Prev
Next

Campaign countdown: When you win by not losing

Tory Maguire

by Tory Maguire

26 Jul 06:00am

Must Reads

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge - this is a caption

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

38

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread? - this is a caption

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

92

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref - this is a caption

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

71

Filed under: Campaign Countdown, Election 2010, Great Debate, Julia Gillard, Politics, Polliegraph, Tony Abbott, Worm

180 comments

It’s demonstrative of how uninspiring the first week of the 2010 Federal Election campaign has been that Tony Abbott could have felt pretty chuffed last night that he didn’t really lose the Great Debate.

Gaffe-free zone ...

Yes Nine’s Worm gave the debate to Gillard by an overwhelming margin, but Seven’s Polliegraph had it almost line ball and various online polls and political commentators handed victory to Abbott. News this morning that Newspoll has tightened again to 52 to 48 to Labor, in significantly from last week’s staggering 55-45, will no doubt add to the spring in his step.

It’s all subjective really, but what last night did do was put Abbott back on track after his shaky start to the election campaign.

The Coalition campaign gears have been a little rusty in the early stages of the race.

Gillard had until last night successfully pinned Abbott down on Workchoices, even maneuvering the Opposition Leader into that silly “dead, buried, cremated” signed pledge on Melbourne radio.

Party glitches, like having to disendorse a candidate for his anti-Muslim ranting, only served to make the Coalition look like its wheels were spinning.

I watched last night’s debate on Seven and found the reaction of their gender specific Polliegraph to be surprisingly even handed. In the end its audience gave the night to Gillard 53-47.

But there’s no doubt Gillard, regarded as a more polished performer, did not wipe the floor with her opponent. The conventional wisdom that Abbott would tank if he went negative on Gillard was not borne out.

Indeed, there were points during the debate when the audience just wasn’t buying her message, especially on climate change and government debt.

Gillard’s “citizens assembly” on climate change went down like a lead balloon, and Abbott got elevated ratings when talking about economic management and administrative incompetence.

Neither of them set the audience’s world on fire. Nor did either of them stuff up. Both sides last night were quick to spin their own victory.

But I think we can all agree the big winner on the night was Adam Liaw.

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

Get The Punch on Facebook

Most commented

427Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
375There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
304Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
262Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

180 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Joe says:

      06:58pm | 26/07/10

      Abbott no way,he masked well last night but today he is back to his old bad Tony.I had to suffer under Howard for too long ,I will try to suffer as long under Gillard.
      It is good to have a “women on top”.

      Reply

    • sue says:

      09:48pm | 27/07/10

      I am sooooo sick of hearing labour bang on about workchoices, and hearing the ACTU do the same.  I and many others lived through workchoices and if you are a valued employee who works hard and is half smart, employers will look after you.  Only the lazy and inept have anything to fear from workchoices.  Australia - for goodness sake stand up and become a nation of people with a work ethic instead of needing laws to cover you and allow you to be hopeless.

    • Carl Palmer says:

      03:57pm | 26/07/10

      Hmm, now let me see, Julia Gillard accuses Tony Abbott of being naïve and that it is an “endearing trait”??  Another word for naïve is inexperienced. Well blow me down with a feather…. Aside from Steven Smith, the rest of your front bench is not only naïve they are incompetent.

      Julia, please read this article - http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/abbotts-record-suggests-he-could-do-rudds-job-20100618-ymw7.html

      Mr Abbott may not be the “polished” performer when it comes to talking but as the attached article highlights he’s not bad on the delivery, something you and your govt could learn from. You have been in power for 3 years and you are unable to place a tick against the litany of promises made back in 2007. Your failures are well documented here at The Punch. Your CV and that of the Govt have too many crosses, lots of red ink and lack substance and vision for the future. You pose too much of a risk moving forward. I for one do not trust you or your government with my money, my security and the wellbeing of my country.

      Reply

    • Ray says:

      07:55am | 27/07/10

      At least Abbotcomitted something. Gillard committed to nothing

    • Troy says:

      04:23pm | 26/07/10

      Thanks Carl, I find it very interesting that Abbott was one of only 2 ministers in the Howard government that where against Workchoices and opposed it. Yet Labor have nothing else to attack him on, so they continue to run out that very used line. Very good link, thankyou again.

    • davis says:

      03:11pm | 26/07/10

      i am trying to figure out politics before i vote for the first time.

      I watched the debate last night - but discovered that i can vote for neither Julia Gillard or Tony Abbott. Instead i vote for someone else (locally) who is told which way to vote on policy generated by Julia Gillard or Tony Abbott. These local representatives have decided in advance that they will support every piece of legislation offered by their party even before it has been created.

      my question is - why do I vote for local representation if all of the issues discussed seem to be of a national nature? What is the purpose of the local member if they can only vote as directed by the national party leader (who sounds like they may be controlled somewhat by business or unions).

      Also if neither candidate seems to be have the answers to some of the more pressing issues - is it possible to vote on issues directly - rather than occasionally vote for someone who is compelled to vote with someone before a solution has been fully clarified.

      It seems to me that if the policy was developed fully and presented to the nation - we could vote on it directly - without the need to be ‘represented’.

      I found myself agreeing with Julia on some points and with Tony on others. By voting directly on the issues I could have the best of both worlds.

      Many on these forums sound very angry generally toward Julia or Tony…and even each other.  Perhaps voting on issues rather than for people would take the edge off of that anger because we would all be able to participate directly in the process.

      Reply

    • hot tub political machine says:

      05:26pm | 26/07/10

      Tragically you will probably only get a good independet candidate with a realistic chance of winning in a few seats in this country.

      Voting on single issues only rarely happens and it just wouldn’t be practical for government who need to work efficently- so while it would be nice its unlikely to happen. I advise if you are passionate about a particular issue, write to your local MP or even ask to meet them. That way they can feed your input into the party room - you only have to look at the change of Liberal leader (apparently due to a grassroots movement) to see that the MP will listen to your views - they may disagree but your letter will get read.

    • Saskia says:

      03:28pm | 26/07/10

      If you are unsure and agree with some policies of both then you need to decide on priorities.  An intelligent person would put economics at the very top of the list of the number one issue that a govt MUST be competent at.

      That takes out the ALP, and THE Greens.  Having the Coalition as a default position is the safest option to the undecided.

    • micha says:

      02:56pm | 26/07/10

      Ted that is superb hahaha made my day.

      Reply

    • James A says:

      02:00pm | 26/07/10

      Is there any reason why Gillard’s relationship with Craig Emerson has never been brought up?

      Emerson’s wife lost her marriage over it.  But still Australian women prostrate themselves to Julia simply because she has two X chromosomes.

      Reply

    • Cecil says:

      03:17pm | 26/07/10

      I think Abbott has the hots for Julia, I can’t really see what a persons private life has to do with any of the issues we need to know to vote for someone. I don’t care what any of them do in their off time.

    • Ted says:

      02:18pm | 26/07/10

      I dont care about their ALP relationships…....inbreeding is fairly common on the left i.e. Anthony Albanese…..so is infidelity it seems i.e Bob Hawke, Gareth Evans, Graeme Richardson…...almost a rite of passage.

      Can someone please ask the PM about her socialist roots? This whole “lets moving forward” deal is rubbish. She is about as conservative and capitalist as Josef Stalin.

      Where is the media ? Hello, some scrutiny of policy rather than hairstyle.

    • MarK says:

      02:17pm | 26/07/10

      Pretty much it is known issue.

      She and Craig got it on. It did not end well for Craig or his wife. /shrug

      Sad but true. Doesn’t really detract from her ability to do the job. Her lack of competence is the limiting factor there.

    • Gregg says:

      01:56pm | 26/07/10

      Being what I would call myself more of an openminded swinging voter than an as dyed in the wool either side as many on the Punch likely are and I have voted for both parties in the past, first I’ll say I was pleased that Tony did as well as the worm rated him and it was not unexpected to see the Female/Male bias.
      I do think however that he could have done better in being more constructive and less defensive or evasive with some of his statements, they being
      . Immigration - and not so much whether it is he or the government attempting to manipulate immigration numbers, be they nett, including student visas [ which are temporary residency only ] or whatever but there is a question of ownership and that question was put to him directly by Laura.
      I would have been happier to have seen the question answered as:
      ” Yes we did put immigration policies in place that had potential outcome for Australia to increase our skilled numbers where there were deficiences and yes, those policies have been used by educational institutions to grow their industry and at the same time dangle a carrot of PR for many not so highly skilled areas and a trickle became a flood that needed quicker fixing than has occurred to date. The Liberal policy will be to ensure that the monitoring of skills needs by employers and regional differences is maintained whilst ensuring that loopholes identified in the immigration system do get quickly plugged “
      Senator Evans and the Immigration department have now legislated so a tighter control of numbers is possible.
      . Asylum Seekers - and Tony I feel missed something of an opportunity to address how an Asylum Seeker is someone with money that a Refugee in a Refugee centre does not likely have and yet though our Special Humanitarium Program allowance of numbers covers both refugees and asylum seekers, what is not clearly being told is that for every boat person asylum seeker arriving and virtually being guaranteed residency because of the revoking of TPVs by Labor, that means one less refugee being sponsored from a refugee centre.
      It is very clear that despite Senator Evans wanting to promote that there is no queue to jump, it is occurring if you have money and do not drown.
      Yes, the removal of TPVs is encouraging boat people and subsequently people are dying at sea and our own service people are being put at risk.
      Nauru was used before we had Christmas Island established and even it is not an answer if TPVs are not immediately re-established and the message goes back down the line, Australia is less of a soft destination just as that message had previously been sent.
      Then the full refugee program can be managed in the well structured way it has been for decades and one that Australia can be proud of.
      The ETS statements of both were reasonably forgettable as is the greatest moral challenge of our time it seems.
      Gillard made more of a connection between a lower company tax rate and cost of living and Tony could have connected more with a better economy because of less government debt also contributing and he could also have made a connection between Labors reduced company tax being reliant on an unresolved mining tax that for the big miners does not kick in for a while and will give no benefit to government revenue not if but when commodity prices fall.
      Both the economics of that as with Asylum Seekers Vs Refugees are complex issues that would be difficult to fully get across in a debate scenario and also have wormers/listeners fully comprehend, so some credit is due Tony for keeping detail to suit the audience.
      With Julia, she managed to steer clear of moving forward but did not to me explain any better what it was a Gillard led government would be able to do any better than what a Krudd/Gillard government has done.
      It was to be expected that on the night of the long knives she would not elect to answer.
      I can understand the view of some that Tony won because as the challenger he did not lose though I would put it down as more a draw and one where we did not see a PM project herself as leading a great party because it ain’t and Julia is more a figurehead intended to see an election won just as Rudd was to some extent rather than a strong leader.
      You would expect a PM to be stronger on fact rather than fiction and with a slightly different approach in a few areas, Tony I feel had far more capacity to improve his result than Julia did.

      Reply

    • BobM says:

      08:54pm | 26/07/10

      Julia’s too scared to have another debate - she’s already taken a hit in popularity after this one. You just can’t cover up incompetence indefinitely!

    • Troy says:

      04:14pm | 26/07/10

      Well said Gregg.

    • Brad Price says:

      01:23pm | 26/07/10

      Julia Gillard has just started on the same downward spiral of Rudd. She showed last night that she has nothing left to add to her appeal. The cupboard is bare and any policy they announce will be seen as desperation.

      I strongly suspect that the polls will continue to move towards the Liberals over the next 4 weeks. Australians have only had 4 weeks to get used to her and hope that she will do something different to Rudd. As those expectations are not met, hope will fade. The fact that she continues to delay the ETS and is placing further road blocks to the process proves that the delay by Rudd was fully supported by cabinet and Julia included.

