Right Pulse

“All talk and no action” in the words of Tony Abbott, aptly describes Rudd. The Coalition is now 10 points behind the Government on 2PP. Abbott on Nelson :

“I don’t think anyone who’s worked closely with Brendan Nelson over the last six months could fail to be impressed,” he told. “Because he’s worked incredibly hard and I think he’s made gutsy calls on a few key issues and I think people will come round.”

While Nelson’s approval rating is below that of Rudd, by a long way, he is making in roads into Rudd’s popularity and people are moving into the undecided camp before they commit to supporting Nelson. I’d say Nelson has to November to really shake things up further, to avoid a leadership challenge. The key battleground issue should be opposing a carbon trade system, by explaining to people it will have no measurable impact on the climate, but will cost businesses and consumers billions of dollars. Dollars that the government will pocket for no clear fiscal outcome. This from Access Economics:

Mr Richardson, director of economic consultants Access Economics, said many people still did not get the concept of an emissions trading scheme and much of the pressure on politicians was wrong-headed. “The whole idea of carbon pricing is that if it doesn’t hurt it won’t work,” he told Canberra ABC radio today.

In other words: “you bunch of peasants, the lady of the lake has spoken so just learn to cop it sweat while the rest of us make millions out of the climate change agenda.”

I was reading one of Tony Abbott’s blogs and a reader made the following comment, which may reflect what many people in the electorate are now starting to feel:

Tony,

I don’t get it - one day we’re told we’re fat, drunk and everything else - then the next we’re the longest-livers in the world?

I just feel like we’ve all gone mad!

I was shocked the other night when I felt like I actually missed having Mr Howard talk to me on the news. At least he was decisive and stuck to his guns!

Ditto!

A couple of big swings against the Labour Party, both here in Australia and in the UK. Starting in Australia and in the Gippsland by-election the ALP suffered an 8.4 per cent swing against them after only 7 months ago having achieved a 1 - 2 per cent swing the other way. The result was never in doubt, a National win, but the swing against the Government is promising. Rudd’s popularity is starting to wain as people start to think about politics again.

In the UK, the Labour Party suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of the conservatives:

A HUMILIATING fifth place finish for the Labour Party in a parliamentary by-election was Gordon Brown’s anniversary present yesterday as he marked his first year as Prime Minister.

Labour’s candidate even lost his pound stg. 500 ($1036) deposit after failing to reach the 5per cent threshold intended to discourage joke candidates.

Labour supporters who have been wondering just how low the Government’s fortunes could plunge may have found out in the Henley-on-Thames by-election, as their candidate polled just 3.1per cent of the vote.

For the first time, Labour was beaten not just by the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, but even by two parties that lack a single member of parliament: the Greens and the far-right British National Party.

Combined with promising polling in New Zealand for the conservative Nationals, and also with Liberal state oppositions here, it looks like the political pendulum is swinging back to the right all round. The latest from the SMH about Premier Morris Iemma:

The results of today’s Sun-Herald/Taverner Poll will be the final straw for MPs, who have stoically stuck by their man only to see their party’s support plummet, with political oblivion a certainty unless something is done.

The damning verdict of voters surveyed on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights will alarm Labor MPs.

An election held now would propel the Opposition into government with a 56-44 two-party preferred landslide.

A revealing insight from The Australian into why the Australian Democrats are no longer in the Federal Senate:

TODAY is the last day Australian Democrats will sit in the federal parliament. After 31 years, the last four of their 26 senators are packing their offices and preparing for life outside politics.

From next Tuesday the sole Democrat remaining in the country will be Sandra Kanck, a South Australian Legislative Councillor last in the news for suggesting traumatised war veterans could benefit from ecstasy.

Oh really? A little too much of the illegal stuff can really go to your head.

An interesting observation from Malcolm Turnbull regarding Rudd’s performance, as reflected by business and consumer confidence:

There is a growing concern in the community that this new Government is not in control, that it is reacting from one crisis to another, focused on the daily news cycle instead of the long term.

And that is why we have seen such a sharp collapse in business and consumer confidence to near record low levels, according to the Westpac Index, which began in 1974.

Rudd says it is not his fault - but rather that of the “international oil shock” that has shattered consumer confidence.

So let us look at another international shock: the September 11 attacks in New York, when the two mightiest buildings in the centre of the world’s financial markets were destroyed. Western countries like Australia then appeared to be a facing a threat from terrorism to our very existence.

The Westpac consumer sentiment index fell from 107.6 to 99.5. But by the next month it had rebounded, and by January it was 110.

Since the Rudd government came to office the index has dropped 23.3 per cent. It is now at its lowest level since December 1992, when the nation was crawling out of Labor’s “recession we had to have”.

Remember Rudd had a vision for Australia. He had one, now it’s probably all too much for him.

Why has Australian consumer confidence taken a greater dive than after the September 11 attacks in 2001?

It is because of a lack of leadership. Confidence has to be based on consistency and competence - a real ability to deal with the big issues and take decisive action.

But as we look behind the facade of symbols and photo opportunities, what we see from the new government is a void. Where is the substance? Where is the consistency? Where is the predictability? The thought bubbles are starting to become a joke.

Fuel Watch, hybrid cars, an Asian EU, nuclear disarmament, Kyoto, the ‘Sorry’ statement and seemingly endless pointless overseas trips. More than a joke, and an embarrassment for this country.

Rudd was a former diplomat within the Department of Foreign Affairs. So you’d think that he’d understand the nuances of international affairs, especially within the East Asian region. Well think again, as outlined by Patrick Cook on Radio National Counterpoint.

Let’s start with India - India. Well that’s them offside.

And what about Japan - Japan. Another one bites the dust.

It’s a case of Rudd teaming up with the biggest bully in town, China, to get the rest of our neighbours offside. It smacks of Rudd’s own insecurity, his failure during his time at Department of Foreign Affairs and reflects his only real skill, the ability to speak Mandarin. Not much to recommend on the diplomatic front.

The left mocked Bush and his coalition for going to war in Iraq without UN multilateral support, i.e. without the support of China, Russia and France. Like this is a problem. Well anyway, if you want to see the workings of multilateralism (UN mandates) then look no further than Iran.  EU attempts to control the Iranian nuclear programme have been a complete failure - Iran continues on with their nuclear programme, regardless of sanctions. See the following Mark Steyn video from the 4 minute mark onwards:

Andrew Bolt has the latest regarding Rudd’s poor leadership skills in play. I’m not going to repeat the details here, needless to say it is amateur hour on display by Rudd and his office cronies. The media elite are also beginning to turn against their mate Rudd. They are disappointed Rudd has not turned hard left, like they were all hoping he would. John Lyons in The Australian:

The commentators, for their part, are increasingly seeing a problem. “Everything’s either for the next 24-hour news cycle or 2020. Nothing seems to be for the here and now,” says a leading political commentator who asks not to be named.

Most of the journalists spoken to for this story requested anonymity for fear of being frozen out by the new Government.

One prepared to be named was the ABC’s political editor, Uhlmann: “Petrol is a case study of how the Government’s focus on the news cycle is working against its long-term agenda. We have been treated to a daily slanging match over meaningless price cuts when Labor’s real task is to show the courage to make the hard argument for a carbon tax.

“It makes you question whether the Government actually appreciates just how fraught introducing an emissions-trading system (for dealing with climate change) will be: it will dwarf the GST as the most dramatic, wilful change ever imposed on the economy. The longer Labor plays short-term politics on petrol, the harder the long game will become.”

Talk about posting your colours to a mask. So the ABC wants a carbon tax, regardless of the consequences for the economy. The remarkable thing about this comment is that the ABC knows a carbon tax will damage the economy - so the motivation is clearly ideological. Like their apparent disdain for Howard and the GST.

Senator Bartlett and his ‘healing’ fund, I covered a day or so ago, have done battle with conservative bloggers and he’s come off worse. Big mistake from Bartlett, to say the least. It started with Andrew Bolt of the Herald Sun making a post about Bartlett going up against a blogger at the Daily Telegraph and then Bartlett decided to post on Bolt’s site and all hell broke lose. Bartlett wrote:

The Stolen Generations Assessor in Tasmania has issue payments to a number of people who had their claims assessed. All claims were tested and assessed. Some were knocked back. Presumably this government body, required to act in accordance with Tasmanian law, didn’t pay out money to people who just made things up. You can pretend they don’t exist if you like, but those of us who prefer to deal with reality and reason have better things to do.

And Bolt wrote in response:

You presume incorrectly. Actually, the Tasmanian Assessor under law is not required - or even authorised - to determine whether Aborigines claiming compensation for being “stolen” were in fact taken forcibly or for racist reasons. It is enough under Tasmanian law that they were raised as wards of the state by non-whites. Incredible, but true. Hence we find, for instance, a woman being compensated even for having been rescued from a home so bad that her mother was jailed for three months for child neglect.

It went on with other readers, but there are too many posts to reference. To his credit, Bartlett came back for more punishment:

It seems you are more interested in waging some sort of ideological crusade or score some political or rhetorical points against whoever you perceive to be your opponents, rather than looking at ways to reduce some of the individual and social impacts of failed and wrong policies of the past….For anyone who doesn’t want to dwell in the point scoring and wants to look at the reality of the impact of these past practices, it’s worth having a look at some of the submissions to the Senate Inquiry - available here - and yes, even just amongst those, there are at least 10 from people who indicate being directly impacted by Stolen Generations.

The crusade lives on! From Bolt:

Have you noticed that some of the names on your list are of people who make no claims to actually having been stolen? Have you checked why exactly those people who do claim they were “stolen” were actually taken? If you do, you’d find some were “stolen” in states that actually had no “stolen generations” policies at all. You’d also find that “stolen” children turn out to be children saved from starvation, rape and neglect. Take Margaret Hooker, for instance, one of the names you offer on that link. Check her real story.

Or check Eddie Thomas’ real story here.

This issue is crying out for a judicial inquiry into these people’s claims.

Peter Saunders, from the Centre for Independent Studies, argues on ABC’s Counterpoint against the Australian welfare state and taxation system. A system that takes money from individuals and families and then gives it back to them through welfare benefits:

…it’s saying that people who feel that they would be better off with their own money, buying the things that they need, organising their own budgets, looking after their own families and dependants should be able to say that, they should be able to declare independence from the government:

I don’t want your Medicare, I don’t want your social insurance, I don’t want your schools, I don’t want any of that stuff. I’m willing to pay tax in so far as it’s necessary for the redistributive component of the welfare state, to help people who genuinely can’t help themselves, but I’m fed up with paying tax so you can give it back to me again. And in return will you please leave me alone with this increasing amount of paternalistic regulation that you’re bringing in. Stop running my life for me.

A case of the Government stealing from the middle class and then giving the money back - as if it was a privilege to receive from the Government what was already yours.

Churning’ is that you’re paying for your own benefits. Your listeners can look it up; the Australian Bureau of Statistics produced a report last year which proudly stated that the average family with dependent children was paying in all tax (not just income tax but GST and so on) was paying I think it was something like $516 dollars a week in all taxes and was being given in the value of all benefits and services $503 a week. So there was this massive bureaucracy to take the money off you, including taking more than you should have done in order to give it back at the end of the tax year, and then there’s another massive bureaucracy to hand it all back again.

No club for victim hood here. Our friends seeking ‘healing funds’ could learn a few things. It is another reason why an Aboriginal state would never work - Aboriginal elites want independence from the Australian Government but can’t survive without Australian Government money and support as it is.