Laffing at #Führertuber Dutton......

 

 Deputy Sussan Ley & Liberal Party Leader Peter Dutton
Mark Knight

The Shot, 28 October 2024, excerpts:

34 thoughts I had while watching the Liberal Party conference

Ronnie Salt

To the ballroom of the Sydney Hyatt, (were you expecting West Wyalong?) where the Liberal Party’s 64th federal council conferencefestmeet is in full swing in June. I’m at home on a Sunday afternoon watching it back on Facebook and reading along with the comments from Brian and Raelene and Irene and Ron, who enjoys writing his comments in all capitals......

1. And we’re off. Sussan is wearing a fetching navy blazer to match all the other navy blazers at the two bridal tables on the stage full of white people. So very, very white. And navy – lots of navy.

2. Sussan says something about Peter being a leader and then does that head toss thing that reminds me of horses when their fly veil isn’t sitting on their head right.

3. No matter, Sussan has mercifully finished telling us all about Peter’s entire life story which nobody in Australia has ever heard before. Did you know he used to be in the police force? Stop it.

4. Sussan scurried back to her chair and here he comes, Peter Dutton, the Andrew Tate of Australian politics. Like Tate, hair-free and boring, he likes waggling the ToughMan persona-dildo in your face while nothing of any substance ever comes along to back it up.

5. Ron doesn’t seem to be bothered by that, GET RID OF THE GREENS!!

6. Oh, Peter is telling us that Sussan is a great friend of Women-In-The-Liberal-Party and a very good friend of something called Women-In-General. Not sure what Women-In-General he means, but it probably doesn’t include the attention-seeking missile Jacinta Price, who loves a good women’s uterus policing.

7. Immediately after Peter tells us how good Sussan and the Liberal party are for Women-In-General, he thanks the Liberal party president and the Liberal party treasurer and the Liberal party managers, who are all men called John and Charles and Andrew. Guess Sussan ain’t that great a friend of Women-In-The-Liberal-Party and Women-In-General after all.

8. He thanks yet another man, Jeremy Rockliffe, for being Tasmanian but I miss the part where he mentions the Rockliffe Government delaying charges in child sexual abuse cases that happened within the Tasmanian government, however Pete does tell us how exciting the Rockliffe Government will be for young people, and oh goodness what a clanger you dropped there Peter.....

10. Peter’s only seven minutes in and already the lady in the second row with one of those Prude & Trude black velvet hairbands (they must be compulsory) is checking her phone for emails. Have a fistful of mints Judith, cos Pete’s due to talk for 45 minutes and not even a bowl of blow is going to help you through this.

11. Apparently Australians cannot afford to buy a home, says the man who’s been in Parliament for 23 years and in government for 17. Did everyone know Peter and Mrs Peter sold one of their homes on the Gold Coast in 2022 for $6 million? Peter forgets to tell the audience this, too.

12. Yay. Here we go. Law, order and unity get their first call out and we’re only 10 minutes in. Peter has not yet referenced his nine years in the police, but there’s still time yet.

13. Peter is alarmed. There are radical Greens activists in the Teal’s midst. Why have the Teals never noticed them? Get Ron in the comments on the case. He’s seen them. Ron knows.

14. An annoying young journo is in the way of Judith the hair-band lady. She’s leaning over and giving him a good Karening.

15. Our Peter owns a little collection of Australian industries too, it seems. He’s talking about our miners, our farmers, our fishers and our foresters, but sadly no mention of our property developers, our $6 million Gold Coast apartment owners, and our billionaires who live in Singapore for tax purposes (wave to Gina everyone).

16. I’m worried about the journo. He’s a young’ish sort of fella. He’s not seasoned enough for the wrath of Judith from Double Bay. Run little journo boy, run.....

18. At 29:29 we hear, a Prime Minister cannot conduct themselves as somebody who is only there for sexual interests, and I’ve played it back and I think he might mean ‘sectional’, but ‘sexual’ is what Peter has said and I really don’t know what to say about that.

19. Peter has recently spoken to a man in the Cunter, which worries me until I replay it and realise it’s a man in the Hunter (Valley) and I’m not sure if Pete needs to see a speech therapist, or he’s just deathly tired, but this speech is getting very out there.

20. Peter thinks Anthony Albanese does not have a robust handle on nuclear. Does nuclear energy have a robust handle? And if it does, Peter sure doesn’t have one either. What in the name of stale conference room odour does it even mean? One day God herself is going to have to answer that one.