      Shame on you Julia. You have the blood of an elected Prime Minister on your hands now and what do we Australians have for that in return? A. Nothing. She has added nothing to this country by her actions.

      Reply

    • Thomas says:

      12:50pm | 26/07/10

      At every election they forget about pensioners and people with disability,as we don’t exist anymore.It was good to use us when we could work and pay the tax but now they sweep us under the carpet or in the gutter.
      Shame on you Labor and Liberals.Same!
      I make the call to All Seniors,Pensioners to stand up for our rights.
      Is there a party anyone can recommend I should vote for? Pleas let me know.

      Reply

    • MarK says:

      05:10pm | 26/07/10

      “Why aren’t we being told this? I was going to vote Liberal, but on the news today I hear because Abbott wants to tax Coles and Woolworths our food prices are going up. “

      You read that today? Cool.

      “Now he wants to tax grog so we can’t even consol ourselves with a beer!! This attacked on the disabled is low. Nope no way I will vote Green instead. “

      Well you like NonLiberalFan are shown stuff in the paper and then say “why aren’t we being told” - what more do the Libs have to do? Send you a memo? If it is in the paper just read the fine print. The article Krista has a somewhat pointed bit at the bottom where it says this

      “A spokesman for Mr Abbott told the Herald: ‘‘There are ongoing discussions about policy ideas. No final decisions have been made in these areas.’’”

      So…errrr it is not a “policy”

      Also Philip I direct you here

      http://greens.org.au/node/764

      There is the energy policy. Look closely at what you are voting for.

      See especially point 10

      ” energy prices should reflect the environmental and social costs of production and use.”

      Hmmm. Do you think they will put up the price of energy for everything?

      Do you think stuff might become a tad more expensive under the Greens.

      Oh I like this one as well

      15.  Australia to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as is feasible and by no later than 2050 with a minimum of 40% reduction on 1990 levels by 2020.

      and this

      30.  ensure that renewable electricity provides 30% of national demand by 2020 by increasing the renewable energy target (RET) and by introducing measures such as feed-in tariffs and regulations to support a range of prospective new renewable energy technologies.

      The tax rate could be 50% and prices would not go up as high as they would under the Greens. Do you know how much more expensive renewable energy is?

      Grow up. Your “threat” is hollow and pointless.

      By voting Green you are guaranteeing higher prices. That is what the ETS is. A big tax on everything.

      Want to try again with your false shock and outrage you two?

    • N says:

      04:37pm | 26/07/10

      Haha, listed back in February and not even a party policy; “Mr Abbott proposed…”, “There are ongoing discussions about policy ideas. No final decisions have been made in these areas.’‘

      As I recall both cigarette and alcohol excise were increased under Labor, but don’t let that get in the way of a good story. Nice continuation of the Labor scare campaign though Krista, Julia would be proud. Don’t forget to throw in some mention of WorkChoices for full points!

    • Philip Martin says:

      02:46pm | 26/07/10

      Why aren’t we being told this? I was going to vote Liberal, but on the news today I hear because Abbott wants to tax Coles and Woolworths our food prices are going up. Now he wants to tax grog so we can’t even consol ourselves with a beer!! This attacked on the disabled is low. Nope no way I will vote Green instead.

    • NonLiberalfan says:

      02:25pm | 26/07/10

      Thank you Krista thats changed my vote, its a shame reporters are not letting us know, seems like we will have to rely on each other to pass out information. I have sent this link on to many of my friends. Thanks again.

    • Daryl says:

      02:02pm | 26/07/10

      Thanks for the link Krista. As a significant tax payer, it’s good to see someone talk about reining in waste. the Labor party have allowed taxpayer’s money to be wasted and rorted over the last three years. I have no argument with Abbott’s comments: “allowing people who could readily work to stay out of the workforce for long periods is cruelty and not compassion”. The focus seems to be on getting people who are capable of working, back into the workforce and off welfare. I don’t think you’ll find many people who think that’s a bad idea?

    • Daryl says:

      01:31pm | 26/07/10

      Krista, any basis of fact to your stories??? In terms of price increases, what has Labor delivered?? Fuelwatch - FAIL, Grocery choice - election promise cost over $20million - FAIL, More affordable books (remember that election promise?) - FAIL, More affordable housing (remember that election promise?) - FAIL. And the cost of power is set to go through the roof with the proposal of Labor’s ETS added to the incompetent running of services by State Labor in NSW. And btw, Labor increased the taxes on alcohol in the last budget. A budget which is shot to pieces now that they backflipped on the “not negotiable” profits tax. What are you talking about?

    • N says:

      01:17pm | 26/07/10

      Krista - Could you please sight references to these hypothetical Liberal policies?......

    • Krista says:

      01:03pm | 26/07/10

      Tony Abbott will be sending those on a disability with muscular and skeleton problems back to work. That is something you can look forward to and the only gift from either party the disabled are getting. You can also look forward to an alcohol price rise with Tony Abbott. So if you like a beer expect to pay more for it. All us of are sacrificed for working families. They are the only ones who matter to both parties.

    • Ann says:

      12:43pm | 26/07/10

      Sorry but Abbott lost me,I was waiting for something from him,as Julia policy has been out for some time. but he didn’t say anything about Liberal Party policy and plans,just what they won’t do.And this spin with numbers of migrants,he didn’t do his homework.Still playing fear,scare and boat people card,it isn’t working any more.
      Not good enough for me.
      It was boring and empty debate.

      Reply

    • Greg says:

      01:18pm | 26/07/10

      Yes Julia’s list of policy failures have had three years to run. I wouldn’t call East Timor a policy? I heard Tony Abbott say the Coalition will: End the waste (e.g. insulation fiasco, and School scheme rorts for starters), Repay the debt (that’s record levels of foreign debt and $40b in budget defecit racked up by Labor), Stop the taxes (profit’s tax, private health rebate lie) and Stop the boats (return to temporary visas vs the East Timor failure).  More information for you Ann can be found on the web here: http://www.liberal.org.au/Policies.aspx

    • HT says:

      12:40pm | 26/07/10

      Abbott did better this time than against Rudd in the health care debate, but he still spent too much time criticising the Labor government and not enough time telling me what his policies are. To this day I still don’t know what Abbott will do differently, and therefore find myself unable to vote for him. I am female but I will not be voting for either of them.

      Reply

    • Bryan says:

      12:29pm | 26/07/10

      Gillards comparison on the changes in leadership were both naïve and untruthful. Opposition leaders are not put into their positions by the Electorate, however, a Prime Minister is. It is plainly obvious why Gillard would only agree to one debate and that is because she has very little to say that could not be construed as spin and trust me promises. Muck like those that were made by Rudd and her in the last election.

      In fact most of the things that Gillard is promising was promised by Rudd and her in the Kevin 07 campaign. The good old Aussie bulldust meter can only be fooled for so long before people wake up to what Gillard is trying to do – and that is – to get people to forget about the last three years and ask that they trust her with some new promises for the next 3 years? Abbott was on the money when he was talking about being Fair dinkum – it’s a simple term but is has always had a powerful meaning for Australians.

      Last night a number of people were finally starting to see the difference between a spinner and a person that was being Fair dinkum!

      Reply

    • john says:

      12:11pm | 26/07/10

      I see the lib staffers are out in force this morning…  As a swinging voter my honest opinion is that neither of them won the debate.  Neither of them come out with anything new, neither of them did anything in particular to gain my vote.  What I can say is that continuing to talk about what the Government did or did not do under Rudd is really starting to annoy me, I want to know what each of them will be doing in the future I don’t particularly care about the past.

      Reply

    • Troy says:

      11:53am | 26/07/10

      Are we “Moving Forward” yet? This would have to be the the first time a “First Term” Government hasnt used its past record as a reason to get re-elected. I am astounded by the hypocrisy of Labor. They continue to “Look Forward” because they don’t want you to look at their past, yet they want to stay in the past when it comes to Tony Abbott. Abbott has said numerous times that the voters of Australia sent a clear message that they did not want workchoices and he will not make any changes to industrial relation laws for the next 3 years. Yet Labor continue to go down that line, but when it comes time to look at what Labor has done to the economy in the last 3 years they won’t answer one question.  Abbott clearly won the debate and it was the first time that he actually looked like a Prime minister. Gillard look like she was out of her depth.

      Reply

    • watty says:

      11:45am | 26/07/10

      Must have been a lot of weeping and wailing at the aftermath wake in the CanberraPress Club last night.

      Predictions about Gillard wiping the floor with Abbott because of her great oratory skills failed miserably.

      Dear Ashley fro SKY could barely disguise her grief whe dismissing the debate as “boring” following her glowing reports about the Gillard roadshow..

      As the incumbent Gillard displayed her penchant for spinning rather than answering with even David Speers forced to repeat or clarify questions.

      Gillard always had a sleekit look about her which was only highlighted last night with the closeup camera.

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      11:43am | 26/07/10

      Nobody wins in this election. People have to vote for the lesser of two evils, whatever that may be…..

      Reply

    • Robert s McCormick says:

      01:56pm | 26/07/10

      Exactly, Shane From Melbourne!
      Malcolm Fraser called an unnecessary early Federal Election, for no good reason. He, if he wasn’t ( I think he was) the best PMs this country has ever had, he’s certainly the Most Humane, Kind, Decent PM we have ever been blessed with. What happened to him as a reult of his politically-motivated early Election? He got tossed out.
      The Gillard Federal Election has noting to do with what is best for Australia, politics or brand new policies which she, falsely, would have us believe will reform Australia. Falsely? Yes, Sir, for like so many of the ALP’s Policies over the last 2.7years, she will abandon them all.
      It is all to do with political opportunism. There was no pressing urgency nor was it vitally necessary for Gillard to call this election 5 months early.
      She has done it for one & one only purely personal, selfish reasons: Julia Gillard. That is the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth!

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      11:37am | 26/07/10

      Watch out! St Julia of the ALP! The polls have turned against you! Don’t turn your back on anyone, girl! If, as is inevitable, the union bosses turn against you at least make them stab you in the chest not in the back as you did Kevin Rudd.
      The Great Debate?  Nothing more than a contrived, controlled talkfest. What debate? It was simply “Questions & Answers” much like ABC-TV’s Q&A programme except that Q&A have real people asking real questions.
      When are they & in particular Gillard who, elected by the union bosses, is PM going to have the guts to actually come face to face with real people? So far dring her appearances the only people she has dared to meet are those hand-picked by her minders. When a real person, with real concerns comes anywhere near her she allows for the ‘outsider’ to be man-handled, cuffed & taken away. At least Tony Abbott did not get into a blue funk when that silly ALP staffer in his padded-out Speedos & beer belly approached him.
      Who won? It was a draw. I don’t watch it but I don’t doubt the Great Non-Debate was out-rated by the 4 million who watched Masterchef!

      Reply

    • Lorraine says:

      11:34am | 26/07/10

      Listening to the debate last night was awful, Julia Gillard could put the most rabid night owl to sleep…what a flat speaking monotone of a voice! riddle me this, how does someone originally from Wales end up with such a slow drawn out speaking voice?  and what was with the hands…( I did catch some view of it by sticking my head around the corner.

