Nielsen: 55-45 to Coalition
GhostWhoVotes tweets the latest monthly Nielsen result has the Coalition lead at 55-45 – an improvement for the government on 57-43 a month ago and their best Nielsen result since March, but shy of their form in other recent polling. This sits nicely with Possum’s recent finding that Nielsen has had a 0.9 per cent “lean” to the Coalition relative to Newspoll, Essential and Morgan phone polls since the 2010 election. The primary votes tell a familiar story in having Labor steady on 30 per cent but the Coalition down three to 45 per cent, with the Greens up two to 14 per cent. This chimes quite well with Newspoll’s respective findings of 32 per cent, 44 per cent and 12 per cent.
Where Nielsen differs is in showing a strong recovery in Julia Gillard’s personal ratings: up six points on approval to an almost respectable 39 per cent, and down five points on disapproval to a still fairly bad 57 per cent. She has also tied on preferred prime minister for the first time in a while, gaining a point to 45 per cent with Tony Abbott down three. Abbott’s ratings are exactly unchanged at 41 per cent approval and 54 per cent disapproval. As always, the poll was conducted by phone from Thursday to Saturday from a large sample of 1400, producing a margin of error of 2.6 per cent (assuming a random sample).
The poll also found support for a mining tax at 53 per cent with 38 per cent opposed, and that Gillard’s handling of the Qantas dispute had 40 per cent approval and 46 per cent disapproval. Michelle Grattan in the Age rates this “surprising”, but it in fact compares favourably for her with Morgan and Essential’s figures. Qantas’s actions had 36 per cent approval and 60 per cent disapproval, very much in line with Morgan and Essential, while the unions fared rather better on 41 per cent and 49 per cent. Grattan reveals the Victorian component of the result had the Coalition’s lead at 53-47 against 54-46 last time. I should have full tables available tomorrow. UPDATE: Here they are.
In other news, closure of Liberal preselection nominations for seats held by the party in NSW on November 4 brought forth a number of challenges to sitting members:
• The Goulburn Post reports Angus Taylor, “45-year-old Sydney lawyer, Rhodes Scholar and triathlete”, and Sydney restaurateur Peter Doyle are among a large field of entrants in Hume, where 72-year-old incumbent Alby Schultz’s future intentions remain unclear. The Post faults both Taylor and Doyle for being from Sydney (Doyle having been mentioned in the past in relation to Wentworth and Vaucluse) and notes the local credentials of three further candidates, “Mittagong accountant Rick Mandelson, Yass grazier Ed Storey and Yass-based IT executive and olive grower Ross Hampton”. The latter has also been a television reporter and has “an extensive CV as a political advisor and was press secretary to the former defence minister Peter Reith during the ‘children overboard’ days”.
• Bronwyn Bishop faces a challenge in Mackellar from Jim Longley, the state member for Pittwater from 1986 to 1995. Imre Salusinszky in The Australian rates Longley “the most formidable candidate she has faced in a preselection challenge”, but nonetheless says Bishop is expected to win.
• Imre Salusinszky’s report further notes that Mitchell MP Alex Hawke faces three little-heralded predators from the David Clarke side of the Right sub-factional divide – Dermot O’Sullivan, Michael Magyar and Robert Picone – but is “expected to survive”.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
No finns. Bk said he is in afganastan, well the link does
N
by my say on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:17 am
Morning all. Not a lot in the press this morning. It is as though the right wing have run out of things to criticise.
Gay marriage is certainly in the news. Let us hope for a conscience vote. The majority of voters clearly support it. But then, just as with Howard and the Republic, I fear the Labor right will act to deny the will of the majority here.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/voter-opinion-adds-weight-to-shift-in-marriage-policy-20111114-1nfkj.html
by Socrates on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:23 am
The OECD has revised forecasts of (western) growth down. Realistic. I don’t think this will hurt Labor. It actually reinforces the difference between Australian performance and the rest.
