Last week, the BludgerTrack poll aggregate disappointed Coalition fans by failing to respond much to the morale-boosting poll result the had received from Ipsos. Now it’s Labor supporters’ turn, with a shift to the Coalition recorded despite Labor’s strong two-party result from Newspoll. This reasons for this are that a) BludgerTrack goes off the primary vote, and the numbers provided by Newspoll were scarcely different from those that produced a two-party result of 53-47 a fortnight ago, suggesting that much of that two-point shift came down to rounding, b) numbers added this week for Essential Research and Roy Morgan were both soft for Labor, and c) the very strong results Labor was recording at the time of the leadership spill have now entirely washed out of the system. All of which adds up to a solid move to the Coalition on two-party that brings with it four seats on the seat projection, numbering one each in New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia.
Newspoll and Essential Research both provided numbers for leadership ratings this week, and they collectively find the Tony Abbott dead cat continuing to bounce, to the extent that he’s nearly back to where he was at his previous all-time low after the budget. A surprisingly sharp deterioration in Bill Shorten’s numbers has also moderated with the addition of the new numbers, returning him to a more familiar position just below parity. The new figures also knock some of the edge off Abbott’s recovery on preferred prime minister. Full details as always on the sidebar.
[Members of Parliament, who didn’t even think for themselves and when pressed to would not even entertain the possibility.]
So take away their vote so they don’t *need* to think for themselves! Brilliant reform!
WWP@445: “are you assuming they hadn’t noticed he wasn’t following their orders as PM when that is what they have been quite open about as a gripe? Didn’t he pick his ministry instead of them? Wasn’t he not sufficiently consultative with his betters in the union movement? Is that not radical reform from obedient puppets?”
A ludicrous post. Rudd’s problem in mid-2010 was not that he wasn’t following anybody’s orders but that he had more or less stopped giving them.
He had always lacked what Keating liked to call “policy ambition”, was always more focused on how he and his government looked in the 24/7 news cycle than on delivering long term, lasting reforms. By mid-2010 he was even starting to lose interest in that. Everything was a mess. Climate policy had gone down the drain. The Resource Super Profits Tax was a looming catastrophe. His policy on asylum seekers had manifestly failed and all he could do was rant and rave about “evil people smugglers”. Huge amounts of energy had been invested in some sort of hospital reform policy process, but virtually nothing had emerged from it. And, in response to the embarrassment of the home insulation stuff-up, he performed a human sacrifice on Peter Garrett.
His government had reached a state of catatonic inertia. The polls were going in the wrong direction. And a large majority the Caucus had had enough. The idea that evil union bosses were behind the whole thing is a nonsense. Sure, the egregious Paul Howes ran around the place claiming it was all his idea. It wasn’t: he did nothing more than sway a few members whose votes wouldn’t have been needed if it had ever come to a spill motion. Gillard had the broad support of the Victorian Right, the Victorian Left, the shoppies, the South Australian Left and the Queensland Right. She didn’t need the NSW Right and some of them (by no means all of them) only jumped on board at the last minute – on the very day of her challenge – because the NSW Right can’t tolerate the idea of being on the losing side of a leadership challenge. Kevin Rudd was their boy: hand-picked by Mark Arbib and Karl Bitar and extensively trained and groomed for the race by Bruce Hawker. The idea that it was the evil NSW Right who was behind the events of 2010 is a fantasy only to be found inside the mind of Paul Howes and a few diehard Ruddites on PB. It was elements of the Victorian Left – Carr and Ferguson to the fore – who were in the vanguard. The NSW Right was well to the rear.
According to my sources, that’s how it went. IMO it was a very bad idea to get rid of Rudd at that time, but it was one with overwhelming support among the Caucus: they didn’t have to be told to do anything. And they were the ones who had been dealing with the unravelling and decided they couldn’t take it any more.
And then, as TPOF pointed out earlier, Rudd – and/or people close to him – began pretty quickly to start undermining Gillard in a systematic way. Which showed that, for them, personal gripes/ambitions were far more significant than the Labor cause. You and some others seem to believe this was fair enough. A lot of other people – even many who would have preferred Rudd to Gillard as a leader – would consider it to be gross disloyalty.
That’s how I see it, FWIW.
Hmmm.
[4corners @4corners
Next Mon #4corners reveals leaked communications, top secret decisions & interventions to shore up the PM’s leadership. #auspol #libspill]
Should’ve added to the above:
Abbott gone by Tuesday?
Dan
Heard on radio some talk about Four Corners on Monday raising speculation but not explicit.
Here is one example of research that might explain why over 65s are more likely to vote for Tony and friends.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/07/elderly-financial-exploitation-holidays/1746911/
“Now, scientists are learning why: New research suggests age-related changes in the brain make it harder to detect suspicious body language and other warning signs that people may be untrustworthy.”
meher baba
No matter how often the facts are stated by those close to the action or with reliable contacts, there are some who will not believe it. The myth of St Kevin lives on.
[ “At the end of the phone was silence. I thought he’d actually hung up at one point. But it was absolute silence,” Mr Andrews told reporters on Thursday.
