Peter Brent at Mumble is reporting that Newspoll shows Brendan Nelson’s preferred PM number moving up from 12 to a stellar 17 (where it’s been in Morgan incidentally). Rudd’s down 4 points to 66. The 2PP shows no change from last time - 57 to 43 in favour of the ALP.
Numbers here.
Update #1: The spin begins. Introducing the story on Lateline a few seconds ago, Tony Jones said something along the lines of “Rudd’s troubles have hit home”. Total nonsense. What’s happening is that Nelson has achieved what he sought to achieve - boosting his own PPM number. There’s obviously no evidence whatsoever that any of this changes anyone’s voting intention. It just makes Nelson’s position in the Coalition safer.
There’s a huge disconnect between the way the political class perceives the theatre of politics and what voters pay attention to. After a fortnight where almost every media commentator (I’m making a hypothetical exception here, in case anyone can point out any actual exceptions) has been jumping up and down and screaming that the opposition was “winning” the day or the week or whatever, there was no perceptible movement in the electorate on the only number that counts.
Update #2: Newspoll also asked some questions about petrol. The most interesting finding here is that a majority of voters don’t think that either party can do anything to lower fuel prices, or are uncommitted on the question. That, of course, is right. And we’ve had two weeks of total nonsense about competing “plans”. If Nelson were smart, he’d stop talking about his 5c pledge, and start emphasising his “broken promise” argument. We’ll see. But I imagine this line of attack is on the way out. We’ll see if the opposition play their favourite game and try to find any other angle that will move the polls - the exact same game they were playing without success all last year.
Update #3: Tony Jones - interviewing Julia Gillard as I write - makes my point on the punditariat. “All the commentators” agree, he argues, then points to Nelson’s poll “bounce”. Let’s remember where Nelson’s numbers were and are. Up 5% (with a margin of error of 3 points) to 17%. Less than 1 in 5 of those polled. It’s just the number the political class are currently fixated on - because they started focusing on it when the “Liberal leadership wars” was their preferred all purpose story. Julia Gillard is quite right to say that the premises of the questions Jones is asking are false.
Update #4: The anonymous correspondent at Newspoll central leads the report with “Rudd pays personal price”. Yep, KRudd will be sleepless tonight at the thought that only two thirds of the population prefer him as PM, that’s if he’s not sleepless anyway working public servants into the grave. An alternative interpretation of the PPM number would be to note that it’s highly probable that all Nelson has succeeded in doing is impressing more rusted on Liberal voters, not that he’s doing any great damage to Labor.
Elsewhere: More at The Poll Bludger. Tree of Knowledge doesn’t think Nelson got much value from a policy that would cost 2 billion, while Possum thinks “miles and miles” of “op/ed piffle” about honeymoons being over has met its match in reality.
Lyn at Public Opinion looks at Rudd’s “whacking” and quotes the ABC website:
The Prime Minister’s prediction he would take a ‘whacking’ over fuel policy has been proved correct in the latest opinion polls.
She also reports on a new level of punditocratic idiocy - adding together the drop in Rudd’s PPM and approval number. Look - the honeymoon is over! It’s proven! Whatever…
And Possum on the “parallel universe of the Opionatas”.
We all lost them, as far as I’m concerned.
The ‘Petrol Wars’ debate was a massive waste of time and taxpayers funds (to pay for politicians salaries).
The real issue is not whether we can reduce the price of petrol - but how we will introduce alternative fuel sources into the Australian transport fuel marketplace and start to reduce oil dependancy.
The US military funded the Rocky Mountains Institute to examine ways of dramatically reducing oil dependancy in the US. The reault of this was a book : Winning The Oil Endgame - Innovation for Jobs Profits and Security.
a pdf of the exec summary is available here :
http://www.oilendgame.com/pdfs/WtOEg_ExecSummary.pdf
‘Winning the Oil Endgame offers a coherent strategy for ending oil dependence, starting with the United States but applicable worldwide. There are many analyses of the oil problem. This synthesis is the first roadmap of the oil solution—one led by business for profit, not dictated by government for reasons of ideology. This roadmap is independent, peer-reviewed, written for business and military leaders, and co-funded by the Pentagon. It combines innovative technologies and new business models with uncommon public policies: market-oriented without taxes, innovation-driven without mandates, not dependent on major (if any) national legislation, and designed to support, not distort, business logic.’