      Reply

    • Gran Depine says:

      12:12pm | 26/07/10

      Lorraine I’m sure PM Gillard has some Greek heritage in her. I also loved the way she moved her hands when she spoke during the so called quasi-debate. I was at home screaming at Tony Abbott ” tie her hands, tie her hands”  to shut her up. Well it works with my Greek mum. I agree Lorraine, she was showing her palms to the audience as if she was creating a protective subconscious barrier or a bloody good impersonation of the fictional character, detective Monk. My conclusion, if you ever go for drive with PM Gillard and she feels the need for speed in the driver’s seat,  don’t bloody talk to her. You might be responsible for dangerous driving or you maybe lucky she hasn’t had the charisma by-pass performed as yet and you will definitely fall asleep.

    • Jason CR says:

      11:24am | 26/07/10

      The election will be won on the gender of the leaders and the preference of the lunatic Greens.
      Also, where’s Tanner and Faulkner this campaign?
      Although leaving, surely they would like to pump up the ‘wicked witch of the wests’ credentials from the past 3 years.  They have been very quiet hmmmm

      Reply

    • Mark M Aldridge Independent says:

      11:24am | 26/07/10

      This voting for the lessor of 2 evils stuff has become very un-inspiring, and this American style presidential debate creates a mockery when we consider true democracy, either leader can be replaced with out our input, and their are not many of us that can vote for either.

      It is about time we scrutinised our local candidates, for it is those that will be representing our electorate, going further the senate is the place where policing of policy takes place, so why not reconsider where your vote is cast to ensure it does not become a rubber stamp.

      Democracy is all about the free will of an informed electorate, not the choice of the cover of a book, representatives should pledge allegiance to the people not the party machine, whose policy directives are determined with the help of the non elected.

      Reply

    • Paolo says:

      11:01am | 26/07/10

      “WorkChoices by name may be gone, but the idea will be revived with a different name…”  Spot on, TC.  The man couldn’t lie straight in bed.

      Reply

    • watty says:

      12:11pm | 26/07/10

      Has Gillard given an undertaking that she and her Government will neither add to or amend the Regulations governing her IR policy if re-elected?

      Has anyone from the Media even asked her?

      Answer to both questions “No way Jose”

    • Gran Depine says:

      11:44am | 26/07/10

      Allow me to give you a hypothetical political lesson Paolo and TC. When a Parliamentary bill is passed in the lower and upper house, is it religious and dogmatic? Would you like to be called a heretic, if a bill requires modification? Using the ALP/Greens ETS MARK II as an example I will make it easier for you to understand my point of view. If the ETS Mark II bill is passed and the Australian tax payers contribute the proposed $140 Billion dollars over 15 years to third world countries to implement green energy products and the global mean temperature doesn’t decrease and the carbon dioxide emission doesn’t decrease and Australia slips into a bee’s dick of defaulting on Sovereign debt, will you criticize the ALP and Greens for the introduction of the ETS Mark II or would you modify the bill? Well may God bless your little white cotton socks and I pray they don’t get wet on your ocean front home in Dubbo in 50 years time. No crystal ball, meteorologists, Jedi or prophet can predict our weather in 1 month, even the 12 Gods of Olympus can help them with a 50 year forecast. But lets all use any means possible to keep the ALP in power, even make private back room deals with the Green Party with out disclosing their intentions to the public and their motives with proposed treaties in the upcoming UN climate change conference in Cancun Mexico in December 2010. Who is the deceiving lying bastard? No mention of indigenous issues and their ancient system of preserving the environment and living in equilibrium? What is that reply?...oh yes SORRY! History has taught me that if you don’t look behind you will be doomed to repeat it, alas Rudd/Gillard Government et al go, move forward don’t look behind…we might all turn into salt oh glorious Goddess Gillard

    • hot tub political machine says:

      10:56am | 26/07/10

      52-48 sounds more realistic – I suspect the 55-45 was slightly inflated Labor vote. So it looks like the incumbent to win again losing some in QLD/WA while pick up some in SA/VIC. That looks like the election result from the polls. So barring anything extraordinary happening (and lets face it both candidates are playing it very safe so its unlikely) 52-48 sounds about right for the election result.

      There is a slight hint – though yet to be conclusive – that Labor has a superior vote with urgent carbon trading plans as opposed to playing it cautious.

      Small bit of feedback for Tory – did you ever notice how ridiculous the results of online polls are generally absurd? (you can find one’s saying 80% of Aussies are in favour of the death penalty). Your not a bad journalist so quoting online polls should really be beneath you.

      Reply

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      05:50pm | 26/07/10

      With the Greens promising to close down most of the Mining in SA & the massive job losses throughout SA as a result neither the greens nor their political masters the ALP should get a single vote in SA

    • James A says:

      11:05am | 26/07/10

      The ALP won’t pick up any seats in SA! 

      Gillard is Welsh and lives in Melbourne.

    • Gran Depine says:

      10:51am | 26/07/10

      Can someone give the political animals producing election polls during last night’s quasi-debate that a worm is a hermaphrodite so how the f$#@ can you have a male and female worm?

      Reply

    • thatmosis says:

      10:51am | 26/07/10

      The debate was a nothing event but i think the real problem with our pollies today is that they have never lived in the real world. Reality is very removed from the cocoon of comfort that these people live in. People in the real world are alarmed at the rising prices of everything, somewhat alarmed with the illegal immigrants and not very alarmed with the Climate Change fiasco. Food, shelter, the rising price of petrol, education of their children, crime and appropriate punishment, rising taxes and interest rates these are the things that worry the average Australian but none of these things are being tackled as part of the Governmental processes. All we are getting is promises that sometime in the future something may happen when it is here and now that concerns most people.

      Reply

    • Helen says:

      10:30am | 26/07/10

      Why didn’t they put a polygraph on the politicians? I am not interested in being told what other people are thinking.

      I am, however, very interested in knowing if there is any truth in the debaters comments. I’m sure the polygraph would spike at every word uttered.

      Reply

    • T.Chong says:

      10:09am | 26/07/10

      Hey Rosie , how many leaders has Julie (as in Bishop) pledged unswerving loyalty to since Howard departed?
      Shes getting good at it . Lots of experience.
      WorkChoices by name may be gone, but the idea will be revived with a different name-the LNPs backroom boys (, Forrest, Palmer and friends ) are zealots of workforce deregulation. They will want returns on their money investment in the LNP , and Abbott owes them almost everything.
      The “PS” (wink, smirk) scoop you finish with( even if true ) that candidates repeat their partys lines. Libs, Nats, Labor , Greesn - normal practice for al parties including the LNP.

      Reply

    • Ted says:

      11:13am | 26/07/10

      Two words: Jenny Macklin. Try again battler.

    • MarK says:

      10:53am | 26/07/10

      Hi Chong.

      What evidence do you have that Julie Bishop voted for anyone but the incumbent leader at either of the leadership spills.

      I an pretty sure I know who Gillard would have voted for if the Labor party had deemed it PC enough to allow a democratic election of a leader instead fo a knifing.

      Still, going on her recent performance where she flip flops all over the place, getting her to tick the correct box out of a choice of two might have been a challenge to far and the backroom boys decided to make it easy for her. She shows a distinct dislike of making a choice or taking a stand over anything so I guess it is a good thing she has the factions do the thinking for her.

    • jb says:

      10:44am | 26/07/10

      ... and your girl Julia wont be owing the Unions or Greens anything right?
      She’s a stand up solid girl with a mind of her own right?
      If you support the behavior of her and the faceless thugs then what sort of message does that send to our children huh, that bullying and deceit is okay because that way you get what you want?
      It abuse thats what it is plain simple and disgusting…

    • TheRealDave says:

      10:02am | 26/07/10

      Ahh, seems as though the Liberal hacks are working over time to pimp their leaders dribbling stuttering ineptitude. Fair dinkum, it was like watching Porky Pig. Is Abbott able to get a sentence out without making a meal of it?

      I expected him to stick his head throughthe end credits and do a: “Th-th-th-that’s all folks!”

      Reply

    • Dash says:

      02:19pm | 26/07/10

      Dave, come on mate you can do better than that! I can’t think of one PM the libs have removed in a backroom deal. Opposition leaders yes, PMs no.  At least Keating had a deal and let Hawke serve a few terms! Yes Rudd was the worst PM we’ve ever had and yes this is the worst government we’ve ever had, even worse than Whitlam and the people dismissed him in a landslide at the 1975 election!

      As for ammo on Labor’s slip-ups you haven’t been reading my posts: Insulation - oops, school schemes - oops, Fuelwatch - oops, grocery choice - oops, more affordable housing - oops, I’ll turn the boats around - oops, 200+ childcare facilities - oops, profit tax - oops, ETS - oops, green loans - oops, who do you trust on interest rates - oops, I’m a fiscal conservative - oops, NBN black hole – oops, root and branch overhaul of the tax system = one new tax - oops, Forgot to ask Timor if they liked my idea - oops, Faulkner and Tanner’s walk out and vote of no confidence - oops, Rudds leak to the press about “our private conversation” - oops, Peter Garrett - oops, “No child shall live without a laptop” - oops, “Fight the inflation genie” - oops, Securing water on the Murray/Darling - oops, Internet censorship - oops, “Cheaper Better Childcare” - oops, implementation of anything from 2020 summit - oops, “Cheaper Books for Australians” - oops,  Copenhagen conference (he he he) - Oops, “War on Homelessness = increased Homeless numbers for 2010 - oops, “reduce consultancies by $112 million” = increase to over $800 million - oops. How’s that for starters?

      Wow Rollback! whatever happened to that policy Dave? Same as the “read my lips L.A.W” tax cuts I’m still waiting for! “no child shall live in poverty” or without a laptop it seems! They’ll roll out Rex Connor and Khemlani next!

    • TheRealDave says:

      01:26pm | 26/07/10

      @Dash - I find it amusing to hear the Lib shills scream ‘backstabbing’ when your lot have done in more leaders in the past 20 years (and thats including the 10 years ‘peace’ that Honest John held the reigns) than the Praetorian Guard ever did in Rome wink I think its more of an envy thing - Jools did what Costello didn’t have the intestinal fortitude to do wink

      You’d think with all the things that have gone wrong for Labor in the last 3 years you’d think you lot would have more ammo rather than wring your hands over abloke you were spitting on a few weeks ago calling him the worst Prime Minister of all time.

      But I forget, you lot have no actual policies worth anything yet do you? Other than rolling back whats going to be the greatest leap forward in our telecommunications infranstructure we’ve ever seen and cutting the crap out of everything so you can have a useless surplus that you refuse to use to build the infrastructure we need again.

      @Macon - the material writes itself, I can’t take all the credit. I thank the Mad Monk himself mostly. You couldn’t make a better whipping boy if you tried. Plus, everyone else is doing the ‘lets save the world’ crap, I’m going for cheap laughs on a Monday morning, christ knows we’ll need it if he gets in wink

    • AdamC says:

      12:24pm | 26/07/10

      Dave, at least your abuse is borderline amusing - though how any fan of ‘Joolya’ can criticise anyone’s speech delivery is beyond me.

      And, of course, given Dullard’s uninspired performance last night, it isn’t surprising that all the ALP hacks have today is abuse. It is understandable, the Laborites are starting to realise that the messiah’s second coming (all of three years after the first one) may actually be an antichrist, with a bogan accent to boot. What are you guys gonna do after Jools fails to meet your expectations? Call Wayne Swan?

    • Dash says:

      11:41am | 26/07/10

      Fair enough Smack, but given current polls suggest more of the primary vote will be for the LNP, it’s hard to argue that the ALP has a mandate for anything but to thank their Green mates!

    • Richard says:

      11:27am | 26/07/10

      A mandate for what Smack? What exactly are Labor seeking a mandate for. Certainly no particular policy to speak of… It just seems like they’re seeking a mandate for Julia Gillard to move into some swanky new digs i.e. the Lodge.

