New poll says Labour leads the government 54-46 in two party preferred. That's enought to win next year.
Iraq seems to be one of the main issues.
I wonder what JH's advisors will come up with as a distraction. The whole immigrant thing didn't seem to bite. The budget surplus is the the ace up the sleeve for the government. I can see some very specifically targeted spending increases and tax cuts coming in the next budget.
Adrian
G'day and welcome back!
Thanks Margo.
Hope all is well with you.
Adrian wrote:New poll says Labour leads the government 54-46 in two party preferred. That's enought to win next year.
Iraq seems to be one of the main issues.
I wonder what JH's advisors will come up with as a distraction. The whole immigrant thing didn't seem to bite. The budget surplus is the the ace up the sleeve for the government. I can see some very specifically targeted spending increases and tax cuts coming in the next budget.
Just save on a terror attack?
Massive headlines re the same.
Adrian wrote:I wonder what JH's advisors will come up with as a distraction. The whole immigrant thing didn't seem to bite.
My theory is that
The Plan is to keep producing non-stop distractions from aspects of government policy that they don't want scrutinized too much. (Like the federal government taking over control of education from the states, at the moment.) So ... Julie Bishop this week, then Amanda has to come up with something suitably rivetting next, then Alexander can have another go at the Solomon Islands, then Ruddock, the another "terrorist scare" ... etc, etc, etc ... I reckon they can keep the ball rolling & keep IR, the public's reaction to Iraq, whatever, off the front pages, radio talkback & letters to the editor. They've been doing a pretty good job of this for most of this year. Obviously it works!
I do so sincerely hope North Korea has not provided us with the next distraction.
I am shaking uncontrollably and making strange noises - I am just not sure whether I am laughing or crying!
Would this be the first Australian parliamentarian wanting to actually visit David Hicks at Guantanamo Bay? If so, that's outrageous! Almost 5 years in that hell hole! It seems a perfectly reasonable request to me!:
Last Update: Monday, October 16, 2006. 5:45pm (AEST)
Brown seeks permission to visit Hicks
Greens Senator Bob Brown has promised to report to Parliament on Guantanamo Bay if he gains permission to visit the detention centre.
Senator Brown is hoping to visit Australian detainee David Hicks at US military prison during a trip to the United States next week.
He says dozens of US Senators have been to the facility and he has urged the Prime Minister John Howard to insist on equal treatment for him.
Senator Helen Coonan says she has asked the Department of Foreign Affairs to talk to US authorities about Senator Brown's request.
"Issues involving broader Guantanamo Bay policy are of course a matter for the United States Government, including who visits," Senator Coonan said.
"The Australian Government has very much focussed its efforts on Australian nationals detained in Guantanamo Bay, in particular their welfare."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200610/s1766139.htm
Why, oh why, do the ALP persist in shooting themselves in the foot like this?
SMH article.
Quote:WHEN the workplace relations minister, Kevin Andrews, manages to crack a joke and cause a belly laugh, you know the ALP is having a rough trot.
Thus it was yesterday when Andrews was one of a line of ministers jumping ugly on the Opposition Leader, Kim Beazley, for the South Australian Labor Party's ban of non-union journalists at its weekend State Labor conference.
For decades, a union card has been a requirement of entry for all journalists to any of the SA Labor Party's forums, be it the annual conference or the monthly state council meetings.
The policy has gone unnoticed for years but it exploded spectacularly when three journalists were denied entry to hear Beazley's keynote speech on Sunday.
The Bomber blamed local party officials for enforcing the policy and walked across the street to a park where all and sundry - union members and others - were granted a press conference.
But the symbolism was heaven-sent for the Government which has been repeatedly accused of denying workers' choice with its new industrial relations laws.
Bloody idiot South Australians. (Sorry Bunny)
They just seem like headless chooks, running around in circles getting nowhere.
They will never win an election if they don't stop, think about what they need to do and bloody well do it. Just putting trendy young things up for nomination is not going to do the trick. Substance, not show, is what is needed.
If they want to impress us with their dancing, they should take off the oversized clown shoes.
etc, etc, etc..........
Adrian wrote:...The Bomber blamed local party officials for enforcing the policy and walked across the street to a park where all and sundry - union members and others - were granted a press conference.
But the symbolism was heaven-sent for the Government which has been repeatedly accused of denying workers' choice with its new industrial relations laws.
Of course it would have been useful for the ALP for the press to hear Beazley's speech, but I don't really know about the "symbolism" bit regarding workers' choices & the IR laws. We're not exactly privy (nor is the media) to the details of Andrew's private strategy meetings with employer groups. (Of course they happen.) I don't really have a problem with the press being excluded from parts of ALP conferences, though, particularly during internal debate over contentious issues that need to be hammered out.
I hope you don't think I was ignoring the substance of Adrian's post by straying into generalisations.
What I am trying to say is that the ALP is desperately trying to get the voters on side, and is using the industrial relations issues in their attempts to do so.
If they were formulating strategies, or negotiating sensitive problems, fair enough, most people would agree there is a need for a 'members only' policy, but when it comes to speechifying by the party leader, surely no one expects he is going to be discussing specific sensitive issues. He is, after all, the spokesman for the party, the public 'face' of the party and if they want to win over the populace, what he has to say, should be heard by as many as possible. The journos are there merely to report, they have no input to the substance of the Conference.
If people want to vote for Labor, are they going to have to show their union card? Stupid, isn't it?
Well, if Labor didn't oppose the IR laws then I figure they might as well pack it in! Can't think of a more "core" Labor issue.
My reaction to the SMH article was simply "huh?" I really can't see that there was that much for Andrews to carry on about & capitalize on, really. I mean, the Libs are not exactly transparent & above board on just about any important current issue you can name.
And don't misunderstand. I'm not defending Labor. I'm pretty disenchanted with their lack-lustre performance in opposition, too. It's just that I don't see Andrews as any sort of paragon of openness & transparency, so I see his comments pretty irrelevant, really. Me, I'd like to see him publicly debate the IR "reforms" with say, Greg Combet (sp?). And explain to us precisely why they're so necessary & good for us! Fat chance, huh?
THIS is what is causing me to have an almighty freak-out right now. Heaven help us when the Libs are through with the media! They cannot be allowed to get away with all this without a bloody good fight!:
From Crikey:
Unlike its other military engagements, the federal government's war on journalism is making good progress. This week's casualties include several battalions of the ABC's pesky Left Wing critics, who have been forced back into their bunkers by some effective policy work from General Scott of the Ultimo command. Elsewhere, the persistence of Brigadier Coonan has produced swift results as waves of media owners sweep over the cross-media barriers, with sightings of several units of investment bankers in their wake.
The broader strategy remains focused on the defeat of independent journalism, especially where it is practised by Left Wing elites and members of the Commentariat. The government's emergency media legislation, which has been expedited through parliament, aims to ensure that loyal moguls are given carriage of the national debate and direct the employment of the journalism troops, whose numbers can be significantly reduced to great effect. On the public broadcasting front, the strategy aims to ensure that the ABC handles recalcitrant producers and presenters with military precision based on new guidelines and bureaucracy.
No-one suggests this will be an easy war to win. There will undoubtedly be many challenges and infractions along the way. But in the government's war on independent journalism there is simply no option of cutting and running. ...............
~
Added to all this, today's announcement of the Packer sell-off to foreign ownership makes me weep for the 'Australian' media.
It is just so heartbreaking & gut-wrenching to watch. Damn those Libs! And damn those senators who caved in. As someone (Crikey?) said, exactly which family is Senator Fielding putting first? The Packer family? A pox on the lot of them!
Poor Auntie! 
And all this was announced at the Sydney Institute, no less!:
ABC outline strict editorial guidelines
October 16, 2006 - 2:33PM/the AGE
The ABC's managing director has outlined to staff strict new editorial guidelines designed to tackle perceptions of bias at the national broadcaster.
The guidelines will not only apply to news and current affairs, but spread across chat shows, documentaries, opinion programs and comedies. ...
.................. The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU), which represents ABC staff, has attacked the new guidelines, saying they are unnecessary, vindictive and damaging.
CPSU national secretary Stephen Jones said it was hard to understand how the guidelines could work in practice.
"Does this mean Communications Minister Helen Coonan will vet every gag on (comedy program) The Glasshouse before it goes to air," he said in a statement.
"This latest absurdity is the end result of stacking the ABC board with political appointees who have no understanding of, or experience in, broadcasting.
"It appears the government won't be happy until it has bullied the ABC into becoming a taxpayer-funded cheer squad."
Mr Scott is expected to publicly release the full set of guidelines during a speech to the Sydney Institute tonight.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/tv--radio/abc-outline-strict-editorial-guidelines/2006/10/16/1160850853573.html
:
