Either way, Turnbull’s on eggshells
|
Malcolm Turnbull is caught in a pincer movement between Liberal conservatives and Kevin Rudd and both appear determined to destroy him. If Turnbull had a solid core of support amongst moderates, he might be able to face this challenge with some confidence. But even former supporters believe he is treading water. Now that the Oceanic Viking debacle is behind them, the Government can concentrate on applying maximum pressure on Turnbull on the CPRS. The best means of doing that is, peculiarly, to give him what he has asked for, or some semblance of it, creating the impression the Government is willing to compromise in order to strike a deal. On one side is acceptance of all the Coalition’s demands, which won’t happen, partly because of the sheer cost to the Budget. On the other side is rejection of most of the Coalition’s demands, which will be sufficient for Turnbull to recommend to his colleagues that they say no. There’s a gap in between, an uncertain space into which the Government would dearly love to lure Turnbull, so that he has to seriously consider recommending to his partyroom acceptance of the compromise, thereby putting the Coalition’s deep divisions on show. Yesterday six Liberals told the joint party room there should be no deal of any kind. They included some of the usual suspects — Tuckey and Jensen — diehard Turnbull opponents like Bronwyn Bishop, and, significantly, Mitch Fifield, a shadow Parliamentary Secretary who has more substance than a renegade like Corey Bernardi. Fifield was the erstwhile Costello supporter who — in the bizarre way the Liberals conduct their factional affairs — was the party conservatives’ choice to replace Bernardi when the latter was sacked for bringing his war with Christopher Pyne into the open. While, based on Treasury’s numbers, the Government is constrained in what additional compensation it can offer to polluters, it has some options on how it meets the Coalition’s demand for extra handouts. It can increase or extend compensation in later years — extending compensation for electricity generators beyond five years, for example, or agree to remove the tapering that will progressively reduce compensation to EITEs. This has the biggest effect in the latter part of the next decade, but at the moment may as well be Monopoly money, about which only perhaps Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner is professionally concerned at this point. That would also give the Government a handy response to Opposition criticisms about “debt and deficits” — to wit: “you’re the ones who blew the budget out in future years with your CPRS amendments.” They could also fiddle with household compensation, based on the idea that the more compensation for electricity generators, the lower the price effect on consumers. In the end, if they can’t agree a compromise package, there’s no downside for the Government. The Prime Minister simply gets to go to the next election as the man who did everything he reasonably could to get a deal on climate change. Some conservatives, meantime, will be hoping for exactly the same outcome as the Government — for Turnbull to take a deal to the partyroom. This would become a proxy leadership vote. If they could roll him — and there’s no indication at this point they have the numbers — Turnbull by his own rhetoric would be in an untenable position. That’s why Nick Minchin continues to give voice at every opportunity to his climate denialism. Minchin may not believe in climate change, but he doesn’t have Wilson Tuckey’s inability to resist a microphone. Nor does he have Corey Bernardi’s bitterness. He is one of the Coalition’s smartest, most experienced figures and he knows better than anyone the value of unity and when it’s better to keep internal battles out of the public gaze. His ongoing commentary is deliberate and aimed at encouraging the partyroom to reject any deal with the Government, in effect destroying Turnbull’s authority and, most likely, his leadership. So Turnbull has two cold-blooded political killers after him on the ETS. Given Turnbull’s combativeness, you’d normally say that would be just the way he likes it. But the stakes here are his political survival itself. And even if he manages to strike a deal that wins the support of his colleagues, it would simply give Rudd a major political victory. Both Rudd and Minchin would still be hunting him. Oh — what’s that? Doing something about climate change? Don’t be silly. This is politics. |
|
|
|
Crikey's Guide to Julia Gillard
35 Comments
The last paragraph points to the real and only problem for the populace. The preceding stuff is, unfortunately, an accurate description of a roadblock.
Sh_t!
Turnbull is akin to a punch drunk boxer, eventually one of the hits will put him down, there is only so much punishment he is able to take. Making the attacks even more critical most are coming from his own corner, something like his trainer telling him to get back into the ring but giving him a straight right as he goes.
