Simon says, "Bill's in like a shot"

ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
edited September 2018 in Purgatory
Simon Toad wrote: »
In any event, our latest Prime Minister will be out of office by May at the latest, and I predict our next one, Bill Shorten, will be in power for a decade. He has an iron grip on the Parliamentary Labor Party and is supported by a swathe of powerful unions across the political spectrum. The Liberals hold a one-seat majority that they will lose when K[er]ryn Phelps wins Wentworth.
My two dear and close friends in the Labor party would be pleased to hear your prediction.

I'm not sure about the decade... And not convinced about the next election. I feel people will want to punish the Coalition for deposing Malcolm, but I sense weariness rather than vengeance in conversations.

And I wonder if the wagons are circling Bill. He is not popular. Labor seems to win the 2 party preferred votes because people dislike the Coalition; Liberal alternatives seem more popular.

What are your thoughts?
«134567

Comments

  • Personally, I think Tony Abbot and Peter Dutton will be the major factors. If they continue to destabilise, then Labour will be in for years. I think, while Morrison is fairly popular, if he doesn't move on climate change, and continues to dodge issues like the bullying in parliament, they the Coalition w
  • I think there is now a decent chance that Tony Abbott won't get more than one more term in Warringah, if that - either because he's deselected next time round or because he loses to an independent. As he's my federal representative, I'd be very happy with either of those outcomes. He's an embarrassment, and even his own "base" no longer appears to be entirely convinced.
  • It looks like the women complaining of bullying and intimidation have been well and truly silenced. I’ve just heard that the Somali MP who threatened to name names has been placed in an unwinable position on the preselection ballot.
  • Big Mal Fraser was hugely unpopular for the entire period of his seven year Prime Ministership, during which the Liberals won three elections. His popularity didn't matter because the ALP was a shambles. I'm actually having trouble finding the evidence in support of that set of assertions, although I must have taken some kind of truth serum to admit that, as I prefer to argue in a fact-free environment. The earliest polling I can find online is for 2003.

    Shorten hasn't made many false moves at all during two decades in the public eye, starting from when he spent a week appearing daily on Sunrise as the Federal Secretary of the AMWU during the Beaconsfield Mining Disaster in Tassie. He is the bloke who got the NDIS off the ground during the Gillard Govt, nothing less than the biggest public sector social welfare initiative this century. He probably engineered the ending of Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard, but it was no coincidence that the ALP changed its rules to make a sitting Labor PM virtually impregnable just before he took the job of Leader of the Opposition. One the ALP get elected, I think people will start to recognise his worth.

    The Liberals have to lose. They almost lost last time, scraping in by one seat. MP's are already starting to bail - another one announced she was not going to re-contest her seat today. They see the writing on the wall. I know Julia Banks is taking the opportunity to try to advance the position of women in Parliament, and perhaps also address the behavior of her colleagues, but she would not be going if she thought she was going to win her marginal seat. She has better things to do than spend six months campaigning in a seat she is going to lose. Julie Bishop decided not to resign from her safe WA seat where she is heavily supported at the branch level. She is already making moves to destabilise Dutton in co-ordination with Turnbull. First she agreed that Dutton may not be eligible to hold his seat, constitutionally, and then she failed to rule out crossing the floor in support of a motion to send the question of his eligibility to the High Court! She's not yet in full-on wrecking mode, but do you think she's going to do much to get the new PM elected? She will do what she needs to defend herself against the accusation of wrecking and not one bit more. No, the Liberals are SO going to lose the next election.

    The ALP, just between you and me, needs less than a 2% swing to unseat Dutton. That will be my major focus on election night. I want that bloke out on his arse.

  • Athrawes, that is the best avatar I have seen in a long time :)
  • It is Hedwig of Blessed Memory, attempting to steal my tea. He was diabetic, and loved anything sweet, poor thing. And being a horrorkeet, he had no problems with theft or intimidation...
  • That it is personal to you makes it even better :smiley:
  • We very much hope you're right. I don't particularly like Shorten, too much of Sussex St about him for me. He played far too big a part in getting rid of the popular Rudd, too much of the machine in that. Tanya on the other hand..... No hope of that at this stage, so close to the election.
  • I have it on good authority that Rudd was out of control in a manic kind of way (not alleging mental illness, but am alleging not coping) and that his removal was a survival strategy by senior ministers. The removal of Gillard, however, was a Machiavellian attempt to save as many labor seats as they could at the upcoming election loss.

    Shorten is unquestionably 100% right-wing Union. That's his background and his power base. I'd argue from a policy position, this is what the country needs - patching up the welfare state and stiffening our lax industrial laws. The Banking Royal Commission is the tip of the iceberg with respect to corporate malfeasance. Think about all that flammable cladding builders have been using for the past 30 years! The Docklands in Melbourne is full of the stuff. Its about time we shortened the leash on business. They need to know that their capacity to make super-profits is dependent upon them remaining servants of the public weal.

    I disagree with you on one thing. Shorten's not Sussex Street. He's Lygon St.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited September 2018
    I was using Sussex St in its technical, not geographic, sense and should have made that clear.
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    edited September 2018
    I read on Twitter our new PM described non-renewable energy to a shock jock as "what I call 'fair dinkum power' ". Good Lord.

    Anyone who can stop these grubs in the insurance, wealth management and banking industry has my vote. Well, depending on their other policies. But something needs to be done. For overseas readers, we are finding many financial institutions are charging people after they die, preying on those with mental or physical disabilities, giving advice which makes the companies richer, etc. Bernard Keane in Crikey was suggesting the government get back into insurance.

    What are people's thoughts on our PM's religious freedom bill push? Hardly the biggest thing on most people's mind in my view. Stagnating wages and affordability seem more important from what so hear. But from a legal standpoint is the fact it is missing a problem? It seems to be described as "preventative" which indicates nothing has yet happened? Or am I wrong?

    edit: added more words
  • I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move—

    That the Senate acknowledge:

    a. The deplorable rise of anti-white racism and attacks on Western civilisation.
    b. It is okay to be white.

    Pauline Hanson
    Dear God. What "interesting" times we are living in. I really didn't think we were this far down that road. I realise she is a nutjob, but still.
  • Are Hanson and Fraser Anning having a pissing contest maybe?

    I think the Religious Freedom Bill is like a call to prayer for the Hillsong scene. I think its a distraction designed to shore up conservative votes for the election.

    I don't know who he is signalling to with the fair dinkum power act, other than perhaps his liberal party constituency on the right. I do think their strategy will be focused on saving as many seats as they can, rather than putting out any real policy. Even the Aged Care Royal Commission is about that. Perhaps 'especially' rather than 'even', but it is certainly time that industry was given a long hard look.

    Did you see the woman from This Australian Life give evidence? She had been in the job 9 months and knew nothing! I thought TAL was thumbing their noses at the Commission by sending in someone with so little knowledge of the company. I do hope we get some of our public sector institutions back into banking and finance. Bloody Keating. Labor never should have swallowed the neo-liberal agenda.
  • What do people think of Kerryn Phelps running as an independent in Wentworth? I liked her way back when she was President of the AMA. I suspect that if it wasn't for the vocal right of the Liberal Party, which these days is more the entire body than a wing, Kerryn Phelps would be quite comfortable as a Liberal. How many brilliant and small L liberal people are no longer interested in being in a party with people like Andrews, Abbott, Dutton and Betz? How can people like Tim Wilson stand to be there? I guess he's made his peace with prejudice...

    I remember when I could comfortably contemplate becoming a Liberal, in the days when people like Fred Chaney and Ian McPhee were ministers. Indeed I was a student Liberal and attended a Young Liberal conference. One was enough I must say. I was miles away from some of those people - HR Nichols Society groupies. We called them the New Right in those days.

    The party has moved so much to the right since the mid 1980's. It was Howard's doing. I moved to the left too, especially on industrial relations and economics, although I was never much interested in economics. The thing is there used to be plenty of room for people who advocated liberal ideas on social justice. Remember Chris Puplick too? He ended up serving as a Commissioner in the area of Discrimination I think. Chris Puplick wouldn't run as a Liberal these days I'd reckon.

    Kerryn Phelps, no nonsense inner suburban doctor quietly going about her ordinary life in a same sex marriage, should be a Liberal. She would make a brilliant Liberal in the Pru Goward mold. I hope she wins the seat of Wentworth and the social conservatives understand what their throwback purity costs them.
  • AthrawesAthrawes Shipmate
    edited September 2018
    I have a feeling it will go against her. The preference deals have already copped a fair bit of criticism. It is being seen by some in the LGBQTI community as selling out, to get the seat. I suppose it depends how far Right Sharma is. I'm hoping it doesn't backfire.

    Then there's the issue of bullying. Men don't seem to. Otice, at least in my circles, but women get the distinct impression that the complainers have been silenced. The PM's assurances that there is no bullying in the Federal party have not been convincing to female voters.
  • Others obviously think otherwise, but I've never ranked her very high - too much a one issue person and did not show much depth in that issue either.. The by-election would have been much more interesting had she not recommended any particular preference path to be followed by her voters.
  • When the leadership contest was hotting up and Malcolm first indicated his intention to leave Parliament if he lost, Lee Lin Chin tweeted that she was open to offers from either party to stand for the seat. I think she wanted (all tongue in cheek) a cash payment!
  • Simon Toad wrote: »
    Kerryn Phelps, no nonsense inner suburban doctor quietly going about her ordinary life in a same sex marriage, should be a Liberal. She would make a brilliant Liberal in the Pru Goward mold. I hope she wins the seat of Wentworth and the social conservatives understand what their throwback purity costs them.
    Simon, those of us who have closely observed NSW politics would not regard Pru Goward as a successful Liberal politician. She is widely regarded as a dud minister, and at the last election recorded a swing against her of about 20% in what has been a safe Coalition seat for over half a century. Some of the recent decisions of the NSW Government have not gone down well in the electorate, so next March could be very interesting, especially if a strong independent candidate emerges.
  • Thanks Barnabas. I was reaching for a good comparison, and I had Goward pegged as a moderate liberal. I admit there was an element of click-bait involved though, as I'd love to see an Oz Politics thread get going. :)
  • The latest Newspoll surprised me a bit... Morrison ahead of Shorten on preferred PM. I know Shorten isn't particularly liked, but I thought he may be more preferable to our (current) PM.
  • Just the bounce you'd expect so soon after the transition. Unless he's made a dramatic change after his election, I'd be expecting a decline from here on.
  • Depends. Morrison is very blokey and Presents himself (according to one journalist) as a daggy dad. People may prefer that to Shorten's more aggressive personality. Some people have noticed there's little substance behind the blokiness, but it will take a while for people to make up their mind. And many don't like his inaction on climate change, energy policy and gender equality. Personally, I'm none too keen on either of them.
  • AthrawesAthrawes Shipmate
    edited September 2018
    So, how do people think the interference in the ABC will impact on the Govt.? Given that the Chairman was a friend of Malcolm Turnbull, and trying to appease him, is it likely to have any effect on the new PM? Or is it likely to be seen as an enquiry by the very Govt. who was trying to influence the ABC in the first place? And if so, will that reflect badly on ScoMo, especially in light of his recent budget cuts to the ABC?
  • The most grating thing about Scummo is the grating hypocrisy of his much proclaimed "Christianity" .

    His "compassion" goes so far as to include imprisoning innocent children on far away islands under the guise of "stopping the boats". Plus as Treasurer and (earlier) as Minister for Social Services he has been one of those responsible for making it difficult to access the very inadequate "NewStart" unemployment allowance on the grounds that since people favoured by God are automatically prosperous (like him), the unemployed must be those not favoured by God and therefore should be further penalised.
  • All too true - Morrison's very much in the current US style of evangelical, at least as it's presented to us.
  • Athrawes wrote: »
    So, how do people think the interference in the ABC will impact on the Govt.? Given that the Chairman was a friend of Malcolm Turnbull, and trying to appease him, is it likely to have any effect on the new PM? Or is it likely to be seen as an enquiry by the very Govt. who was trying to influence the ABC in the first place? And if so, will that reflect badly on ScoMo, especially in light of his recent budget cuts to the ABC?

    I certainly think the Chairman Milne is compromised and must go. Whether he will or not is another question.

    I feel passionately that the ABC is the most important cultural institution in the country, and a glittering Government Wonder of the World. I have had to place a box of tissues next to my chair in the lounge-room so I can dab my eyes every time one of those promos with the national anthem come on. "I am you are we are Australian". As such I am utterly unable to form an objective opinion about the ABC and will be attending next year's Liberal Party National Council wielding a pitchfork.
  • I look forward to the headlines. :wink:

    Well Milne has gone. I wonder what the rest of the Board knew?

    Tukai and Gee D have eloquently shared my concerns on our latest person to take the title PM. I shudder when he trumpets his "Christianity"; many people see him as very hypocritical given what Tukai wrote. I remain amazed he got up. But I suspect he has to be better than Dutton.
  • Climacus wrote: »
    But I suspect he has to be better than Dutton.

    So do I, Climacus - whilst lamenting what a woefully low bar we're setting these days.

    The SMH had an article after Milne's resignation suggesting that the entire board might need to go. I was quite surprised by the backgrounds of some of the board members. Renewal might not be the worst thing that could happen.

  • Indeed.

