It’s a mixed-bag of lollies in the media this morning, with talk of population continuing to overflow, Tony Abbott still getting haunted by the “dead, buried, cremated” Work Choices zombie and political nerds preparing their rebuttle over the crappy timing of the leaders’ debate.
Julia Gillard busted out her a “Sustainable Australia” line again yesterday at her speech on population to a critical audience in Western Sydney.
As Matthew Franklin writes in The Oz:
Population growth has emerged as one of the key issues in the lead-up to the August 21 election, with political leaders tip-toeing between a range of constituencies, including communities struggling with congestion and inadequate services, communities wanting growth to fill labour shortages, those concerned about overuse of resources and others concerned with immigration levels and inflamed by the recent flood of asylum-seeker boats off northern Australia.
But if population is so critical why can’t Abbott or Gillard name a target number? “Both sides tell us they want a sustainable population but neither side can tell us how many people they think a sustainable Australia can support,” notes Sue Dunlevy in The Daily Telegraph.
And Gillard’s stance on population goes where no pollie dared go before, says Paul Kelly in The Oz: “It seems Gillard’s over-arching election strategy is to slow Australia’s population growth, a populist pitch long available to Australia’s leaders and long resisted…Can you imagine the outcry if John Howard had talked like this?”
Janet Albrechtsen in The Australian leads the way in admitting commentators on the right were perhaps wrong to beg Julia to take over from Kevin — “Alas, Gillard is not so different.” She then launches into an assessment of Gillard’s accent: “Could she have manufactured those broad nasal vowels, so different even from her Adelaide-accented sister, to fit her political emergence within Labor’s left-wing factions? You feel so cynical even suggesting it,” wrote Albrechtsen.
Meanwhile over at The Oz’s editorial, it’s claimed that the rest of the media fawn over Gillard and forgive all her foibles without proper scrutiny, while Abbott makes one tiny gaffe and everyone pounces: “Many in the Fairfax media and the ABC seem mesmerised by the performance. That may be good news for Labor but it’s bad for democracy, bad for the country and bad for the free press… This is not a new phenomenon. Throughout Kevin Rudd’s ascendancy and his government, the ABC and Fairfax papers failed to nail his true character or understand what a mess he was in — inside the party and in the electorate.”
But industrial relations and economic reform have got Abbott in quite a pickle. Despite Abbott’s “Work Choices is dead, buried, cremated” mantra, he seems to be stuck talking about it. Partly because it’s been revealed that the economic policy that Abbott released yesterday would actually force changes to the Fair Work Act in order to accommodate it.
“Unfortunately for the Coalition, its leader’s predicament over workplace relations policy has come about because of a sclerotic and, dare it be said, deluded approach to its political task during this term. Abbott’s failure to get his lines right was but a misdemeanour,” writes Shaun Carney in The Age.
Paul Kelly agrees: “The Liberals are looking like amateurs.”
The Liberal Party is supposed to focus on work place reform and small business — that’s the whole point of the Liberal Party, writes Peter van Onselen in The Oz. “Politically Tony Abbott might sound like he doth protest too much when he pledges not to reintroduce Work Choices, or even amend the Fair Work Act. But there is only one expression suitable for the promise: sellout.”
All this economic talk is cheap, says Malcolm Farr in The Daily Tele: “Economic management will dominate this election campaign, but the debate will be entirely free of bold policies and will be packed with really annoying name calling.”
Gillard is busy keeping the nation’s purse closed, but perhaps it’s time to stop being so stingy: “…the obsession with balancing the books risks going too far. Worthy policies could hit the cutting room floor or never get a running start, all in the name of ”fiscal conservatism” writes Jessica Irvine in The Sydney Morning Herald.
Meanwhile in Queensland, Premier Anna Bligh is so unpopular ALP strategists have apparently asked her to delay her ascension to the party presidency, The Courier Mail reports. As Craig Johnstone writes this morning: “What an unforgiving game politics is when Australia’s first elected woman premier can’t step out on the hustings to help ensure the election of Australia’s first woman prime minister.”
Not that Gillard should be too worried about Queensland according to the polls, says Dennis Atkins in The Courier-Mail: “…when it comes to Gillard, she is taking no voter pain in Queensland or elsewhere.”
Andrew Bolt warns that voters should be wary of the ALP-Greens preferences deal: “Wake up, people. The Greens will have the balance of power in the Senate.”