      But why? What did Kevin Rudd do so bad that he was forced to move out? And if he did stuff up so badly, why should the deputy (who is also culpable) replace him, instead of the opposition who have proven that they are a stable and competent alternative government?

    • Macon Paine says:

      11:23am | 26/07/10

      @ TheRealDave

      It’s telling that your resorting to launching a personal attack on Abbott after the debate. If Julia had done so well you should be pimping her performance, unfortunetly for you there is not a lot to “pimp”.

      “Moving forward” anyone?

    • Smack says:

      10:56am | 26/07/10

      “people are not stupid enough to make the same mistake and fall for the spin a second time.”

      Dash - I’ll accept your critique on the Australian public on election night if Labor win. Fact is, for now, they are ahead in the polls and looking likely to win - so will all LNP supporters at that stage lament the ‘stupidity’ of the Australian public, or will they accept that the public has provided Labor with a mandate? Shall be interesting to watch.

    • Dash says:

      10:25am | 26/07/10

      The alternative is a lying backstabber who sits back and watches union backed labourers rort taxpayers money (not to mention NSW Labor paying bribes to schools not to go public)! A polished performer who talks the talk but has delivered the country record levels of foreign debt, the pink bats fiasco, the East Timor lie, and a 40.4 billion dollar defecit. What’s worse Dave, inept talk or inept performance? Talk is cheap! Labor’s performance speaks for itself and people are not stupid enough to make the same mistake and fall for the spin a second time. Let’s hope for the good of our nation that as far as Labor’s waste and rorts is concerned, that really is all folks!

    • Rosie says:

      09:48am | 26/07/10

      According to the media this election with its debate & campaign is really about nothing. Using a Julia Gillard saying; I believe it is because the Labour Party and their leader has nothing to defend from when they came into power in 2007. What did we expect from Tony Abbott when Julia keeps saying we did this and we did that and yes they tried to implement all that was promised to us with wreckless spending, undelived policies and the shelfing of the ETS. Do you blame Tony Abbott for having to go negative so we don’t re elect a Govt that doesn’t deserve another term.? This is made worse by the Govt’s supposedly loyal female Deputy in the choice she made to knife the nation’s elected P.M. and with all smiles couldn’t wait to step into his shoes.

      I think the change in Tony Abbott has come about because he has finally got Labour to stop flogging a dead horse on “work choices” by saying he has used the populace like Gillard’s “People’s Assembly” to leave Labour’s Fair Work Policies alone. The small businesses have told him that they are sick and tired of all the changes and will be content to live with Labour’s Fair Work Policies.

      Hopefully we can now put all this behind us and look forward to some positives from Tony Abbott and his team.

      Tony Abbott is slowly but surely looking to have Primeministership qualities.

      PS heard on Channel 9 that a message was sent out to all Labour candidates to what they had to say after the debate if they were to comment to the media.

      It seems that the Union Powers are not only pulling on Labour’s female bra straps but Labour’s male jock straps as well!

      Reply

    • Seano says:

      11:03am | 26/07/10

      Abbott helped design work"choices”, helped force it down the throats of Australian workers in a suprise attack, he supported it well after it was rejected by the electorate and he and his party cannot get their arguments straight on whether it’s dead or not. Considering the way the coalition misused their power with work"choices” the last time it’s perfectly reasonable to fear a revival of work"choices” whilst ever Tony Abbott is leader of the opposition.

      PS. Whilst you’re rambling about union (Booo! Scary!) plots to push the party line did it ever occur to you that the LNP would have pushed out similar messages to their candidates. I guessing the Liberal candidate for Chifley had stop reading the talking points memos.

      PPS. It’s Labor not Labour.

    • Brad Price says:

      09:37am | 26/07/10

      Abbott clearly won last night by simply “not” losing. Julia has failed to increase her net support after the debate where Abbott will clearly pick up votes from this.

      Labor won’t commit to additional debates unless the polls go against them dramaticly. Was it 3 or 4 times she was asked to answer the question that was posed after her 3 mins of waffle?

      Abbott scored a huge blow on Shark Eyes when he talked about his Wife and Kids.

      Reply

    • Brad Price says:

      12:24pm | 27/07/10

      @Sven Gali. It’s not sexist to suggest that there is a certain number of votes that JG will bag simply because she is a woman. You would have to be retarded to think that won’t happen.

      You honestly don’t think that Mark Arbib, Bill Shorten and the other Union Swordsmen overlooked her gender as an advantage?

    • Sven Gali says:

      03:57pm | 26/07/10

      It would great if Tony “some of my best friends are women” Abbott’s supporters continue to insult women by suggesting they’re only voting for Julia Gillard because she’s a woman. Keep up the good work.

    • Brad Price says:

      10:57am | 26/07/10

      @Erin. It wasn’t pretty I totally agree. But it was a salvo that wasn’t rebuttled. There was no opportunity to answer with spin. Which is Labor’s favourite weapon.

    • Erin says:

      10:18am | 26/07/10

      Really?? I thought he looked like he was trotting out there names for nothing more than to say “i’m a family man”. The wife and kids factor added nothing to the debate for me.

    • Ray Graham says:

      09:20am | 26/07/10

      Tory. were you watching the same coverage as me. I thought Abbott won comprehensively. Or is it that yourself and other female deva journos have difficulty in coming to terms with the decintergrataion of your first female Prime Minister or in terms of “The Who” my generation ‘just fade away’. Gillard was exposed succinctly as big on rhetoric but small on substance, fact or policy, and a denyer of complicit partnership of the Labor disasters she helped mould. Words but not much else. No real meaning.

      As for the focus on the female worm. That is an indictment on our elections (and society) where all is about women. ie. maternity leave, baby bonus, childcare rebate, Education, Affirmative Action, Family Law Act, Discrimination (Against Women) Act, Domestic Violence (used as a weapon as much as for the protection of women), Ministries for Women, Emily’s List. All just for starters.

      Welcome to Australia the land of the ‘Wickerman’ as per Nicholas Cage. I think we will escape the inevetable ‘Wickerman’ state temporarily, before the take over by stealth which is in train.

      Reply

    • Julie Coker-Godson says:

      05:03pm | 26/07/10

      @Ray Graham:  “decintergrataion ..”  I think you mean disintegration.

    • Macca says:

      10:18am | 26/07/10

      @Ray, I disagree, whilst Abbott came home strong, Gillard was by far the stronger in the first 15 minutres. I reckon Tory’s article is pretty bang on.

      The fact that there is so much influence on ‘gender’ in this election (in 2010!) is pretty disappointing. Yes we have different bits downstairs, but I don’t honestly think independent minded journalists use that as a basis for their reporting. Amateur Bloggers on the other hand…

    • nosthow says:

      09:18am | 26/07/10

      Amazing how Liberal supporters are claiming a win in last nights debate when both Channels 7 and 9 Worm audience of 150 people each gave it clearly to Gillard ! Now when the Australian people reject Abbott on August 21 are the Liberals going to say “no fair - Tony won !” I bet they do - big sissies and bad losers !

      Reply

    • John says:

      12:54pm | 26/07/10

      And Jason, what about all those men who will vote for Abbott simply becasue they will not vote for a female?  Either way they are both pathetic.

    • MarK says:

      10:56am | 26/07/10

      You lefties and your 150 people magic numbers lawl.

      So what nosthow. 150 people twiddling a dial doesn’t mean a thing.

      Gillard was supposed to rip Abbott apart. All I saw was an articulate Abbott doing extremely well.

      Just another “myth” about Gillards competence exposed.

    • Jason CR says:

      10:55am | 26/07/10

      @Macca
      Shock horror, are you trying to tell nosthow and other Labor fans that Laurie Oakes has more of an idea than the worm?? 
      It doesn’t really matter, this election is all about gender and scare campaigns and nothing to do with politics.
      To those females voting for Labor on gender alone, don’t come back whinging when the cost of living keeps eating into savings and income.  Julia won’t be knocking on the door to pay the bills.
      I’ve learnt one thing about voters during this election - and that’s common sense is not very common.

    • Macca says:

      10:11am | 26/07/10

      @nosthow, Laurie Oakes and several of the Sky News commentators gave it to Abbott.

    • Horthy says:

      09:55am | 26/07/10

      Wow. Just. Wow.

    • BMJ says:

      09:15am | 26/07/10

      As far as I’m concerned, unless something major happens, I’m going to get my name marked and immediately throw my ballot paper into the nearest bin.

      That was rubbish last night and it showed how stupid these two people THINK we are.

      Julia went the concerned motherly route and failed. Abbott went the I’m going to drill stupid slogans down your throat till you nod alla Fox News route. Pathetic stuff.

      Reply

    • Saskia says:

      11:02am | 26/07/10

      I love you lot.  I bet you either vote Labor or vote Green (which is the Labor vote for those too embarrassed to admit they vote Labor).

      Abbott was steady and the Coalition presents a very good alternative to the hopeless ALP.

    • BMJ says:

      09:14am | 26/07/10

      As far as I’m concerned, unless something major happens, I’m going to get my name marked and immediately throw my ballot paper into the nearest bin.

      That was rubbish last night and it showed how stupid these two people THINK we are.

      Julia went the concerned motherly route and failed. Abbott went the I’m going to drill stupid slogans down your throat till you nod alla Fox News route. Pathetic stuff.

      Reply

    • Russ says:

      09:13am | 26/07/10

      Our country cousins across the waves now have a leader who was so charismatic that everything he said was taken as truth (when it was not).  He was almost worshipped. by much of the media.  The result was the leadership has been a shambles.  Now the media deliberately withheld the real facts of the case in many instances because they wanted him in - being leftists.  Julia Gillard is a leftist of thirty years.  What is our media doing?  We do not want someone in who gives glib speeches, panders to the crowd and hides the realities.  At least with Tony Abbott, we know where we stand - and he will do what he for one will do what he says.  After all, he is a seasoned politician who was in the party in power that did show integrity and truth.  Have we seen any with Rudd and Gillard - and their followers?

      Reply

    • shabangabang says:

      08:58am | 26/07/10

      Anybody who watched the ‘debate’ last night is either a political junkie who doesn’t get out much or a 30 year old virgin who doesn’t get out much.
      These are pointless in a 5 week campaign when every announcement they make is televised and replayed again and again and again.
      If they really are trying not to lose, that will mean that the incumbent (Gillard) will win. Abbott is behind and in opposition so he must try to win.

      Reply

    • MarK says:

      11:04am | 26/07/10

      And I see your prediction of a Gillard floor wiping didn’t eventuate.

      Abbott was very convincing, articulate and poised.

      Shame Jools didn’t have anything real to say.

      Now that we have Abbott winning the debate what else have you got left?

    • Dash says:

      10:39am | 26/07/10

      I agree shabangabang, Labors performance speaks for itself, we dont need a debate to realies they are inept and wasteful liars and need to go. Well said.

    • Cat says:

      08:56am | 26/07/10

      If Gillard had actually performed as strongly as she was expected to and had won the debate convincingly then there would have been headlines this morning. There were no headlines, just muted praise for the very strong performance by Abbott.
      I think this says more about media bias than anything else.

      Reply

    • Evan Findlay says:

      08:35pm | 26/07/10

      Greg,
      It was also illegal to abolish penalty rates without fair compensation yet Spotlight removed their employees penalty rates and compensated them an extra two cents. Hardly fair compensation.
      Workchoices legislation was wrong for so many reasons. Firstly it would never achieve what it set out to do, and that was to compete with the Chinese manufacturing industry. Secondly, it was always going to be unpopular because it took income and entitlements from the worker and gave them to the boss and thirdly, it was only going to prop up unviable businesses/industry’s until they finally fell to economic rationalism, but the bosses alawys would walk away with extra in the hand.
      It was a band aid solution compared to economic reform.

