!!
Yes!
Yes yes yes yes yes Yerrrrrrrrsss!
Thasss rite!!! weaahh (not sure about this bit, he’d just about blown the michrophone out at this point)
..followed by…
Yeesss (slightly sobbing now), Yes, yes, yes YES!!!!!… (radio link switched off)
Millions would have seen and heard this, ….the best thing for Australia in ages.
God Save The Queen was definitely used for the 1980 Olympics, and we didn’t win any gold medals in 76. Before that I can’t imagine anything other than God Save The Queen being played. Very interesting bit of trivia though.
At least I could remember the words to God Save the Queen …
On another note, does anyone else think Stern Hu looks like Jackie Chan?
I am still waiting for the first call to be made of:
China born Chinese Businessman
So far the discipline has been good. it is still:
Australian Rio Executive
Maybe if he was to “confess” that he did done to the Motherland.
I hope Al tells him how much of an utter tool he is
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25774114-29277,00.html
Steve Fielding wants a personal meeting with Al Gore, presumably to show him the graphs the Heritage Foundation gave him.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25774114-5005962,00.html
Dario
That’s TWICE today !!!
SNAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Praise be the brave Senator Fielding standing up against the massive worldwide conspiracy of climate change.
Wrong – any trivia quiz nut will tell you that honour belongs solely to GBS.
Oh Winston – never let truth get in the way of good reporting
Compulsory voting:
1) It removes from authority the temptation of making it difficult for certain demographics to vote; for example, consider the USA.
2) It removes the excuse, “don’t blame me, I didn’t vote”, we are all equally responsible for the outcome.
Compulsory voting was a very smart innovation, the the rest of the world hasn’t caught up, big deal.
521
Even if it’s inconvenient.
Esential Research 57/43 http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/Media/Essential_Report_130709.pdf
Oh Dear, Colin Barnett has had a complaint made against him at the CCC.
http://www.mediastatements.wa.gov.au/Pages/Results.aspx?ItemID=132198
Especially if it is inconvenient!!
Very interesting numbers on the tax cuts with 60% approve and only 23% disapprove. Fighting the GFC also the top response for most important government action since election.
46% say the Libs need a new leader, and only 29% say Malcolm should stay
My ageing parents used to love non-compulsory voting in the UK, they could always get one party or another to drive them to the polling booth and back home. ( a big deal when many people did not own a car).
I have an open mind on compulsory voting, if it was not in place candidates would be forced to work the electorate much harder.
I receive a lot of flak in my party for supporting compulsory voting, but I very much believe that a true democracy requires all people to participate, not just those who decide to show up on polling day. I also have little faith in governments who’ve secured a “mandate” based on the votes of less than 50% of the electorate.
No 501
Just because people are ignorant about the political process is not an argument against compulsory voting.
Good to see we agree on something GP
Crikey, strewth, blimey, a fair suck of the oyster sauce bottle, these cobblers could just be right here:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/07/13/crikey-says-40/
Socrates
Irrigation has increased considerable in the Riverland, I have watched it grow. There has been large plantings of grapes ( resulting in the current oversupply), however the serious problem is almond growing, it is a crop that takes considerable water because of the growing season. I can’t see that industry surviving.
Cotton growing in Queensland; it may survive; you do have to remember they get to the water before it flows a 1000 miles through desert country. As you have correctly pointed out, the large water purchases by the government isn’t going to make much difference to the lower lakes, the water isn’t going to get there. We have taken those areas out of production to increase the flow into the desert slightly, really it will keep a few load mouths happy but little more.
Rain in the Victorian and NSW’s alps is the only solution. Angry words are not going to make it rain. The sad thing is, climate change is probable real and the rain isn’t going to come. Southern irrigation areas will have to close and food production will have to move north.
That is just the way it is, nature wins.
In addition to my earlier post, it’s worth noting that one of the virtues of our compulsory-voting system is that our elections don’t descend into the farce that is the US system.
Socrates 449:
As you say, these problems date back more than 20 years.
So that’s where the blame lies; with governments 20 years ago.
