|Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
|Go to - FDNC NEWS FORUMS > Other Political News > Will Labor Take Shorten to the Election?|
|Posted by: Charles Jun 30 2018, 01:52 PM|
| Labor suspects an election is imminent, so what does that mean for Bill Shorten?
By Laura Tingle
Photo: Captain's call overturned: Opposition Leader Bill Shorten. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)
There weren't a lot of Opposition frontbenchers fronting up to the cameras between the time on Tuesday that Bill Shorten announced that Labor would repeal tax cuts for companies with turnover between $10 and $50 million and the time on Friday when he announced it wouldn't.
One of the few who did was deputy leader Tanya Plibersek: "As for the questions about who talked to who when, honestly, Canberra journalists might be interested in these process stories — what ordinary Australians are interested in is what you are for and against," a rather testy Ms Plibersek said.
"We are against tax cuts for the big end of town, $17 billion tax cut for the big banks, we are against that."
And that, at its heart, is what Labor is now desperately scrambling to get back to: talking about what it is against.
It's not clear that the partial backdown announced on Friday — that it would not repeal tax cuts already in force but would try to stop those that have been legislated but which don't come into force until 2025-26 — is a clean enough bandage to stop the political bloodlet this week.
How the Captain's Call unfolded
Some senior frontbenchers believe the Opposition Leader just stuffed up on Tuesday.
Others remain convinced he did it to lock in a divided cabinet about the decision.
Mr Shorten and his Shadow Treasurer and finance spokesman suggested yesterday that a decision had been taken on the issue by them as Labor's expenditure review committee.
And, whatever Ms Plibersek says, process does matter.
What is not in dispute is that the strategic question of whether to wind back tax cuts for companies under $50 million turnover has been hotly debated by the frontbench for months.
Some sources say that while a decision had not been formally taken, it was becoming more of a certainty that at least some form of repeal would proceed.
That it was only a question of deciding the cut-out, once costings had come in from the Parliamentary Budget Office.
Whether or not ERC had made a decision, or was just sort of heading that way, it was certainly not a decision put to shadow cabinet.
The more sympathetic version of Mr Shorten's "Captain's Call" was that there had been so much discussion he had got to the point where he thought a decision had been made.
Whatever the case, the tactical decision then had to be to batten down the hatches for the remainder of the parliamentary sitting, minimise the opportunities for media scrutiny, then make and announce the formal decision once Parliament rose.
The campaign against One Nation
The Opposition believes that once the focus on "process" disappears, it is left with a potent policy position for the looming by-elections on July 28.
That is, it will be campaigning on local services like hospitals, particularly in the crucial electorates of Longman in Queensland and Braddon in Tasmania.
They believe the Government's tax cuts for companies with turnover over $50 million remains political poison for the Coalition — and for One Nation if they can tar the party with the brush of doing a secret deal to support them.
This week, polling in Longman, on Brisbane's northern outskirts, put One Nation's support at 14.7 per cent, Labor's at 39 per cent and the LNP's at 35.5 per cent.
You can see why One Nation's preferences are seen as crucial. But it also makes Labor's decision to ratchet up attacks on Pauline Hanson rather perplexing.
Labor certainly isn't expecting One Nation to do it any favours in Longman on preferences.
But it does believe that One Nation can still deliver Longman to it. And that is by painting Ms Hanson as a Liberal in not very good disguise.
It believes what worked in the Queensland seat of Logan last year can work in the federal by-election in July 28.
One Nation polled 30.9 per cent of the Logan primary vote.
When preferences were distributed, Labor won the seat on Brisbane's southern outskirts, despite having won just 42 per cent of the primary vote.
The LNP's vote crashed almost 20 percentage points to just 18.9 per cent, which went to One Nation.
Do the maths on this: Labor, much to its own surprise, ended up winning the seat on the back of One Nation preferences which went to Labor because it portrayed One Nation as a Liberal front.
Amid all the uproar and confusion this week, the Opposition devoted considerable attention to planting the idea that the Turnbull Government has done a secret deal with One Nation to pass the company tax cuts for big business once the July 28 by-elections are out of the way.
Ms Hanson's heated reaction last week to Labor robocalls in Longman suggesting she was doing a deal shows she understands how toxic the Government's company tax cuts for "the big end of town" and particularly "the banks" remain.
