Rudd’s gamble pays off

Dick J says:

04:05pm | 23/03/10

T. Chong samo samo every blog? Does party HQ pay you to be the dedicated Punch blogger?

Me says:

04:07pm | 23/03/10

I don’t understand where this meme of Abbott being “Authentic” or a good debater, or “straight talking” has come from.

If a politician, any politician, has you convinced that they are “authentic” or “straight talking”, it simply means that they are exceptionally good at spin.

Abbott is a crap debater and a crap communicator. He is good at kicking heads on the floor of parliament during question time, but sucks when talking about anything important.

Second of all, he doesn’t take a principled stance on anything,

Brian Connor says:

04:13pm | 23/03/10

T.Chong…..more chips than a Baghdad taxi. Rudd is full of it but partisans like you would vote for anyone ALP…..

Jimmy says:

05:26pm | 23/03/10

Spot on. That laugh, his arrogant demeanor, at times his voice sounded like Howard. He didn’t have a policy. The problem with the Liberals they still think they are born to rule.

FedUp says:

06:05pm | 23/03/10

wow T.Chong - I hope you’re not a betting man.
Rudd’s disgusting 3 year mismanagement of Australia is all we need to discuss - how will his delivery be any different from the botched insulation or education promises?  The answer is simple - another apology coming to a televison near you.  If you vote Labor in the next election, you have no one to blame but yourself.

Scot says:

07:04pm | 23/03/10

Full marks to Abbott today telling Rudd to his face that he is a liar. Rudd is a one man band and he does not consult or listen. Its his way or the highway. Soon it will be all over for Rudd Labor. Everything that Rudd touches is a disaster. His per theme when all else fails is to ask the Liberals to get into bed with him. Who in their right mind would get into bed with Rudd, as Abbot said many time he and his front bench are liars. They tell porkies and twist the facts.  The reason we have a party in opposition is keep the bastards honest. Tank goodness Rudd cannot rubber stamp the Senate. Abbott stood up for the Australian public today, Rudd sucks.

Big Tas says:

09:35pm | 23/03/10

Spot on! Abbott was showed up for the clown that he is. With his fake laugh which he hides behind, big mouth, no answers and treats everything as just a big joke! What a circus freak!

Fen says:

01:12pm | 24/03/10

Too right, he will get flogged at the next election. Rudd is far to smooth a player for a hip shooter like Abbott. Abbott fell right into the trap the “let’s work together”  comment was brillant by Rudd. Of course he has no desire to do any such thing but Abbott fell for it. Classic stuff,  it really shows the difference between the 2 players. Rudd is far to cunning, clever for Abbott

Evan Findlay says:

06:52pm | 24/03/10

After yesterday’s cringeworthy attempt at debate, Abbott would want to hope that he doesn’t have to debate Kevin three more times. Only a cat has more lives.

Where do people come off stating that Tony is intellectual. I have yet to hear anything out of Tony’s mouth that has stimulated me. I find him shallow and lacking in any intellectual endeavour. He only just passed his academic studies, his failed at his attempt in the seminary, he was next to useless as a health minister and yesterday I watched a man bereft of ideas and policies, a man that talked about everything except the topic, try to goad the Prime Minister down to his level of stupidity. Tony never bothered to address the topic, he attacked the Prime minister on insulation and incompetence, the latter being something Tony was very familiar with as health minister, but rarely about health. Tony looked pathetic!

I, as a Labor supporter, figured Tony would go into the weekend after the request for debate, determined to upstage Rudd with substance and policy. To come out fighting with a steely determination, to show initiative, policy vigour and a demeanour that would represent leadership. I figured Rudd would have to be on his game. Well I was right on one thing, Rudd was.

Words cannot describe what an imbecile Tony is. Yes it may mean little that Rudd massacred Tony on the day, so far out from an election but what it did show is that Tony is not prepared or qualified enough to step up. Time and time through out the debate he showed himself to be a man of no substance and little more than a schoolyard bully. His laughter at being challenged to be bipartisan in health policy was so contrived and embarrassing….I felt sorry for him. 

I know understand why he chose the likes of Barnaby and Bronwyn to head his front bench. He needs to show that he is smarter than someone, anyone.

Bob says:

03:28pm | 23/03/10

You do realise that the online polls don’t stop multiple votes? I’ve had fun at times pushing the polls to bizarre outcomes, like 70% of ‘people’ voting in favour of interest rate rises.

They need to smarten up their software to get reliable results.

