7 June 2010
The Socceroos coach recently trimmed his squad down to 28 before departing Australia and then again to 23 after arriving in South Africa; fine-tuning his line-up to ensure he has the best possible combination going into the first game against Germany on the 13th of June.
Let's hope Pim Verbeek has not botched it like the Rudd Government, which has been engaged in a similar process in the last month or so. Not cutting players, rather cutting policies and fine tuning its message in the lead-up to the election.
Explaining the rationale, a Labor minister told me the Government had been trying to do too much, its messages were being confused.
That argument was manifested in the recent mopping up exercise that included a delay to the Emissions Trading Scheme.
Kevin Rudd wants an election line-up centred on the Government's economic and tax reforms.
But delaying the ETS was like the Socceroos coach selecting Tim Cahill and Harry Kewell but leaving Mark Schwarzer at home.
It's fine having your attacking players but you need to protect your goal or in political parlance, your base.
The ETS was central to the Rudd Government's identity, it was the embodiment of Labor's commitment to action on climate change.
Not only did Kevin Rudd campaign heavily on the issue, immediately after the election the PM travelled to Bali and committed Australia to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Since then he invested heavily in the Copenhagen process and famously described climate change as “the greatest moral and economic challenge of our time”.
When Kevin Rudd said he would delay the introduction of the ETS he signalled he was giving up on the greatest challenge of our time.
The consequences since have been clear, the Rudd Government has lost votes to the Left - the Government's primary vote is now down to its bare base at 33% and the Greens are at record levels on 15% in this week's Nielsen survey.
The same can be said on asylum seeker policy. The Government suspended processing Sri Lankan and Afghani asylum seekers and again left its base vulnerable.
The Nielsen poll has just 19% supporting Government border protection policy, the Greens on 18% while the Coalition is on 35%.
The Government left its goal clear and now has to play catch-up football.
Comments are moderated and will not appear until they have been approved.
Muriel Ryan , Bowral NSW (17 July 2010 1:31PM) wrote:
Kieran, I wish to say that I think your reporting leading up to and today during the announcement of the election has been very professional, fair and balanced. We as Sky News subscribers have been considering turning off totally, you have brought us back this week. May I say Kieran I do believe that this taking Australia forward is rally an insult as if we are a backward nation. I think this will lose votes for Gillard. I think the implication for many is that she is a forward thinker and that those Liberal supporters are backward thinking people. There are lots of swinging voters who do not see this Country as anything but always moving forward for over 200 years. I have spoken to people on both sides who see this as an insult to our we who have lived and invested in the future of this country all our lives. As for this "Myschool", Myhospitals, "Mysuper". Have you read "Mao"??!!
CARMEN, SYDNEY (15 July 2010 9:31PM) wrote:
Because Julia Gillard is seeking my very precious vote, which would be one of many, together with my trust in her to continue serving my country, I wish to put my views to you, the media, WHY SHE WILL NOT GET MY VOTE. Before I give you my reasons, I want to make it quite clear that my following views do not reflect on any other person or persons who hold Ms. Gillard's belief. However, Julia is seeking to be our nation's top politician, and this is where I take umbrage at her arrogance in proclaiming that she does not believe in God. How could we accept a faithless person to be our representative? Belief in God creates a conscience which in turn enables one to, hopefully, make the right decision in difficult times. Stabbing Mr. Rudd in the back, especially after assuring him that he had her complete loyalty, is proof enough that Julia does not have a conscience and, therefore, is not a fit and proper person to be leader of our country. It would also be out of place for her to have her partner move into the Lodge, which up until now, has been home only to married prime ministers. This tradition should be allowed to continue.
Brian Wuillemin, perth (2 July 2010 2:05PM) wrote:
to Gilbert and Speers ask the question , "what did Gilard use to buy off the mining giants? my bet is "no union trouble", for some years, somewhere they have been bought. get a copy of the transcript from the Gov/Mining meeting see what has been said
Dave T, NSW (25 June 2010 9:03AM) wrote:
David Speers has just done his first hit job on Julia Gillard, enlisting none other than Mark Latham. It must be Kieren's turn next. It has been very disappointing to see Sky News descend in to the kind of political reporting one sees in the U.S., notably of course in the methods and tactics of Fox News. Australia shouldn't take its lead from the U.S. in any area these days. We have to set our own high standards because we value what it is to be Australian, which isn't about being cynical and know-nothing contemporary Yanks.
Ian Crossing, Adelaide (13 June 2010 1:19PM) wrote:
On Agenda this week -how come Jason Clare's statement was never challenged when he stated that '80,000 Australian businesses would be better off with the drop in company tax due to the RSPT'? Where did his ignorant statistic come from? There are not even 80,000 Australian trading companies that pay company tax. There is not even 80,000 of those trading companies in existance here. There may well be 80,000 businesses here but 2/3rds of these businesses are either sole proprietors or partnerships both of which are never liable for any company tax. However if they do employee staff they will be liable for an increase from 9-12% in Mr. Clare's Govt's compulsory super contribution levy increase. If the Rudd Govt wants to be taken seriously in RSPT then they should start by telling the truth to the Australian voters. Another Rudd Govt recent lie re the RSPT debate was their claim that mining companies only paid up to 17% in tax on their net profits (refer Hansard records.) When KPMG indendently audited mining company financial accounts showed that this true figure was over 46% refer Rio Tinto. Literate Australians that can do basic arithmetic know that 46% is far greater tax payment on net profits than the Rudd Govt's claim of 17%!
Damien Blackley, Brisbane (13 June 2010 10:16AM) wrote:
I find the discussion on Asylum Seekers misleading on all sides of politics including the Media. No body mentions those who come by Air, we only here about those who come by boat. While all are Asylum Seekers, they are been used by the Coalition and the Media as a way of attacking the Government. When the number of Asylum Seekers arriving by boat is increasing, the People Smugglers see this as a last chance before the Coalition close the borders and their business dries up. Asylum Seekers will still keep on coming with more turning to air. Base on a report written in 2008-9 at least 3 person per day enter by air and this has occurred since Howards' time in Government. Can we at least have the truth on this matter, we only have to look at Europe and the US to see that this is occurring World Wide.