The Murray Darling agreement has been in place since well before the 90s. It was a response to the over allocation of water and it placed a cap on the States. Victoria has a long history of compliance with the cap – and has taken political damage as result, for example losing the state seat of Benalla largely over issues surrounding the drainage of Lake Mokoan.
Victoria also has been well ahead of the pack on water policy, with the Bracks government doing a major review/revamp of this in the early 2000s (basically started as soon as it was elected). It was recognised as leading the States in its approach to water.
Unfortunately, it started the water review in about the third year of the drought, when no Victorian drought in recorded history had gone much longer than that. We’re now in about Year 12 of drought (my youngest son, aged 12, said the other day, “You keep calling this a drought. It’s my life.”)
You can write the best water saving policy in the world; if there’s no water to save, it’s irrelevant. (Zero water allocations are just that…)
Also recognise that once the water hits the Murray, Victoria has no say in what happens; it becomes NSW water.
Even John Howard recognised that the States to point fingers at in this argument are NSW and QLD, who have made little or no efforts to meet their responsbilities under the cap.
Given the drought, therefore, I think it’s unreasonable – or ignorant – to blame current governments. Action taken five years ago in NSW and QLD might have had some effect, but action now is a bit like action on climate change – too late to make any real difference.
We can, however, plan for it never to happen again, but that’s a different story.
BTW, there is an argument that cotton farms are inherently more environmentally friendly than permanent orchards; you simply don’t grow cotton when there isn’t water, permanent crops require water regardless.
Just be careful when you read this not to confuse your Mr Smiths. It provides an interesting and not very promising outlook for Mr Hu. And someone really needs to sack the subeditor working for the ABC. The headline distorts and sensationalises an interesting article.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/13/2624519.htm
GP I would argue that NZ, Canadian and British elections do not decend into the farce of the US system GP
you cannot dance to “The East is Red”, it aint got beat or rhythm.
No 537
On the other hand, the travesty of NZ, Canada and Britain is that their governments scarcely command meaningful mandates.
zoomster
Mrs D’s essay said that rice was easily the worst crop in terms of $ earnt per litre of water used.
We should all stop buying Australian rice. I did years ago. Our rice is crap anyway.
If we did not have compulsory voting then the political parties and independents would need more money and volunteers so they could have get out to vote campaigns.
Already run by Possum, but here for your convenience is the Essential Research report (Labor lead down from 59-41 to 57-43). I probably won’t be reporting on Newspoll in good time this evening, so make your own fun here.
ABC online are on the ball.. Their current ‘just in’ ‘top story’ is an interview from last week.
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/asiapac/stories/200907/s2622882.htm
I almost feel sorry for ABC, seems they are trying their hardest to keep ‘weak Rudd won’t buck evil Chinese’ in the headlines but 10 News only gave it passing mention in their finance report and I don’t think 7 even mentioned it.
As was the same with the last China spy beat up this one doesn’t seem to interest the general public.
So, sorry ABC, it ain’t working you won’t bring Kev or his ratings down no matter how long and hard you try to keep this as your main newstory.
Forgot there was a Newspoll tonight.
I’m not surprised the ABC might go the xenophobia route given their Liberal flag wavers but it is curious The Age seems to have picked up a racist somewhere along the line, and can’t get enough of whistling on the evil Chinese. Maybe one of the guys there had a nasty split with a Chinese girlfriend or something.
The TV have got it right, nobody is interested in xenophobia and racism just at the moment, the last Government over used that tactic and we have become bit bored with it.
Blasphemy!
Throw rocks at the bugger!!
SBS News is catching the ABC disease of sensational headlines. At its 6:30 World news, it said:
* Australia has lodged a formal protest over the Hu arrest – no such thing
* President Hu personally authorised the arrest of Hu – no such thing.
Forgive me, Sir. I have been on holidays – in QLD, so what do you expect?
Bigger rocks!!
What’s the bet that there will be no special announcement of Newspoll tonight?
Tom.
Sunburn ?
I reckon Newspoll will be in the 54-56 range as usual. But who knows, they, like the best of pollsters, can always have the odd “rogue”.