Labor believe election is imminent
But there is something else that almost anyone in the Labor Caucus will volunteer that they believe.
That is that they don't believe the Parliament will return, after the winter break, on August 13, but that Malcolm Turnbull will up stumps after the July 28 polls and call a general election.
Now, this is not a new theory, and there have been various versions of it, including that the Government would actually cancel the by-elections and call a general election on July 28.
But as politicians left Canberra this week, it is compelling that so many in the Opposition believe this, and why they do so.
Will Labor take Shorten to the election?
The prospects of Labor losing at least one of those by-elections is not out of the question, and if that happens, the focus on Mr Shorten's leadership will intensify.
Since the Coalition's political strategy is focused on destroying Mr Shorten, the last thing it will want is for a change of leaders, the argument goes.
Kevin Rudd's legacy is that it is now hard for Labor to change leaders between elections.
There is no organising going on to desert Mr Shorten. Anthony Albanese is a leadership rival, but he is not a challenger.
Photo: In a May Newspoll on preferred Labor leader, Mr Albanese was on 26 per cent, followed by Mr Shorten and Ms Plibersek on 23 per cent each. (AAP: Lukas Coch)
But Labor is a party of cool-headed pragmatists.
Asked this week about the technical difficulties of changing leaders, a senior Labor figure observed "when have technicalities actually stopped such things if they need to be done?"
Labor has every reason to talk down its prospects. The Prime Minister has insisted the election will be next year.
The by-elections will be fought on perhaps the most clearly delineated policy grounds that we have seen for years.
But we go into them with a reminder that a couple of slip-ups can completely shift the psychology of the political battle.
Laura Tingle is 7.30's chief political correspondent.
Bill Shorten is becoming more and more of a liability to the ALP and I'm sure the ALP powerbrokers are aware of this.
They, no doubt, don't want a repeat of the Gillard v Rudd fiasco but as Shorten's popularity dwindles and Anthony Albanese keeps presenting as he has in recent days they may have to tackl;e the issue sooner than later.
|Posted by: Michael.W Jul 2 2018, 08:38 PM|
|Curly forgetting his marbles again|
|Posted by: scepo Jul 3 2018, 06:51 AM|
| The longer they keep Curly as leader, the less chance they have of winning government.
I hope they stick with the little grub.
|Posted by: charka Jul 3 2018, 07:36 AM|
|Hard to choose is it not We are told our vote to minor parties is wasted How dare they|
|Posted by: Bill Jul 3 2018, 03:14 PM|
| The rule changes brought in by KRudd virtually precludes any change of leader mid term, because it takes about 3 months to hold a membership ballot and the government would almost certainly call an election while that ballot was taking place. Political suicide to even contemplate it.
The only time that a leadership ballot can practically occur is immediately following an election, (win or lose).
If as seems to be the case according to polling, Labor wins the election, it would be unlikely that Curly would be removed. If Labor loses he will certainly lose his job.
Interesting that Brian Trumble is insisting that the election will be 'next year'.
My guess is before Xmas for a couple of reasons.
1 The last Budget was framed as a pre-election Budget, so leaving it for almost 12 months to call an election is dangerous as things could change.
2. All indications are that, with the Chinese economy on the wane and with the possibility of trade wars and sanctions on the horizon, the economic outlook (revenue), for Australia will deteriorate.
3. The MYEFO (Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook) is due out in December, and I can't see that ever being delivered prior to an election if it confirms that there is not the revenue to finance the government's tax cuts and promises.
So for me, it's an election before Xmas, possibly just after Trumble delivers his apology to the victims of institutional child abuse, conveniently overlooking the fact that we wouldn't have had a RC, had it not been for the efforts of Julia Gillard. .
|Posted by: Charles Jul 3 2018, 04:11 PM|
| Bill, you say "The rule changes brought in by KRudd virtually precludes any change of leader mid term."
Rules are made to be broken and, apparently, there are those within the ALP who are prepared to follow that saying. If you read the initial article there is an interesting paragraph:
Asked this week about the technical difficulties of changing leaders, a senior Labor figure observed "when have technicalities actually stopped such things if they need to be done?"
|Posted by: Bear Jul 3 2018, 06:39 PM|
| How right you are Charles, how many rules have been broken by politicians in recent times - most of them have set a very poor example.