Daryl Saal says:

03:35pm | 23/03/10

Hamish, newspaper internet polls and phone polls say more about who has the time to vote repeatedly than whatever the topic is. Time and again these polls are way out of kilter with serious polling where the pollster approaches random citizens, or elections for that matter. I watched it and was quite disappointed with Abbott, as he was simply way outclassed. Wouldn’t have won a high school debate. I think that the pundits who are calling it a win for Turnbull have got it right.

Luke says:

03:43pm | 23/03/10

Hamish, you are definitely making comments out of ignorance.  To claim the Channel 9 studio audience is biased and yet the Herald Sun online poll is somehow not biased is what really beggars belief.

Abbott lost because he went in with a tough guy stance to push Rudd around and smear him all he could.  When Rudd refused to play that game it just left Abbott looking like a bully who had nothing of merit to say.

You claim Abbott was within his rights not to have come up with a policy in the last 5 days, and yet Abbott has been talking about hospitals and health care reform for much longer than that.  And what happened when Turnbull was in charge?  Do the Libs just sit back and argue amongst themselves all year instead of coming up with viable alternatives for Australian voters?  Sure looks like it.

I wish I could be there when you do get to watch the debate and see Abbott crash and burn.  It was very entertaining.

d.jay.stevo says:

03:40pm | 23/03/10

Abbott hasn’t had 5 days to formulate a policy, he has had at least eight years, 5 of them spent as Health Minister.  Also, he didn’t ‘lose’ because he wasn’t very nice, he ‘lost’ because he had nothing but snide remarks and criticisms, instead of a policy platform of his own.

Rudd was not shown up, I thought he was very clear about who would run the hospitals,  100% federal responsibility, with individual hospital consultation, 60/40% federal-state funding.

Perhaps you should watch the debate, then comment.

Hamish says:

03:53pm | 23/03/10

d.jay,

If that was Rudd’s response, it’s not clear who is going to be responsible. You think the states will pay 40% of the funding, but get 0% of the authority? If that’s what he said, then it’s not clear.

Give us a break says:

03:55pm | 23/03/10

People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
Listen to the debate and if you are objective as were the audience, Tony LOST, not a word of policy.

d.jay.stevo says:

04:50pm | 23/03/10

Hamish, I was under the impression, it really doesn’t matter what the states want, if it doesn’t get through them and the Senate, it will be put to the people, and i for one think that it is reasonable to make the states pay 40%, which decreases their share by 20%, and lose the burden of responsibility, because obviously they can’t handle it.  Like I said, perhaps watch the debate, then comment.

Carrie Contalis says:

04:59pm | 23/03/10

Ooh Hamish, you’ve stirred up the haters (let the personal attacks and name-calling begin)!  I just want to know what criteria are used to confirm that the studio audiences are actually swinging voters?  I always vote liberal and I think, since I’m unemployed at the moment but not on the govt’s books as yet might I add, that I should have been in that audience claiming I’m a swinging voter.  I’ll bet it’s that easy.

Mr Abbott did win the day.  Since he’s not in govt yet it isn’t really up to him to release his policy in time for Mr Rudd to adopt some of its features as his own.  Mr Rudd didn’t answer Paul Bongiorno’s question on whether his policy would stop the ‘blame game’ - obviously not.  All I know is that Mr Abbott commented on the worth of private health insurance and while I think it’s expensive I’m glad I have it and can afford it.  Which reminds me that nobody called Mr Rudd on his intention that any surplus patients from the public system can go private for their surgery?  This means nobody is going to want to pay for private health insurance…you can just imagine what that will do to the health system.

Jack of Melbourne says:

06:10pm | 23/03/10

I saw a news article this morning that Tone spent the best part of the evening being prepped for this debate by his Health Shadow Minister Mr. P. Dutton (which may have accounted for Mr. Abbott’s dearth of detail).
I also saw a quote from Mr. Dutton that he had been slaving over his plan for health reform for the last 12 months, which lead me to think, hasn’t he been shadow Minister for 2 1/2 years?

Mel says:

07:02pm | 23/03/10

mmm…Tony Abbott make policy on the run, no he wouldn’t would he. Not at all like his half baked policy on paid parental scheme which he was so arrogant over he didn’t even take it to the party room for approval, and for this he was ridiculed by Peter Costello who as the treasurer for 11 years so should have some idea of what he’s talking about. On the other hand when it comes to health which was his own portfolio and which he has had 2.5 years to come up with a policy..nothing.  Tony Abbott as with the paid parental scheme is spending too much time trying to get one up on Kevin Rudd rather than spending time developing solid policies of his own that offer a real alternative that we can debate on.

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

09:02am | 24/03/10

Christian Real :  Joe from Brisbane called it right , afer the FOIL BATTS FIASCO can you imagine Rudd’s ” warm & fuzzy ”  words creating hospital beds. ?  Tony Abbott says what he thinks as opposed to Rudd’s tendency to say , without delivery ,  what people want to hear .
Tony Abbott exposed Rudd’s lies on his time as Health Minister in the Howard govt.  Abbott firmly linked Rudd’s insulation policy as proof of inability to deliver on hospital beds.

Christian Real says:

06:05pm | 24/03/10

Wayne Fehlhaber says: 10.02am 24/03/10
Wayne, What part don’t you Liberals understand? The debate was on HEALTH!, but like Abbott, it appears his supporters have also failed to stick to the Debate Topic.
They should have had some signs held up with HEALTH written on them so that Abbott would not keep forgetting the topic he was suppose to be debating.

Christian Real says:

08:31pm | 23/03/10

Joe from Brisbane says: 04.19pm 23/03/10
Abbott didn’t land any good punches at all, and besides the Debate was on Health, but Abbott kept rambling of the topic because he was way out of his depth. Abbott has shown that like all his supporters, he is a loser.

matilda the drovers dog says:

03:55pm | 23/03/10

Yes and Rudd kept on with the lie regarding the $1billion. Records speak for themselves:
Rudd in Qld - 2000+ beds closed, Rudd as PM a mere 2 out of 36 GP clinics built (at that rate that particular promise of Kev07 will take 32 more years to fulfill). Abbott made a fair point - Rudd has problems delivering…BTW Rudd has nothing to offer but cliches, motherhood statements and blahblahblah

persephone says:

04:20pm | 23/03/10

Well, Tony was unable to prove him wrong, and in fact went a little way to confirming this: he could not deny that health had received less than previously promised under his time as Health Minister.

persephone says:

04:22pm | 23/03/10

And apparently, that’s more than Abbott had.

Jade says:

04:33pm | 23/03/10

Michael, isn’t that what rudd does on a daily basis?

Joel says:

11:46pm | 23/03/10

@matilda the drovers dog:if you’ve ever been involved in an infrastructure project you’ll understand that the completion rate is not uniform over time but rather ramps up as you get through the large upfront investment in processes (eg: land acquisition, design, community consultation etc).

That he has delivered two in 27 months from the time he took office is not a bad result.

How long does a commercial building take to go from concept on the back of a napkin (so to speak) to completion?

Rowdy says:

12:56pm | 24/03/10

Not sure Joel….maybe ask conroy about his (back of the napkin) NBN…..or Garrett/Rudd on the (back of a napkin) batts program….or Gillard on her (back of a napkin) BER program…..or Macklin on her (back of a napkin) aboriginal housing program or Rudd on the (back of the same napkin) grocerywatch and fuelwatch programs…...except I think they used the back of coasters in lieu of the napkin…too much space to fill on the napkin….

persephone says:

06:20pm | 24/03/10

Tony, apparently, doesn’t even have a napkin.

James1 says:

04:17pm | 23/03/10

Hear hear William.  Some people place politics over policy.  I might not like Rudd so much, but this opposition makes me wonder why I still support the Liberal Party.

Dingo says:

05:23pm | 23/03/10

So on the one hand WIlliam you expect Abbott to have a policy and in the next breath you say get out of Rudd’s way and let him get on with government business.

Rudd’s said he had a health plan and a fix for the hospitals in 2007. It’s 2010 and not one piece of legislation has been put to the parliament to fix the hospitals.

So the senate blocking legislation is a moot point - and one of the latest Hawker Britton on message phrases that every ALP member will be sprouting off ad nauseum.

Abbott’s not in the way, Rudd just can’t do anything except tell you what you want to hear. Isn’t he sweet the way he talks about mums and dads and little kiddies and his own quaint childhood (gag).

I don’t care if Abbott sounds negative when he continues to point out Rudd’s failings. It might actually result in him doing something. Although given Rudd’s record on program delivery, maybe we’re lucky he’s all talk on health.

Scot says:

07:15pm | 23/03/10

Thank goodness Rudd cannot rubber stamp the Senate. If he could we would be now up to our eye balls in ......... As long as the Senate can stop this reckless spending by Rudd Labor for back of the envelope ideas and half backed ridiculous photo ops the better. Rudd Labor have failed on ETS, School sheds, Grocery, Super, Fuel, Medicare etc. NSW Labor. Rudd is as Abbot said a liar. Who would work with a liar. Get real.

Joel says:

07:39am | 24/03/10

@Dingo: house of review not house of reject champion.

persephone says:

04:25pm | 23/03/10

No, mixed funding to hospitals in regional areas was raised in Rudd’s original speech.