58-42 would put a cat among the pidgeons.
The mouthpiece of CPC, the People’s Daily, is reporting that a new anti corruption regulation has just been released:
http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776/90785/6698633.html
Previously, it has also reported a new drive to stamp out high level officials corrupt activities.
http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90776/6683976.html
The Hu affair could be the first test case and a continuation of this drive and for the CPC to send a clear and strong signal to the foreign business community not to take part in the corrupt activities.
Hardly! It bloody rained the whole time (well a lot of the time)
I haven’t noticed Fairfax media (or newsltd for that matter) report on Essential polling in the past.
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/labor-turnbull-take-modest-hit-poll-20090713-dimk.html
I thought we ran them off cliffs?
Baying.
Labor on 57% TPP is a “modest hit” and “46 per cent of the 1,060 respondents said the opposition should look for a new leader, while 29 per cent said Mr Turnbull should stay” is a “modest hit”. Do they really know the meaning of the word “modest”?
MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
ALEXANDER DOWNER
FA 99
8 September 1999
Australia – China Consular Agreement
http://www.foreignminister.gov.au/releases/1999/fa099_99.html
Well, using that terminology, I will accept a ‘modest’ landslide at the next election.
Finns, it turns out China held an anti corruption summit in June and have just set up a whistleblowers hotline.
http://www.respondanet.com/index.php?option=com_events&task=view_detail&agid=23&year=2009&month=06&day=15&Itemid=110
http://english.cctv.com/20090630/104343.shtml
Jack the Insider has a say on the HU thing:
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/jacktheinsider/index.php/theaustralian/comments/cries_of_do_something_a_bit_rich_in_china_spy_case/
grog
Where were you in Qld? I was in Port Douglas all last week and it was beautiful.
I hope the Labor hacks here have a bloody good explanation for this twitter from Rudd today.
On a more serious note, look at the Hottest 100 ever posted below. There are only TWO female singers out of 100 (and they are both guest vocalists on Massive Attack songs).
Are Australians sexist (musically at least)?
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hottest100_alltime/countdown/cd_list.htm
grog
Where were you in Qld? I was in Port Douglas all last week and it was beautiful.
I hope the Labor hacks here have a bloody good explanation for this twitter from Rudd today.
Can’t believe Mozart didn’t get a guernsey in triple js hottest 100 of all time.
On a more serious note, look at the Hottest 100 ever posted below. There are only TWO female singers out of 100 (and they are both guest vocalists on Massive Attack songs).
Are Australians sexist (musically at least)?
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hottest100_alltime/countdown/cd_list.htm
By the way it’s all Howard’s fault that we didn’t win the cricket, bloody jinx, hope he stays away from the next test
You can bet your life that if Rudd had come out on day one and attacked the Chinese, then Turnbull and Bishop, and the pontificators at The Australian, would be criticising him for jeopardising the relationship with China and doing special favours for corporate mates, etc. Their political desperation had made them totally shameless in the irresponsible rubbish they talk.
It’s a culture thing. You either have it or you don’t.
Ponting declared too late. He’s not a very good captain really.
I’d like to note the irony that my last post was banned because I included Rudd’s sign-off which he genuinely uses on twitter.
http://twitter.com/KevinRuddPM
That is funny Dio. Now the Rudd haters will stop using it.
Diogenes that has happened to me also, had to repost and put a space between K and Rudd.
I like his previous post better than the Mozart one
Psepfh #567
Ponting is the last real link to the period of Australian greatness that produced gaints like Warne, Hayden, Glichrist, McGrath etc…
I agree – Ponting should retire right now – mid tour – find an excuse, whatever, we needed a clean slate for the Ashes,
Let the new generation find its own way and make its own statements
Dio – I was on the Gold Coast… a loooooooooooooooooong way from Pt Douglas.
First, it was a glorious draw and now:
http://tinyurl.com/np3d7a
So we were defeated, according to the UK Daily Terror. The “cheating”, according to Andrew Strauss, was just some “confusion”.