In this context I think Aussie uranium sales to India are sensible. Another good move by Gillard:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-15/pm-proposes-lifting-uranium-ban/3666362
by Socrates on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:26 am
Abbott has surfaced, still pulling stunts and being laughed at.
by sprocket_ on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:27 am
abbott playing macho man with troops, saying they should be allowed to wear berets SMH.
by mickt on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:28 am
One final story that is not the government’s fault, but certainly hasn’t been fixed by Costello or Swan: executive pay. It is going up again, despite there being scant evidence that business “performance” is improving. Ian Verrender rightly lambasts it.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/executive-snow-job-cant-conceal-christmas-loot-20111114-1nfl3.html
This is possibly the worst rip off of workers and retirees in Australia today. Really time government did something about it. Want to set anther world first? Put a cap on exec pay; say 10 times average worker pay. You woudl gain many votes.
by Socrates on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:28 am
my say
It’s not a fait accompli just yet. Bet the Conference is going to be a rowdy affair now though.
And I bet Labor left will not be pleased either.
by kezza2 on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:29 am
According to BK;s link, TA is in Tarin Kowt promising the troops they can have their berets back He also dressed up in bomb disposal gear to practise disposing of a fake bomb. He must be getting ready for his welcome at the next Lib partyroom meeting.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:31 am
and here he is, folks!
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/11/15/1226195/121597-tony-abbott-in-afghanistan.jpg
by sprocket_ on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:31 am
Oh, it’s okay, Michelle Grattan says Labor left are not passionately anti-uranium now.
And PM JG won’t be rolled on this issue.
by kezza2 on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:42 am
sprocket,
I dunno whether to laugh or…just laugh more.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:42 am
things getting nasty for Abbott – lots of innuendo in Savva’s spray
http://www.google.com.au/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=http:%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fnews%2Fopinion%2Fbrain-snaps-put-abbott-in-dog-house%2Fstory-fnahw9xv-1226194962132&pbx=1&oq=http:%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.com.au%2Fnews%2Fopinion%2Fbrain-snaps-put-abbott-in-dog-house%2Fstory-fnahw9xv-1226194962132&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1281l1281l0l1755l1l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=f47bbb2481bec8f5&biw=1280&bih=831
by sprocket_ on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:43 am
The guy is a f*ckwit. I spent 10 years in the army and seeing Abbott prancing around playing soldiers annoys the crap out of me. Howard rode the occasional tank and loved the media attention he could get being near soldiers but didn’t show a secret desire to be one. If Abbott had ever got of his hairy ar#e and joined the reserves then I wouldn’t mind. It should be compulsory for senior politicians to watch an animal getting shot, it may be a cruel thing to do but then the idiots might appreciate what modern weapons can do and stop playing f#cking games.
by Smaug on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:43 am
sprocket_
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 at 7:27 am | Permalink
Abbott has surfaced, still pulling stunts and being laughed at.
During his visit, Mr Abbott also dressed up in a bomb disposal suit to participate in the defusing of a mock roadside bomb, drawing laughs from assembled troops when he sprinted clumsily down a road on the base.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/abbott-woos-troops-on-secret-afghanistan-visit-20111115-1nfy6.html#ixzz1diIFbqZs
My feeling last night was right he is resurfacing, with his nusual macho man tricks, I am waiting to see if my comment to the above article will be posted or not
by mari on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:44 am
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/decisive-julia-gillard-chooses-own-issue/story-e6frg6zo-1226194968624
I can’t get this “pro” Julia?? by DS out from behind the paywall by googling it’ others I can. Have any other PB had this problem with this article?
by mari on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:54 am
mari
by kezza2 on Nov 15, 2011 at 7:58 am
I thought Australia had signed some UN thing which says we can’t sell uranium to anyone who hasn’t signed the non-proliferation treaty, and as India hasn’t, we do not sell them uranium.