I’ve been surprised since that the media didn’t seem to have picked it up.

Katie says:

04:15pm | 23/03/10

Yes!  Rudd looked uncomfortable and rude.  I found Abbott to be the better debater.  Rudd was out of his depth against Abbott ease and confidence.  Generally though I have always found Rudd one dimensional and insincere, and I’m growing to think him arrogant and poor at delegation (making him ineffective). He might win this election, but no more after that. 
It was disappointing that the opposition had no policy of thier own but that is politics, when do oppostions ever have poliicy?  It is a game, the opposition will release policy when it is strategically beneficial for them to do so.

Christian Real says:

08:40pm | 23/03/10

Katie says: 05:15pm 23/03/10
The only one that was uncomfortable and completely out of his depth in this Health debate was Tony Abbott
Abbott could not debate his way out of a paper bag, and Katie, yours is a typical response from a Liberal supporter who can only dream Abbott won, when in fact he didn’t!

matilda the drovers dog says:

03:54pm | 23/03/10

David - are you serious? A smart Opposition releases a Health policy closer to an election. Rudd 3 weeks ago said that the govt health policy was still being devised and then a few days later releases it (in part). That it (the govt policy) is a thought bubble became crystal cleared when Rudd esentially agreed to change it to allow for anomalies such as the Vic health system has. BTW, yes Rudd works “bloody hard” - I just wish he would work bloody smart - if he did we would not have 4 young men dead in roof spaces (such a possibility was highlighted to Rudd/Garrett last August).

Dingo says:

05:34pm | 23/03/10

David, what was revealed by the debate today is that Rudd does not have a health policy.

He’s come up with a few broad strokes and is desperate for Abbott to fill in the detail. Hence his pushing a “bi-partisan approach”. Which means the Opposition write the policy and Rudd takes the credit.

Abbott knows this and is not about to write the policy for Rudd to claim as his own and nor should he. If Rudd wants the top job, he needs to do the job.

The Opposition will no doubt release a fully costed policy after the budget and after Rudd has had to detail his health plan assuming he comes up with something.

matilda the drovers dog says:

04:01pm | 23/03/10

Let’s hope Australians are not that stupid - time will tell. Without the Henry review the health “debate” is so much tosh - but it is a good distraction.

James1 says:

04:24pm | 23/03/10

Clearly, some Australians are stupid enough to use an apostrophe to denote a plural, so draw your own conclusion…

Fog Badger says:

07:18pm | 23/03/10

Miaoowww, James1 @ 0524pm.

andrew says:

04:25pm | 23/03/10

this here (cats @ 447) is pretty much the only comment that matters.  liberal members and supporters will always think they are winners, while labor members and supporters will always think they are winners.  to these people it is totally irrelevant what, how and by who was is put on the table.  one side it is wrong, one side it is correct.  australian politics is so boring

persephone says:

04:28pm | 23/03/10

But it’s the people who are neither Labor or Liberal who decide elections.

The kind who had their finger on the worm this afternoon.

d.jay.stevo says:

08:03pm | 23/03/10

or unless they can see outside the 2-party box.  No one has an un-biased political opinion, one will always at least agree with whoever best represents their views, that is the whole point.  I do not vote Labor, but today they were the only ones with a policy of which to speak, how can i support nothing?  Not just nothing, but nothing from a party which has been out of office for 3 of the past 15 years.  For that reason alone, I expected something, but to give nothing shows they have no intention of doing anything other than what they did for all those years in office.  That was when they had their chance to fix the system, so when the former health minister cannot present an alternative policy, I have to question their capablilties to run the country.

David J says:

04:33pm | 23/03/10

make Wilson Tuckey Pm and the circus has come to town

Noguaranteeofsanity says:

06:27pm | 23/03/10

Agree political spin is far from a new phenomenon, although spin doctor is far from being a new term and became popular during the nineties.  It was even featured on television, in the show, Spin City.

While if you have had enough of ‘total opposition’ in politics, I suppose you agree the Liberals should back down and allow the numerous government bills, which they have blocked, now pass through the senate?

Although i question your wartime cabinet proposal.  After all did Howard form a wartime cabinet during the Australian intervention in East Timor or when Australia became involved in Iraq and Afghanistan, collectively called the ‘War on Terrorism’?  If we don’t need a wartime cabinet during a war, why would the GFC warrant such an approach?

Also, who exactly are the reds in the red/green/Labor coalition? Family first or Nick Xenophon?