TB will applaud Labor if BS remains as their leader.
If Labor keeps BS they will not win the next election, Labor's best chance is Anthony Albanese.
|Posted by: charka Jul 3 2018, 09:53 PM|
|And worried about breaking tier word for the pars agreement Liars one and all 2 traitors did this|
|Posted by: Bill Jul 5 2018, 06:56 PM|
| So.....Are we are now quoting the mythical 'senior Labor figure' (so often referred to in the past ), mentioned in the article as a trusted accurate source, instead of the actual rules for changing leaders Charles ? It's a three month process and can only be held after an election unless the leader resigns.
You do realise that Laura Tingle, in spite of being appointed as the ABC's 'political editor' for 7.30, still works for Fairfax where Fairfax's "Kill Bill' campaign is still running full bore. Laura's forte is economics, not the internal machinations of the Labor Party.
Meanwhile back in LNP land, a real leadership struggle is going on and the media doesn't want to know about it.
If an election were held today, Curly would win at least 85 seats to the LNP's 58 based on the Poll Bludger's analysis of ALL of the polls done in the last month.
Still.....whatever gives you hope, I suppose.
|Posted by: lee Jul 5 2018, 08:40 PM|
You mean it is not Murdoch? I am shocked; shocked I tell you.
"Over the past few weeks, Bill Shorten has washed up in the doubt zone, largely because the people around him are doubting, shifting, reflecting, worrying, chattering.
At its simplest level, that’s what’s going on. That’s the static you can see coming from the Labor side of politics. That’s why political journalists are leaning in with their ears pricked – not because we are addicted to crass spectacle or can’t be bothered following policy debates, but because we are close enough to detect the shift in the barometric pressure."
Oh no; the guardian.
|Posted by: scepo Jul 5 2018, 09:50 PM|
| Well, holy snapping duckshit!!!!
Not only is the leftist Fauxfax bagging Curly, the bloody Garbage Bin has joined in the act as well.
Just proves that Curly is on the nose in his own ranks.
|Posted by: Bill Jul 6 2018, 12:32 AM|
| From lee:
Oh no; the guardian.
Even before I looked I knew who wrote that piece lee.
The wonderful Katharine Murphy, (with two 'A's'), is the Guardian's Turnbull apologist. She writes op-ed pieces to try to keep the advertisers on side. That's her job - as it was when she worked at Fairfax.
Her op-ed pieces are rarely open for comments, except when she criticizes Abbott, but it's mostly 'puff pieces' supporting Lord Truffles, or articles suggesting Albo is waiting to pounce on Curly.
You should read more of Katharine on the Guardian lee. She will give you hope that all is well in the LNP camp, and Lord Truffles sits on the right hand of god.
I've seen an analysis of hers on a poll that headlined Lord Truffles lead in the PPM (Preferred Prime Minister) poll, and completely ignored the fact that the 2PP was Labor - 53%, LNP -47%. The comments were inadvertently left open for an hour and the proletariat savaged her.
|Posted by: scepo Jul 6 2018, 06:07 AM|
| "Lord Truffles"?????
Can't you do better than that Bill?
He's a staunch bloody Republican, not a Monarchist.
The Garbage Bins token "conservative" eh?
All our left leaning media occasionally make a token attempt to appear unbiased. It may fool some, but not too many of us.
|Posted by: Charles Jul 6 2018, 09:59 AM|
| All our left leaning media occasionally make a token attempt to appear unbiased. It may fool some, but not too many of us.
At least Bill is incapable of making even a token effort to appear unbiased. Other FDNC have expressed contempt for both parties and leaders on various occasions - but not our Bill!
|Posted by: Bill Jul 6 2018, 02:46 PM|
| Katharine is not a 'token conservative' at all. Her job is to ensure that the advertisers don't boycott the Guardian.
Any study of her 'contributions' of op-ed pieces would reveal that she's very good at it. Only occasionally does she slip up.
As for Charle's allusion to my apparent lack of 'evenhandedness' regarding criticism of both parties.....
At least Bill is incapable of making even a token effort to appear unbiased. Other FDNC have expressed contempt for both parties and leaders on various occasions - but not our Bill
The evidence seems to indicate that there is not a lot of negativity apparent in the operations of those operating on the left of the political spectrum that is not manufactured by their opponents...…..
…...while the conservative side of politics seem to lurch from one diabolical brain fart to another on a daily basis.
I give you:
1. Individual tax cuts that benefit the well off.
2. Ccorporate tax cuts that benefit the tax avoiders.
3. The latest 'magic pudding' GST redistribution that isn't. (It's actually a Federal Government 'top up' for the up-coming election). All up a destruction of the Federal revenue base totaling approximately $250 BILLION. Who do you think is going to pay for that ?
Add that to the dubious decision making process of nearly $300 BILLION worth of 'defence contracts' that this government has signed up to and we have a structural deficit that Howard and Costello could only dream about. Someone has to pay for that, and guess who that's going to be ?
Meanwhile, the MSM is pushing the idea that Labor's house is in disorder and there is a potential leadership spill around every corner.
I could post a half dozen stories every day pointing out the incompetence, hypocrisy, and disunity in the conservative ranks, but there is not a lot of point to that. You guys need to have some thing to cling to - even if it's an illusion. .
Tony Abbott won't be making a comeback btw and, after the election later this year, there is every likelihood that PHONY will only have one member (Pauline), the A.L.A. will have none and Cory's Conservatives will just consist of him - .
Politics is ….interesting.....not even handed.
|Posted by: Flin Jul 6 2018, 03:13 PM|
|They better keep Bill Shorten. The voters have come to expect "Bottom of the gene pool barrel" leaders from all the political parties in Australia. It is now considered one of our birth-rights.|
|Posted by: Bill Jul 6 2018, 03:37 PM|
|I think it all went down hill after we missed out on 'Big Kim' and got the little egotist KRuddy Flin.|
|Posted by: Charles Jul 6 2018, 04:11 PM|
| I give you:
1. Individual tax cuts that benefit the well off. I suppose there is absolutely no benefit for lower and middle income Australians!
2. Ccorporate tax cuts that benefit the tax avoiders. How can tax cuts benefit anyone who is avoiding tax? In case you hadn't noticed, Donald Trump's tax cuts to businesses have resulted in job creation, a boost in consumer confidence and benefits passed on to employees.
3. The latest 'magic pudding' GST redistribution that isn't. (It's actually a Federal Government 'top up' for the up-coming election). All up a destruction of the Federal revenue base totaling approximately $250 BILLION. Who do you think is going to pay for that ? No it isn't a redistribution as you well know. The other states would never allow it. It is a top-up to address the gross GST injustice that WA has endured for years. Who pays for the states that receive more than 100 cents in their GST dollar?
Add that to the dubious decision making process of nearly $300 BILLION worth of 'defence contracts' that this government has signed up to and we have a structural deficit that Howard and Costello could only dream about. Someone has to pay for that, and guess who that's going to be? We agree on one thing. Excessive spending on defence is a worry.
|Posted by: Charles Jul 6 2018, 04:15 PM|
I second that statement. Both sides of politics are sadly lacking in politicians whose vision extends beyond the next election.
|Posted by: Bill Jul 7 2018, 04:06 PM|
| Hi Charles
Thanks for your reply some agreement and some need for clarification.
It's not just the 'defence spending' that's the problem Charles - it's the 'structural deficit that Morrisonj is introducing to the Federal Government's revenue base.
If none of these 'tax cuts' were proposed, most people wouldn't notice and wouldn't care. The miniscule amounts being proposed for low/middle income earners will make stuff all difference to their day to day existence.
$300 Billion spent on things like Hospitals, Schools, the NDIS, a proper fibre optics NBN that only a few fortunate people have, support for the homeless, mental health support for our veterans. refuges and support for victims of domestic violence etc., etc., will make a huge difference
In short almost everything that reasonable people accept as necessary for a compassionate and caring society. We could have all of that - every four years.....or we could give tax cuts to people who don't need it.
As Curly says every day - it about priorities.
|Posted by: Charles Jul 7 2018, 04:57 PM|
| I agree that we should look at comparisons if we are to comment on policies - though I would point out again that there is a difference between policies put in place by a Government and promises made by an Opposition.