I thought it was about India not signing, not us not selling.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:00 am
Morning bludgers
How unsurprisement. Abbott did a stop over to Afghanistan. He is so predictable
by victoria on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:02 am
[and here he is, folks!
http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/11/15/1226195/121597-tony-abbott-in-afghanistan.jpg
sprocket, Tone has morphing into a dalek.
by joe2 on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:04 am
A great shot of Tony Abbott in his bomb suit. Most interesting is to read the comments section . Despite this being the Daily Telegraph the comments are overwhelmingly unfavorable.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/abbotts-surprise-visit-to-afghanistan/story-e6freuy9-1226195122450
Perhaps TA was trying out for a place as an extra in Dr Who ?
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/04_01/SontaranL_600x805.jpg
by poroti on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:06 am
As a civilian, its like some one from another school, turning up and, telling the boys they should have
their caps back,
This of course before melenoma, was thought about,
by my say on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:07 am
Morning All
Anyone that thinks Labor is a centre left party is kidding themselves I’d suggest – are they seriously going to break with years of sensible policy and sell India uranium? If they want it they can have it – all they need to do is sign the NPT. As i just heard it argued – it will be a fungible (i love that word) resource – i.e. sure we won’t use YOUR uranium for weapons, we’ll just use someone else’s because we won’t need it for civilian purposes anymore
And then, a conscience vote on gay marriage – they can’t be serious – they know full well that there is a core of ALP MP’s that will vote against it and stop it becoming a reality as the Liberals will be voting against it. Worse though, how bad will it look for Gillard to be siding with the Liberals and voting it down (if she maintains her current position). Support for gay marriage has to become party policy – the numbers will be there to get it through if it does. Look at the polls
Add the changes to the NT intervention around expanding cuts to welfare to combat truancy and talk of expanding welfare restrictions of alcoholics
They are so frustrating
by womble on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:08 am
Puff
Times have changed it seems. The restriction will now be if India promises to use Australian uranium for peaceful purposes, then it will all be okay.
Stephen Smith sidestepped the “this will allow the freeing up of Indian uranium for armament purposes” argument on RN just now. He sounded soothing if less than convincing imo.
It all sounds so sensible doesn’t it. It’s a practical solution, and also beneficial in many ways:
economically (more export dollars for us & more Aus jobs created & more revenue from the MRRT I expect),
strategically (India becoming a superpower and we need them onside to counter the rise of China),
politically (India embarrassed Australia by refusing to come to CHOGM ostensibly because of the uranium issue & the USA has negotiated a way round India’s refusal to sign up to the non-proliferation treaty so we may as well do the same).
by kezza2 on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:10 am
poroti
I left a short comment at the TD. Wonder if it will be published
by victoria on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:10 am
joe2
No Tones is morphing into a Sontaran. See 919. Check out how wiki describes them.
by poroti on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:12 am
I, for one, support selling Uranium to India. They are not a rogue state, they are a growing regional power that needs to balance out China and, most importantly, it is a big economic boost to SA, who want the mining revenue from the expansion to boost this state financially and lay the seeds for long term economic strengths, so we can be self-reliant and not be that “welfare state” that you easterners love to kick around so often.
by Carey Moore on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:14 am
victoria
I think you have a darn good chance in light of the other comments made. It looks like praise be to Tony comments are not compulsory today. I will look later to see if a pro Tony “backlash” occurs after such a thumbs down to Tony start.
by poroti on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:16 am
I read this differently. He got yet another favourable article.
He still looks a goose to many of us agreed, but the article is just what he wants.
by dave on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:16 am
Gerard Henderson joins the rank of race callers who can’t – or won’t – see who’s gaining and who’s tiring.
A mile out from the finish line the bolter is 8 lengths ahead but is starting to slow down while the champion mare is just getting into her stride.
So Henderson reminds us that if was a one mile race instead of a two mile race, the bolter would win easily.
D’oh.
Not only that, but he’s rather bitchy about it, in that Hendo sort of way.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/the-media-are-picking-up-good-vibrations-but-cant-shake-off-the-facts-20111114-1nfgp.html#ixzz1diG0j6JR
For someone who is always rabbiting on about good policy, and indeed runs the Sydney Institute, dedicated to in-depth policy discussion involving speakers from both sides of the political street, Gerard is taking unusual comfort in 2 years premature poll numbers all of the sudden.
