Time for a new open thread post, though I don’t have a whole lot to hang one off. There’s always US pollster Morning Consult’s tracking poll on approval of Anthony Albanese, which continues to record no significant change since June, with Albanese currently on 60% approval and 27% disapproval. This gives him the third best result of 22 international leaders being followed by the pollster, behind India’s Nahendra Modi and Mexico’s Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
There are also two new sets of supplemental results from last week’s Resolve Strategic poll in the Age/Herald:
• A series of questions on outcomes from the Jobs Summit published on Saturday had favourable results for multi-employer bargaining, more TAFE places and allowing older Australians to earn more before losing the aged pension, but only 34% in favour of the increased migration intake, with 33% opposed. Only 24% rated themselves “definitely aware” of the recent Jobs Summit, compared with 38% for “vaguely aware” and 38% for unaware. Thirty-six per cent agreed it had achieved its (non-political) objectives compared with 19% who disagreed and 46% who were either undecided or neutral.
• The Age/Herald had a further result yesterday showing a 64-36 break in favour of a constitutionally enshrined Indigenous voice, evidently based on a forced response. Clear majorities were recorded in all states, and while there is no reason to be dubious about this, the Tasmanian sample especially would obviously have been exceedingly small.
Dr Doolittle says:
Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 3:10 pm
Boerwar at 2.53 pm and south at 2.48 pm
As noted elsewhere, above, Dutton is seeking to neutralize: women’s issues and ICAC.
Substance matters. Note that Dutton endorsed Linda Burney’s remarks re sexual harassment. Burney might be sick of having to talk to LNP members who often know so little about vital issues, such as Nola Marino’s ranting support for paternalism. The 4 Corners show on Dutton ducked the big question, which is his position on the Voice. That is the only issue that he can influence. Otherwise, he is irrelevant politically, though he can be polite when he chooses. The Resolve poll on the Voice shows why Dutton has hesitated. In essence he opposes it. After all, he tried to dump Turnbull, who rejected it. But he knows most people support it. If Dutton leads the No case and Yes wins, perhaps even in Qld, then his irrelevance will be entrenched.
============================
Yep.
poroti @ #35 Tuesday, September 27th, 2022 – 3:17 pm
It would be beneficial for the nation as a whole for the government to get unanimous support for the NACC, so giving those sort of concessions helps to enable that for sure.
Sidebar: Why does the song, ‘My Sharona’ come into my head every time I see/say The NACC? 😀
Whoopsie!
Hand grenades all round.
Hanson throwing Thorpe at Faruqi…
…with considerable effect.
shellbell @ #36 Tuesday, September 27th, 2022 – 3:19 pm
Legally define ‘special’.
McKim tries to run interference for Senator Thorpe who is not present to support Senator Furqi. Whish-Wilson tries to back McKim. Both are sat down.
Could it be that the Greens senators do not actually quite like getting that which they give with such serene holiness….
C@tmomma,
Exceptional circumstance and public interest that will be up to the commissioner. So the LNP may expect quiet investigations. Hopefully the ALP will put a hard nosed truth seeker in the job.
They’ll also need to make sure that funding is a lock.
Also, Hanson in the senate is funny. But god, could you imagine having to sit there and listen to this. Golly.
Just going to drop this here…
https://youtu.be/ESAaz9v4mSU
…and walk away.
Ah the joys of jargon and the meaning of a word coming from a dictionary different to the one you use 😆
Hanson’s finest hour?
Hanson-Young gets sat down.
According to the President, H-Y verbals Hanson!
The Greens definitely do not like Senator Thorpe’s behaviour being served right back up to them.
This is a festering sore in the ACT.
https://citynews.com.au/2022/refusal-to-review-sentencing-laws-untenable-say-libs/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=canberra-daily-today-s-news-today_7801
Thorpe is a heat seeker, she’s not the sort of personality who brings across the undecided.
Shellbell:
Change “exceptional” to “exceptionable” circumstances and you’re on the money!