Pfft. If we can’t win without Warne’s boorishness and McGrath’s sledging I’d rather lose.
Interesting Comments from Clive Hamilton re Hu’s Arrest, in particular in regards to him being a Chinese National.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/13/2624726.htm
No greater contrast in today’s media than Ponting’s moaning an’ bitching vs Weber unscrited joy and relief..
Who said being the Australian PM was the second most important job in Australia (after being captain of the Australian test team)? – or have I got it around the wrong way
Newspoll:
56-44, apparently. Although primary votes shift slightly in favour of Coalition.
Ponting declared too late. He’s not a very good captain really.
For your enjoyment, Thommo savages Ponting:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,25717605-272
We were talking about rain and water earlier. Here is a post about the drought. Look at how much of Victoria is in the worst drought on record.
It’s time we realised that it is NOT going to start raining again in the same amounts in the past. We are going to have to adjust to lower rainfall as the new normal.
http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/07/10/climate-update-ongoing-decline-in-south-east-australian-rainfall/
# 579:
By “adjust” you mean building new dams in Gippsland. Something that Labor is pathologically opposed to due to Green zealotry.
It is disappointing to see that there is still a lack of understanding about China at even the most basic level. Last night SMH run the title of “Jintao” authorised invesitgation into the Hu affair, clearly not knowing that Jintao is actually the given name of the Chinese president. Then we have several people claiming Stern Hu having dual citizenships, not knowing that China does not recognise dual citizenships. Now we have intellectuals such as Clive Hamilton coming up with gems such as “As far as Chinese authority is concerned he is a Chinese national”. This has nothing to do with the ethnicity or origin. The Chinese authority does not care if Stern Hu was born in China, or in Vietnam, or indeed in Andromeda, nor do they expect any loyalty towards China. If the allegations widely publicised in Chinese media are anywhere near the truth his conduct would have led to billions lost by Chinese steel makers. It really doesn’t matter whether it is Stern Hu or Steven Hubbs or Slobdan Huntukovic who did it.
My prediction: After a lengthy judiciary process Stern Hu will be found guilty and deported.
It’s funny how every single major dam ever built in Victoria has been built under a conservative government.
Note also that I did not claim Stern Hu is actually guilty. Too hard to tell and the way things are developing it doesn’t matter anymore.
robot
Pardon my ignorance but I only had the OO to read last week so I have only even been told that Hu is a caplitalist pin-up boy who has been persecuted by the slopey-eyed commies.
What exactly has Hu actually been accused of
Diogenese
As far as I know his formal status is that he is being held while he is being investigated but he has not been charged.
Diogenes:
Hu has been alleged to have bribed a (possibly more) key official in the Chinese negotiation team, obtaining confidential internal records and production data which greatly aided Rio Tinto in the latest round of negotiation. In short, Hu knew the bottom line of Chinese negotiators.
Several executives of Chinese steel producing/trading companies are also detained, with several more “under investigation”.
Saw the throw-away comment above about having to move north to grow food now that the Murray Darling Basin is rooted.
Great idea. And when the North is rooted we can try fish farming in the Coral Sea.
I’m amused at Ponting’s complaints about time wasting. He might have got an extra over or two in if Peter Siddle had turned and walked back to his mark rather than stand mid-pitch and abuse Graeme Swann. But I suppose some fast bowler standing mouthing obscenities that can easily be understood by anyone watching the coverage at home is acceptable behaviour rather than questionable sportsmanship.
Just as long as he avoids Wagner…
Possibly because conservatives ruled Victoria without a break from 1855 to 1952, and then again from 1955 to 1982. There were no water shortages in Victoria in the 1950s, or even in the 1980s. This has really only become an issue over the past 20 years. How many dams did the Kennett government build? (I don’t know.) My recollection is that they actually decomissioned the Tarago reservoir, which Labor is now bringing back online.
It was a conservative government that decided to build an aluminium smelter at Portland using power generated in the La Trobe Valley, requiring vast high voltage cabling to cross the state, losing vast amounts of power through resistance in transmission. Mind you, I don’t think any succeeding government Coalition or Labor agrees that was a good decision.
robot
For example, imagine a Defense contractor bribed a Chief of Staff to get info on a submarine bid. What would they be charged with? I doubt it would be spying.