He seems to be upset about Kerri-Anne Walsh’s use of the word “vibe” to describe a feeling about that some kind of corner has been turned, or maybe a sense that the rot has finally stopped.
Gerard’s not the only one.
If we were to have believed Shaun Carney a few weeks back, Labor still had abyssal depths to plumb before their poll numbers bottomed out. Labor insiders had told him that private Labor polls had shown things were a lot worse than the public polls let on. Labor was on the slippery slide, maybe heading for a primary vote in the teens. It was all over.
People were calling Gillard a liar to her face, on the telly and – worse – she was copping it sweet. Bob Hawke would have called the woman in the shopping mall a “silly old bugger” and brushed past her. Maybe Abbott would have taken a swing at her, or at least have set his jaw a’quiver at the indignity. Gillard instead was polite and sought to engage the woman. “How piss-weak was that?” asked Shaun. “Well, we don’t have to listen to her anymore. That’s for sure,” he told us.
He was probably hoping that federal Labor would tank NSW Labor-style. Some of the other ingredients were there: constant calls to have the government and the nation put out of its misery with an election, leaks from the inside, ex-heavies kibbitzing, the papers all nasty and sarcastic, even calls for a new leaders (or an old one reborn).
While this situation persisted, the policy wonks, the “senior” commentators lamented the paucity of the political debate. They wrung their hands in disappointment that Tony Abbott was being negative, successfully negative, mind you, but all this naysaying was a let down for the nation.
Like Roman patricians looking down on the grubby, fetid streets from their marble balconies above, they passed rose water under their noses, lamented that The Games had to exist to keep the proles in check, and then financed the bloody spectacle anyway. Such a shame it had come to this, but there you go… an opposition’s duty is to oppose and all that. What can one do? .
Hartcher and La Stupenda, fellow giants of the Fairfax commentariat, also take pains to point out that Gillard – based on yesterday’s snapshot of the field a whole two circuits of the track out from the finish – is a “dead woman walking”. They too, like Gerard and Shaun, find it difficult, or inconvenient to judge who’s improving and who’s fading.
All of them live in a fantasy world where the lack of serious, mature policy discussion and achievement is pooh-poohed as so common, gross really, but when the enactment of a huge policy – the Carbon Tax – is finally accomplished by the government, a policy that the bolter Abbott has staked his future on murdering, burying and cremating (signing a comic book oath in blood to that effect), they revert to an early photo of the race where he seems to be still so far ahead.
Tobacco plain packaging, Qantas as a mirror of IR policy, the (now popular) MRRT, National Disability, tax reform, superannuation boosting, the NBN, the Queensland Flood Levy and many more – 250 or so of them, actually – without a single win by Abbott except maybe on Boats (and look how that’s died a death as an issue as a result) were all good policy projects, able to be discussed and put out by them as good for the nation etc… but only because they thought Abbott would win anyway.
When it all boils down to it, the Fairfax mob – who some here seem to think are the more reasoned of the commentators we have advising us on politics – are just your common or garden mug punters who can justify their positions with prettily-worded ambiguity about “policy” (or lack of it) and with plonking dismissals of the distastefulness of “retail politics”.
But when it comes to the crunch, when policy after policy becomes law against all the odds, when the field starts to sort itself out, when the bolter is flagging and seen at last for the one trick pony that he is – when “the vibe” starts to improve for the government, if you like – they’re just as partisan as a loudmouthed blowhard from News, or a shock jock shouting at someone down the phone.
The polls gave the Fairfax patricians the opportunity to appear to be reasoned and a little sad at what things had come to. It allowed them lament the direction that policy debate was taking… but only because they could point to those polls to show their horse was a dead-cert to win in a canter.
Now that the government and Gillard personally are starting to make ground on Abbott, and we can see just how long this race has to run, they’re left with nothing much else to say but, “Lookatthepolls! Lookatthepolls!”