21. Nuclear! Nuclear! Nuclear for all! We will have so many jobs in the Cunter that people will be lining up to live there due to all the nuclear power stations that people want to live next to and somehow I think Peter’s telling us a bit of a fib here.

22. Peter is telling us the Liberal party will speak to Australians about nuclear power and consult with Australians about nuclear power and do costings with Australians about nuclear power and have meetings about nuclear power and lots of other sentences that include the words nuclear power, but sadly no information follows about the construction of stations for nuclear power or the timelines and money involved or where to read the full policy on nuclear power. What was that about Andrew Tate?

23. Aspiration dies where crime thrives. He looks very pleased with himself after that hilarious quip and so does the lanyard guy at the end of the bridal table who obviously wrote it cos he’s got that used-up radio ad man look about him....

25. The camera shows us the full room and they all have free Liberal Party travel mugs, so now you can recognise these people when they’re out in the wild at their lawn bowls clubs.

26. Judith is out of mints.

27. Raelene in the Facebook comments wants us to, Ask Albo what happens to all the waste of solar panels, batteries and turbines when they reach their use-by!? I assume Raelene has never seen the toxic wasteland of abandoned mines across the globe and the rising temperatures that are cooking the planet from those mine’s fossil fuel emissions, but you do you Raelene. (Narrator: it’s also clear these comments have been heavily censored, because every single comment is rejoicing in Sussan and Peter and everything Liberal. Either that or they’re handing out free nangs as well as free travel mugs.)

28. Peter is shifting to terrorism and immigration, which he says in the same sentence because that’s Peter’s safe place. But you go off king, while your ship is sinking, keep going.

29. Peter’s looking excited, which means he’s circling back to CRIME and LAW AND ORDER again. He gets a little glint in his eye when he’s talking about crime, like a penguin at feeding time.

30. Sorry, I dropped my laptop on my face because Peter’s just told me that highly credentialed politicians “like Dan Tehan” will help “restore Australia back to what it once was”, and even Judith looks like she ain’t swallowing that one, unlike the mints.

31. We’re working up for the big finish because the little journo boy and his camera are back, bravely facing danger in the untamed jungle of navy blazers and privilege and personalised travel mugs.

32. BORDERS, BORDERS, LAW AND ORDER, POWERS TO POLICE, CRIME, KNIFE SALES, GANGS, STOP AND SEARCH, INTERNET BADDIES, SOCIAL MEDIA BAD, CHILDREN COMMITTING CRIMES FOR LIKES, (unlike politicians), BAD BORDERS, SARAH HENDERSON IS IN CLASSROOMS WORKING AGAINST EXPLICIT SEXUAL THINKING (I have nothing to add there) BAD PEOPLE ARE EVERYWHERE, EVEN IN CLASSROOMS (probably get Sarah out of there then)......

Read the full article at

https://theshot.net.au/uncategorized/34-thoughts-i-had-while-watching-the-liberal-party-conference/

So you think a minority government is the answer?

 

In May 2022 the first-time Albanese Labor Government secured seventy-seven seats in a House of Representatives having 151 members.

With a floor majority of two that subsequently rose to four majority after the April 2023 Aston by-election win.

After boundary adjustments by the Australian Electoral Commission this year redistribution will reduce House numbers from 151 to 150, so seventy-six will remain the magic number for an absolute majority at the 2025 federal general election.

For the last twelve months I have noticed quite a bit of chatter discussing the supposed benefits of voting to reduce the Albanese Government to a minority federal government at the next general election.

For some reason there appears to be a view forming that a minority government would inevitably deliver positive and lasting environmental, social & economic policy change with the aid of The Greens & Independents.

Nothing is set in stone and, given how volatile the global climate and international politics are in 2024 and predicted to be going forward, perhaps it's time for a gentle reminder of what happens to duly elected governments during periods of widespread uncertainty.

One punter's view of Australia by way of example.....

There have been 47 Australian Parliaments since 1901.

From 1901 to 1910 federal elections had resulted in what were essentially minority governments and the prime ministership changed hands six times across those first three Australian Parliaments.

The Cook Free Trade and Liberal Association Government, with a one seat majority, was first federal government in Australia that did not even last one full term. It went for 1 year & 55 days from July 1913 to September 1914 when it lost a double dissolution election. Britain and her dominions declared war on Germany & her allies on 4 August 2014.

The Scullin Labor Government was the second and last federal government that did not last one full term. It went for 2 years & 79 days from October 1929 to January 1932 after failing to win a second term. The Wall Street Crash which triggered the decade long Great Depression occurred on 28 October 1929 at the very beginning of this Labor Government's term.

During the terms in office of five consecutive Coalition prime ministers over 23 straight years from December 1949 to December 1972 there was one major issue which increasingly exercised Australian society between 1962 to 1972—the Viet Nam War and Australia's active participation in progressing that war.

Opposition to that war was a significant factor in the Whitlam Labor Government winning the 1972 federal election by 67 seats (with a positive two-party-preferred swing of 2.50%) to the Coalition's 58 seats (with an adverse two-party-preferred swing of 2.50%). The new government inherited a Senate where both Labor and the Coalition held 26 seats each, the Democratic Labor Party 5 seats & an Independent 1 seat.

In May 1974 the first-term Whitlam Government called a double dissolution federal election on the basis that a hostile Senate had unreasonably obstructed the first term government by returned 6 Bills to the House, in addition to the matter of another 21 bills covering government promises taken to the 1972 general election which been rejected, stood aside or deferred by the Senate.

After which the Labor Party remained in government in the House of Representatives with 66 seats and a positive two-party-preferred swing of 1.00%, to the Coalition's 61 seats and an adverse two-party-preferred swing of 1.00%.

In the Senate both Labor and the Coalition held 29 seats with the balance of power held by one Independent & one Liberal Movement senator who on past history would vote with the Coalition.

After the election, the six Bills that had formed the basis of the double dissolution – the Commonwealth Electoral Bill (No. 2) 1973, the Senate (Representation of Territories) Bill 1973, the Representation Bill 1973, the Health Insurance Commission Bill 1973, the Health Insurance Bill 1973, and the Petroleum and Minerals Authority Bill 1973 – were passed at a historic joint sitting of both houses of parliament.

In what can only be described as a silent coup encouraged by the Liberal & Nationals political parties, big business and Buckingham Palace, in October 1975 the Coalition Opposition deferred voting on supply bills in the Senate in an attempt to force Whitlam to call yet another election for both the Senate and the House of Representatives. In response, Mr Whitlam decided to ask the Governor-General to call a half-Senate election to resolve the situation. Instead the Whitlam Government was pre-emptively dismissed by the Governor-General on 11 November 1975 after two years & 341 days.

Malcolm Fraser was invited to form government and the Coalition won the subsequent 1975 federal election 91 House of  Representative seats to Labor's 36 seats. This appears to be the highest majority ever held by an Australian federal government.

The Australian Labor Party did not form federal government again for almost another eight years when it again held government for thirteen years before the Coalition regained government in 1996 and with John Howard as prime minister held it for 11 years & 269 days until December 2007.

According to political pundits almost every first-term government since the World War Two has suffered an adverse two-party-preferred swing at the next election.

In the case of the federal Rudd-Gillard-Rudd Labor Government which began life on 24 November 2007 by winning 83 of the 150 seats with a two-party-preferred positive swing of 5.4 % it all looked like smooth sailing. The Liberal Party having only won 55 seats, the National Party 10, and Independents 2.

However by June 2010 the accepted story is that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd had lost the confidence of the national electorate after the federal government appeared to lose its way on a number of issues (including Senate rejection of its Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in November 2009) and walked away from a strong policy push for climate change mitigation measures following the collapse of UN COP climate summit in Copenhagen in December 2009. The Labor parliamentary party replaced him with the Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard in June 2010.

Following the 21 August 2010 federal election, the Australian Labor Party (with an adverse two-party-preferred swing of 2.58%) won 72 seats, the Coalition 72, Independent Nationals 1, Greens 1 & Independents 4.

With the support of the Greens member (Bandt) and three of the Independents (Wilkie, Windsor and Oakeshott), Prime Minister Julia Gillard was able to form a minority government which could muster 76 votes to 74 in the House of Representatives.

Under relentless disruptive attack from the Abbott-led Coalition Opposition that number fluctuated over the course of the next 3 years & 16 days (going as low as 75 to 73), when a last minute change of party leadership meant that Kevin Rudd had the dubious honour of leading that Labor federal government to defeat in September 2013 winning only 55 of the 150 House of Representative seats (its lowest primary vote in 100 years) with an adverse two party preferred swing of 3.61% and, the Coalition winning government with 90 seats.

From 2010 to 2013 the Gillard Labor Government had passed a range of bills including the:

> two National Broadband Network acts in 2011 (significantly & adversely altered by subsequent Coalition governments);

> Clean Energy Act 2011 (a carbon emissions trading scheme repealed by Abbott Coalition Government);

> Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011;

> Mineral Resources Rent Tax 2012 (repealed by Abbott Coalition Government);

> National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013 (rolled out by successive Coalition governments); and

> The National School Reform Agreement (passed by Senate on Gillard's last day as prime minister. Under successive Coalition Governments & current Labor Government has never lived up to expectations).

(Re)Tweet of the Week

 

Because @AusConservation was suspended for truth telling and I cannot add one of its tweets to today's post lineup, this short video is getting an airing again....

Finally! Peter Dutton answers questions on Political Mastermind .... #Nuclear #Auspol pic.twitter.com/jRqMI3nI0O

— A Rational Fear (@ARationalFear) July 4, 2024

The Independent COVID-17 Response Inquiry Final Report will be given to the Albanese Government by the end of September 2024 - with only about 15 Lower House sitting days left between 1 October and the day the parliamentary year ends - when will the report be tabled?

 

On 21 September 2023, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced the Commonwealth Government COVID-19 Response Inquiry which had the stated purpose "to identify lessons learned to improve Australia’s preparedness for future pandemics".

The independent panel members heading this inquiry are Robyn Kruk AO (Chair), Professor Catherine Bennett (Member) and Dr Angela Jackson (Member).

The list of authors of the 2,092 submissions received by COVID-19 Response Inquiry from 6 November to 15 December 2023 and, those who gave permission for publication, can be read at:

https://www.pmc.gov.au/covid-19-response-inquiry/consultation/submissions.

COVID-17 Response Inquiry's published summaries can be found at:

https://www.pmc.gov.au/resources?f%5B0%5D=area_program_initiative%3A46&f%5B1%5D=area_program_initiative%3A75&f%5B2%5D=area_program_initiative%3A90&f%5B3%5D=area_program_initiative%3A683&f%5B4%5D=area_program_initiative%3A703&f%5B5%5D=area_program_initiative%3A707

The Independent Panel will deliver the COVID-17 Response Inquiry Final Report to Government, including recommendations to the Commonwealth Government to improve Australia’s preparedness for future pandemics, by the end of September 2024.

The following excerpt from a media article is the latest journalistic opinion on Inquiry evidence to date, in what has been a rather low profile inquiry.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 July 2024:

COVID-19 has left Australians with poorer physical and mental health, helped fuel inflation because of too many government handouts and encouraged people into the black economy, the first wide-ranging inquiry into the pandemic has heard.

Businesses, unions, health experts and the education sector have told the inquiry, due to report in weeks, that Australia needs to prepare for future pandemics to avoid repeating mistakes made across all levels of government that are still being felt in some parts of the nation.

The inquiry, promised by Anthony Albanese ahead of the 2022 federal election, is being headed by former senior public servant Robyn Kruk plus economist Angela Jackson and infectious diseases expert Professor Catherine Bennett.

Established last year, the 12-month inquiry is due to report by September. It has been given a wide remit to look at joint Commonwealth-state actions, although its terms of reference preclude examining unilateral actions taken by states and territories or international programs.

Across a series of roundtables, the inquiry has been told of major shortcomings with elements of the federal and state governments’ responses to COVID-19 and the long-term problems these have caused.

Health experts said border closures had a “significant” impact on healthcare provision, particularly in rural, remote and border communities, arguing health workers should be exempt from such restrictions.

Australia’s average age fell last year while the country experienced a record number of deaths in 2022.

Chronic disease monitoring and cancer screening were disrupted, the sector said, noting a nationally co-ordinated effort was now required to clear the backlog of tests.

“People are currently waiting longer for care than before the pandemic, are often sicker and [are] finding it less affordable,” the sector said.

Experts said the mental health system was in crisis before the pandemic, and COVID-19 had exacerbated problems that had only worsened since.

“Australian communities are experiencing a process of rolling recoveries from one emergency to the next (extreme weather events and the pandemic), with resulting cumulative trauma,” they told the inquiry.

“More emphasis is needed on community resilience and on strengthening the system ahead of the next emergency.”

Well now the Chicken Little's of Australian journalism have moved on to other topics, here is another perspective on that latest Newspoll

 

Well the headlines this week ran a particular pessimistic line.....

Fresh Newspoll suggests Labor spiralling towards minority government at next election in worst result since Voice defeat [Sky News, 25.03.24]

Newspoll: Labor on slide as new year reset fades [The Australian, 25.03.24]

Newspoll: Worst result for Albanese gov since referendum backlash [The Courier Mail, 25.03.25]

Federal Labor's Popularity Slips In Latest Newspoll [10Play, 25.03.25]

Voters’ harsh verdict on Labor as cost of living bites [The Daily Telegraph, 25 March 2025]

So what exactly did the latest Newspoll survey results show?

NEWSPOLL, Sunday 24 March 2024

Newspoll was conducted by YouGov from 18-22 March using a survey pool of 1,223 participants.

Federal Primary Voting Intent:

ALP 32 (-1)

L/NP Coalition 37 (+1)

Greens 13 (+1)

One Nation 7 (+1)

Other 11

Federal Two Party Preferred Prediction:

ALP 51 (-1)

L/NP Coalition 49 (+1)

Click on image to enlarge

Better Prime Minister:

Albanese 48 (+1)

Dutton 34 (-1)

Approval Rating

Anthony Albanese: Approve 44 (+1) Disapprove 51 (0)

Peter Dutton: Approve 37 (0) Disapprove 52 (+1)

By way of context

On 24 March 2024 the nation was 61 weeks out from the last possible date for next federal general election, 17 May 2025.

This 24 March the two party preferred outcome of 51-49 in Labor's favour mirrored past Newspolls on:

28 April, 5 & 12 May 2019

12 Jan, 23 Feb & 15 March 2020

25 April, 16 May & 27 June 2021.

In Newspoll on those same dates the Coalition had the higher primary vote on:

28 April, 5 & 12 May 2019

12 January, 23 February & 15 March 2020

25 April, 16 May & 27 June 2021.

 

With the 16 May 2021 Coalition primary vote lead being a 5 point advantage making it an identical voting intention & prediction poll with this week's 24 March 2024 poll.

At approximtely 61 weeks out from May 2022 federal election, Newspoll was showing a two-party preferred prediction outcome of 52-48 in Labour's favour and, a primary voting intention outcome of somewhere between 40-38 & 42-37 in the Coalition's favour by 2-5 points.

It would seem this is a road well travelled and this far out from an election gives no real indication of the mood of a national electorate in May 2025.

International Womens Day 2024: So how is female suffrage getting along in Australia?

 

United Nations banner

So how is female suffrage getting along in Australia?

After federation came into effect and the Commonwealth of Australia began its life in January 1901, the first federal parliament contained no women as elected representatives.

It wasn't until 1902 that Commonwealth Franchise Act established equal suffrage at a federal, allowing adult women the right to vote in federal elections and elect members to the House of Representatives and the Senate.

By 1903 women began to stand for federal election - as independents or as candidates for minor parties as neither the forerunners of the Liberal Party of Australia or the Australian Labor Party would support woen candidates.

It took another forty years before the first two women were elected - Enid Lyons, the Liberal MP for Darwin (Tas) and Dorothy Tagney Labor Senator for West Australia.

Both women entered a Parliament House which since its erection in 1927 had been totally devoid of toilets set aside for female members of parliament. [National Museum Australia, "First women in parliament", 2024]

For another forty years between 1946 to 1986 another 6 women MPs and 26 women senators came and went in the federal electoral cycles. A woefully small number. [Australian Parliament website, "Women parliamentarians in Australia 1921-2020", December 2020]

In May 2010 first federal Labor elected & then in August the national electorate endorsed the first female prime minister of Australia. In the federal government ministry, as at the end of June 2010, there were nine female ministers and parliamentary secretaries (representing 23% of ministers and parliamentary secretaries), including the Prime Minister The Hon Julia Gillard MP and a further three who were Cabinet members. Around 17% of shadow ministerial and parliamentary secretary positions were held by women [ABS, Measures of Australia's Progress, 2010]

However, it took until 2014 before women made up 26.7 per cent of the House of Representatives and 38.2 per cent of the Senate.

Now in 2024 the gender landscape in the Australian Parliament stands thus......

A total of 37 of the 78 Labor Government MPs in the Australian House of Representatives are women. That number represents 47.53 per cent of all those sitting on the government benches in the Lower House and 63.79 per cent of all federal women MPs in 2024.

A total of 17 of the 25 Labor Government senators in the Australian Senate are women. That number represents 68 percent of all those sitting on government benches in the Upper House and 40.7 per cent of all women senators in 2024.

Women in the Albanese Labor Government make up a combined total of 24 per cent of all MPs and Senators in the Australian Parliament. While women of all political persuasions comprise 44.44 percent of all parliamentarians sitting in the Australian Parliament in 2024. [Australia Parliament website, March 2024]

By December 2023 17,721,975 Australian citizens over the age of 18 years were enrolled to vote and the enrolment rate was 98 per cent. Historically overall voter turnout at elections is high. However, if the trend since 1996 holds, slightly more female registered voters are likely to turnout to vote than male voters at a federal general election.

In June 2023 the Australian estimated resident population numbered 26,638,544 individuals of which est. 50.35 per cent were female. [ABS, National state and territory population, June 2023]

It has only taken women 123 years to get to less than half the elected political representation their population demographic suggests they are entitled to expect.

And in the Australian Senate this week they were arguing over a difference of five minutes.......

How to shut down the Australian Senate in under 14 minutes, during an argument over a five minute difference between allotted speaking times OR one of the many ways members of parliament choose to waste Treasury funds.

Player Cheat Sheet:

Labor Senator Sue Lines for Western Australia, President of the Senate. 

Labor Senator Loiuse Pratt for Western Australia, Acting Deputy President of the Senate

Liberal Senator Maria Kovacic for New South Wales 

Labor Senator Helen Polley for Tasmania 

Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe for Victoria 

Liberal Senator Paul Scarr for Queensland

Labor Senator Murray Watt for Queensland.

Senate Hansard, 27 February 2024, pages 101-103:

Note: My yellow highlighting throughout the excerpt

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT (Senator Pratt): Senator Polley, if you could just pause for a moment— Senator Kovacic?

Senator Kovacic: I've been waiting here for over an hour and 15 minutes, as the schedule has shifted around over and over.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: If you are seeking a point of order—

Senator Kovacic: It's five minutes—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No. Senator Scarr was the first speaker when no-one jumped up before then. We immediately went into 10 minutes right from the outset. Some people spoke for less than 10 minutes, as a courtesy to the chamber. But under the standing orders anyone can now speak for 10, because that is what—

Senator Thorpe: We weren't told that by the last speaker—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I beg your pardon? Senator Thorpe!

Senator Thorpe: We weren't told that by the last speaker! We were told by the person—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, sit down now! You won't get the call at all unless you sit down now. Senator Scarr?

Senator Scarr: Acting Deputy President, my understanding was that we were going through the 10 minutes and then we were starting with the five minutes with Senator McCarthy. So, Senator McCarthy has spoken. Senator Sharma spoke. We're now onto Senator Polley. My understanding—and I think the Acting Deputy President who was in the chair indicated we were on five minutes—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Scarr, I understand what the President indicated. Senator McCarthy spoke for 10 minutes—

Senator Thorpe: No she didn't!

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: and that is because she had agreement to move from the list to do a 10-minute speech. So, I'm just going according to the standing orders.

Senator Thorpe: We were told five minutes!

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senators! It is a courtesy to the chamber—

Senator Thorpe interjecting—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Stop! Stop interjecting, Senator Thorpe, and I will tell you what the rules are.

Senator Thorpe: Wake up, because you've been asleep in that chair, and I have a mother who lost a son to your system—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, sit down now!

Senator Thorpe interjecting —

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, you will come to order.

Senator Thorpe: Wake up! Wake up!

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, I've been listening intently to the speeches before me— 

Senator Thorpe: No, you have not—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Polley's speech on dementia and the speech on concussion, which I note you were taking a deep interest in because of your parliamentary work.

Senator Thorpe interjecting—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Kovacic, I'm sure you're very glad you took a point of order! Please, both of you sit down and I will allow Senator Polley to continue. Senator Polley, you have the call.

Senator Thorpe: We were told five minutes. How can you as the chair change the rules? How can you come in and change the rules?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Polley has the call.

Senator Thorpe: How come all of us heard one thing and you heard something different?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Polley, you have the call.

Senator POLLEY: I'd like—

Senator Thorpe: No. A point of order!

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, what is your point of order?

Senator POLLEY: You're delaying it.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Kovacic, you're on your feet. Senator Polley, my apologies. 