The US military can see good reason why the US needs to get off oil to the extent that they funded a research group to show how it could be done.
But sadly, the mentality of our politicians seems to be more suited to the oil abundant 1960’s rather than the 21st century.
hehehe
all that hooplah and drama results in bugger all change.
it seems the pundits see the petrol wars for what it is. Stupid.
Wow. Only 66% approval? I don’t know how the Ruddbot sleeps at night, except, wait…he doesn’t sleep, right?
66% approval? I think the meat lovers pizza recorded a lower approval rating amongst meat lovers!
17% for Nelson. The bedrock support for Liberal is about 34%. So, what, about half of Liberal voters prefer Nelson? A mighty achievement.
I think the meeja are in transports of delight and admire Nelson’s 17% because that rate is higher than the percentage of dates they were able to get in high school.
To demonstrate, here is the survey that Shanahan took from the girls in his final year at All Pratt’s United Secondary College:
Q) Thinking about the male students in your year who still haven’t got a date for the Year 12 Formal - Will you go wif me?
66% No way get f***ed f*** off.
17% Undecided
17% You have a car, right?
Elsewhere: Tree of Knowledge doesn’t think Nelson got much value from a policy that would cost 2 billion, while Possum thinks “miles and miles” of “op/ed piffle” about honeymoons being over has met its match in reality.
Update #4: The anonymous correspondent at Newspoll central leads their report with “Rudd pays personal price”. Yep, KRudd will be sleepless tonight at the thought that only two thirds of the population prefer him as PM, that’s if he’s not sleepless anyway working public servants into the grave. An alternative interpretation of the PPM number would be to note that it’s highly probable that all Nelson has succeeded in doing is impressing more rusted on Liberal voters, not that he’s doing any great damage to Labor.
17% Brenda has peaked!
It’s all downhill from here
The Opposition utterly lost the Petrol Wars.
So much talk of short-term politics from both sides - yet it’s pretty obvious who started the fight at recess.
The result - a staggering amount of political energy expended by the Opposition for a lousy 5 points for Nelson, and no change in 2PP. In a staged two week contest they literally couldn’t win. Terrible politics.
What’s Nelson’s next move? What’s his next sound bite? Does he honestly think he can ride this four more weeks till Gippsland? What else was in his budget reply? I can’t remember.
And another question - what would they have had to attack minus the leak?
Not the rest of the Fuelwatch documents the Government possessed and had the ACCC release in good time - namely, after the Opposition had spent its attacks on faulty incomplete data, and on the same day the Bill was introduced.
Abbott admitted their attack was empty/futile on Lateline last Wednesday night - no-one in the press, including Sales at the time, picked up on it.
Good points Mark.
Strawman ain’t so scary…few ran back to poisoned camp…considering potential bias of reporting media outlet, pretty pathetic all up. Population would have noted as many weaknesses in Opposition as in Labor. Once FOCUS goes back on Opposition just about everyone goes SPEW.
Considering the ruthlessness & intensity of the campaign, the damage was minimal. Nothing that can’t be repaired w/ a bit of sleep, reflection, planning, front foot work and a change of some painters.
Coalition front-bench look buggered…as do media talking heads (tho I imagine the cosmetic surgeons are “working over-time”…doesn’t that song get over-played these days?)…plenty of melting faces & desperation in the eyes…& sleep-walking moments…and laughs that are forced and not synchronised properly…bit like watching a dubbed Italian film in the 70s…hilarious…
tick tock…tick tock…Libs acting out Labor ideals w/out understanding Labor…like cheap romance novel pretending to be Wuthering Heights…kinda funny really…in that “if it wasn’t so serious it would be funny” kinda way. Libs lost in maze & not even realising it…tick tock…tick tock…
I hope new Libs come along…bridge builders. Does Turnbull know how to design something that can span a great divide? In troubled times the people need to cross from side to side. Obviously Nelson doesn’t…he’s too concerned with getting the role of screaming actress in THE BIRDS down pat…worried about petrol burning.
But the only birds I see are Luftwaffe like eagles scaring the sleep out of kids in Iraq. And in turn exciting flighty speculators w/ plenty of greenback credits and tax cut goodies at their disposal…those who suck the oxygen out of Aussie home owners & manufacturers as they spread their wings.
Why is it that even when I listen to the sweet smiley Libs & Nats I still hear WELCOME to the MACHINE? Not as much w/ Labor these days. No, not quite as much.
I enjoyed that nasking
I’d beg to differ a bit on ‘Nothing that can’t be repaired…’
I think the repair/refinement began early last week, but with (stark contrast) no need to rush anything to press.
The Government had a few ‘heavy days’ in Parliament ie. lots of name calling and impassioned/embarrassing censure speeches, and ‘worst week ever’ outside.
But meanwhile, they Introduced and worked through their ‘consumers vs oil companies’ message, and ‘yours is uncosted and paid from budget surplus, ours from oil company profits’ and ‘why would oil companies argue against a scheme you say they’d profit from’ refutes.
The Thursday, final ACCC data released, pre-submission press conference from the PM with Bowen beside (anyone in the press pick up on that one?) - spells out ‘consumers vs oil companies’ for all to hear + strong talking to childish/unpurged leakers who think they’re worked too hard. Conflated two public service theories into one/a clear message to public, and who still thinks the Rudd’s Cabinet is falling apart ‘only 6 months in’? All made tv news sound bites.
And positioned long-term Public Transport (yes, those 2 words also made tv news sound bites) etc solutions as the ‘real debate’, not the ‘bogus debate this is’. Which was continued on Thursday evening on Q&A as ‘that’s what the BAF is intended for’ and into the weekend.
The Bill had inevitably passed through HOR, and really…everything was sewn up.
Friday was ‘Labor showing some spine again’ in blogs, if not press.
Another notch on the election commitment belt, and even ‘We’ve done all we can’ from the previous week has lost it’s potential for repercussion. I’d hazard a guess the public mentally append the mitigating ‘for now’, and think ‘ok, fair enough…for now’.
(a bit glossy, but hey…that’s how short-term politics go down…especially when, ignoring the leak (???), they more or less go as planned)
I agree Nick. The line the opposition should have been taking against the rise in fuel prices was that the infrastructure should be improved and alternatives should be found. The problem they (the Opposition) had with that line of attack was that it would have come back and bit them. They had nothing to attack the Government with, so should have let it ride and push that Rudd is copying another LNP policy (West Australia).
Finally, the famed Liberal “budget bounce” in the polls: only it took a Labor budget to achieve the bounce
We all lost. Australian politics descended into abyss of petrol populism and the ETS is almost certainly stillborn. Gillard’s waffle was unwatchable last night.
Frankly couldn’t give a monkey’s $%$#$@ what the polls are doing, who’s “winning” and how the media is spinning it.
The last election was all about getting rid of the rodent, but on the evidence so far, his replacement isn’t much better.
For me, it largely comes down to whether transport energy is included in the ETS. If the last fortnight’s shenanigans don’t affect the big policy outcomes, then it’s much ado about nothing. If they chew into good forthcoming policy, I’ll be cross.
Oh, I don’t know carbonsink. KRudd’s sneaky pre-election promises were much better than Howard’s. Howard’s had fundamental existential issues (”interest rates will always be lower under me than under a Labor government), whereas KRudd’s made some sense (”If we’ve never had it so good, how come petrol and grocery prices are rising? By the way I’m going to have a petrol inquiry and a grocery inquiry.”). Both were primarily about deceiving ordinary Australians, but only one is not complete and utter nonsense. Give KRudd credit for that, at least. He is a very clever politician.
BBB
Like others have said, more or less, at 66% K.Rudd is quaking in his boots. Not.
And I’m totally fed up with this excuslionary “working families” bullsh*t, btw. And the implied pretence that all pensioners got the $500 allowance.Only seniors get it.
I mightn’t like it, but I’d really prefer if pollies on all sides told us the truth, viz: Petrol priuces and grocery prices are going to go up but we can do bugger all about it. And they’re going to go up even more when we do something effective about climare change.
Fat chance of that, though.
btw, the capitalists are going toi put up childecare fees so they can gooble up the childcare rebate, if you haven’t noticed. But Julia Gillard is Watching, so maybe they won’t.
Lyn at Public Opinion looks at Rudd’s “whacking” and quotes the ABC website:
She also reports on a new level of punditocratic idiocy - adding together the drop in Rudd’s PPM and approval number. Look - the honeymoon is over! It’s proven! Whatever…
As it turns out, Bren gun has good reason to be happy.
He now knows that one cent promised, off the petrol price, equals one percent increase in his personal popularity figure. Clever chap that he is, he will likely offer another five cent drop before the next Newspoll.
The other good thing is that it largely pisses Malcom off.
To be fair to Dennis, he never says (this time) that the honeymoon is over. Apparently, he has given up on that set of words.
No, this time Dennis tells us that Rudd has lost his ‘gloss’.
Great quote from lateline last night regarding childcare fees going up after the rebate (surprisingly non means tested) increased:
Well, actually, it’s a stupid quote, because it’s an opposition talking point. Clearly what Gillard was saying was specific action would be taken by the government more along the lines of approving, varying or disapproving health care fund increases rather than a consumer choice website being set up - which is what FuelWatch is.
Yeah! Rudd’s 66% is really SAD! He’s now so far down in the polls, he matches Howard’s best PPM rating! And if Howie’s kept him in power for 11yrs 6 mths …
Meanwhile, back in the real world:
As said in Update #2 (above):
So the public is not nearly as dumb as the MSM, Liberals and their commentators make out … Now if someone does something about media “dumbing down”, starting with ABC & SBS …
By the end of the month OAPs & Carers will have received their $500 + the next installment of their Utilities & Phone/ Internet Allowances, and probably a new issue of Seniors News announcing the new transport & other subsidies (Thanks, Joe Hockey, for the little mag that sets out every teensy thing the FedGov ever did for the Aged - which, I assume Kev intends to continue); so “Nothing out of the budget” is going to look tacky (Thank you also, Brendan, for swamping media beatups of pensioners’ protests with your petrol stories! And whose bright idea was that?)
In 28 days, the Senate takes over, and the BoP passes to minor parties, independents & maverick Nats (and the most maverick are currently pi*sed off by Liberal antics in Queensland). Brendan’s Mob, needed to pass legislation in the Senate, will then be almost as irrelevant as the ALP was during the last Howard term.
We await the next by-election. If the Libs don’t markedly increase their margin, it may be the last for this term - barring illness/death & possibly McEwen. Won’t that make Lib Leadership & Coalition front branch politics fun to watch!
Just because the opposition says something doesn’t automatically make it stupid
I think Tony Jones’ comment was pointing out the difference in expectations that Labor had set prior to the election and what has happened - and they were very careful not to actually promise any change and yet have the implication understood that grocery and fuel prices were important, that the libs didn’t understand, but that the Labor party could do something about it.
I think Gillard was actually being very careful to not promise that any regulation of childcare would be forthcoming whilst still implying that the government could or would do something about it. As is to be expected, like all governments, they want to be seen to be doing something about the problem even if there isn’t much they can do.
People keep going on about how prices in certain areas are going up faster than inflation - eg petrol, healthcare, childcare whilst ignoring that in other areas its going up slower than inflation. Its to be expected that some will go up faster than inflation and others will go up slower.
The difference with child care is that there are grounds for suspicion that unfair pricing might be going on - I’m sure Gillard didn’t want to prejudice any action the ACCC might take, or pre-judge something which might be the grounds for an ACCC determination and legal action. I think it’s pretty clear why she chose her words carefully, and Tony Jones could easily have confirmed this if he’d wanted to, rather than sticking to a false analogy just because it’s what the opposition and “all the commentators” say.
Peter Martin on why GroceryWatch will be effective, despite the propaganda to the contrary by retail interests, the media and the opposition:
http://petermartin.blogspot.com/2008/06/tuesday-column-fuelwatch-was-just.html
Possum on the “parallel universe of the Opionistas”.
How is that any different to the allegations that have been made for many years around petrol pricing and supermarket monopolies? And its much clearer to everyone now in those cases (petrol/supermarkets) that its much easier to claim there are problems than it is to actually prove there are and come up with something that will make a significant difference.
Have a read of Peter Martin’s post, Chris.
Just to give you some idea of how effective GroceryWatch might be, back when I worked for (unnamed large supermarket chain) a couple of decades ago, we used to receive a computerised printout of the pricing we had to update on the little minicomputer that ran the scanning system. We received this printout with ALL of the NSW stores prices on it and it was a bit of an eye opener to a 17 year old. While some of the differential pricing could simply be seen as added transport costs to distant stores, the differences in stores just in Sydney was incredible. Everything that was advertised on the TV was synchronised across stores, but everything else had a location markup on it that bore little resemblance to transport costs and far more to localised demographics. Don’t get me started on the practice of supermarkets selling shelf space to suppliers. Getting ripped off at the supermarket is a carefully tuned science. I’m sure Woolies and Coles will simply insist on a very narrow selection of branded goods for their basket before allowing GroceryWatch to start, then subvert it instantly by fiddling the prices of “near essentials” like tampons and toothpaste.
30
I concurr David.
As an ex casual-to-get-through-uni-worker the micromanagement of grocery pricing is both scary and quite wondrous, both in it’s depth and success.
I wonder if people realise how the arrangements for shelf space an aisle ends really work, or how often the representative from those companies are in the store to check their operation?
I dug this from Possum:
“The world of the Opinionatas - a sort of deafening echo chamber of electoral ignorance and lemming like commentary- has never been more irrelevant to the wider public. Costello was right when he told them that they don’t need politicians around to generate noise, they can just make stuff up among themselves. Which is all too often what happens, and the public can see right through it.”
darn tootin’
Some of the The News Ltd lot are like the bulk of the wives in the Stepford Wives (Ira Levin’s book), except instead of being transformed into mindless, obedient, docile housewives who spin the worst of actions into something pleasant & desirable…but have a vicious streak when it comes to their opponents…these are journos & opinion-makers…& there are plenty of dills writing for the SMH who have joined them.
In their world, Labor, particularly the likes of the gutsy, awesome Gillard are the problem. They detest the mavericks & independent thinkers who challenge their bullying, domineering system that sees a certain group of privileged types benefit from the passivity & brain-washing of the rest of the population.
The Gatekeepers & Senior journos are part of the manipulating crowd. The young journos are the manipulated…as are some of the public. But many now realise something is not right in the media Kingdoms. Are they brain-washed…or gynoids? Who know?
Smile, you’re on candid camera people. Check out those obedient smiles.
Considering how tired she must be, Julia Gillard was brill on Lateline & in the parliament yesterday. I’m running behind on the recordings due to cleaning & gardening.
Great links Kim. Excellent points Nick, Muskiemp, Ambig & others.
I’ve been wandering down the ailes in the local independent while a company representative was complaining to the store manager because his product didn’t have as much space as it should have. Not sure that its an easy problem to solve though - can you really ban those sort of practices?
33 Chris (a different one)
I’m not sure that it needs to be changed or ’solved’, but like fuel (ducks for cover) it should be disclosed and more widely understood.
Kim, one interesting aspect of Peter Martin’s commentary is that he rails against higher per-unit prices for larger items (his example is “a six-pack of Toohey’s stubbies selling for $11.99 alongside individual stubbies selling for $1.59″) but then also, in an earlier post about “FoodWatch”, he cites, with apparent approval, an academic’s suggestion that “it was that the people who could afford to buy the biggest packets were well-off enough not to care about properly calculating the price.” The clear implication of the latter is that the wealthy are subsidising the less-wealthy by adopting a cavalier attitude to supermarket shopping. At the same time, Peter seems to be in favour of legislated per-unit pricing regimes, a la Aldi, which will presumably dampen the effects of the subsidy; it’ll make it a little easier for rich people to figure out that they are getting stitched. The end result may well be higher prices for the smaller-sized packages that the poor more typically purchase. I don’t think Peter has quite figured this one out yet. Still, at least he, or his mates, will be able to write headlines like “supermarket margins down” or some such rubbish, eh?
BBB
Chris (a different one) wrote:
As onimod said - education of consumers would help a bit.
I do remember doing a little “consumer affairs” in high school at the time I was working in the supermarket and marvelling at the gaps. While they dutifully point out that 80% of the brands of washing detergent are from the same company, they don’t explain fully how that company commands so much space. The naive idea that the free market is allowing unbridled competition (in washing powder at least) is somewhat blunted by the reality of the leverage that established players exercise. The result might be better than central planning, but it’s a long way from the libertarian ideal of delivering the right products in the most efficient manner through unregulated markets.