    If PM Morrison turns up at a footy final, dare I hope for a repeat performance? Yes, I'm childish. And can't stand the man.
  • Simon ToadSimon Toad Shipmate
    edited October 2018
    Looks like the Religious Freedom thing is more serious that I thought,
    Fairfax is reporting one of the recommendations is that religious schools be able to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or relationship status.

    Schools would have to publicly outline their policy on the matter.

    The measure would only affect students, as schools set up for religious purposes already have the right to take such matters into account when hiring staff or contractors.

    What sort of people would legislate to allow a child to be booted out of school because they realise that they are gay? If Tim Wilson can't stop this, what use is he?
  • ClimacusClimacus Shipmate
    edited October 2018
    Yes, Crikey linked to that article in their morning email, finishing with this:
    However the panel, chaired by former attorney-general Philip Ruddock, also rejected notions that religious freedoms are in “imminent peril” across Australia, and warned against extending LBGITQ discrimination to businesses.
    So businesses discriminating bad, schools good?

    Is it more complex than that?

    I was also fascinated by our Dear Leader's stance on climate change, in light of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. I guess at least it's not the-raw-onion-eating-PM's 'the science behind climate change is crap' (paraphrased), but it doesn't give me much hope we've got adults in charge.

    And good to see Morrison visiting his biggest supporter.
  • Climate Change is such a huge problem for the Liberals. I still find it quite funny watching them dodge and weave, even though they are in Government.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Even more of a problem now is the use of the Opera House sails for private advertising. The by-election for Wentworth was always going to be interesting and this might just be enough to get an independent in.
  • I hope so Gee. It'd be brilliant.
  • I'm getting push polled by the ALP in the Victorian state election. They do a regular voting intention poll and then a series of questions along the lines of: "The Victorian State Govt is [insert Govt initiative]. If this makes you more likely to vote Labor press 1 ..."
  • I know someone involved in that. Do you want me to lodge a complaint?
    :wink:
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    We can hope. Many factors against it. It's one of the wealthiest electorates in the county and AFAICR the Liberal candidate has never been forced to preferences even. Sharma is obviously a very high quality candidate. While Kerryn Phelps will appeal to the western end of the electorate, and perhaps around Bondi, I doubt she has the same attraction in such addresses as Victoria Rd Bellevue Hill. Against factors like that, I'd be surprised in Alan Jones has many listeners there, and even fewer who'd admit to it. There's also be a higher than average group regularly attending performances at the Opera House. It may be an interesting Sunday. Even going to preferences would be a sort of victory.
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Another plus for Sharma would be his history as ambassador in Israel where he took a very pro-Israeli line on many matters. Wentworth has the highest proportion of Jewish voters than any other electorate in NSW
  • I suppose, taking a medium view, that it is better to get a high-quality individual in Parliament than to hope for the worst outcome for a Government that is going to have to go to a General Election in May next year anyway. Even if the seat were to fall and the Government to lose its majority, it would rightly be supported by one of the independents on confidence at least.

    I'm kind of hoping that the Religious Freedom stuff explodes in the coalition's face in slow motion. I think it has good potential to do that. I love Hinch's line that if schools want to discriminate they should lose their funding. It will never happen, but it should put the fear of God into every Private Sector institution in the country, and those people are powerful. I also think I noticed a line from David Marr on facebook, using the moment to push for the abolition of the religious exemptions entirely. Again, not happening, but a smart attempt at moving the goalposts. I stress that they bloody well should be abolished, those exemptions.
  • The ABC has uncovered a covert plot by Australia's alt-right movement to join major political parties and influence their policy agendas from within.
    Glad it's come to light. Despairing it exists. And annoyed at my ignorance in thinking such things were not happening.
  • These types of plots are as old as Dr Who.

    Better news, I almost fell off my chair when Nikki Savva, former Howard staffer and current writer with the Australian said on Insiders this morning that she expected that people on Nauru would be resettled to Australia and New Zealand shortly after the next election. She said that they had simply been there too long and it was time to do it.

    She also said some good things about the religious beliefs exemption, which good old David Marr spend the show broadening to include women who contravene church teaching on fertility, and including not only schools but hospitals, nursing homes and anything else run by churches. I'm starting to think that my confidence that the abolition of the religious exemptions was 'not happening' is misplaced! Yippee! (but not too yippee. the cup and lip thing).
  • Dear God.