    • Greg says:

      12:43pm | 26/07/10

      Paris, average wage under workchoices was increased in 2006 to $13.47/hr so it was illegal to pay your son just $5. And it’s hard to believe actually. Also, the minimum wage has been increased now to $15 under Labor four years later. So much for IR progress eh! Still I guess that’s moving forward.

    • Paris44 says:

      10:51am | 26/07/10

      I have a good memory Dash. I remember work choices that paid my 18yr old son $5 an hr no matter what day or shift he worked. It paid my daughter $14 an hr to act as a manager in hospitality working till midnight and weekends/public holidays with no annual or sick leave. I remember the Tampa lies and the children kept behind razor wire and sexually abused under a Howard government. I know the health system was allowed to fall into disrepair because I have worked in hospitals since1973. I know Australia was committed to a war in Irac because of fear mongering over weapons of mass destruction. Where are those weapons? Another lie the Americans spun to gain control of oil. Yes I have a very good memory. But now I can see a more positive future with the Labor Party and Julia Gillard. The man who wanted to control womens lives and fertility has no place as the leader of Australia.

    • Steve Turner says:

      10:23am | 26/07/10

      Agree 100% Cat. Beasly, Latham and Rudd all scored massive front page headlines everywhere all screaming Labor wins. Difference this time could not be more stark.
      ABC adelaide 9am news did not even mention debate.
      ABC 24 mentioned it briefly, but called no winner.
      I am constantly amazed that most people aren’t more aware.
      It is also telling that such a wide group of media organisations and their journalists all treat every story in exactly the same way. The Australian excepted.

    • Seano says:

      09:20am | 26/07/10

      I think these continual claims of bias says more about the paranoia of the conservative demagoguery.

    • Paris44 says:

      08:54am | 26/07/10

      The Prime Minister was brilliant! Composed, articulate and capable. I like the positive comment and the feeling of a good future. On the other hand Abbott gave as I’ve now come to expect from him….negativity,no real policy and insult. As a female voter and lover of men I say…. you go girl!

      Reply

    • Dash says:

      12:03pm | 26/07/10

      Oh and Paris, could I recommend you report the employer your son worked for to the authorities. On 26 October 2006, the Fair Pay Commission increased the minimum wage to $13.47 per hour. That was the minimum wage under Workchoices, not $5 as you suggest. Still, Labor wont let the truth get in the way of a good story. Four years later under Labor, the minimum has increased to $15 an hour. A huge one dollar more than your daughter was paid. Still that’s moving forward eh!

    • Dash says:

      11:36am | 26/07/10

      Paris, What has your Labor state government done for schools and hospitals? The LNP gave ALL of the GST to state governments. What have they done with it??? If you are in NSW, they have p!ssed it away. The federal Labor party would have you believe that the state government’s neglect of schools and hospitals is now under control because of their influence. In reality they have again promised much but delivered nothing re hospitals, waiting lists are longer. As for schools, Labor backed builders with their noses in the taxpayer trough resulted in a parliamentary inquiry. As for IR laws, the unemployment rate has gone up since Labor came to power in 07. They are the lapdogs to the union movement. The Howard era was arguably the most prosperous time in the nations history and the surplus which was left has been thrown away by an incompetent, wasteful and lying government. Don’t believe the spin Paris, Abbott has a wife and daughters. Gillard sauys she’s for working families (like yours and mine) yet she’s got no idea what that means because she’s chosen not to have one! I’m sick of the lies and waste from this government, they need to go!

    • Dash says:

      09:18am | 26/07/10

      Yes the PM is a very very good talker. But as we all know, talk is cheap. I will judge the government on what it does, not on what it says. I seem to remember a lot of positive things said in ‘07 when Kevin and Julia promised us the world Paris. Do you have a short memory? Grocery choices and fuelwatch - positive but not delivered! 206 childcare facilities - positive but not delivered! “I’ll turn the boats around” - positive but not delivered! Insulation scheme - positive but delivered a mess, Education revolution - positive but parliamentary inquiry into rorting, Green loans - positive but a mess, 2020 summit - positive but nothing delivered, Public control of hospitals by July 2009 - positive but not delivered, the ETS - positive but not delivered. And then you can add the record levels of foreign debt they have racked up, the surplus replaced by a $40.4billion defecit, the lie about not touching the private health tax rebate, the profit tax debacle and the East Timor policy announcement that wasn’t a policy at all. Why would anyone believe what the PM says any more?? And why do people expect Abbott to be positive about the performance of this government? He wants to make sure the electorate remembers the mess, rorts and lies. It was clearly a mistake to elect the ALP in 07. Only fools make the same mistake twice.

    • Cinamin says:

      08:54am | 26/07/10

      I watched the debate on ABC, it had no worm. To be honest with you I thought it was a very weak debate. Neither side really gave us anything more than we already know. Julia Gillard spoke quietly and acted as the lady she is. Tony was more well behaved than I expected. I don’t watch Master Chef but I think if you had missed it to watch the debate, you would feel dudded because the debate for me was a very flat affair.

      Reply

    • Greg says:

      08:52am | 26/07/10

      I dont care about this televised lie fest. One issue seals it for me.

      There is no way that I am voting in a party with intentions to stifle information and promote censorship like a totalitarian regime. Conroy’s internet filter is a blight on our democracy and must never be allowed to get up.

      Labour voter no more!

      Reply

    • Seano says:

      08:50pm | 27/07/10

      No actually it does say something about censorship. It doesn’t extrapolate censorship to the extremes were you’ve hysterically taken it but it does say that he support censoring.

      And so do I and so do most sensible people. They just don’t run around with their hands in the air screaming totalitarian regime when clearly that’s not the intent.

    • SkepDad says:

      09:55am | 27/07/10

      Seano, that quote says nothing about endorsement of censorship.  Conroy’s filter is a censorship concern because of the way it is structured, and the heavy-handed manner in which it treats all internet users as paedophiles-in-waiting.  Similarly, the ozlog is heading well beyond what could be considered acceptable in a modern democratic society.  These policies are what they are because of the people that are driving them - namely Conroy and the ALP.

      I don’t pretend to know what’s in TA’s head, and neither should you.  I’m looking at what the two parties and the individuals have done and said - Conroy and the ALP are, however you want to dress it up, leading us into a heavily monitored and controlled authoritarian state.  The LNP has taken a more conservative stance, and some of its senior members have spoken out firmly against the proposed filter.  They are the facts of the matter.

      The Coalition is the lesser of two evils in the matter of internet censorship - no question.  That may change if the Coalition wins government, and if it does I’ll be just as stridently opposing Abbott.  But on the facts before us, there is an immediate, known threat - the ALP - and an unknown with at least the sense to see the flaws in the current proposal.

    • Seano says:

      07:14pm | 26/07/10

      Tony Abbott from Q&A:

      “I want to see protections in place. I don’t want to see our kids exposed to really terrible stuff on the internet. On the other hand I don’t want to see the internet destroyed by a filtering system that won’t work so I guess for me it’s a factual issue.”

      So Abbott supports censorship he’s just taken the sensible approach to back away from a solution that wont work. Now you might say he only wants sensible protection, well so does Labor. So saying that we must vote Labor out for wanting to censor when Abbott wants to sensor is silly. To claim that one side only wants to censor bad stuff and the other wants to start the process towards a totalitarian regime is very silly.

    • SkepDad says:

      05:42pm | 26/07/10

      Quoted reference please Seano.

      Or are you just extrapolating from his catholicism?  A fair call in many cases, but it doesn’t apply to the Coalition, many of whom have spoken out against the filter.

    • Seano says:

      04:53pm | 26/07/10

      @Ryan - about as long as it takes Abbott to come up with some sensible policy?

      @SkepDad - So Gillard must go for something Abbott in pribciple agrees with? Get a grip.

    • SkepDad says:

      04:19pm | 26/07/10

      @ Seano: clearly you’ve missed that Labor intend to log everything you and everyone else does online “in case it’s needed for future law enforcement”.  The filter is just the first step, not the endgame.

      Totalitarianism is exactly where Conroy is heading.  In twenty years the criticism that both sides are getting in this open, democratic forum will be impossible due to government censorship, and you’ll remember this election as the one in which you let it happen.

      Labor must go, whatever we think of Abbott and Gillard.

    • Ryan says:

      11:21am | 26/07/10

      @Seano: so Labor or “Labour” at the time was “moving forward” in 1912? I wonder how long it will take before they figure out they are facing the wrong direction.

    • Seano says:

      11:07am | 26/07/10

      “Its Labor .......the architects of the ALP couldn’t spell properly as the party was built on hard working uneducated types…...the “working class”. “

      I stopped reading this silly rant at this point. If you’re going to have a go at least get your facts straight champ.

      The ALP changed from Labour to Labor in about 1912 because they felt that the American spelling was more modern. As American spelling now dominates the English speaking world mainly thanks to the IT age it was a very forward thinking move.

    • Ted says:

      10:54am | 26/07/10

      Its Labor .......the architects of the ALP couldn’t spell properly as the party was built on hard working uneducated types…...the “working class”.

      That party is looooooooong gone - now they are followed by the chattering inner city Keating, Bligh, Brumby, Rann type uneducated spivs, educated windbags like Beazley/Gallop/Lawrence, conservative exterior socialist/communists like Gillard, Rudd and then voters/electorate wanting free everything, pay for nothing Whitlamesque type policies.

      Abbott won that debate easssssssssssily. Whoever made the comment about Gillard’s condescention that TA cannot return for fear of being branded a bully is breath-taking.

      I think the media would do us a favour and breakdown the male-female thing otherwise it is still a very uneven playing field.

    • Seano says:

      09:17am | 26/07/10

      It’s Labor, not Labour.

      They’ve put the internet filter aside and as someone who worked in IT for a long time I can guess that it’s too impracticle to come back.

      I don’t support the filter but there’s a difference between the sorts of things they wanted to censor and those that are censored by a totalitarian regime.

      The Libs have supported a filter and have had their own ideas on implementing one.

      Were you really ever a “Labour (sic) voter”?

    • T.Chong says:

      09:10am | 26/07/10

      “Labour” ? Greg? Labor voter you never were !

    • Nigel Catchlove says:

      08:51am | 26/07/10

      It’s easy for us ‘Punchers’ to get all excited about the intellectual battle of wits between the two party leaders, but in the real world the view is often very different. That is where the election is decided, not by the rusted-on voters from either side, or the politically connected and fluent voters.  I will never, ever vote Labor because I fundamentally abhor thier philosophy on so many matters and there are equally people who feel the same about the Liberal Party - vive la difference.

      A friend of mine - and a Labor voter (yes I do have friends with different opinions - however wrong!), a middle aged friend with only high school education mentioned this morning that they thought Julia won the debate because (in their view) Abbot was constantly negative and never said anything other than how badly he thought the government had been.  Julia, on the other hand, used facts and figures to tell us how she would solve Australias problems.  Not my view, but the view of someone in voter land who hates politics but has to vote.

      At least my vote counteracts theirs.

      Reply

    • Yul says:

      01:29pm | 26/07/10

      Given the extremely large sample size (voting population = say 10M for easy numbers) then the mean and the median should be pretty close to the same figure.

      You wouldn’t get massive variation from such a size.

      So gentlemen you are both correct - this from an advanced mathematics student.