“…His ongoing commentary is deliberate and aimed at encouraging the partyroom to reject any deal with the Government, in effect destroying Turnbull’s authority and, most likely, his leadership…”
And I for one applaud Mr Minchin’s gumption and candour.
At least Minchin is prepared to call the ETS for the economy-wrecking farce that it is…reinforced again today by BigClimate’s latest shrieking joke-filled and apocalyptic missive from “The Carbon Group”.
Unlike the rest of Turnbull’s portentous milquetoasts in the Liberal Party.
Turnbull is trapped by his own genuine beliefs and the remark about the type of party he didn’t want to lead.
He’s also trapped in that the position he should have taken is precisely that of his predecessor whom he defeated largely over precisely this issue.
The evidence is that Minchin is a sceptic not a ‘denialist’ but Bernard Keane can’t help himself and echoes Rudd’s speaking points like an automaton.
The evidence is that Minchin too is genuine.
I humbly believe Rudd is not.
Minchin has said that he supports Australia paying her fair share in an internationally agreed framework.
The real ethical problem for Minchin is that a Coalition agreement with Labor at this juncture means that it would be complicit with Rudd in selling the interests of the Australian people down the Swanee with potentially indeed even likely no advantage to the climate whatsoever. That of course assumes a belief that a reduction in anthropogenic CO2 was an important and necessary to protect us from climate change
It is simply foolish beyond description to enact an ETS
(the honest version) or rather CPRS (the dishonest version) before an international agreement is struck and note it will only take effect 2 years from now.
Nary a mention of that from Bernard Keane [Edit] telling us that our PM lied but not quite, that he misled parliament but so what and today he’s back to Liberal bashing.
Among the oh-so-very-many things Bernard is “sick of”:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/11/16/keane-im-sick-of-the-cprs-to-hell-with-you-all/
….bashing Liberals instead of keeping the government to account isn’t one of them apparently.
The ‘rationale’ for want of a better word being:
I mean I know they’re not going to win the election but just in case, it’s better to ‘Never Give a Sucker an Even Break’.
[Edit - Play nice please]
I used to think poor Billy was the most inept and pathetic politician I had ever seen but Turnbull beggars belief.
Why is he even in politics? He is as comfortable as a cow on a bike and it shows. He was so thoroughly Greched this year that there seems to be no way to ever come back from it and bashing up a few refugees on an Australian ship is not the way to do it.
They do have rights, and we broke the law.
End of story no matter how many ways the media try to beat it up into something else.
Rudd is absolutely wrong to suggest that he is entitled to force refugee claimants into detention in Indonesia on the grounds either that they are travelling with aid of people smugglers, or because they are “illegal” immigrants.
Refugees use smugglers – and sometimes, regrettably, traffickers as well – precisely because there is no other way quickly, and with even a modicum of reliability, to get out of dangerous places and to a country in which they can seek recognition of their protected status. Australia, like most other rich countries, has erected a myriad of physical and legal barriers – carrier sanctions, visa controls, and the like – that prevents genuine refugees from coming to us legally. Even if a refugee could somehow safely reach and walk into an Australia embassy abroad, we would not issue a visa for the purpose of seeking asylum here. Travel without pre-authorisation is, for the truly desperate, usually the only real option.
Professor James Hathaway.
End of story.
Shepherdmarilyn,
Why is he even in politics?
I still think he has a lot of good potential, but he has had a major run of bad luck.
Bad luck Jillian, he is just inept and impatient and bad tempered and clueless.
Nothing to do with bad luck.
One of the shout-back rednecks on )Sydney) commercial radio opined that Turncoat would have been a good right wing Labor PM. In place of Krudd I’d agree but have we really fallen so low that the choice is Tweedledum or Tweedldummer?
It’s a rhetorical question, otherwise these scum would be out on the streets collecting dog dirt.
I don’t think he is inept or clueless. He is very intelligent and I like that he is more moderate than we had become used to. I can be impatient and bad tempered if people stuff me around too much. Probably a lot of people can.
Jillian is sounding like you have the ole Malcolm, Malcolm, where fore art thou Malcolm, be still my throbbing heart
Raymond, one could do a lot worse.
Which scum would you prefer then AR?