    Hat-tip to Crikey. For those playing along overseas, a minor party has taken the name of a former party [1931 - 1945] and claimed the former party's PMs as its own.
  • bloody hell. Doesn't Palmer still owe people money for that refinery he ran into the ground?
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited October 2018
    Bonkers. Including those former PMs makes it a clear passing-off. Not that I'd rank them very well. By 1950, when he became the local Member for here (not that I remember him) Hughes was well past his prime and even at his peak he was not too flash.
  • Palmer is on a hiding to nowhere. Yes, he still owes money. He's loudly declaring that he doesn't. Unfortunately, we get his Make Australia Great billboard on the road out of town. All he needs is orange makeup and a mop.
  • He's spending heaps. There are two or three billboards in various places along Melbourne's freeways and I've seen his ads while watching the ch.7 news. Why would he spend money in Victoria? It seems insane.
  • I really don't want to send this thread to Dead Horses - but can an Aussie clarify for me whether the whole school discrimination was an issue because there is a lot of state funding of religious schools in Australia (is there?) or whether the idea was that even if the state gives no funding to a religious school, it should be able to tell the school that it can't discriminate against students who do not follow the religion's teachings on sexual morality and gender expression?

    If the latter is true, does that mean that religious schools cannot discriminate for any reason? Can a Jewish school give preference to Jewish students for admission, or not admit non-Jewish people at all unless they convert (not that Jewishness can be defined both as a religion and as a race, so people could make an argument based on racial discrimination, which given history is dangerous, in my opinion)? Islam generally considers the children of Muslims automatically Muslim, so you could also make an argument that since non-Muslim children would be required to convert, that a racial preference is being made.

    More broadly, if a religious school gives preference (or only admits) "practicing" students of that religion (and not just students who were born into, converted, baptized, etc.), who gets to define what practicing means? The government? Could an Evangelical school require prospective students or their families to sign a faith statement to be admitted? Can a Muslim school require headscarves for girls? Can a Jewish school require boys to be circumcised?

    I am gay and very liberal on sexual issues, but because I am supportive of separation of church and state I don't like getting too involved in admissions criteria of religious schools.

    One caveat I would give is that I think that a religious school should not be able to deny admission to a student of a certain race who is a member of the religion that the school belongs to (and that a school cannot claim that their religion excludes people of any race). I would also ban religious schools from discriminating against children from interracial families, although I would allow schools to discriminate against children from interfaith families (both parents would need to be a member of the religion or have converted, if the school wishes).

    One area where I am torn is schools for an oppressed indigenous group, which need not be religious in nature. I am leaning towards saying that they can discriminate against children not from that group, even though it is racial discrimination, especially if they receive no funding from the state.

    Maybe this should be its own thread!
  • Interesting questions stonespring; I have to confess ignorance as to what is permissible or not currently. Hopefully someone can help.


    Meanwhile, I'm glad I didn't hear this last night before my walk or I may've thrown myself in the cold, swift-moving Murray:
    The Australian Senate has narrowly voted down a motion condemning “anti-white racism”, despite government senators voting for the controversial statement echoing alt-right rhetoric.

    On Monday the Senate voted 31 to 28 to reject a motion put by Pauline Hanson – the leader of the anti-immigrant nativist One Nation party – which acknowledged the “deplorable rise of anti-white racism and attacks on Western civilisation” and “it is OK to be white”.

    Hanson’s motion received 23 votes from the ruling Liberal-National Coalition ...
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    What a lot of questions. I'm sorry but I don't know the answers to many (eg discrimination in enrolment on religious grounds) off the top of my head, nor do I have the time to look up the answers. As to the religious basis though, many ask for reference from a priest/pastor/minister and the absence of one would make it very difficult to gain admission. The school I went to (as did my father and Dlet) was Presbyterian, is now Uniting - one of Dlet's mates had parents who are Orthodox. That may be a part answer. Discrimination on the basis of gender is common.

    Roughly a third of schools are private in one form or another. Many of these private schools are Catholic parochial ones, both primary and secondary. They charge very low fees. Of the others, most have some church affiliation, but not all. There has been a number of new schools established in the last 20 years which while perhaps not associated with any single church are fundamentalist in outlook.

    For the last 50 years, governments have considered that the private system as a whole takes a substantial burden which the government would otherwise have to bear, and should therefore receive some partial subsidy per child. That has now turned into a complex formula with a base subsidy and then amounts on top calculated on the income basis of the pool of parents in that area. A quick example - a mate of my son did an exchange for a couple of months to St Alban's Academy in DC, and his parents had a boy from there for about the same period. The fees for a day boy at STA were then (a dozen or so years ago) were roughly double those at School. To put it another way, fees for a day boy at STA were roughly those of a boarder at School.
Sign In or Register to comment.