I’ll admit every state, Labor or conseravtive, committed that sort of atrocity in the 1970s.
The last dam of any size built for Melbourne was the Thomson, commissioned in 1983 under Cain (but built under the previous government).
Kennett didn’t build any dams.
There are now a few ‘off river water storages’ being built for various country towns across Victoria.
My understanding is that Gippslanders froth at the mouth when people like Bolt talk about damming their rivers.
They would win the contract but then get sent to Adelaide…
The last dam built was the Thompson in 1981(?). Kennett didn’t build anything – a terrible mistake IMHO (neither did Cain / Kirner). However, it is simply inexcusable that Labor has failed to act since 1999 when the water situtation was clearly deteriorating – only in recent years did they half-heartedly commit to the desal plant. Something that won’t harness nearly as much water as effectively placed dams would.
We are a first world nation, there is absolutely no reason why we should have to deal with onerous water restrictions. it is simply the result of bad policy making.
Diogenes,
In the case you outlined it will be spying+endangering national security. The punishment is likely to be much more severe because national defence is involved.
Newspoll 56-44
http://mumble.com.au/?p=62#comments
Turnbull’s satis rises 6%, though still very neg. Net Turnbull sat +9, making up somewhat for last week’s 40% fall.
robot
Isn’t steel production normally considered an essential component of military preparedness and so fall under the national security umbrella? I think that even in Australia that the Government has some oversight role in it’s production as we could obviously not fight a war if our steel makers all closed down.
And Cossie’s wins Opp leader hands down!!!
Diogenes,
You are correct. However, this case is being regarded as “economical”, and all the talk was about how a higher iron ore price will affect productions and national economy. I personally think it is going to be a stretch to link this case with national security.
You’d have to expect some comeback for Turnbull from the abyss of the week after emailgate. Any other week 56/44 would be regarded as disastrous for him. Now no doubt the Murdoch grubs will spin it as The Great Comeback. Recall that a Labor 2PV of 56% would bag Labor 103 seats, including Wentworth.
Actually according to Antony’s Election Calculator Wentworth would still be held by libs, but on a knife edge margin of 0.2%
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/calculator/?swing=national&national=3.299998474121094&nsw=0&vic=0&qld=0&wa=0&sa=0&tas=0&act=0&nt=0&retiringfactor=1
Dead cat bounce.
But for some reason, reading it gives the impression it’s 55-45.
Via Mumble – Sketych from Big Girl’s Blouse and possible Liberal Leaders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGQchIKJZ0c
They are still some fairly awesome figures for Rudd.
Better PM Rudd 64/65 Turnbull 19/18
Satisfaction Rudd 61/59 Dissatisfaction Rudd 28/30
And awesome figures for Turnbull as well. You know the future is bleak when twice as many dislike you as like you. Satisfaction Turnbull 31/25 Dissatisfaction Turnbull 55/58
Rudd’s now has a recognised genuine economic manager reputation to put in his kit bag, he has stolen that crown and damaged the Liberal Party legacy somewhat.
One further outcome of the Turnmail-gate affair is that it will diminish the effectiveness of future attacks and smears against him (not that they have been that much in the past). People will pay less heed to them and treat them with a little more skepticism than usual. That doesn’t speak well for a negative Liberal election campaign. That little bit of trickery may have made Rudd impregnable to personal attacks in the future.
Nice to have you back Patrick Fogarty.
No 608
TP, what a crock. During the email affair, you and your happy clappers were claiming that voters didn’t care about this stuff. Now you’re saying that the affair has made Rudd impregnable to personal attacks. Which is it?
Who said that? I certainly didn’t.
Antony Green: “I’m amused at Ponting’s complaints about time wasting. He might have got an extra over or two in if Peter Siddle had turned and walked back to his mark rather than stand mid-pitch and abuse Graeme Swann. But I suppose some fast bowler standing mouthing obscenities that can easily be understood by anyone watching the coverage at home is acceptable behaviour rather than questionable sportsmanship.”