Do Thorpe and Hanson feed off each other?
If so, to whose benefit?
Boerwar,
Whose benefit?
This is for their ego’s and for us to watch. They progress nothing for the nation. Nero fiddles while rome burns, etc etc.
Steele-John tries to disobey the President. Gets sat down for his troubles.
Birmingham up to spread some anodyne oils on troubled waters.
Boerwar,
Already sitting I would think ?
It was bound to happen at some point in this parliament, it’s good for them to get it out of their system. At the end of the day though Hanson should be censured for those disgusting remarks she made.
south
True. I was considering the same conundrum. What does the President direct in his case?
milius van der Lubben says:
Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 3:41 pm
It was bound to happen at some point in this parliament, it’s good for them to get it out of their system. At the end of the day though Hanson should be censured for those disgusting remarks she made.’
—————————-
And should Thorpe be censured for her behaviours? Goose gander country?
Bureau of Meteorology, Australia
@BOM_au
·
14m
#LaNiña is underway and the negative Indian Ocean Dipole (#IOD) event continues.
When these conditions combine, the likelihood of above average rainfall over Australia is further increased, particularly for the eastern half of the country: http://ow.ly/C3ZL50KTR4M
I missed what has happened.
Have Labor and the Coalition altered the motion to a general motion abjuring everyone to behave in a respectful manner?
Boerwar
The question at hand is whether Hanson should be censured because she made remarks on the public record telling a Pakistani immigrant senator to “piss off back to Pakistan” because she didn’t want to say goodnight tiddlywinkies to the queen of England. The Thorpe matter is a question for another day. If the media reports are true, then probably.
McKim has actually got Standing Orders wrong, IMO. He wants a POO after the matter has been voted on.
I don’t think that the Greens came out of this one with much dignity.
or “in all the circumstances”
With respect I disagree boerwar, I think the media that matters to their voters will be sympathetic to the Greens.
Amy finishes up her take on the with this re Hanson…
On managing the consequence of the Optus data breach:
https://citynews.com.au/2022/access-canberra-unable-to-change-licence-numbers-following-optus-breach/
No doubt the quiet Hansonites will be overjoyed at her attack on the Greens.
Frankly, it’s really sad to see Labor “both sides” their way out of this censure. A pack of squirrels, the lot of them.
‘Emilius van der Lubben says:
Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 3:51 pm
I disagree boerwar, I think the media that matters to their voters will be sympathetic to the Greens.’
——————————————–
Hanson has described Thorpe’s reported behaviours in the Senate. Under privilege. They are now in the open and are now not actionable.
Are you seriously trying to tell me that Thorpe’s behaviours are acceptable to the Greens but Hanson’s behaviours are not acceptable to the Greens?
Are you seriously trying to tell me that the Greens think that Thorpe’s behaviours are a media triumph for the Greens?
Even the Greens must have heard of the saying, ‘You are what you walk past.’
Frightening and abusing an elderly woman to health treatment is apparently acceptable to the Greens.
boerwar
“Are you seriously trying to tell me that Thorpe’s behaviours are acceptable to the Greens but Hanson’s behaviours are not acceptable to the Greens?”
“Are you seriously trying to tell me that the Greens think that Thorpe’s behaviours are a media triumph for the Greens?”
Please direct me where I’ve said this 😉
I’m not actually sure where I’ve supposedly espoused by love of Lidia Thorpe, so boerwar please show me where I have 🙂
I see Labor and Liberal joined up to protect Senator Hanson from the Faruqi/Waters motion.
I am still waiting for a Greens to express whole-hearted approval of Thorpe’s behaviours. Apparently it is supposed to increase support for the Greens.
Boerwar says:
Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 3:29 pm
McKim tries to run interference for Senator Thorpe who is not present to support Senator Furqi. Whish-Wilson tries to back McKim. Both are sat down.
Could it be that the Greens senators do not actually quite like getting that which they give with such serene holiness….