    • Nigel Catchlove says:

      12:19pm | 26/07/10

      And some don’t understand the difference between median and average ... Anyway RT, I think your point is clear.

    • RT says:

      11:17am | 26/07/10

      Remember that 50% of the population is below average intelligence… quite scary when you look at it that way.

    • The Big Guy says:

      09:44am | 26/07/10

      Labor prays on the uneducated and uninformed, happened at the last election, and will happen at this one too

    • Seano says:

      08:44am | 26/07/10

      Obviously not a decisive win for either side but Julia did win it purely on the strength of the fact that she remained a lot more positive than Abbott.

      Abbott as always offered us plenty of attacks and stunts. Shame Gillard mostly didn’t pull him up on them, although she did catch him on leadership. But I’m particularly surprised Gillard let Abbott get away with his big new tax on big business to support his paid maternity scheme. More of a stunt than a scheme, it will never happen because he would never actually tax big business to fund social welfare.

      Actually I think they both forgot that it was a debate and not a press conference. Where was the cut and thrust? It’s like neither of them wanted to take a risk which was a mistake for Gillard because it’s usually pretty easy to get Abbott to say something stupid and it was a mistake for Abbott because (despite his innate ability to say stupid things) he needs to make the running as he is still way behind.

      Regardless, Abbott said nothing last night that changes the position that he is unelectable.

      Reply

    • Seano says:

      08:44am | 27/07/10

      @MarK - I don’t think you should be making comment about dodgy election flyers, not unless you can say Jackie Kelly three times quick,


      Interesting though isn’t it, it’s ok for FF to direct their preferences to the coalition, a party who they feel they have most in common of the majors, and fair enough but it’s not ok for the Greens to do the same thing. Apparently that’s “grubby”. I don’t think Troy understands our democracy.

    • MarK says:

      08:38pm | 26/07/10

      ”  PS. I wonder where the family first preferences are going champ?”

      Well going on the SA election and those dodgy fliers the ALP were handing out to whomever the ALP prints on them. Guess that would be them.

      If you meant the official preferences probably the coalition although I know of no such official deal.

    • Seano says:

      04:58pm | 26/07/10

      So what’s wrong with two parties working together? Apparently it’s ok for the LNP so exactly what is your objection to the democratic process?

      Here’s a tip, if you want to negotiate with the Green’s for their preferences then don’t promote a climate change sceptic to leader.

      PS. I wonder where the family first preferences are going champ?

    • Troy says:

      02:59pm | 26/07/10

      Seano, So what are you saying; The Greens and the Labor Party are as one???? The Liberal and National Partys are a coalition, and they work together, one for the traditional country and the other party for citys. By your reckoning Bob Brown is Australias next Deputy Leader, and the Greens will stop fielding candidate in Labor marginal seats. Cant wait to see what the Union Power Brokers that dumped KRudd will think about that.

    • Seano says:

      02:18pm | 26/07/10

      Welcome to the preferrential system and democracy Troy. I wonder if you’d describe the deal done between the Liberal and National parties to form the coalition as “grubby”?

    • Troy says:

      01:48pm | 26/07/10

      Seano, Tony Abbott has more of the primary vote than Gillard does. If that is unelectable, what does it say about Labors Great White Female Hope. Labor may still win the election due the grubby deal done with the Greens, but I certaintly wouldnt call Abbott unelectable.

    • Seano says:

      01:35pm | 26/07/10

      @TimB - I’ll keep point out that Tony Abbott is unelectable whilst ever it remains true.

      Of course the worm is biased, you lost and that’s how it works with conservatives. The same conservatives who were recently telling me that Laurie Oaks is biased towards Labor (lol) and are now clapping their hands manically because Oaks gave Abbott the win, just! Some pundits give it to Abbott some to Gillard but apparently not losing by miles is a huge win for Abbott? LMAO. Talk about lacking credibility.

      The problem for you lot is of course that the Worm is much more representitive of voters and what you’ll be facing on polling day. But you keep brushing the punters aside with your divine right to rule attitute, Tony Abbott remains unelectable regardless.

      @Joe Blow - you mean the same position he was before Rudd got rolled ie. in an election losing position? I’m no sure if it is Gillard who should be watching her back. Hopefully Joe Hockey is working on an “action contract” of his own.

    • Joe Blow says:

      12:23pm | 26/07/10

      Seano, I think today’s Newspoll indicates that Abott has said things that have changed public opinion and that Labor is now in the same poition as before Rudd was assassinated.  Julia better watch her back ......

    • TimB says:

      11:25am | 26/07/10

      “Unelectable, Unelectable, Unelectable”  *SQUAAAAWK*

      Come on Seano, try something new instead of parroting your mantra of choice. It’s tiresome.

      And BTW, Gillard only “won” according to the Worm, which has zero credibility. Everyone with a lick of political nous (Oakes et al) gave the night to Abbott.

    • Seano says:

      10:53am | 26/07/10

      “Lacklustre” and yet she still won which says a lot about the unelectability of Tony Abbott.

    • Macca says:

      08:59am | 26/07/10

      @Gillard did nothing last night to convince the people of Australia that she is a worthy Prime Minister. Her Climate Change policy announcement last week and her amateur efforts with East Timor show how spineless a leader she is. Her lacklustre effort last night only reinforces this

    • Apple Pie says:

      08:41am | 26/07/10

      Mastergirl or Masterboy?  Neither of them are yet my Masterchiefs!

      Reply

    • Macca says:

      08:28am | 26/07/10

      Abbott would never get away with calling his female opponent naive in the condescending manner she employed last night. Interpret this however you want.

      I would have given the debate to Gillard by a nose, felt she started the stronger of the two, however the second half hour was definitely Abbott’s, especially considering the nation-wide expectation that he was going to put his foot in it at some point. He was obviously nervous and Gillard was the more articulate, had he shown just a little more substance he would have been in with a real shot at the election.

      Reply

    • Troy says:

      12:12pm | 26/07/10

      You are probabably right although I would have given it to Abbott. He started slow but smashed her in the end without attacking her. I was unsure about how he was going to get his message across without looking like a bully, but he amazed me how well he did. This is the first time he has truly look like a leader worthy of the Top Job. Gillard looked out of her depth.

    • T.Chong says:

      08:21am | 26/07/10

      Hey folks heres a quick summary- For Labor supporters , Gillard proved her coolness and depth of knowledge,won easily, and for LNP supporters- Abbott was the obvios winner as well , for the same reason.
      Only another 4 more weeks of the same.

      Reply

    • Fred says:

      02:20pm | 26/07/10

      First comment I’ve read here that actually makes sense.

    • jb says:

      08:08am | 26/07/10

      If she talks to Abbott in that dismissive condescending tone you can be guaranteed that she will be 10 times worse to us Australians.
      It will be shut up you lot you voted me in now let me get on with doing NOTHING…
      Ever been cut of in traffic or blocked in a merge?
      That was probably Julia Gillard our self appointed PM…

      Reply

    • Evan Findlay says:

      08:08am | 26/07/10

      No one won last night but I felt the Australian electorate was the biggest loser. I know I lost…... I lost an hour of my life.
      Abbott would have to be a complete moron to keep pushing for another two debates. Another debate similar to last nights and the only winners will be the independents.

      Reply

    • Evan Findlay says:

      07:41pm | 26/07/10

      Sorry I would like to make a correction to my last comment. Joe hockey is the Shadow Treasurer and not the Shadow Finance minister. Apologies to all.

    • Evan Findlay says:

      05:53pm | 26/07/10

      Richard,
      If as you say you believe economic stewardship to be the most important role of government, then claiming Joe Hockey to be more capable is somewhat of an oxymoron. As shadow finance minister, and in response to the budget papers, he declared that he would abolish the RSPT thus saving the government 12 billion dollars. It had to be explained to Joe by Lindsay Tanner that abolishing the tax would lose the government 12 billion dollars in revenue, it would not save it 12 billion.
      Now, I realise that all Treasurers and shadow Treasurers are nervous when finding their feet, even our greatest Treasurer, Paul Keating, stumbled in his early days, but to not understand the difference between tax revenue and government debt places him in the same league as Barnaby Joyce. And we all know what happened to him!
      I agree with you in regards to the act of political bastardry enacted on Kevin Rudd. It too has swayed my voting intentions. Although unlike yourself I am far too passionate about reform and policy substance to ever vote for the Liberal party again. Once is enough. So now I look for an independent. There is one canvassing in my electorate who believes that we should be spending more money on our space program, I’m not sure that we even have one, but she believes that we should be looking to colonize other planets.
      Can’t help but think that she is related to Barnaby.

    • Richard says:

      04:32pm | 26/07/10

      At the supple and well-lubricated age of 28, I hardly think you can describe me as being “rusted-on”, John. In fact I actually voted for Kevin Rudd in the last federal election, and I can honestly tell you I have never voted for the Libs before: in any election, be it state or federal or even local. I have always opted for either Labor and the Greens up until now.

      I could have swung either way in this one too until the man I personally voted for last time (Rudd) was needlessly toppled~ (Why? still no-one can tell me why he was replaced so soon before an election. It seems like there was no underlying principle or conviction behind it, just cynical expediency).

      I support the Libs now because, even though I consider myself a bit of a leftie on issues such as immigration and social policy, I believe that economic stewardship is the most important role of the government, and I have more faith in Joe Hockey than in Wayne Swan in this regard.

      Nevertheless, being a political animal I have always enjoyed the leader’s debates, and this one was no exception. If John A Neve and Evan Findlay and T. Chong et al (typical labor apologists) want to keep saying that it was a boring debate and a waste of time and same old same old etc., perhaps that itself is the clearest indication that Abbott won, (because if Gillard had won surely they would be crowing about how well she performed and how awesome the debate was etc.)

    • Evan Findlay says:

      04:05pm | 26/07/10

      Richard,
      For starters I wont be voting Labor at this election so that somewhat discredits your assumption of me being a one eyed supporter of the Labor Party.
      Secondly, I love how the conservatives live in their own little dream world. As stated I believe that both leaders were politically inept and lacking in any substance or vision. I do find it interesting though that even though both studio audiences gave the debate to Ms Gillard, you believe Tony won.
      Thirdly, how sad your life and expectations that you derived pleasure from such a boring,intellectually vacuous hour of political drivel.

    • John A Neve says:

      12:57pm | 26/07/10

      Richard,

      If you found the “Great Debate”, “interesting and illuminating and enjoyable”, you are easily pleased. Sadly. I thought it was same old, same old, but there you go, saves you having to think, that’s the best part about being a rusted on supporter isn’t it?

    • Richard says:

      12:09pm | 26/07/10

      All the usual suspects (as in 1-eyed ALP supporters) are coming out and saying what a waste of time the debate was and how boring it was and how no-one won.

      HA!

      I thought it was very interesting and illuminating and quite an enjoyable hour of viewing.

      I also thought Tony Abbott won, despite the handicap of not being able to pursue Gillard too vigoursly for fear of coming across as being insensitive to women.

      Gillard doesn’t have the guts to face him in full debate again: so much for the “conventional wisdom” that a bogan student radical socialist would be able to match a skilled veteran of the Oxford University debating team in a formal debate over mainsteam issues.

    • Jennie says:

      07:55am | 26/07/10

      Gillard looked totally out of her depth again. She is not Prime Minister material by a long shot the debate showed that and also the polls are starting see through Labors new “Princess” as well. Should have left Rudd finish his job, they would have more of a chance.