But this just harks back to the same Liberal fearmongering in 2007, where it was argued that if the Greens had the balance of power “…in no time at all Parliament House would be festooned with bongs and macrame,” says Phillip Coorey in the SMH.
As for the one leaders debate that we’ll be treated to this campaign, Bernard Keane has published an email on The Stump from Press Gallery President Phillip Hudson:
The Board of the National Press Club is able to advise that following agreement by the ALP and Liberal Party Campaign Directors that the Prime Minister Julia Gillard will debate the Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott this Sunday 25 July 2010 at 6:30pm for duration of One (1) hour at the National Press Club.
It is further advised on the basis of the agreement that:
- The debate will be moderated by David Speers, Political Editor Sky News
- The Leaders will be questioned by a panel of three (3) senior federal parliamentary journalists:
Chris Uhlmann – Political Editor ABC News 24
Laura Tingle – Political Editor Australian Financial Review
Malcolm Farr – National Political Editor Daily Telegraph.The full debate rules will released later this week.
Not that wonks are impressed by the decrease in debate time. “The only election campaign debate between Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott has been brought forward by an hour and shortened after the big parties recognised that Australians were more interested in a reality cooking show than who will run the country”, writes Phillip Coorey in the SMH.
But there is one extra televisual treat for wonks — Tony Abbott is judging Red Faces on Hey Hey it’s Saturday tonight. Gillard turned the opportunity down. Tune in to see who’ll finish up with the red face by the end of this potential car crash of a segment…
I’ve been watching both the media and the leaders and I have to say this:
The media, for the most part, are still clinging to their ‘Liberal right to rule’ principle — thus they mostly forgive the gaffes coming from the Liberals.
The Liberals are fumbling all over the place. Not often I agree with Paul Kelly these days but they ARE looking like amateurs.
I just sat through Abbott’s school announcement and it really makes me wonder how stupid they think the electorate is. His announcement that the rebate will extend to ‘other items’ will make absolutely no difference.
It is merely dressing Labor’s policy up in different clothes — every parent has costs of books, uniforms, computer expenses and fees of some kind. The amount of rebate from either side would not cover even half these annual expenses — so which items it covers does not really matter.
I am having difficulty deciding who is the bitchiest with the longest claws, the ice maiden Julie Bishop or the wicked witch of The Australian Ms Albrechtsen. Im leaning towards Julie at this stage but there is a long way to go.
Think I’ve now heard everything:
“Many in the Fairfax media and the ABC seem mesmerised by the performance. That may be good news for Labor but it’s bad for democracy, bad for the country and bad for the free press… This is not a new phenomenon. Throughout Kevin Rudd’s ascendancy and his government, the ABC and Fairfax papers failed to nail his true character or understand what a mess he was in — inside the party and in the electorate.”
‘The Australian’ complaining about biased reporting?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
[As Craig Johnstone writes this morning: “What an unforgiving game politics is when Australia’s first elected woman premier can’t step out on the hustings to help ensure the election of Australia’s first woman prime minister
Of course the problem with Bligh is that having just squeaked home campaigning against privatisation of state assets, immediately set about, with Andrew Fraser, privatising state assets.
I find this one of the more bizarre things. The current NSW government’s troubles started in earnest when, despite the fact that about 70% thought privatising power assets was a bad idea, Iemma and Costa got it into their heads that they should do it anyway and try and ram it through. Even the Liberals weren’t all that keen. Since then, the NSW government has traded one leader for another, made a couple of hundred or so ministerial changes, lost byelections with 25% swings, and is now for all practicalpuposes, the political equivalent of someone in a persistent vegetative state. In fact, that could almost describe NSW.
So looking at this, it is easy to see why Bligh swore she wouldn’t do it, but incomprehensible that of all the promises to break, this is the one she chose.
I wish I had a plausible explanation for this apparently suicidal policy, but the best explanations come from shows about hypnotism and demonic possession.
I heard “Sloppy Joe” on AM this morning trying to explain how the Libs could reconcile some of their budget cuts with their promise not to make changes to workplace legislation.
All I can say is that his soubriquet is well earned.
He reminded me of nothing so much as Joh Bjelke Peterson – “Don’t you worry about that!” Nudge, nudge, wink, wink!
Has it come to this already? Sad, really.