Good call, Antony. If you’re going to carry on at a Glenn McGrath level of sledging, than you ‘d better earn it with a Glenn McGrath quality of bowling.
my post 612: you’re= Peter Siddle
Turnbull has become the incarnation of bluster and mis-judgement. He is most unlikely to recover credibility.Tough thing for the Libs – they have no-one else in the Parliament.
It’s a long time since “the Australian cricket team” and “sportsmanship” could be used in the same paragraph. Ever since the Age of Warnie dawned I have supported all foreign teams against Australia, particularly India, since I think the Indians have preserved at least some of the traditional ethos of cricket. I do have to support Australia against the Poms, however – one must draw the line somewhere.
No 615
Why waste time with Cricket when football (or soccer as it is known in some parts) is far more interesting.
Are you referring to that tedious European activity where they all run around in circles for two hours and never kick any goals or take any marks, and where they fall down and howl like babies whenever anyone bumps into them? I guess you are.
GP #610,
I believe that your friend Patrick “it’s good to have you back” Fogarty was saying something similar…
The arrest of Hu seems to me to stem from two intersecting motives – first, the Government of China is letting Rio (and by extension, every other supplier to China) know that you should never take them for granted. Rio have broken all the cardinal rules: they profiteered when it suited them, begged for help when they needed it and then dumped China when they changed their mind. And second, there is the Anti-Corruption campaign, which every law-abiding citizen of China can only welcome.
In all, the government is saying to anyone taking any notice: don’t mess around with national policy imperatives and don’t put selfish private interest before public duty or you will pay the price.
Personally, I always found it interesting in a game where a lot of goals are scored off the noggin, that it is called “foot”ball…
And by “a lot of goals” I actually mean “a fair percentage of the woefully small amount of goals scored”
And get paid more than the Prime Minister per game as well.
Pspefff – I can’t believe i’ve read something from you I agree with
For all their acheivements, there is something in the approach of the Australian test team that has sapped any sense of enjoyment I had in watching the sport
I rejoice when they lose, as though there is some important lesson for them that has not yet been delivered
Patrick Fogarty @ 596
Amusing. As you rightly point out, the desalination plant is a half-arsed panic-stricken reaction by a society that has yet to learn to live within natural limits.
Remind me what the plan is when:
(1) every last river is dammed
(2) fresh water is all used up
(3) natural variability in rainfall reduces the availability of water
(4) climate change makes the situation worse in some regions (better in others)
(5) the all dams silt up (They do all silt up. They so at varying rates. The record is for a dam which was never used – it was silted up as they were finishing constructing it. Some may take a thousand years to silt up.)
It would be handy to know the plan because this is the model most of the world’s nations are working on.
I won’t ask what your plan is for maintaining biodiversity because you have made it clear that you do not value it.
Can you people not talk about cricket? It’s like reading the news.com.au blogs talk about politics – ill informed.
Pat – I really can’t see the need for another dam. Another dam is of no great benefit if it doesn’t rain and if it does rain we have a number of dams to catch the water including the massive Thompson Dam. If you want to argue that those dams are in the wrong place then blame that on those past conservative governments you refer to.
I was sort of hoping that the Oz would win, but then Chappelli sneered about how long Monte would last, ‘five overs?’, and I started hoping that the Never Will be Slaves mob would hang in there.
No 617
They play in rectangles, not circles. I think you’ll find AFL players frequent circular fields.
It’s also mightily hilarious that a fan of cricket, a game that can go on for hours and hours and still amount to nothing, is accusing football of being a “tedious” exercise.
ENSO looking bad for rain. Indian Ocean Dipole a bit more ambiguous. A great site for rain tragics:
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/
No 620
Peter, it can’t be as strange as calling Rugby a variant of “football” when the ball it’s more like handball.
delete “when the ball” in 630.
You need to understand cricket. Cricket is never about what is actually happening.
It’s about what *might* happen. Say, if this partnership flourishes….