Finally you do realise by commenting on political blogs and articles like this, which you seem to do an awful lot, you are actually adding your own spin to that, which already confronts us daily?  While i find somewhat strange you criticise Labor for ‘spinning’ issues, yet seem happy to offer your own pro-Liberal spin.  Seems to me, your only adding to the problem you are complaining about and making things worse.

Seano says:

06:29pm | 23/03/10

You’re a swinging voter….lmao.

Steve Putnam says:

06:01pm | 23/03/10

All I remember about Abbot’s 5 years as health minister was his selective attempt to give a Tasmanian hospital in a marginal seat $141 million in the lead up to the last general election. The issue is far too important to be left to this intellectual lightweight whose approach to everything is belligerence & sarcasm. I first met Abbot over 30 years ago at Sydney Uni when hen was involved with the democrat club and he hasn’t matured any since then; in fact he’s probably gotten worse.

Seano says:

06:31pm | 23/03/10

He also claims to have been a snag…not worth taking seriously.

marie says:

07:48pm | 23/03/10

Tom: Agree, But it would not be sporting to put a man up against a big girl !!

d.jay.stevo says:

08:50am | 24/03/10

Is it really unfair to expect the ‘party’ he represents to have a policy?  He is a leader of a party, therefore represents his party’s policies, though perhaps someone has forgotten to tell Tony, re: paid maternity leave.  And the party has had since 2007 to make changes to the policy the governed with, the same policy which did not fix our health system in the 11 years they were in government, one may even argue, they made it worse.  So if they had nothing to contribute yesterday, I assume that up until now, they didn’t think they really needed one, that what they had done previously would suffice.

Fleeced says:

07:26pm | 23/03/10

That question didn’t go down well - but was really a little unfair.  Rudd accused Abbott of taking $1b out of hospitals, when it hadn’t… “the question has the percentage gone down?” is misleading, since funding had increased, but state funding had increased by even more.  Regardless of whether the question was fair, he handled it poorly, and should have said, “Federal funding increased, but state funding increased by even more, because of the GST we provided to the states… Rudd now wants to take some of that GST back and give directly to the hospitals - so he’s not providing any increase in funding”

persephone says:

07:39pm | 23/03/10

Fleeced, no, the GST was included in the calculations.

The Federal government had - a few years before - agreed to give the States a certain amount of funding into the future, but didn’t deliver on that promise.

Their excuse was that increased usage of private health due to their private health rebate and lifetime cover would reduce the demand on public hospitals and thus they didn’t need to provide the same level of funding (the private health rebate is counted as part of their spending on health, btw).

This didn’t happen - in fact, the pressure on public hospitals increased.

Rudd has also stated very clearly that the Feds will put more into health than the GST they’re proposing to take back.

It’s fair enough that, if the Feds are doing this, they recoup some of the GST funding intended for the health system.

Gin says:

06:32pm | 23/03/10

If rudd could stop faking and deliver proper policy he would have done it by now.

Kim Panos says:

08:21pm | 23/03/10

Tony Abbot is a ball buster he has no policy. He is so aggorant that he thinks that being a ball buster is all you need to run a country. Does anyone believe that supporting health reform that will allow equitable access is bad? Authenticity is not a part of politics but realizing that we live in an amazing place is paramount to believing that reform is needed to allow our country to be what it should be.

Gotta be says:

08:29pm | 23/03/10

Not a party member.  My views are mine.  Yours, yours.

Abbott is not a straight talker. Rudd may never win a snappy speaker medal, but he was on the front foot and kept his cool. He won fair and square. Abbott dug his own hole and the worm reflected that.

I don’t need to call you an idiot to make my points, but you’re not only wrong but out of order.

Scot says:

11:12pm | 23/03/10

So what happened to people using their OWN brains and not some stupid thing called a WORM. If people are not literate or can comprehend what is being debated and need technology to tell them what people are saying god help us all. Its like people saying they believe what they read on the internet an do not do their own homework. Just like the old days of newsprint, never believe everything you read in the papers? It is Abbotts job to keep the bastards honest. Thank goodness we have someone that has been a health minister, is a straight talker, and does not have verbal diarrhoea.

Andy says:

06:12am | 24/03/10

I agree there were a group of us watching and we kept laughing about the fact every time Rudd even opened his mouth and even before he spoke the worm ran to the top of the graph, sometimes even going off the graph. As soon as Abbott opened his mouth it went straight to the bottom. When Abbott had pot shots at Rudd it plumeted down, yet when Rudd had personal shots at Abbott it still went up? If Rudd had said poison on toast was good for you, I’m sure the worm would have gone up.

iansand says:

07:07am | 24/03/10

The worm returned to its position last time that participant spoke.