—————————-
I must preface this comment by saying that I have yet to see the drama in the Senate. But is your hatred of the Greens so visceral that you will side with someone as reprehensible as Hanson in order to get out a ‘take that Greens’ comment?
Boerwar @ #331 Tuesday, September 27th, 2022 – 3:51 pm
Which is why using these as ID by any but their original issuer is fraught.
wranslide
The Greens are hoist on their own petard here.
They cannot possibly be simultaneously asking the Senate to formally censure Hanson while at the same time running a protection racket for Thorpe.
Over to you.
I genuinely think it is a bad political move to leave something important as the carriage of FICAC in the hands of someone like Dreyfus. I do not think he has the capacity or political smarts or heft to carry this through. It should be a Govt victory but I worry in the hands of Dreyfus the Govt will lose some shine.
The once great Australian Labor Party … they gave us Medicare, they gave us welfare, they abolished White Australia … and now they piss themselves at the very thought of censuring racism.
Rex Douglas says:
Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 12:41 pm
So, Labor’s NACC will only hold public hearings in ‘exceptional circumstances’.
Is this a dodgy deal with the Libs to try and hide all their dirty dealings …?
____________
First things first, Rex…
Name (and/or preferably link) your source (for the first bit, the second is clearly your version of Labor hatred.)
Emilius van der Lubben @ #80 Tuesday, September 27th, 2022 – 4:15 pm
Another Greens’ stunt supporter I see. 😐
FYI: It wasn’t racism. It was a stunt by Pauline Hanson, that got answered with another Greens’ stunt.
I await the next Greens censure motion: the one where Thorpe is censured for….
… oh wait.
Upnorth says:
Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 1:32 pm
shellbell says:
Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 1:29 pm
poroti
“But as this is all Lawyerland territory I suppose we’ll have to wait until the ‘fine print’ has had the traditional fine toothed comb through it .”
I consider myself retained by you. Let me just grab the meter and the oversized calculator and I will begin.
中华人民共和国
Don’t forget your “silent partner” the photocopier.
____________
This photocopier…?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEp3Ig3isxc
I am quite shocked that some people on this blog would find comfort from someone like Hanson especially those that purport to be Labor supporters.
Socrates says:
Tuesday, September 27, 2022 at 7:36 am
Thanks for the roundup BK. It is a mixed bag though. Few stories highlight more the AFR’s slide from newspaper to pro-business rag than this piece:
“ Australia needs a national independent anti-corruption body. But its remit should be confined to genuinely corrupt conduct and should not cover matters of integrity that are essentially political, urges the AFR’s editorial. It says its remit should be confined to genuinely corrupt conduct at the level of federal government – defined as abuse of public office for private gain – and, by and large, should not cover matters such as pork barrelling scandals that are essentially political.”
https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/federal-watchdog-must-root-out-genuine-corruption-20220925-p5bkvv
Why have an anti-corruption commission that only considers one side of corruption cases? Abuse of public office usually involves some private interest offering money to the public official. Why exclude one half of every corruption case from investigation?
———————————————————————————————
Agreed Soc, I think this is a very difficult position for the AFR to defend and suggests it doesn’t take corruption seriously which is itself a great concern. I’m extremely disappointed that they try to draw a difference between “ genuinely corrupt conduct and should not cover matters of integrity”. I would suggest this is exactly the reason we are in the current position. Certain behaviour is considered opaque in its morality therefore is allowed to proliferate which inevitably leads to outright corruption.
Integrity is never opaque therefore actions should be considered highly questionable if they’re not clearly honest and transparent and subject to investigation. This would set a minimum standard that would meet the public’s expectations, restore faith and drive appropriate political culture. An inability to support such standards should immediately raise a red flag to voters and parties about an individual and the subject actions. If there’s nothing to hide there’s nothing to fear.
Dreyfus is doing something the Greens have failed to do for 32 long years… which reflects on the appalling track record of failure by the Greens to achieve anything much at all, really.