Or if Australia get a couple of quick wickets…
Or perhaps if the ball starts to turn on the 4th day…
Boerwar
Australia has a simple, easy to impliment response that would assist the tightening water management concerns
Slow down the ridiculously high levels of immigration
Most people recognise high levels of immigration put pressure on infrastructure, why not include water management on the list of issues impacted by high levels of immigration?
Actually the difference is that with cricket the scoreboard ticks over even if it is a draw. With soccer you can have the scoreboard do absolutely bugger all for the whole game.
PJN @ 632
True, but Cricket is also what might have happened, if:
*the umpire had not cocked up yet another LBW decision
*the captain had introduced the spinner when there was a bit more bounce in the pitch
*silly mid-on had not dropped that catch…
DIAC, in setting the levels of permanent migration, takes this into account.
Mr Squiggle
It would help stop the problem from getting worse. It will not help solve the current set of problems.
Yo ho ho @ 636
So who in DIAC is being held accountable for cocking that up?
Like most public policy, a balancing act would take place between the various stakeholders. Unfortunately/fortunately, depending on your point of view, the ‘weight’ given to environmental concerns is not as strong as that given to industry concerns.
Yo ho ho @ 638
Thankyou.
And I did not answer your question at all it seems.
The answer is I have no idea – but ultimately Cabinet sets the migration levels so I guess it’s Cabinet’s fault.
590
The ALP had a few minority governments in Victoria before 1952 and there were some other governments that were progressive for their time too.
GP: We agree on something! Rugby is truly a type of handball…
Yo Ho Ho
that’s an interseting observation – I thought the level of immigration was a policy level decision, set by politicians not public servants
poor innocent little ol’ redneck me
Ohhh – i’m way too slow tonight, Yo o’l Ho HO buddy, good answer at #641
Well, like most policy decisions, the government would be provided with a range of options by the public service, based on different considerations. I suspect they then ignore them and do what they want.
What? Including Indian Habajan Sing hitting one of his Indian team mates (Sreesanth) in the face while on the field? And Harbajan Singh refusing to walk after being bowled?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSYENiM6NGk
What about Sachin Tendulkar slap on the wrist for ball tampering (a suspended one match ban)? Or India refusing to comply with an ICC ban on Virenda Sehwag for over appealing? The only thing the ICC could do is say that the Sehwag’s next match was no longer classed as a test, because the Indian board refused to drop him from the game.
You also seem to be ignoring the fact that it is the Indian cricket board that props up Zimbabwe’s corrupt cricket administrators because doing so effectively gives India an extra vote in the ICC, which enables them to create more and more Twenty20 and 50 over tournaments at the expense of Test cricket.
When Australian Malcolm Speed as the ICC chairman delivered an independent report that revealed corruption by Zimbabwean cricket administrators, the Indian board used its numbers to have Speed sacked, oh I mean ‘given an early retirement’, because he dared to shine a light on how much money Zimbabwe cricket officials were stealing from the ICC (which of course partly comes from the money Australians pay to see cricket at Australian grounds) and even from Zimbabwean players!
Defending the primacy of Test cricket is part of the “ethos of cricket”, but the Indian cricket board is mainly interested in more and more Mickey mouse limited over tournaments, and is willing to sell its soul to Mugabe’s minions in order to secure them.
No 634
There’s more to a sport than the score board. I’ve watched some fantastic draws in my relatively short lifetime.
Personally, the only variant of cricket that I can watch is 20/20. They smash the ball endlessly and it’s not all that bad. Test cricket, as the old saying goes, is like watching grass grow.
Just like a game of soccer eh?
ShowsOn
Agree entirely. Thanks.
No 649
Never.
Since there is a discussion about sport I might as well add some more politically controversial. Gender desegregation.
Check this out G.P.:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_OKdf8I_bxhI/SlsQ24lj0_I/AAAAAAAAFJI/BKOLwZ_Xi2s/s1600-h/Aust_govt_debt_historical2.jpg
Also, I made you this desktop wallpaper:
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/5268/johnnyp.jpg
Newspoll sure didn’t seem to have bowled them over at the OO. Not a word yet.