My comments were not meant as a comparison but in response to your post that followed your opening comment, "…...while the conservative side of politics seem to lurch from one diabolical brain fart to another on a daily basis. I give you:"
With regard to your response to my comment on US Consumer confidence under Donald Trump, I refer you to this statement posted earlier this year in Marketwatch.com:
The numbers: Consumer confidence surged in February, the first month Americans started to benefit from the Trump tax cuts, to the highest level since November 2000. Evidently the recent selloff in U.S. stock markets did little to dampen their optimism.
|Posted by: charka Jul 7 2018, 06:29 PM|
|SHY for pm|
|Posted by: charka Jul 7 2018, 07:49 PM|
|Was it howard that said bless they are core promises you do not have to keep them god i despise them|
|Posted by: scepo Jul 9 2018, 07:25 AM|
I recall you defending Krudd, until he got knifed by Juliar.
But I must admit I am surprised that you didn't say it was all downhill since the Keating era (excluding Juliar's era of course).
You slipped up there Bill.
|Posted by: Bill Jul 9 2018, 04:39 PM|
| Liked Keating scepo - Never a fan of Hawke, and I was a union rep at the time he was in power. I had a lot of time for Hayden, (the drovers dog). He gave us Medibank - and then Medicare. Without Hayden, no Medicare.
KRudd gave us nothing except the apology - he was good at apologies - Gillard gave us the Royal Commission, the NDIS, Gonski - and lots of things.
We'll finally get the 'Full Gonski' when Labor is returned to the government benches in Canberra.
|Posted by: scepo Jul 9 2018, 06:08 PM|
| Well Bill I can recall you defending Rudd right up until your "class act" Juliar back stabbed him. Don't forget he gave us pink batts, unwanted school equipment and buildings, opened the floodgates for people smugglers etc. etc.
Well she never gave us the full Gonski and it was never close to being fully funded under her. And it is a total waste of taxpayer money. Throwing truckloads of money at a problem rarely fixes it, but of course that is the progressive way. And yes I concede that this useless mob have thrown money at it and not fixed it either.
Neither was NDIS fully funded (though I did and still do support NDIS). But I can't see any government being able to afford to fully fund it anytime soon, if ever.
Despite recent competition, I still rate Gillards term as the worst federal government in this nations history. By quite a long way!!!!! Just a pathetic, despicable person all round
|Posted by: Charles Jul 9 2018, 06:49 PM|
| "We'll finally get the 'Full Gonski' when Labor is returned to the government benches in Canberra."
Heaven forbid Bill. Even David Gonski himself wished to be distanced from Julia Gillard's corrupted version. Hers was all about grabbing central control, blackmailing states that resisted and throwing money at a perceived problem when there were already more than adequate programmes in place (in some states).
|Posted by: Bear Jul 9 2018, 07:21 PM|
| "We'll finally get the 'Full Gonski' when Labor is returned to the government benches in Canberra"
Sounds like the left's version of the 'full Monty' - but I bet that it will cost taxpayers a fortune and have more 'floors' (flaws) than a highrise, costed by morons, funded by the poor battlers as always!
The cost of socialism - bourne by a few, regretted by the many.
|Posted by: Bill Jul 10 2018, 04:04 PM|
The biggest problem, as you have explained many times before, in the implementation of Julia Gillard's Gonski reforms was in having to negotiate 11 (?) different agreements with the States, Independent Schools and the Catholic Education sector.
Now, courtesy of the Minister, Simon Birmingham, and the LNP, there is only one funding model that all stakeholders come under. Curly and Plibbers would have been high fiving in the hallway and cracking open the champagne at that announcement.
When Labor is returned to office, all that is required is to increase4 the funding in the areas that is required to implement Gonski as intended. It doesn't even require legislation, just increased funding.
And...…...Curly has already announced a fully funded education policy.
It took two terms to deliver Medicare - it will take two terms to deliver Gonski 3.0 and NDIS 3.0 and the NBN 3.0.
Hang on to your hats. It's going to be an exciting ride.
|Posted by: scepo Jul 10 2018, 05:14 PM|
| Dream on Bill.
And by the way, the real reason your class act Juliar was in such a rush to introduce GONSKI and NDIS was because she knew she had no hope of winning the 2013 election, and was determined to load the incoming Abbott government with an even bigger mountain of debt than her and Rudd had already accumulated.
Bloody class act alright mate.