I don’t usually watch much TV, which doubtless hampers me in keeping in touch with the mood of the Australian electorate, most of whom still get much of their political news from this source. But, over the summer break, I tend to take things easier which means watching more TV, and taking less interest in politics. So, I don’t think the following observations are way out of line with general public reactions
* When it limped into the end of its first session, the talk coming out of the Abbott government’s media cheer squad was that they would let us watch the cricket in the hope that we’d forget the fiascos of their first few months. Instead, they’ve generated more and worse political coverage than I can ever remember for this time of year, floating trial balloons, rerunning culture wars and so on
* As I remember them from Opposition a fair few of our new rulers are reasonably personable types. But the government’s media strategy has been to keep them all in the background, and to push the most appalling thugs and fools (Pyne, Morrison, Bernardi, Newman (Campbell and Maurice), Andrews) to the forefront. Or maybe there is no strategy, and they are just letting everyone do what comes naturally
But perhaps there is a brilliant plan here, and I’m missing it. Any thoughts?
John Quiggin 
Sorry about the double moniker. These typo’s are getting a bit too frequent…
And by “fact value”, I meant “face value”. Arrgh.
@Tim Macknay
Obviously I don’t accept this:
But I think we may be missing the point. I’m not a PUP cheerleader/booster/rusted-on-die-hard who thinks they can do no wrong and that we must all always vote for them for the good of the country. My point is that an awful lot of ALP supporters hold that view of the ALP (applies to LNP too). And, that such blind loyalty actually deprives this country of the best features of a functioning democracy.
Two things about the ALP climate change policy: It would have seen emissions continue to rise for the near future rather than stabilise or fall, and, it looks like they will be completely undone by about mid-year anyway.
A big change (such as the GST) might be heavily opposed and cause much noise but (like the GST) once in place it seems very hard to remove and becomes accepted. I remember well the “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good” meme doing the rounds when we were all supposed to be waving pom-poms for the ALP on climate change. In my view that didn’t really work out.
@Megan
Stuffed up the blockquotes. Blurgh. It’s really not my day for formatting…
@Tim Macknay
You are being slippery in attributing to me the “view that the current ALP/Greens originated policy is not worth preserving”.
You describe it as: “…a reasonably good climate change policy framework in place, which has the potential to being driving down emissions (and on the evidence, is already doing so to some degree)and can be ramped up as circumstances permit/require.”
My view is that the policy is a bit like deciding to drive a motorbike into a wall at 95kph when the other mob want to keep doing 100kph. “Reasonably good” isn’t anywhere near good enough, is the point.
My analogy to GST was simply to make the point that some BIG changes have been implemented over the years and despite all the howls they proved relatively difficult to undo rapidly later (other examples might include metric system, medicare, suffrage, dropping the draft).
Basically, when looking at PUP policy, just look at how it would benefit Clive. More refugees = cheap labour. Sugar to ethanol = pork barrelling my mates.
To me the ALP might sometimes be wrong or ineffective, but they aren’t a party with a leader who looks at the world and thinks how he can change things to enrich himself more.
@John Brookes
We’re in agreement on this:
Exactly! “Change” is the farthest thing from his mind (and all ALP leaders for that matter).
BAU is their mantra.
@Vegetarian
I too am curious to know which are the ones (on the Coalition frontbench) that Professor Quiggin perceives (or perceived) as ‘reasonably personable types’. I have never paid enough attention to them to form individual views about them (well, maybe two or three).
@Megan
No, I don’t accept that. I stated what appears to me to be the straightforward implication of your comments. You haven’t been particularly clear as to precisely what you do think would be an adequate global warming policy, so if I got it wrong, it’s not altogether surprising.
We are Helping All Australians, with a all out Assistance in helping them in there Home Loans Canberra, Car loans, or even Wealth creation
We are Helping All Australians, with a all out Assistance in helping them in there Home Loans Canberra, Car loans, or even Wealth creation http://ablefinancial.com.au/
See, PUP policy is guaranteed to make at least one person better off, whereas the coalition can’t even manage that. Clive’s the clear winner in strict utility terms.
Maybe I’m just strange, but I find it funny that I regularly get threatened with bans for responding to defamatory attacks or misrepresentation of things I have said; I can no longer link my website to my name when posting comments – but stuff like this:
not only slides through the eternal moderation the years long regulars are subjected to, but manages not to be banned.
Pays someone’s wages, I suppose – but if anyone thinks they’re going to get a single cent from a reader of this site I’ve obviously overestimated the intellectual quotient around here.