Strange… They do own it, don’t they?
BB: Possum pwns Newspoll… everyone knows that…
The main page is usually updated at 1 AM EST.
No 653
Great pic of Mr Howard. It’s a shame the native resolution on my screen is 1920×1200 pixels.
But usually there is a small item under Breaking News.
653
That shows those that those Socialist in the ALP in the 40s had the highest debt in the history of the Commonwealth.
And all good Liberals know that had Howard and Costello been running Australia during the Second World War we would have had a surplus and tax cuts.
I changed over to the HD channel but as I did they had gone back to the game.
I’m sure he will be at Lords for the second test, so I’ll try and get a HD one.
No 659
Yes, it is hilarious when ShowsOn shoots himself in the foot.
Yeah, they would’ve just abolished income tax and introduced a 50% GST.
No 660
Full HD is 1920×1080 (16:9 widescreen).
661
Did you not get the second sentence of 659?
This is the height of idiocy. Are you honestly suggesting that Curtin and Chiefly should’ve put the security of the country at risk just so they could run a budget surplus?
Or was that part of WWII when the Japanese bombed Darwin and sent submarines into Sydney Harbour only a movie?
This is a perfect demonstration of G.P.’s problem, he is part of a budget surplus cult that puts surpluses ahead of every other public policy priority, including defending the nation during a world war.
No 665
ShowsOn, the height of idiocy really is in fact demonstrated by the fact that you actually thought I would put surpluses above security. LOL
I have a 1920×1080 here at home, but used to use a 1920×1200 at work for CAD purposes. The extra 120 vertical pixels do make a difference.
Oh OK, so your comment at 661 was just an example of the sort of abject nonsense that we have all come to expect from you.
The graph demonstrates that in historical terms our debt is extremely low, and anyone who says other wise doesn’t know anything about economics.
No 668
ShowsOn, you’ve never posted sense in your entire time on this forum.
Ten Late News reported News Poll as 55-45 with the ALP down 1 and the Coalition up 1.
Shazza has some of it…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25778648-601,00.html
News are honestly a joke. Main page of news.com.au:
“Turnbull wins back voter support”
…with a big smiling face of Malcolm. Do they seriously think that is a fair assessment of the latest poll?
It is what’s technically known as “Turd Polishing”, in both the Liberal’s and Limited News’s own conduct. Also they’re probably glad Michael Jackson’s death sucked any oxygen in Turnbull’s shenanegans with the Debt Truck etc.
Psephos at 617:
Didn’t know Fremantle was part of Europe…
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25778648-601,00.html
I thought Mumble was bizarre. It is indeed 55-45.
Boer, as I have asked you before, what are the ‘natural limits’ for Australia?
Post-European – about 3 million? More?
Until you quantify this figure, it’s hard to discuss the rest of your argument.
If you can’t quantify it, then continually making statements like the above is pretty meaningless, and just suggests you’ve got a kneejerk reaction to the subject without any real facts to back it all up.
I think you’re cleverer than that, so am mystified as to why you seem reluctant to talk numbers.
And Boer, given the present circumstances (a prolonged, unpredicatable drought, with climate change meaning that these might be more frequent) what is the non half arsede panic stricken reaction?
The scenario is: Melbourne has its present population. It hasn’t rained properly for many years, as the result of an unprecedent drought. How is the population of the city to be assured of water supply in the future, given that it can no longer rely on rain?
You may provide alternatives to any part of the problem.
Cricket is like fishing – patience and hope, hope and hope. That’s what i like.
Shows @ 647. Indian cricket has it’s problems, but when they catch players dealing with illegal bookies [- they punish them. I certyainly don’t recall Waugh or Warne being given lengthy bans. I also note that in the interests of transparency and honesty CA stated that all they did was provide weather and, think, pitch, information to the bookies – something that any cricket fan would know by watching the BBC coverage. I’m sure that the bookies would pay big dollars for this hard to come by information. And on top of that we give a drug cheat half of the minimum sentence so that he can win games for us. Who was in charge of CA for most of this?
Tom.
New thread.