      Reply

    • thatmosis says:

      07:55am | 26/07/10

      Joolia Gillrudd lost conclusively. She wouldnt answer questions and that ingratiating smile and nasally voice was irritating to say the least. Abbott had policies and stated them whilst Joolia flounced and fluffed and said nothing. Interesting to see that the womans line on the worm always was higher when Joolia was on as though they seemed threattened by Abbott. Just shows how insecure the New Age Woman is if a man can still cause that sort of reaction. Well done Abbott and now its time for the media to become even handed in their handling of this election and start giving Joolia a taste of the crap they have been dishing out to Abbott. A Prime Spin-ister without policies saying trust me is like neville Chamberlain saying “we will have peace in our time”!

      Reply

    • mickey says:

      07:54am | 26/07/10

      And some said it was disgraceful that most of us would rather watch the Masterchef finale.

      Reply

    • DD Ball says:

      07:41am | 26/07/10

      It fascinates me that when the ALP candidate loses it is ho hum. The only exciting thing that happens is when a Liberal stumbles, or is claimed to have stumbled, or when the ALP comprehensively win. Although the ALP are often credited with winning the debate, and the worm often awards it to them, I cannot recall a time when the ALP fielded someone with a worthy policy. I cannot remember a time when an ALP candidate revealed a dream of improving the lives of Australian peoples through good policy. I only recall ALP self interest in money, or negative politics of greed. I think Mr Abbott was outstanding in his presentation, but I note a body language expert said he gripped the lectern too tightly .. puhlease ..

      Reply

    • John A Neve says:

      07:17am | 26/07/10

      The Great Debate, was a Great Fizzer. Tony and Julia did every thing but hold hands.
      New policies zero, direct answers to questions zero, strength of commitment zero.
      Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum at their very best, it matters not who you vote for, nothing will drastically change.
      We could all have saved a lot of money, if last night they had tossed a coin, heads Julia, tails Tony. Next election they could have swopped places.

      Reply

    • Julie Coker-Godson says:

      04:45pm | 26/07/10

      @John A Neve:  I believe this debate was held far too early in the campaign.  I say this because both sides appear to be doing their best not to reveal too much to prevent the “me tooism” factor, especially by Labor.  Its too late now but I would have had this debate in the penultimate week of the campaign with both sides to reveal everything at that time and to answer each and every question put to them and not progressing to the next question until the previous one had been (answered).  To me, derogatory comments about a person’s physical appearance are just plain rude and denigrate the maker of the comments rather than the hapless victim.  Debate should be about the issues and *not* a person’s physical appearance.  I watched last night’s debate but felt there was an awful lot missing from both camps and believe the “me tooism” factor is at work.

    • hot tub political machine says:

      01:22pm | 26/07/10

      Agreed it was dissapointing. They both appear to have rocked up tired and wanting to be somewhere else. It was devoid of any passion for this country.

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      07:11am | 26/07/10

      Julia managed to pin Abbott on a couple of things especial his new immigration policy scam. you can see him starting to back pedal on that one almost blaming the government for his stuff up.  Julia was a must more polished performer with Abbott stuffing up his words and looking all clammy. You sometimes wonder if a fly flew past his mouth if his lizard tongue would flick out and grab it. He is a funny and uncomfortable if not weird looking little man. Julia stayed on message was able to control herself and not butt in as Abbott did. Abbott may not have lost but he certainly didn’t win

      Reply

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      05:55pm | 26/07/10

      Brad Price, The BIS figures come from “Computer Modelling” so depending on who is entering the data, & for whom, the results can be manipulated to suit whichever political party is paying for the modelling! We can bet that if that modelling had been paid for by a private, independent person or by another political party the results would have been totally different.

    • Troy says:

      12:04pm | 26/07/10

      Rob r Charteris says: You must have been watching a different debate. Julia didnt say on her message at all, in fact she went off on a tanget at every question. Abbott answer every question asked of him and looked like leader, were as Julie looked like a puppet with scripted lines.

    • Jason CR says:

      11:14am | 26/07/10

      Rob, alias Brad Pitt
      Weird looking man? Where’s your photo Rob is you’re going to throw stones?
      I do agree that he doesn’t has lifeless shark eyes or a big nose.  Nor does he have ‘Pomeranian orange’ hair or dye it daily.  What you see is what you get.
      He’s no homewrecker either.

    • Robert Smissen Rural SA says:

      10:32am | 26/07/10

      I keep hearing how “polished” Ghoulia is & wonder is that how you judge a person? ? ? Just remember the last tie someone conned you, how “polished” their speech was, that is how they conned you.

    • Macca says:

      08:32am | 26/07/10

      @Rob, I can’t believe the Worm / Poliegraph thing sided with the Coalition on Climate Change policy. That shows how poor a leader Gillard is with her policy announcement last week. Abbott slayed her on this. And if you disagree with me and believe that Gillard was the clear winner, why would she not hold more debates to ensure ALP victory.

      Politically, the winner is probably Abbott, as his standing in the public’s eyes definitely increased, whilst Gillard almost certainly failed to gain any new supporters after last nights performance

    • Brad Price says:

      08:08am | 26/07/10

      BIS Shrapnel has released figures stating the likley numbers based on trend. Labor has still not committed to those numbers.

      A village idiot knows they will up the numbers after the election, If we are all unfortunate enough to suffer another term of Labor.

    • TimB says:

      07:52am | 26/07/10

      Rob, what about when Abbott nailed her on East Timor? Julia lied about that. Outright. East Timor has said there will NEVER be a processing centre, yet Gillard claims there are ongoing negotiations.
      (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/special-reports/east-timor-dismisses-pms-refugee-centre-claims/story-fn5ko0pw-1225895834184)

      Lies, lies, LIES. And Tony called her on it. Of course if you wern’t viewing everything through Labor coloured glasses you would have seen that.

      How do you excuse this lie Rob? In fact lets look the three main issues Gillard had to deal with when she took over from Rudd:

      Mining tax- Ad’s are starting up again this week because the majority of minersstill don’t like Labor’s backflip deal.

      Asylum seekers- As stated above, Julia’s “solution” is a pie in the sky idea that will never get off the ground, as East Timor have rejected it outright.

      Climate Change- More waffle, more spin, and a farcial waste of time that every political commentator across the land has slammed as utterly stupid.

      Not one of her big 3 issues have been dealt with despite Julia & Labor’s horn-tooting claims. How do you defend this Rob? How do you explain this pathetically wretched performance from Gillard over the past month?

      Please, please, PLEASE, try to respond with something solid and not some empty generic insult aimed at me or the Liberals.

    • Against the Man says:

      07:08am | 26/07/10

      Two points:

      1) Gillard avoided the Rudd issue like the plague. The guilt? She is never going to be a real leader till she explains herself. The spirit of Ruddy is going to haunt her forever. She betrayed him and she will betray us for her own political gain.

      2) The citizens assembly? Is this a watered down version of the Rudd flop aka the 2010 summit? So now we elect politicians so they can outsource their work to the rest of us.

      Labor is hopeless. Time for change. Rudd is gone and now it is Gillard’s turn.

      Reply

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      01:38pm | 26/07/10

      “Against the Man’, You are so right!
      Until St Julia of the ALP stops hiding behind her lies & distrotions, her minders and anyone else she can find to do so, & simply comes out & tells us thr TRUTH then she will never be either a trustted or good Prime Minister.
      Her Great Big New Escape from Responsibility: The Gillatrd Citizens Assembly is doomed to failure just as Rudd’s equally stupid 2020 Summit was. This gathering of allegedly randomly picked 150 yahoos will be anything but open or honest. They will all be personally hand-picked by St Jooolya. or the most disastrous do-nothing Minister this Country has seen in generations South Australia’s own Senator, Senator Penny Wong. This is the Senator who has totally & utterly betrayed SA. She has achieved nothing. The Murray-Darling Bbsin fiasco is just that: an expensive, doing nothing fiasco.
      As Tony Abbott was wrong when he said “A Australia already has a Citizen’s Assembly” .We have, in fact, ( Citizens Assemblies. They are called the Federal Parliament of Australia, The Parliaments of the ACT,Qld,NSW, Vic, WA, Tasmania & the Northern Territory.
      We, the People, elect them all.
      We, the Taxpayers of Australia, pay them very good salaries & provide them with excellent perks, superannuation & pensions.
      We do not need 150 more people, many of whom will be self-styled & promoted “Experts”! Experts who know nothing. Experts who rely on some stupid “computer modelling” to make their pronouncements. A computer programme can be created so that it can be manipulated to show whatever outcome the user wants.
      St Jooolya & her side-kick Penny Wong have yet to tell us how many 10s or 100s of millions their “Citizen’s Assembly"is going to cost.
      Like’em or loath’em we already have more than enough Citizen’s Assemblies.
      If they would stop their silly political point scoring, decrying every single suggestion put forward by whomsoever happens to be in Opposition & sat down & really tried to work out what was best for Australia rather than what is best for themselves & their Party we might start to get somewhere.
      “It’s Time” Time for Australia’s very own Lady Macbeth, aka Julia Gillard, to go & take her rabble of ex-union hacks & other failures with her.

    • watty says:

      11:33am | 26/07/10

      Sorry sherekahn but the coroner ‘s report shows Rudd died from an overdose of his own ego.

      Rumours that Union powerbrokers and Labor factions had a hand in the assassination now dispelled by you.

      It was that ruthless neo Con Far Right Wing bastard Kerry O’brien.

      Give me a break!

    • Macon Paine says:

      10:54am | 26/07/10

      @ Sherekahn

      Nice spin but in reality Rudd was not killed by the media. He was his own worst enemy due to his cowardice over the ETS, the botched mining tax etc. All the media did was report on this cowardice, which is their job. The citizens assembly is an absolute joke and a cop out it’s just more blatant cowardice from Labor over this issue, Labor have lost vitrually all of their environmental credibility now. As Julia said “delay is denial” so by her own standards Labor are now climate change deniers.

      You claim that Electrical Power Generation, Farming, and Forestry industries are the most “guilty” carbon footprint industries. I would like to point out to you that it is not a crime (nor should it ever be) to emit carbon so for you to frame this issue in a criminal sense is deplorable. You seem to have no regard for the positives that these industries provide for our country, positives which far outway their “guilty” carbon footprints.

    • Sherekahn says:

      10:09am | 26/07/10

      Rudd was killed by the Media, such as the 7:30 report, (ABC you dullards!) also by greedy Billionaires like Twiggy Forest.
      As for the “citizen’s assembly” or “talk fest” its aim is to invite people to show their vested interests.
      Example:  The three most guilty “Carbon Footprint” industries in Australia are:  Electrical Power Generation, Farming, and Forestry.
      If Julia manages to ‘invite’ to the talk fest, one Union representative of each of these industries, from EACH state then you will see whose vested interests blocked any previous attempt to get an agreement in the past.
      They will squeal loud to stop any cost to their industries!
      Reuters quoting The Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2008.
      * Carbon dioxide represents 74 percent of Australian emissions (427.8 million tonnes), methane 20.5 percent (118 million tonnes), and nitrous oxide 4 percent (24.2 million tonnes).

    • Sherlock says:

      08:09am | 26/07/10

      Gilard didn’t just avoid the Rudd issue she avoided every issue.

      Did she at any time actually answer a question? It seemed to me that everytime she was asked something she went off on some unrelated tangent in order to avoid having to give an answer.

      It just looked dodgy. I would have more respect for her if she just said she wasn’t going to answer. As an example, she was asked if she stimulate the economy again in the event of a double dip recession. Instead of crapping on with a load of garbage she should have just said that she’s not going to pre-empt what strategies her economic advisers would suggest in every possible hypothetical situation.

