Australia General Discussion 2.0

[morgieb]

Australian politics is such a joke atm.

Not as much as the US but like jesus christ these people are ridic.

Indeed, it seems likely that the Budget will be moved forward a week (all of the function spaces in P'House are booked up for 3 May... in a week when Parliament isn't supposed to be sitting... hmmm?) to enable the Budget and reply to happen, then announce the next weekend for a (sigh) 8 week campaign.

I'm not sure if it's just me, but running on the back of the budget seems a really risky strategy for mine. Especially given that I suspect it'll be a fairly aggressive budget.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think it's a huge risk, as is a really long campaign when Shorten will be as front and centre as the PM.

[Meclazine for Israel]

One thing is for sure.

The Australian election cycle will be less interesting than an episode of RBT.

[Platypus]

One thing is for sure.

The Australian election cycle will be less interesting than an episode of RBT.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

So...

Turnbull will recall Parliament from 18 April for a three-week sitting that will include the Budget being brought forward a week to 3 May. IF the particular Bill on the Australian Building and Construction Commission is blocked by the Senate, he WILL call a double-dissolution election for 2 July.

What's clear is that he fully intends to call a DD, but is trying to get on an anti-union footing by forcing this Bill to be the 'trigger'.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Hack Senator Joe Bullock resigns because he can't accept SSM, and is being replaced by indigenous leader Patrick Dodson:

Sorry this is late, but I just heard about this story.  I don't follow Aussie politics much, but why would the Party force him to vote a certain way on an issue?  Is that typical?  Also, if it were a problem, why doesn't he just switch parties???

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Hack Senator Joe Bullock resigns because he can't accept SSM, and is being replaced by indigenous leader Patrick Dodson:

Sorry this is late, but I just heard about this story.  I don't follow Aussie politics much, but why would the Party force him to vote a certain way on an issue?  Is that typical?  Also, if it were a problem, why doesn't he just switch parties???

Party line voting is pretty common. This isn't like the UK or US where each vote is a vote to be gained etc. there are some issues that are on conscience. SSM is one of them in Labor, whereas the Liberals are forcing a party-line vote against it. The ALP position will change in 2019, but the party is pushing it as an issue and Bullock won't support it at all. He also won't switch parties, because of his hardcore union background.

[Talleyrand]

A new poll conducted for News Corp. has Dick Smith leading Bronwyn Bishop by 33 points on the primary vote in Mackellar. Not buying it, but LOL.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/would-you-vote-for-dick-smith-poll-shows-hed-easily-take-bronwyn-bishops-seat/news-story/6e245f9320580e8b53125941557bd33e

[morgieb]

A new poll conducted for News Corp. has Dick Smith leading Bronwyn Bishop by 33 points on the primary vote in Mackellar. Not buying it, but LOL.

http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/would-you-vote-for-dick-smith-poll-shows-hed-easily-take-bronwyn-bishops-seat/news-story/6e245f9320580e8b53125941557bd33e

Not that it matters as she'll most likely lose preselection anyway.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Turnbull is playing an interesting game here, with a number of options. The official noises are that he's trying to back away from the DD.

1. He really wanted a DD, but the move only really impressed the media and the internal polling is showing the move has not paid off (fwiw, I've heard the internals have the Libs being returned, but it basically being 2010 redux).

2. He really didn't want a DD, but has taken the risk to try to force the cross-benchers to come to heel ... but after all of the bluster of the threats, to not have a DD, even if the Bills are passed, would make him look terribly weak.

3. (the most likely option in my mind) He still wants the DD, but is desperately trying to force the "blame" onto the cross-benchers.

Frankly, despite the remarkable fawning from Mark Kenny/Peter Hartcher etc... I don't see any way out of this in which Turnbull and his government look stronger.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'd urge reading into what Malcolm has just tried to pull with the states and with health and especially education.

This is a very, very risky strategy and could do serious damage to the government in marginals.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-01/brent-seriously,-is-turnbull-trying-to-lose-this-election/7288452

Just for context.

[Ebowed]

totally inept, absolute lunatic proposal from Turnbull, I'm at a loss how this man can, with a straight face, say that we will keep paying for private schools, a private health insurance rebate, massive tax concessions for property investors, and avoid cracking down on multinational tax avoidance ... AND announce massive spending hikes on defense and an "innovation package" while paying billions to fund refugee detention camps and corporate polluter pay-offs ... but there is no money for schools and hospitals?

Complete joke.  He really thinks he can get away with shifting the blame like this?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

It's bonkers. He floated a massive tax reform without notice on the states and it was dead within less than 30 hours.

[IceAgeComing]

[urlhttp://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/apr/04/kevin-andrews-is-prepared-to-challenge-turnbull-for-prime-ministership]apparently there might be a challenge against Turnbull soon[/url] - Andrews would probably lose but I can't imagine that's what the government want floating around a month before they call a Double Dissolution

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

[urlhttp://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/apr/04/kevin-andrews-is-prepared-to-challenge-turnbull-for-prime-ministership]apparently there might be a challenge against Turnbull soon[/url] - Andrews would probably lose but I can't imagine that's what the government want floating around a month before they call a Double Dissolution

Lol, no. Andrews was the stalking horse in 2009 before Abbott rolled Turnbull... but nah.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Newspoll

Primaries
LNP: 41% (-2)
ALP: 36% (+2)
GRN: 11% (-1)

TPP
LNP: 49% (-2)
ALP: 51% (+2)

Satisfaction
Turnbull: 38% (-1)
Shorten: 32% (+4)

Dissatisfaction
Turnbull: 48% (+4)
Shorten: 53% (+1)

Preferred PM
Turnbull: 48% (-4)
Shorten: 27% (+6)

This is the first non-Morgan poll since the Turnbull ascension that has seen the ALP in a lead (versus a 50-50 tie)

[Knives]

Glorious ing glorious.

[Ebowed]

Ugh... when is NSW Labor going to get rid of that deadweight Luke Foley?

Of all the issues to take a "principled stand"... coming out to bat for the dog racing industry.  Calling people who are concerned about animals "elitist" and saying that an enormous gambling industry are the real "battlers"... holy christ this guy is so out of touch, it's sort of unbelievable.

I mean, for goodness' sake, Baird does SO MANY awful, awful things - why pounce on the ONE good thing he's done??!  It defies any reasonable explanation.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Ugh... when is NSW Labor going to get rid of that deadweight Luke Foley?

Of all the issues to take a "principled stand"... coming out to bat for the dog racing industry.  Calling people who are concerned about animals "elitist" and saying that an enormous gambling industry are the real "battlers"... holy christ this guy is so out of touch, it's sort of unbelievable.

I mean, for goodness' sake, Baird does SO MANY awful, awful things - why pounce on the ONE good thing he's done??!  It defies any reasonable explanation.

There's a reason why I NEVER supported Foley, he's got a particularly strong relationship with the gaming/racing "industries". Baird was absolutely right to do this, I don't care WHO is betting and gets enjoyment out of this, it's cruel and until there's rock-solid evidence that it can be run without mass slaughter of dogs, the torture and death of small animals used for training, then it must end. I'm pleased that ACT Labor has followed suit.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Haha,

The whole Australian election covered in 2 posts.

I though Malcolm could have pushed the "children in detention" argument a lot harder.

Because no matter what argument ensues, Labor put them all there.

All I heard was Shorten saying Medicare was going to be privatised.

After Turnbull said, no, never about Medicare being sold off, I was convinced that he would not do it (even though it's probably a good thing) in this term, yet Shorten did not change tact.

That was pretty dumb.

I thought Labor could have won that election if they had a stronger candidate.

Plibersek maybe.

[Ebowed]

After Turnbull said, no, never about Medicare being sold off, I was convinced that he would not do it

That's on you, my friend.

The Medicare angle hit home because we don't trust Turnbull not to privatize it, and we still don't.  In the next few years they will continue to try and sneak in co-payments, cuts to bulk billing, introducing costs for blood tests, pap smears, the list goes on.  They are biting at the very heart of Medicare - which is supposed to be a universal program that is available to everyone, regardless of ability to pay.  They are trying to change the structure so that it's "more economical" to purchase private health insurance - the rebate for, which, by the way, has never been under threat by the cost-cutting Liberals.  I wonder why?

Do you ever wonder why they are so happy to cut funding for public schools and yet Australia's status as a country that fully subsidizes its classist selective school system is never under threat?

Do you ever wonder why they would intentionally mismanage the NBN so that it would eventually be privatized, leaving regional Australians without the Internet speeds that everyone else in the developed world takes for granted?

Can't trust them, and that's what you see in the election results.  Shorten was right to say Turnbull can't be trusted on Medicare.  He can't be trusted.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

a) Mediscare, such as it is, worked because a lot of people fundamentally don't trust the intentions of the Coalition when it comes to health. If it wasn't working, then Shorten would have stopped. He didn't, because it was. Also how would privatising Medicare be good for it? When OH WHEN, will people realise that there are some things the public sector is actually the more efficient and cost-effective option, such as primary service delivery.

b) Shorten ran as good a campaign as any member of the front-bench could have. This election was winnable, and Labor came extremely close. I think Labor has also shown a much deeper bench than the Coalition for the future.

Turnbull might be forming government, but he's got a grazed knee, fewer backers in the party room, an even more difficult Senate than he already had ... he might have won in the immediate term, but unless he does something remarkable, he's the medium-longer term loser.

[Knives]

Turnbull's win makes it a lot easier for state Labor parties to win again which is a good thing.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

First Newspoll post election

Primary (change from election)
LNP: 41% (-1.2)
ALP: 36% (+1.3)
GRN: 9% (-1.2)

TPP
LNP: 50% (-0.4)
ALP: 50% (+0.4)

Satisfaction
Turnbull: 34% (-6)
Shorten: 36% (-)

Dissatisfaction
Turnbull: 52% (+5)
Shorten: 50% (-1)

Preferred PM
Turnbull: 43% (-5)
Shorten: 32% (+1)