Sounds like Abbott slipped into his catatonic noddy-head state. You know, the Mark Riley interview ]
Oh Dear. Shuddering Brain-lock strikes again. Is it any wonder that the Indonesian President wont return his call??
Bring on #libspill. This dude HAS to go. 🙁
[ 4corners @4corners
Next Mon #4corners reveals leaked communications, top secret decisions & interventions to shore up the PM’s leadership. #auspol #libspill ]
Ahhhhh. So the subs / Japan / Soryu Class thing could still be in play.
Hope the ABC bunker is well stocked. They could be in for a siege between now and Monday night.
Lack of comprehension, or outright fibbing?
[The head of the Green Climate Fund has confirmed Australia will not be able to dictate where its $200m contribution will be spent, contrary to the Abbott government’s assertions when it announced it was reversing its previous refusal to give money to the fund.
Announcing Australia would provide $200m to the fund late last year Tony Abbott said the funding would be “strictly invested in practical projects” and environment minister, Greg Hunt, said Australia was providing the money “on the condition it will be spent within the region for our priorities”.
“We set the terms of our engagement and those of our involvement, and those terms are very clear: support for the Asia Pacific, a focus on rainforests, a focus on combating illegal logging.”
“The difference here is that we’re able to target what we’re doing to the region. So on our terms, in our time, in a way which protects the rainforests of the area, our priorities which don’t just help reduce emissions, but they protect the iconic species,” Hunt said.
But in an interview with Guardian Australia, the fund’s executive director, Héla Cheikhrouhou, said decisions about disbursement of the $10bn already pledged to the fund would be made by the board, according to a single, clear set of guidelines and priorities. ]
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/mar/12/green-climate-fund-confirms-australia-has-no-say-in-contribution-spending
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2015/03/12/4196300.htm
The relevant page with promo for the next 4 Corners.
meher baba@352
Sounds accurate to me. Good analysis.
lizzie
Given the propensity for this government to get up ,hand on heart, then tell a bald faced porky, I’m picking fibbing.
imacca@361
House of cards is dead right.
One slip, and the whole shaky edifice comes tumbling down.
lizzie
We could all claim to have contacts. How do we know what is true?
I was told by …….. doesn’t cut it for me.
imacca
The 4 Corners headline is..
“House of Cards”
Now does this imply molevelant sinister & criminal actions by Abbott as the Dennis Richardson character in BBC series.. Will Tony sue ABC for defamation?
Will Tony use McClintock as his barrister, getting job lot discount?
Shortly after Kev became Opposition leader I was having lunch with a guy from the Qld Cabinet Office.
I mentioned Kev – response was “they’ll be sorry”.
imacca@361
[“Understand this, as you get closer [to an election], every marginal seat member is thinking I could lose my seat… if things don’t change, the party room will…”]
And there is the crux of the issue if they go down with Tony what happens to their pensions cars and superannuation.
Unfortunately the Ides of March is a Sunday
Maybe the Saint Patrick’s Day Coup.
Should have added there is no interest like self interest.
Steve777
[Maybe the Saint Patrick’s Day Coup.]
That would be appropriate for Tony being the wonderful generous and caring Catholic that he is.
WWP
Rudd changing a few things at parliamentary level to make life easier for himself isn’t reform of the party.
Great work from Bill Leak on the Minister for Women.
sceptic
[Posted Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 6:35 pm | PERMALINK
imacca
The 4 Corners headline is..
“House of Cards”
Now does this imply molevelant sinister & criminal actions by Abbott as the Dennis Richardson character in BBC series.. Will Tony sue ABC for defamation?
Will Tony use McClintock as his barrister, getting job lot discount]
Lol!
sceptic at 366
I think you will find that the actor in the UK series was Ian Richardson. Dennis Richardson is currently the Defence Department secretary and, earlier, head of ASIO and Foreign Affairs.
He might sue…….
BK
Love it!
MTBW
It’s like the OLD Bill Leak is back.
BK @ 373
[Great work from Bill Leak]
Now there is a rare phrase!
[” this imply molevelant sinister & criminal actions by Abbott as the Dennis Richardson character in BBC series.. Will Tony sue ABC for defamation?”]
The obvious defence is that everyone knows Abbott is not smart enough.
meher
exactly the scenario I have always been given, by countless MPs, advisers and hangers on (particularly when it comes to the late arrival on the scene of the NSW Right).
Also accords with every published account of what was going on.
BK@373
BK – Red tie.
The Rudd who had the power to over rule the factions and appoint his own Ministry, who had the power to sack candidates and who had the power to forbid discussion of same sex marriage at Federal Conference, had all the power he needed to advance other changes needed to make the party more democratic.
The fact that he didn’t show the slightest interest in doing anything at that time means he didn’t want to.
TPOF
Bill hasn’t quite been the same since he fell off that balcony.
MTBW
[We could all claim to have contacts. How do we know what is true?
I was told by …….. doesn’t cut it for me.]
All right, in that case don’t comment on the issue. You have said on a number of occasions that you have based your opinion on that of your contacts.
[According to my sources, that’s how it went.]
[exactly the scenario I have always been given, by countless MPs, advisers and hangers on (particularly when it comes to the late arrival on the scene of the NSW Right).]
So those responsible for the Rudd – Gillard – Rudd disaster and PM Abbott have been consistent in painting a picture to explain the single stupidest political act in Australian history and it puts them in a good light!
If ever I’m charged with a serious crime I hope I get you lot on the jury.
MTBW@365: that’s fair enough too. I wouldn’t even claim that I have every last detail of the story right.
But I was responding to the argument put forward by some, including Kevin himself at times, that he was removed through a conspiracy of evil faceless men – with the NSW Right at the forefront – because he wouldn’t do their bidding. I have given my version of the conspiracy to get rid of Rudd. It didn’t feature the NSW Right and it was based on a majority of the Caucus feeling that l, on top of being extremely difficult to work for, he’d lost the plot. And I gave some examples of how he’d lost the plot.
All I ask of people who don’t agree to provide similar details of what was going on. What was it, other than performing well, was it that Rudd wasn’t doing that the faceless men were expecting him to do? And if it was truly all about the NSW Right, then why were NSW Right figures so quickly at the forefront of the push to bring Rudd back: Bowen, McLelland, Fitzgibbon, Hawker again and, eventually, Dastyari?
Give me a plausible alternative version to the story I’ve provided above and I promise to tap the mat.
WWP
[So those responsible for the Rudd – Gillard – Rudd disaster…]
No, that includes people who had nothing to do with it but were public servants at the time.
meher baba
Posted Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 5:52 pm | PERMALINK
—–GFC get real
WeWantPaul
Posted Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 6:52 pm | PERMALINK
According to my sources, that’s how it went.
exactly the scenario I have always been given, by countless MPs, advisers and hangers on (particularly when it comes to the late arrival on the scene of the NSW Right).
So those responsible for the Rudd – Gillard – Rudd disaster and PM Abbott have been consistent in painting a picture to explain the single stupidest political act in Australian history and it puts them in a good light!
If ever I’m charged with a serious crime I hope I get you lot on the jury
—-yep
btw are we to consider shorten’s switch to rudd a form of contrition or just pragmatism as usual?
in qualification to all above the current failure of lib leadership is as bad arguably more dangerous than anything labor recently produced
WWP@385: I give up. How does it paint them in a good light? Getting rid of Rudd in 2010 was a massive mistake. They stuffed-up. The only real differences between my version and your version is in terms of who was behind it and what their motivation was.
I’ll ask you a question. Do you think Rudd was travelling well in mid-2010?
geoffrey
pragmatism.
Re Meher Baba @352: I don’t have contacts or inside knowledge but the story that you outlined makes sense to me as a member of the general public. In early 2010 Rudd seems to have gone into a kind of funk. He seemed to have lost his touch after the ETS was rejected. Whether he could have recovered we’ll never know.
geoffrey@388. I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to say here, but the GFC stuff happened in 2008-09. Arguably it was a reasonably good policy response: I suspect some Labor supporters tend to overrate it a tad, but that’s neither here nor there.
In any event, it was well and truly done and dusted by mid-2010. And it certainly wasn’t going to help Rudd and Labor in the forthcoming election: rather, it was giving the Libs lots of ammunition about pink batts, school halls and wasted money.
The response to the GFC will probably go down in the history books as one of Rudd’s achievements. But that sure as hell wasn’t doing him the slightest bit of good in mid-2013.
Interesting that 4 Corners has apparently been brought forward by one week. Earlier it had been flagged to go to air March 23, in the week of the NSW election. Maybe that was seen as too political in its timing; or maybe 4 Corners is very worried about legal attempts to block its airing.
In any event, if 4 Corners does – as some have suggested – have documents proving an Abbott-Shinzo deal on the subs, then it is sensibly keeping that power very very dry at this point.
“powder” not “power”
the gfc skewed all expectations Rudd had of being PM to be fair and no sooner than it was over (like several month) than destabilising of him and all the ETS stuff with Gillard was on. I think Gillard stinks actually in this regard – yes we all know she was good parliamentary performer – but she was great destabiliser of all time along with backers – however it is rationalised…………….
Pretty good article, IMHO
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/wall-street-journal/greek-crisis-clock-ticks-down-on-a-solution/story-fnay3ubk-1227260188185
between GFC and faction Rudd was never given a chance
Clarke and Dawe – A Gift for Management:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVk0_7e1QXc
😀
meher at 393
[Arguably it was a reasonably good policy response {to the GFC}]
“Arguably”?
“Reasonably”?
It was widely acknowledged by authoritative experts in Australia and from around the world as the best example of a response to the GFC anywhere.
Even ultra-orthodox mobs like the IMF stated such.
Particularly when compared to the do nothing, ‘maybe a few tax cuts’ response from the COALition.
I’m no fan of Rudd nor the ALP necessarily but credit where it is due.
Its not exaggerating to say the ALP/Rudd/Swan/Treasury response to the GFC saved Australia from large scale wide spread misery and they were never given the praise and support they deserved.
Quite the reverse.