CliffG - I’d vote for Caligula’s horse before any time serving apparatchik, seat warmer or bloodless bureaucrat. A close reading of the Constitution arguably shows that ‘party’ allegiance is banned - an MP must have their first allegiance to their constituents, not any outside force. The political parties have no more status than a stamp collecting club.
I’d rather have a parliament of narrow independents than the sort of moral myopic who would sign up to toeing the party line. Most of the EU countries do just fine with a constantly negotiative system. A group/party/mob is, by denfinition, less than the sum of its parts.
I actually agree with Jillian.
I don’t really like Rudd or Turnbull but if it came to the cruch, I’d probably actually go with Turnbull as he seems to believe in what he talks about, pity the majority of his party doesn’t.
I also despise politicians that have been career public servants, let alone an arts graduate. Atleast Turnbull has had some modicum of success outside of politics which kids could aspire to.
I think the latest polling is correct although I suspect if the ALP had an effective opposition, Rudds popularity would be revised downward. I know alot of people that are tiring of the marketing machine that is yet to make an effective hard decision.
At the end of the day if the ALP could understand the relationship between taxes and spending and the Coalition could be better balanced in their policies, I’d probably vote for a major party.
whoops - i mean “let alone a career politician with an arts degree”
JILLIAN: I have to question Turnbull’s “run of bad luck”. Luck this bad usually is self-generated. The man is a committed liar.
About six to eight months ago he was being interviewed on Channel Two. Someone fed him a Dorothy Dixer and our Malcolm sailed ahead with his carefully rehearsed answer. He was half way through one of his eternal monologues when a minder bent over to tell him he had been fed the wrong question. Without turning a hair he continued on with the monologue, this time arguing completely against his original hypothesis. He wasn’t embarrassed, fazed or flummoxed.
Then, of course, there was the Godwin Grech affair. Turnbull set up this public servant in an elaborate lie in order to snare Kevin Rudd. Then with cold and very calculated cruelty-knowing the unfortunate Grech was in a psychiatric ward as a result of all this-he gaily fed him to the media-sharks.
Further: No matter how intelligent he is, he has the wrong sort of intelligence. A gift for hard work and business does not necessarily translate into political smarts.
Also, I have to disagree with Bernard who continues to harbour kindly thoughts about Malcolm Turnbull: Bernard says he is a decent man. No decent human being would use other people with such hard, cynical disregard of another human being. I dare say he had his person assistant drop Grech a line; wishing him a speedy recovery, which makes the whole thing even more deplorable.
To put it mildly, Kevin Rudd, gives me the shits but he and his cabinet have, thus far, not come within a bull’s roar of the evil perpetuated by the despicable John Howard, and his bully-boy thugs.
Re: NICK MINCHIN: No matter how much he despises the Climate Change assenters. there is, about his cold exterior an implacable quality which seems to suggest he does more than hate Malcolm Turnbull. His hatred is so virulent and vituperative-in a frigid manner, that I am forced to ask myself if he is working for Kevin Rudd. I am not saying it is so. Merely that it is a question I ask myself.
Venise,
“About six to eight months ago he was being interviewed on Channel Two. Someone fed him a Dorothy Dixer and our Malcolm sailed ahead with his carefully rehearsed answer. He was half way through one of his eternal monologues when a minder bent over to tell him he had been fed the wrong question. Without turning a hair he continued on with the monologue, this time arguing completely against his original hypothesis. He wasn’t embarrassed, fazed or flummoxed. “
That’s the lawyer in him. He can argue either side of a case.
“Turnbull set up this public servant in an elaborate lie in order to snare Kevin Rudd. Then with cold and very calculated cruelty-knowing the unfortunate Grech was in a psychiatric ward as a result of all this-he gaily fed him to the media-sharks.”
If I believed that, I wouldn’t support him either. I do not believe Malcolm was lying in that series of events. He wanted to bring down Kevin Rudd, but he also believed he had a just cause and Godwin Grech came to him rather than the other way around. I do not believe that Grech was an innocent victim. He had been around for a long time. He would not be so easily manipulated. If Malcolm made a mistake, it was to grab the wrong opportunity with both hands.
Venise,
I’d still rather someone else rather than a career public servant. I don’t really like Rudd or Turnbull but atleast Turnbull has some runs on the board external to the public service and may infact, be in politics for the right reason. He’ll never be PM however.
Love or hate John Howard, he was prime minister for 11 years and had more balls than Rudd. I can’t say I liked Howard too much myself but a PM like Rudd is an indictment on our country. A friggen arts graduate with a major in chinese history or whatever it is!!!! I live in London and think Brown is an indictment on the UK too. Obama is great.
Give Rudd credit, he has done some very important symbolic speeches, but he has not done anything of tangible substance after 2 years. After his election campaign he deserves a severe wrap across his knuckles for failing to deliver anything!
JILLIAN BLACKHALL: You see, I believe the legal profession has done more to ruin politics and earn the soubriquet of people ‘most hatred’ in the Australian lexicon. In the dim dark ages an ancestor of mine, he was a king, might have been one of the Edwards. He banned the legal profession from becoming politicians. And his reasons were sound. He called them ‘maintainers of dissent’.
The fact that someone can debate a point with passion, and score the highest points whilst being irredeemably opposed to it. Earns from me despair, angst and a deep-seated desire never to vote for him.
The Greens, people towards whom I’m always looking for ways to encourage. Have really gone to town in the electorate of Higgins-my home town electorate. They are standing a man called Clive Hamilton at the by-election. Yes this same man is a fervent supporter of censorship of the internet plus one or two very nasty
side issues. No wonder the Greens are doomed never to rise above their initial interest vote. Labor aren’t deigning to field a candidate at all, and I refuse to vote for the Libs. Which is a lovely dilemma, I don’t think.
Hell, I’m yawning my head off. /Gotta go.
Jillian even if Turnbull was the devil incarnate, you would still be singing his praises, you are infatuated with the man, go back over the many blogs you have written about him. I have no difficulty in seeing faults in Rudd, he has many, but I like the vast majority of the electorate, 63% prefer him to the apple of your eye.
Let’s hope it’s a temporary insanity for a significant number of that 63%.
Of course Malcolm is very appealing to many of the people, male and female, who meet him in person. A large proportion of the women, and a significant proportion of the men, in his electorate are in love with him. He received any number of marriage proposals during the 2007 election campaign, even though he is already married! That’s an added bonus for him. But he is not just an incredibly attractive individual - he is also a genuinely good man.
Barack Obama is also quite attractive, but his increasingly left-wing approach outweighs his pleasant appearance and eloquent speeches.
Jillian,
Whilst I am not too keen to comment on his appearance, I think you are onto something with Turnbull. You can atleast look up to Turnbull whilst Rudd is quite plainly, just a politician with an arts degree.
I was lucky enough to meet him a few months ago whilst he was in London meeting with David Cameron, who will be the next PM of the UK. He actually comes across as a fair dinkum good bloke and is alot more charismatic than Rudd.
David Cameron is a champion. His transformation of the UK Conservative Party is amazing.
yeah he is ok but anything is better than Gordon Brown. The UK was almost bankrupt due to him and his labour cohorts general mismanagement and ill-economic policies.
the mood over here is very similar to November 2007 back in Australia. It is time for a change over here and the Labour Party has not a hope in hell of winning the election in early 2010.
That’s good. I know there was some drama over the Lisbon Treaty, but I listened to the podcast from David Cameron explaining that it’s too late for a referendum this time, but there will always be a referendum on any future European treaties.
Venise,
I knew about Clive Hamilton’s views on internet censorship. One of the best things about the internet is that it is not censored, other than in China. I hope it stays that way.
Apparently he also calls for the ‘suspension of the democratic process’ to fight climate change.
I would be interested to know about the nasty side issues, but I recognise that you may not want to say what they are.
JILLIAM BLACKHALL: Jillian, Jillian “A large proportion of the women, and a significant proportion of the men, in his electorate are in love with him.” In love? This suggests to me that a large of the ladies suffering from this malady are post-menopausal females who remember vividly what sex was like but have Buckley’s chance of getting it.
Nor would I care so cast ‘nasturstians’ (however you spell it) at these guys, but love for another man in politics may be non-politique.
Barack Obama is a fine looking man and it is so refreshing to find an American politician (let alone the President) having a political agenda that hasn’t been soaked in the brine of relentless far right wing religious fundamentalism - think George W Bush and his refusal to allow aid agencies to offer help to the worlds aids-stricken and starving third world victims, unless they deleted all suggestions of using birth-control methods and condoms.
The supporting by the Republican Party of the rust-bucket southern states, the prejudices of the red-necks and their kow-towing to America’s military might…Look, there’s a war which has broken out between the Isle of Man and Wales. We Americans will not stand by and see these two mighty nations reduced to ashes. Ho hum.
Speaking as your normal highly-sexed heterosexual woman, I have to say neither Malcolm Turnbull or Kevin Rudd do a thing for me. Both men are too short. My late grandmother always told me. “Venise do not trust small men. Because the smaller they are, the more big are their complexes. Always remember hija, no small man gives a woman short-stemmed roses.” It took me for ever to understand what this gorgeous and ravishingly beautiful little woman from Corsica was on about. Who am I to argue with such wisdom?
Venise,
I agree that it’s good to get away from the religious right. They’re really crazy.
Malcolm is not short. He would be about 185 centimetres. I have a photo of myself with him. I’m 166 centimetres and you can see in the photo that Malcolm is a lot taller than me.
Let’s remember te topic of this thread.
Which is: Rudd, Minchin and Tucky are after Malcolm’s head and CPRS is unwinnable for him whichever way it swings.
It’s not an opinion poll about a Green candidate in one of the Lib’s safest seats in the country, nor is it a debate about Malcolm’s s_x appeal to ladies, whether or not they have Majorcan blood in them.
Malcolm is pretty well stuffed on this issue, and the longer the story runs, the worse it looks for him.
Which is a pity, because at its base, the CPRS isn’t going to achieve diddly-squat in carbon pollution reduction. If malcolm would only make that point, his party might just regather behind him, regardless of whether or not he advocates that, somewhere down the track, Australia actually do something effective to reduce GHG emissions.
That is his only “out”, and I expect him to play this card in parliament, about Wednesday afternoon.
JILLIAN BLACKALL: I’m in a dreadful hurry but I have to say when you see Malcolm Turnbull surrounded by other people he is nearly always the shortest person there. Also he carries himself the small men always do, trying to make up for lost inches. Like a Shetland Pony stallion shaping up to a Clydesdale stallion. And, as with many short people, his head is disproportionately big for his body.
I am the same height as you and if Turnbull is nineteen centimetres taller than me I will cheerfully eat a large packet of peanuts. Yuk, yuk, yuk I hate them.
Gotta get back to the grind. Seeya
John,
I’m not sure that Malcolm will try to make the point that the CPRS will be useless for carbon pollution reduction because if that were his plan, he wouldn’t have gone as far as he has in negotiations with the government - but who knows? Anything is possible.
Venise,
I think it must be that Malcolm is often around very tall men and so people get the impression that he is short. I have heard that from other people as well. Someone saw my facebook photo with Malcolm and said “Malcolm has grown!” Have a look and you will see what I mean.
haha some funny posts Venise…
I’d say the only thing people find attractive about Turnbull is his $$$$$$$$$$.
I’m 6’1 and was recently standing near him in London and would say he would roughly be between a solid 5’10 to 6’0 at best, most likely 5’10 or 5’11 but certainly not 185cm…
I will bring my estimate down to 180 cm.
THE DUKE: Ah ha! I can sniff out a short man at 100 metres-blindfolded-well almost. Mostly it’s the way their body-language reveals them, as I said in my previous comment, as a pugnacious Shetland pony stallion shaping up to a Clydesdale stallion. I’d put him at 5’8.5”ins. Max 5’ 9” ins. I can only imagine the besotted JILLIAN didn’t notice the platform he was standing on. Nor the fact that he is the sort of person who would wear elevator shoe inserts.
I know love is blind but this is ludicrous.
I can only add something to your comment “I’d say the only thing people find attractive about Turnbull is his $$$$$$$$$$$”…and if one is a woman I’d be very careful not to antagonise his Missussss….who is the Deus ex machina behind him.