Senator Thorpe: Where's the President? Where's the President? Where's the President?

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Kovacic, what's your point of order, please?

Senator Kovacic: I have been on my feet for quite some time—

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, I understand that.

Senator Kovacic: I'm ready to sit down. I don't think it's appropriate for to you reflect on whether I'm happy that I raised a point of order. I raised it because it was appropriate and we wanted to understand when we would be able to speak. I don't think that was too much for either of us to ask.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Kovacic, I will reflect on that as chair. Senator Thorpe?

Senator Thorpe: I'd like, respectfully, for your conduct to be reviewed by the President, who should be in the seat dealing with this issue right now because we are being done over by you and them.

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT: By all means. Senator Polley?

Senator Thorpe: Point of order, now that the President is in the chair—

The PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, the way adjournment operates is by agreement. Senator McGrath made an ruling earlier because when we went to adjournment tonight there was not one senator on the five-minute list in the chamber, so he quite properly went to the 10-minute speakers and then reverted to the five-minute speakers. Senator Pratt has explained that. Senator Polley has the call. I'm going to give her the call. 

Senator Thorpe: A point of order. That was not properly explained [inaudible]—

The PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, please resume your seat. I'm not entertaining any more points of order. Please resume your seat. I've ordered and the matter is finished with. I have been watching adjournment since it began.

Senator Thorpe: Of course you have, so you should know.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, resume your seat. I will order that you no longer be heard.

Senator Thorpe interjecting—

The PRESIDENT: Senator Thorpe, you will no longer be heard.

Senator Thorpe: Have you made that ruling?

The PRESIDENT: Senator Polley?

Senator POLLEY: I was about to conclude my remarks—

Senator Thorpe: Point of order: are you telling me that I can't be heard? Because I want to know. Is that right? Is that what's happening?

The PRESIDENT: Senator Polley, please resume your seat. Senator Thorpe, I have ordered that you no longer be heard. Please resume your seat.

Senator Thorpe: I'm not going to leave this chamber. I will read now.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Polley, please continue. 

Senator POLLEY: As I was saying, President, I was about to conclude my remarks on what I think—

Senator Thorpe interjecting—

The PRESIDENT: Senator Polley, please resume your seat.

Senator Thorpe interjecting—

The PRESIDENT: Minister Watt?

Senator Watt: I ask that the Senate now be adjourned. Question agreed

Senate adjourned at 20:49 

Newspoll 2024: fourteen months out from the likely date of the next Australian federal election and the Coalition is limping along

 

The Australian, Newspoll, 25 February 2024:

Two Party Preferred Voting Intention January 2019 to February 2024

IMAGE: The Australian, 25.02.24

Click on image to enlarge

FEDERAL FIRST PREFERENCE VOTING INTENTIONS

Australian Labor — 33 (down 1)

Liberal-Nationals Coalition — 36 (no change)

The Greens — 12 (no change)

One Nation — 6 (no change)

Others — 13 (up 2)

FEDERAL TWO-PARTY PREFERRED VOTING INTENTIONS

Australian Labor — 52 (no change)

Liberal-Nationals Coalition — 48 (no change)

PREFERRED PRIME MINISTER

Anthony Albanese — 47 (up 1)

Peter Dutton — 35 (no change)

LEADER'S APPROVAL

Albanese:

Approve — 43 (up 1)

Disapprove — 51 (no change)

Dutton:

Approve — 37 (no change)

Disapprove — 51 (up 1) 

NOTE:

Results are based on the responses of 1,245 participants in the YouGov survey, which are weighted to be representative of the population by age, gender, education, AEC region, household income, weighting by past vote (Federal vote and Voice referendum). This Newspoll was published in The Australian on 25.02.24

At this point in time the expectation is that Australian will go to a federal general election sometime in May 2025, roughly 14 months away. 

Fourteen months out from the May 2022 federal election in the 21 February 2021 Newspoll, Labor's primary vote stood at 36 to the Liberal-Nationals Coalition's 42.

While Labor and the Coalition stood neck and neck on the two party preferred graph at 50 points.

At the actual general election on 21 May 2022 Labor won government with a House of Representatives count of 77 seats to the Coalition's 58 seats - with minor parties & independents holding 16 seats - giving the Albanese Government a one seat majority. The Newspoll of 13 May 2023 had posited a Labor win of 54 to the Coalition's 48.