With “the vibe” running the government’s way for a change it won’t be good enough to just invent a “test” and have Gillard fail it all the space of a couple of columns.
Gee, they might even have to earn the high salaries they’re paid for a change. Maybe do some work.
The polls make everyone lazy, except the mob who are losing them. The government has at last drawn the line in the sand and is saying “This is where we fight. Here are our achievements.” Abbott and his patrician scribes at the Herald and the Age will be left holding losing tickets if they don’t find a bookie who’ll allow them a mid-race bet.
For all their phoney gravitas we’re now seeing the broadsheet opinionistas as just another bunch of well-dressed, well-phrased whores. When they think their horse is ahead they can express all sorts of distaste for how “the media” (as they call it) has tabloidized politics. As soon as things start to turn around though, they squeal just as loudly as the smelly common herd down in the gutter below their balconies.
Don’t ask me why. It’s just “the vibe”, I guess.
by Bushfire Bill on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:19 am
Carey agreed, and if we dont some one else will.
We need them as friends,
by my say on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:19 am
Reported as Tony Abbott made a “surprise” visit to Afghanistan. Hands up anyone who was actually surprised.
He can do what he likes as far as I’m concerned. I don’t mind him going in iron man contests or riding bikes or whatever – if he’s into physical fitness then good on him. I’d prefer not to see any of it reported breathlessly, but that phase seems to be over now.
I’m not even that fussed about him going to Afghanistan. He can’t be there in any official capacity, as he holds no actual office in this country – ‘Leader of the Opposition’ doesn’t count, as much as the assembled media would like it to these days. It doesn’t help his profile, as the ‘stunt’ nature of it is always too obvious. And it does highlight that, while he’s prepared to play tough guy way out there, he’s failing at his proper job of keeping the government to account. So who cares?
When he gets back to Australia, he’s going to find things a bit difficult. Regardless of the kid gloves he gets handled with, he is going to be asked why he was out of the country when the carbon pricing legislation was passed. And he is going to feel the pressure of the polls tightening. And he is going to be subject to some talk of challenges from within his party. And from here on in people are going to start to expect policy from him – proper policy, costed and consistent with some form of vision. He won’t get away with being a de facto commentator on ALP policy for much longer. Though I expect he’ll continue to try to do that.
It’ll have to go that way. It won’t only be his detractors asking questions of him. It’s going to come from his own side as well. They’ll be seeing an ALP no longer reeling from leadership changes and subject to cheap shots on things like BER and insulation. They’re not sitting ducks any more, they’re starting to put together an impressive list of achievements. To match it, the Coalition is going to have to lift its game. That’s what they’ll be expecting of Abbott, and if he fails them he’s going to be in all sorts.
by Aguirre on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:22 am
womble
I share your frustration!
Regarding international treaties:
It took a long time for me to shift my position on the Malaysian solution – mainly because Malaysia wasn’t an UNHCR signatory.
And, it was easy for Australia to use India’s refusal to sign the nuclear non-proliferation treaty as a reason for not selling uranium to them.
But, I didn’t spend the better part of my life campaigning against uranium use – after Chernobyl – to see a reversal on this policy now.
Uranium is not a safe product. If there were any doubts about that, then Fukishima was a salutary reminder.
by kezza2 on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:26 am
BB
Excellent offering!
by victoria on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:32 am
So why doesn’t India just sign the treaty? This is a treaty whose aim is to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. Signing it should be a no-brainer for India.
If the people who want to buy our uranium cannot commit to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, then they don’t get our uranium. As a major supplier of uranium we have the responsibility to uphold that treaty. Money, trade, strategic gain or whether India comes to our barbeques are not the major issues.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:32 am
Aguirre
Spot on. The political landscape has changed for Abbott whether he likes it or not
by victoria on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:33 am
I agree with many of the arguments to sell uranium to India for electricity generation etc, but why wont they sign the NPT ?
Pakistan will then ask/ insist on our uranium as well. In their case I wouldn’t sell it to them even if they do sign a NPT because of their links with North Korea and *others*.
by dave on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:34 am
Is Pakistan a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty? If not you can understand India’s reluctance to sign. It’s a vexed issue. Personally I’d opt for leaving the uranium in the ground until such time as Australia needs it and we have developed a way to use and store it safely.
by Cuppa on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:36 am
bushfire
sizzling stuff
as a postscipt
the MSM fear labor and JG.
by gusface on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:36 am
puff
Ah, but that’s the way the change of heart is being sold to us.
I wondered why this article appeared in yesterday’s press:
http://m.theage.com.au/national/antinuclear-rudd-urged-us-to-keep-arsenal-for-deterrence-20111113-1ndw2.html
I thought it was an anti-Rudd piece. But now I know why.
Apparently Rudd is in India as we speak
And Mar’n has just come back from there.
by kezza2 on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:37 am
Good morning, Bludgers. Good morning, Dawn Patrollers.
Tarin Kowt it is! How bloody predictable. My bet should have been less modest!
1. Nothing Oz governments can do about it (except in wartime; but even then, not private empolyment’s professional and managerial levels). Any control early colonial govs had over non-gov workers disappeared before early 1840′s anti-transportation Demos on Sydney docks, and 1854 8 Hr Day & Eureka Stockade.
Oz did, however, create the world’s first regulatory body to decide on a fair basic wage and settle Bosses v Workers disputes (Conciliation & Arbitration); but at arm’s length in the judiciary, and primarily concerned with unskilled labour, tradies, ‘white-collar’ public servants and paraprofessionals. IOW, Oz govs, in conjunction with TUs, set up regulatory bodies to ensure the vast majority of employees received decent wages and conditions. That’s it.
2. In an increasingly globalised world of global companies and a globalised workforce, executive and professional salaries are negotiated within that environment. But so are miners’, mine tradies, office staff etc. Nor are executive-level staff of big companies the only ones on huge salaries: consider the huge sums some footballers are paid.
3. There are already bodies which can help rein in executives’ salaries (as there are who could rein in footballers’), including the corporations/ associations themselves, through the Corporations’ Act/s, ACCC etc – the most powerful of which are control of board appointments, shareholder rights, control of AGM’s, who are excluded from voting, who have the right to decide what, when and how much.
Some companies (even huge ones) have restructured, esp after shareholder revolts (eg Telstra), chosen Australian CEOs and reduced top salary packages.
by OzPol Tragic on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:37 am
OPT
Abbott is so predictable. You called it yesterday and I agreed.
Here is hoping that we also get the demise of his leadership right too!!
by victoria on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:38 am
He will need it too Puff, when you see people like Nikki Savva starting to criticise him, imagine what the Libs MOP are like
by mari on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:39 am
Puff, the Magic Dragon.
Yes that is what I cannot understand.Why not sign the treaty? Back when they were racing to match Pakistan you could understand why they may not have wanted to play by the rules but not any more. They have the bomb,Pakistan has the bomb and everyone knows it. So why not sign? The text of the NPT is here. http://www.un.org/en/conf/npt/2005/npttreaty.html
by poroti on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:41 am
India won’t sign because they want to maintain / increase the number of nuclear weapons they have is my guess
Good to see a bit of anger / frustration at the suggestion here
Kite flying exercise testing the reaction???
by womble on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:41 am
+1 from me as well!
by MTBW on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:42 am
uranium shares will get a boost today with the prime minister supporting uranium sales to india
by oyster on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:42 am
mari
The Libs and their cheersquad know they have to change direction now. The govt has not been knocked off its perch. They have spent the past twelve months focussed on this and nothing else. The Qantas issue was the last shot in the locker. Only problem for the Libs and their backers, it backfired. What are they to do now?
by victoria on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:43 am
by victoria on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:45 am
Emerson giving Brandis SC a bit of a reaming on Agenda.
As usual Fool Gilbert is unable to control the interview.
by BK on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:45 am
womble
Glancing through the treaty there is no reason why they cannot do that after signing.The only articles that could touch on that issue are
by poroti on Nov 15, 2011 at 8:46 am