      Her obfuscation only poured fuel on the more spin than substance allegations

    • With eyes wide open... says:

      06:53am | 26/07/10

      Abbott was brilliant…cause he gave you lot nothing to work with. There would be a lot of disappointed journalist’s out there that had to make quick changes to their headlines…..I don’t think Gillard looked comfortable at all and she is a proven performer and one would think could kick Abbott’s arse on the debating floor but she didn’t…and I must give a pat on the back to David Spears for reminding her on a couple of occasions that she hadn’t answered the questions. She still didn’t but it was a good unbiased look for David…so well done David and I take back those nasty things I thought when I found out you were to be host…

      Reply

    • WayneT says:

      01:01pm | 26/07/10

      It can’t be a completely balanced debate.  One is the sitting PM who wields the power and makes the decisions (actually the Unions do) while the other is the contender.  So how can the debate be run on an even platform?

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      11:31am | 26/07/10

      With eyes wide open… says:06:53am; with eyes wide open eh’ you forgot with beer coasters stuck to them. I also notice David Speers didn’t pull Abbott up for butting in. Unbiased!!! just watch some skynews it is that ridiculous it’s funny

    • Phil says:

      10:16am | 26/07/10

      I agree, but where are the front page news stories, referencing Gillard’s answers to questions, that didnt wnswer anything at all.

      She is a joke. Ok noone expected her to answer details about knifing Rudd, but how many times she warned him, think thats ok, after all otherwise we will ahve Shorten as PM by Christmas with Combet as deputy.

      Not one question about value for the BER, wastage etc.

      Abbott truly handled himself well, though thought he missed a few opportunities to land the killer punch when her guard was down, but he didnt want to come across as anti woman, thats all he would need.

    • Luke04 says:

      06:21am | 26/07/10

      When Gillard can’t explian policy’s or stuffs up the media run to hound Abbott rather than focusing on Gillards mistakes, and Gillard immediatly compares herself to Abbott as also making mistakes like her. When Abbott stuffs up with a policy announcement it gets headlines for days. Similar to this story where Abbott clearly beat Gillard but instead of focusing on that you will say they both didn’t perform all that well. Look at this title -“When you win by not losing”
      Media just don’t seeem to want to give Abbott a good headline anywhere.
      I also bet with the new newspoll results with Labor losing ground again we will hear little about it. Last newspoll when it was showing increase in support for Gillard and Labor there were hedlines everywhere and journo’s couldn’t say eneough about it.

      Reply

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      08:23am | 28/07/10

      Gregg says:01:05pm; I certainly have, they’re just not being published. and my response to you and the other poster above is. Search this site I have already answered these questions and cant be bothered bleating on to your long winded dribble again. I know you thrive repeated bleating but I dont

    • Jack Thomas says:

      02:09pm | 26/07/10

      No Smack, it is simply stating the obvious, which may be just as bad.

      Have a look at the conga line of Labor Ministers and staffers who all worked in the media, mainly the ABC. Tell me they don’t have a bias in their reporting?

      Simply putting a buffoon like John Elliot on Q&A as the ‘right wing’ representative means you don’t get it either.

      Still, when you have GetUp preteding to be anything other than a Labor attack dog in the media it won’t matter.

      Abbott is stuffed, mainly because he’s not likeable. Even the rusted ons would accept that.

      Julia will milk her natural advantage (of women liking her) and we’ll all look forward to media puff pieces about the Citizens Assembly like we did the 2020 Summit. Great to see Gillard has arranged for the uneducated and unqualified to solve the issue of Climate Change.

    • Gregg says:

      01:05pm | 26/07/10

      Rob, I see you didn’t bother to answer any of Mark’s comments and then to Nicole with:
      ” So in what your saying is you don’t like democracy? you’d rather religious fundamentals running this country than someone that has stood up for working people. Every working person in this country has benefited greatly from unions, they have contributed to almost every aspect of your working life. Sadly people forget about that, yet you would be the first to scream blue murder if working conditions reverted back to the times of before unions stuck up for you…..........etc.”
      First of all where is the democracy of a few unionists or former unionists making decisions for a government?
      The huge huge democratic difference of the Liberals compared to Labor is that each Liberal member is allowed to speak for themselves and if it is considered out of place something will be done whereas Labor people will toe the party line - and examples - a Liberal candidate decided to introduce religion - he got dumped as quick as a flash - what does Penny Wong say about homosexual unions? You would think an open gay person would fully support full freedom but oh no!, the party has its policy.
      You can see the differences too, quite clearly in the Liberals having a fully transparent vote on leaders over policy - the ETS and what do we see with how Krudd was removed?
      But to Unions and yes they have been about for many years and just like in all walks of life you’ll have good union people and those not so good, some there for all their members and some just as much if not more so for themselves and I’ve seen many in operation close up.
      There is also something like putting your head in the sand too as to why jobs will continue to be lost offshore.
      And yet whereas Work Choices contained measures of workplace flexibility, what was praised by Labor leaders in helping people to maintain employment in recent times? - just sufficient flexibility for there to be reduced working hours.
      You will also find around this country, open shops and no, not ones to buy something from but places of employment where there will be employees who have elected not to pursue union representation whether they are members or not, and you might just be surprised how satisfied those employees are in their workplace involvements.
      And Rob, is it Unions that have invested the millions and billions of $$$$ in industries and other enterprises that have allowed people to get employment and then give us many Unions that will want not just to hamstring employers and organisations from being as effective and competitive as they can be but in doing so they also put a lead weight around employees’ necks when it comes to job satisfaction and also possibility of continued employment.
      Perhaps you have not been too closely associated with workplaces Rob to understand that without remaining competitive, there’s just one way of moving forward…......and yes with Julia, that’s down.
      Even the Doggies have had their fair share of wooden spoons and Julia may not know it but when they were just about thrown out on to the scrap heap it was indeed a scrap metal merchant made good that salvaged them and less so any Unions though you could say they do have a strong bond.
      They with that bond in place showed a form of democracy in removing I suppose what you could say was their Krudd from their midst.
      Yep Sackermanis = DuddaKrudd you could say!

    • Nicole says:

      12:54pm | 26/07/10

      James1, I did try to apologise to you the other day, but it didn’t get posted. So I apologise, I did read it the wrong way. As for the crutch, you can hand it back, because you seem to me more balanced. Me, perhaps I might just need it. Maybe. smile

    • James1 says:

      12:26pm | 26/07/10

      Perhaps I should hand that crutch back to you Nicole.  You seem to be listing severely to the right…

      I thought Sinodinos on ABC’s coverage got it spot on.  Both performed well, and Gillard gave the impression of having won because Abbott got a little unfocused during the sum-up at the end.

    • Nicole says:

      12:08pm | 26/07/10

      Jeez Rob, ‘Working Families’ is soooooo yesterday. We’re ‘Moving Forward’ now. Get with the program. Don’t bring religion in to this. I couldn’t care less who believes in God and who doesn’t. I just want someone who can Govern this country properly and Jooolya simply can’t do that.

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      11:13am | 26/07/10

      Nicole says:10:52am; So in what your saying is you don’t like democracy? you’d rather religious fundamentals running this country than someone that has stood up for working people. Every working person in this country has benefited greatly from unions, they have contributed to almost every aspect of your working life. Sadly people forget about that, yet you would be the first to scream blue murder if working conditions reverted back to the times of before unions stuck up for you. Unions have always been involved with Labor nothing new there. The ALP is about workers and working families the two go hand in hand, much rather that than a party that would use you as corporate cannon fodder. Whether unions outside of the parliamentary caucus is only put forward by the Liberal party and conspiracy theorists.

    • Nicole says:

      10:52am | 26/07/10

      Rob, so you prefer the unions and their puppet? No thanks, I’ll pass.

    • MarK says:

      10:45am | 26/07/10

      Well lets have a look at the Gillard mystique laid bare Rob shall we.

      She is running nothing. She has not got a competent bone in her body. She has progressed way above her pay grade.

      Evidence to this,

      1. The Rudd government going off the rails as she so quaintly puts it with a hint of under exaggeration. She was in the gang of 4. She was deputy PM. It is her baby as much as Rudds and Swann. The other joker has seen the writing on the wall and has bailed.

      2. The BER. Never before has so much money been wasted by so few. This turkey will continue to give for years to come. This was hers and hers alone. She is responsible. She cannot manage. It is obvious.

      3. The mining fiasco. She was involved in the original tax deal. It was part her. It is purely disingenuous and utterly intellectually biased for her and the media to claim she has “fixed” anything. The mess was part hers to begin with. It is tantamount to declaring war on East Timor then in the next day brokering the peace deal and claiming you have stopped the war. She started it. She caved in. There was no problem until the gang got together with the real Treasurer Ken and devised this “elegant” tax. The beauty here is as soon as her “win”” was claimed in her cave in to big business she ticked off all the medium to smalls. This week should be fun when that lobby gets going. No fix here. Just ongoing shambles.

      4. East Timor (and PNG let us not forget them). Awesome stuff that. Telling a sovereign government we are going to build a bit of a refugee centre on their soil. Ooops forgot to ask them. So boat people…....open door policy dstill continues. More lured to their death. No solution. No fix. Just a mess.

      5. The ETS. How could we forget. From days to act to years to decide if we want to act. Another farcical peoples summit mooted because the first one was such a success. It shows many things this non policy including;
      - she cannot make a decision
      - she needs a focus group to decide for her, in other words, she needs spin at her side
      - ergo she is cowardly and not a leader.
      The beauty here was Wong on the weekend when asked what happens if the 150 people come back after a year and say no carbon tax, global warming is a sham - Wong said that they would have be persuaded harder to believe (words to that effect).

      I mean really. Grab 150 people to blame the indefensible on when you lack the courage. Create a advisory board that is only allowed to report back with the decision you want?

      /golf clap.

      If this is the “leader” you pine for Rob I truly feel sorry for you.

      The longer this campaign goes the more the mystique of Gillard is shown to be false. She is no messiah. She is not even a naughty litlle girl. She is out of her league. The veneer of competency is becoming wafer thin.

      Shorten and Combet will be measuring the walls and floors to ensure the furniture they have on pre order will fit in.

    • Steve Turner says:

      10:08am | 26/07/10

      Dear Smack,
      It could just be that the media is giving you a bad run.

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      09:43am | 26/07/10

      Nicole so you would rather the likes of people like David Parker and his backers running the country eh’

    • T.Chong says:

      09:06am | 26/07/10

      Smack you are very correct. claims of bias from either side lets the defeated to squeal “we was robbed” , with the partisans wollowing in a self righteous sulk while in opposition. Both sides equally.

    • Nicole says:

      08:56am | 26/07/10

      How right you are Luke04. If Abbott even sneezes the wrong way, the media are all over him like a rash.  He won last night and Jooolya just did what she does best, side step and dribble BS. She is not fit to run this country.

    • Smack says:

      08:40am | 26/07/10

      I just want to say this once; so that someone hears it.

      When you complain that the media are giving you a bad run: a) it sounds like sour grapes and b) it means your campaign to get elected is probably over.

 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 24 May 12 09:56PM

RT @popculturechris: Meanwhile, Gotye holds no.1 for a sixth massive week in the US - "that" song has now sold over 4 million copies there.

ToryShepherd

ToryShepherd 24 May 12 09:17PM

@loupascale if the survey made you sad, probably skip the comments...

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 07:27PM

@paulwiggins @richardkendall that fountain pens yarn is a great social trend story

Paul Colgan

Colgo 24 May 12 07:27PM

I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf”

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

by Tony Burke

38

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

by Tory Shepherd

92

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

by Anthony Sharwood

71

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed