Updated February 24, 2012 11:33:17

Video: GG's power tested if Rudd wins ballot (ABC News)

Related Story: Live blog: Labor leadership - Friday February 24

Related Story: Rudd to decide on leadership challenge later today

Related Story: Labor's leadership war becomes numbers game

With the Labor leadership ballot locked in for Monday, questions are turning to what might happen if Kevin Rudd wins back the prime ministership.

The former foreign minister has not confirmed he will stand against Prime Minister Julia Gillard, but will make a "definitive statement" on the issue later today.

If Mr Rudd does run and secures the support of the Labor caucus, there are still some constitutional hurdles he will have to overcome.

Constitutional law expert Anne Twomey says he would need to secure the support of Governor-General Quentin Bryce before he moves back into The Lodge.

"The first thing to know is that it doesn't automatically make him prime minister. In order to be prime minister the Governor-General needs to appoint him," she told ABC News Breakfast.

"First of all you need a vacancy, and that would mean Julia Gillard would have to resign. Assuming she did resign, then the Governor-General would have to make a choice.

The first thing to know is that it doesn't automatically make him prime minister. In order to be prime minister the Governor General needs to appoint him.

Anne Twomey on what happens if Kevin Rudd wins the leadership challenge

"A lot of people don't realise that it's actually a reserve power of the Governor-General; she has some discretion in making this decision, but it's a discretion confined by some convention.

"The convention says she has to appoint the person who either holds the support of the majority of the Lower House or is most likely to hold that support."

Professor Twomey says that is where independent MPs will play a key role.

"Can she feel certain that the independents will support Kevin Rudd and that he is the one who holds the support of the majority of the Lower House?" she asked.

"It might be quite difficult for the Governor-General. There's two ways she could approach it.

"The first would be to ask the independents to come in or give a letter telling her which way they intend to vote - you saw that sort of experience more recently in Tasmania with the hung parliament there.

"Alternatively she could ... wait for parliament to sit, and let there be a vote of confidence or no confidence on the floor of the parliament and whatever the House of Representatives chooses then that person [will be appointed] as prime minister."

"And that would make sure she wasn't seen to be in any way biased or influencing results - she could leave it to the House to decide."

Photo: Governor General Quentin Bryce will play a key role if Kevin Rudd wins the leadership ballot (Giulio Saggin: ABC News)

If the independents backed Opposition Leader Tony Abbott, he could arguably present a case to Ms Bryce to form government.

"It may well be with the independents that they don't support a Liberal government but they do support holding an election," Professor Twomey said.

"The independents can't themselves advise the Governor-General and say 'hey, call an election', but what they can do is say 'we will not give support to the new Labor leader, we will support Tony Abbott to the extent that when he comes into power, the first thing he's going to do is advise the Governor-General to call an election'.

"So that would be the way of causing an election if the independents thought that was the way to resolve the matter."

Professor Twomey says Ms Bryce also has the power to dissolve the parliament - but that is not a simple step.

"The problem with her power to dissolve parliament is that she does need to be advised by a prime minister to do it, so she can't do it off her own bat," she said.

"The way of getting around that is to appoint someone that will advise her to dissolve the parliament.

"So if the Governor-General is inclined to think this whole issue that should be resolved by an election, she would be able to appoint Tony Abbott who presumably would not want to be stuck dealing with independents and therefore would advise her to call an election - that would be the way to achieve it."

Rudd win could test Governor-General's power - Labor at War (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Updated February 23, 2012 11:53:13

Video: Melissa Clarke wraps the Labor leadership situation this morning (ABC News)

Related Story: As it happened: Labor leadership struggle

Related Story: Gillard to call leadership spill

Related Story: Media circus surrounds Rudd's Washington hotel

Simon Crean and Wayne Swan led the attacks on Kevin Rudd this morning as Labor's warlords upped the ante ahead of a leadership spill next week.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced a leadership ballot for Monday at a press conference in Adelaide this morning.

Key developments today

• Julia Gillard calls ballot for 10am Monday
• Kevin Rudd refuses to announce leadership tilt
• Frontbenchers including Simon Crean, Wayne Swan and Nicola Roxon renew attacks on Kevin Rudd
• Ministers Kim Carr and Martin Ferguson come out in support of Mr Rudd

Announcing his resignation from the Foreign Minister's portfolio last night, Mr Rudd said he had felt under attack from Mr Crean and unnamed "faceless men" and accused Ms Gillard of failing to offer him any support.

But Mr Crean, whose attack on Mr Rudd on Monday opened the current, terminal round of leadership hostilities, was unrepentant this morning.

"People say [my comments] were the trigger point ... why was it the trigger point? Because I had the guts to say it openly," he told Radio National.

And he accused Mr Rudd of grandstanding by timing yesterday's announcement in the middle of the night in Washington DC to coincide with Australia's evening news bulletins.

"The caucus will decide but not because Kevin's called it on. All he's done is to resign dramatically ... and [he'll fly home] and make another dramatic statement on Sunday, while the party bleeds," he said.

"[Rudd] has no option but to contest. Will he contest? That's his judgement because he knows he doesn't have the numbers."

And Mr Crean ruled out speculation that he could stand as a compromise candidate if neither Ms Gillard nor Mr Rudd could mount a convincing case for the leadership.

"No. I have said it repeatedly, openly," he said.

On the question of how many votes Mr Rudd might garner in a leadership ballot, Mr Crean was dismissive.

"I would be surprised if he got 30," he said.

Deputy Prime Minister Mr Swan, who last night launched a scathing attack on Mr Rudd, said he acted to expose Mr Rudd's "great weaknesses".

In his statement last night Mr Swan had accused Mr Rudd of "dysfunctional decision making and a deeply demeaning attitude towards other people".

This morning on AM he said the former prime minister was "deeply flawed".

"Yes he does have some very significant achievements, but on the flipside he has great weaknesses - great weaknesses which to date have not necessarily been seen in public - and given his recent behaviour it is simply intolerable for this to go on in the way that it has," he said.

Mr Swan said there was a "lot on the line" in this leadership challenge but he believed the Prime Minister will prevail.

"I certainly expect the outcome of the ballot, when it is held, to be one which will favour the Prime Minister," he said.

"I don't believe this is an ordinary-type challenge, this is a challenge where there's a lot on the line and of course the democratic processes of the party ought to be respected."

Mr Swan, and other senior ministers, have  pointed to new evidence of disloyalty from Mr Rudd - revelations from Clubs Australia that it met "an MP close to Kevin Rudd" in November who made clear the Foreign Minister would "kill" pokies reform if he was prime minister.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said Mr Rudd has been exposed as a "complete and utter fraud".

"He has been pretending that he supported the pre-commitment technology, pretending he supported reform in this area. But his key numbers man just happened to have two meetings and tell Clubs Australia that he would kill it," he said.

A spokeswoman for Mr Rudd says he totally rejected the claims and was prepared to launch legal action against anyone who repeats them.

'Travesty of democracy'

Speaking on Radio National after Mr Crean's interview, Senator Doug Cameron continued his backing of Mr Rudd and accused senior ministers of wanting to "drive a stake through his [Mr Rudd's] heart."

"I would be asking [Rudd] to contest, yes," he said when asked if the former Foreign Minister should nominate for the expected Monday ballot.

"You can always win any contest you're in but this is going to be a big task for Kevin Rudd."

Senator Cameron also called for a delay in the leadership spill, saying it would be a "travesty of democracy" if the ballot was called as soon as Monday.

Attorney-General Nicola Roxon backed Ms Gillard, saying a leadership spill was inevitable and warning that Labor needed to lance the boil.

"We need to get out of this idea that Kevin is a Messiah who will deliver government back to us," she said.

"That is just fanciful."

Video: Rudd holed up in Washington hotel (ABC News)

Earlier Senator Conroy accused Mr Rudd of "constant undermining" since the last election.

He told Channel Nine that Mr Rudd was brought down last time by his contempt for his colleagues.

"The constant undermining, the constant leaking, the constant publication of lists claiming to be Rudd supporters has damaged the Government," he said.

"No question at all. It’s no surprise to see this sort of damage being done by the Rudd camp because this is exactly what happened during the last election.

"Everybody remembers the sabotage that went on in the first two weeks of the last election campaign.

"For somebody to be engaged in destabilising and giving Tony Abbott a chance to win the last election is an absolute disgrace.

"And all Australians watched that farce, or those first two weeks of the election campaign as more and more leaks targeted directly at Julia Gillard were released during an election campaign.

"I mean this is unbelievable."

While Labor was engaged in its civil war, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott renewed his calls for an early election.

"Whoever emerges as the (Labor) leader on Monday, the poison won't go away," he said.

Labor's big guns trained on Rudd ahead of spill - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

By ABC's Barrie Cassidy Updated February 23, 2012 15:50:38

Photo: Former foreign minister Kevin Rudd listens during Question Time. (AAP: Penny Bradfield, file photo)

External Link: Comment collection: Labor leadership crisis

Related Story: As it happened: Labor leadership struggle

Related Story: Gillard, Rudd on course for leadership showdown

Related Story: Labor's big guns trained on Rudd ahead of spill

What an extraordinary moment it is when people so long repressed are suddenly liberated.

When those who have held in their frustrations for almost two years, are finally free to express their emotions.

What a performance from Julia Gillard's senior ministers as they now start to furiously fill in all the gaps from the June, 2010, leadership coup against Kevin Rudd.

After all this time, with Kevin Rudd now on the backbench, they felt free to tell the country why it was that they brought him down in the first place.

The deputy leader and treasurer, Wayne Swan, was the most spectacular contributor, accusing Rudd of dysfunctional decision making, a deeply demeaning attitude towards his colleagues and a deliberate sabotage of Labor's election campaign.

It's the blow out that the party needed to have after the last election, but couldn't. They found themselves clinging to government with Kevin Rudd in a senior portfolio. In those circumstances, how could they explain to a clueless nation why they had taken such a drastic step?

But will the venting of the spleen help them politically, or just act as a cathartic experience?

Probably the latter only, because those with the votes – the caucus – know all the Rudd stories anyway. But in the longer term, if Julia Gillard survives Monday's ballot, it might help at the margins in the wider electorate where some of them will be  hearing of these alleged failings for the first time.

But for the Gillard camp, the first real break came courtesy of the challenger's choice to spruik his case on national television. Not for him, senior ministers in the Government, but a paid lobbyist, Bruce Hawker.

Paul Howes was rightly criticised in June 2010, when he, as a trade union boss, went on Lateline the night of the coup and urged a vote for Gillard. That single event helped give rise to the damaging "faceless men" syndrome.

But at least Paul Howes' union was affiliated with the ALP. To use a lobbyist, armed only with a brand new slogan, was an error of judgment.

It contradicted the very "faceless men" charge that Rudd was levelling at his detractors.

And then to use that same person to try and portray Rudd as an innocent victim of an imaginary destabilisation campaign against the Prime Minister was laughable. The interview was in itself confirmation that the campaign was well developed and that Hawker himself had been a part of it.

As David Penberthy wrote in the Adelaide Advertiser, "Kevin Rudd distancing himself from the soap opera over the Labor leadership is like Reg Grundy distancing himself from Neighbours."

Gillard's supporters, on the other hand, learnt from their mistakes and kept those branded as the "faceless men" of 2010, hidden from view. Senior ministers with big futures in politics, like Craig Emerson, Tony Burke and Nicola Roxon stepped up and added a compelling and new dimension to the Rudd history.

But now to the vote. And again, this will be the vote that the party should have had 20 months ago.

Because Rudd judged his numbers were so low that a ballot was futile, the electorate never really understood the extent to which his support within the party had collapsed. A vote – a record of the numbers – would have helped Gillard at the time. It didn't happen, adding to the confusion.

That now will be rectified and the party's sentiment will be clearly expressed.

But what sort of a margin does the Prime Minister need to put her rival away for good?

The two previous challengers against sitting prime ministers are instructive.

Paul Keating received 44 votes to Bob Hawke's 66 in the first ballot, judged enough to enable him to go to the backbench, regroup and challenge successfully the second time.

But when Andrew Peacock challenged prime minister Malcolm Fraser in 1982, Fraser doubled Peacock's vote and won 54 to 27. That was enough to silence Peacock through until the following election, held 11 months later, an election that Fraser lost to Bob Hawke.

So, based on that precedent, Gillard will need to at least double Rudd's vote. A count of 69 to 34 would do that. Her supporters think that is a modest target, and they can do even better.

Even so, some in the media and unquestionably some in the Rudd camp, will argue that 34 votes is a solid base from which to launch a second challenge.

That misses a couple of key points. Monday is not the first tilt, it's the second. The first happened in June 2010, when the numbers were so overwhelmingly against him that he didn't call for a head count. If the numbers go on Monday as Gillard's supporters expect, then that will be the second humiliation for Rudd from his own colleagues inside two years. In those circumstances, could he seriously knuckle down and shoot for a third? How many times will he really need to be told?

It is true that from the backbench, he can openly campaign and continue to damage the Government. But will that behaviour impress any of those who intend to vote for Gillard on Monday?

Ongoing destabilisation is a real fear for many in Government, and that's why the Prime Minister denounced any intention to make a comeback if she is defeated on Monday. She wants to draw the same pledge from Rudd.

But in politics how much currency do such undertakings have anyway?  Paul Keating said he had only one shot in the locker, nobody believed him, and then he hit Bob Hawke five months later with the second.

Whether Rudd wins, loses or walks, the hardheads know that the road back is a treacherous and difficult one for the minority Labor Government.

One exasperated minister told me that Monday "will determine whether we have a peaceful death or a slow and painful one".

Barrie Cassidy is the presenter of ABC programs Insiders and Offsiders. View his full profile here.

Venting and voting won't bring Labor back into favour - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

February 21, 2012 Opinion

Click to play video

As political speculation churns, The Age political editor Michelle Grattan gives her perspective on the Labor leadership battle.

''You call it on.'' ''No, I'm not doing it - it's up to you.'' The Rudd and Gillard camps might sound like a couple of juveniles, but each is fighting for tactical advantage as the leadership row simmers a fraction below boilover point.

Neither sees advantage in being the first mover. Each side can only get away with inflating its candidate's level of support when it is still in the realm of the hypothetical.

Both sides are vulnerable because the numbers are fluid and they would change once a time was set for a vote.

 

Strategy: Kevin Rudd's leadership ambitions could be foiled if he mounts a challenge without enough support among the caucus. Photo: AFP

Julia Gillard doesn't want to forfeit the advantage of incumbency. Come and get me if you can, she is saying. Calling a ballot would be a sign of weakness and might well add to Kevin Rudd's momentum. Similarly, sacking him for disloyalty would just be a ''game on'' declaration, not only lifting all restraint on him but risking making him something of a martyr.

Despite claims Rudd has a two-stage strategy, the Foreign Minister could be stymied if he called a vote and his support was, say, only a quarter of the caucus (considerably less than the Rudd forces are claiming). The second challenge might then become difficult to crank up, especially given the hostility of many in the caucus to him.

The venom was on display yesterday. Once again, Simon Crean was out with a hot poker, prodding provocatively at Rudd. The strength of his attack is odd because it is known he has been critical of Gillard.

Crean denies he has leadership ambitions himself, but some believe that if Gillard eventually stood aside, he might run against Rudd. At present, however, there is no sign she would not fight to the end.

The Gillard-Rudd stand-off will have to be broken, though we don't know how and when.

In Queensland, where Labor faces defeat, Premier Anna Bligh and predecessor Peter Beattie are calling for an early resolution. Bligh would like the matter settled in favour of Rudd before the March 24 state election. She wants a bit of his popularity to rub off.

But the counter-argument is that if the leadership changed before a Queensland defeat, Rudd's reputation as a vote-puller would suffer and it would be a poor start to his leadership.

Former national secretary Bob Hogg describes this as the most unedifying spectacle he has seen - and he's seen a lot. Yesterday's prime ministerial news conference showed how surreal and dysfunctional Labor has become. The first half was devoted to the ground-breaking Gonski report on schools; then David Gonski departed and the journalists and PM got stuck into the leadership issue.

The Labor Party was simultaneously governing and imploding before our eyes.

Gillard V Rudd | Hogg Warns Of Electoral Oblivion

February 21, 2012 - 12:15PM Opinion

It seems as if the only thing people want to talk about today is the leadership of the Labor Party.

The media, fuelled by on-the-record and off-the-record commentary by members of caucus, are having a field day. Who is in the Rudd and Gillard camps? Who are the plotters and schemers? Who will win and who will lose? Would a second Rudd Government be better than the first? How will the Prime Minister respond?

Perhaps the most annoying feature of much of the commentary by sections of the caucus and media is the view that somehow there are "rules of engagement" that must be respected. For example some say it is up to the challenger to challenge, not for the leader to bring it on. My point here is not that the leader has to necessarily bring on a spill but that he or she has to deal with the issue in some form or another.

The notion that there will be a group of Labor politicians plotting against the leader – whoever that might be- between now and the next election is unacceptable and should be unthinkable!

From the outside looking in it seems that the Prime Minister is in a much stronger position than the Foreign Minister.

Firstly, significant members of the Cabinet are locking in behind her.

Secondly, it is clear that the animosity towards Kevin Rudd amongst many of his colleagues is so strong it is hard to imagine unity and stability within a second Rudd Government. Waverers in the caucus will worry about this.

The political reality is that the best – and probably only – circumstances in which Kevin Rudd could regain the Prime Ministership would be if (a) he had regained the respect and trust of former supporters and (b) the Gillard leadership collapsed. That it is under pressure is true but it hasn't collapsed. The Prime Minister is resilient and Kevin Rudd's position hasn't been helped by the campaign of his supporters to undermine her.

Counter to my argument is the proposition that the caucus will be influenced by the opinion polls which show the Foreign Minister as the preferred Prime Minister – and by a significant margin.

That this is worrying many of them is clear but when the heavy battalions in the government move in as they are doing it won't be enough to allay their fears about what a second Rudd Government would actually mean.

It's a case of a difficult, perhaps even awful but reasonably certain future, versus uncertainty and possibly chaos. That's how a majority of caucus will think. Some may even be reflecting on the difference between what the polling in 2010 said about the consequences of a move from Rudd to Gillard and what actually happened. Julia's "sins of ambition" in 2010 have become Kevin's in 2012!

The wider problem, of course, is with the government in general – it is not breaking through with its pitch on the economy and seems reluctant to go all out with a traditional Labor focus on fairness. It seems to be against or hesitant about more things than it supports.

It is very good at the politics of negotiation and compromise but continues to bleed in the face of right-wing populism and green fundamentalism. It has a strategy for making the best of a difficult situation but not one for winning a majority of votes.

Whatever happens with the leadership one can only hope that this question of electoral strategy will be given more attention.

Labor supporters and former voters all over the country yearn for some messages from their government that it will build on its economic record and work to create a better society but all they get in return is a lecture on the surplus.

Geoff Gallop on the Labor leadership

By ABC's Annabel Crabb Posted February 20, 2012 10:39:02

Photo: If Kevin Rudd or Julia Gillard could speak frankly about the current impasse, what would they say? (Alan Porritt, file photo: AAP)

Related Story: Crean dares Rudd to launch leadership challenge

It is entirely in keeping with the pattern of contrived silence now typical of the Federal Labor Party that - late on Saturday night - the Foreign Minister of Australia conducted what may be this continent's first entirely euphemistic television interview.

It was nearing midnight when Mr Rudd, immaculately besuited, stopped in to Sky News for a chat with political editor David Speers before boarding a flight for Mexico.

At issue was the YouTube video that had been posted just hours earlier, featuring Mr Rudd alternately cussing out staff members and staring-with-the-eyes-of-a-killer into the camera while filming an otherwise routine message in Mandarin to his Chinese supporters.

Mr Rudd was there to talk about the video, and definitely not the leadership, or anything like that.

And so we learned, in great detail, about how the Foreign Minister would conduct himself in future sweary videos. For starters, he couldn't promise to eradicate swearing entirely. He's only human, after all, and he's never pretended to be otherwise. But viewers could definitely assume that in future videos Mr Rudd (or K-Rudd, which is how the Foreign Minister referenced himself at one transfixing point) would consult more widely, delegate tasks where appropriate, try not to work so hard and experiment with being nicer to people.

That Mr Rudd could insist so fervently that he had changed, while conducting an interview at midnight, more or less on the tarmac, before haring off to South America, London, Washington and Tunisia on a category 11 global diplo-binge ("including meetings with Hillary Clinton", Mr Rudd helpfully interpolated; he might aspire to dropping the F-bomb a little less, but there are no key undertakings on name-dropping) gives us some idea just how deeply bonkers all this is.

But in a party where "Don't mention the war" has gone from being a Fawlty Towers quote to being a central guiding principle, Mr Rudd's Sky interview is perfectly routine.

For 20 months now, Julia Gillard has been unable to explain publicly why she offed her predecessor. Even now, she cannot acknowledge that there is a problem. And Mr Rudd, for his part, cannot disclose his intentions without employing a complex parable about a video. Absence of candour is now a settled, systemic and multipartisan feature of the federal Labor Party.

And if Mr Rudd or Ms Gillard could speak frankly about the current impasse, what would they say? Their silent tussle is surely the most nihilistic in Labor's organisational memory. It's not about clashing, passionately-held convictions, or the parties' spirited disagreement on what to do about schools, or nukes, or Syria. It's a classic corner-office dispute of numbing mundanity. She thinks he shouldn't be prime minister because he's nuts. He thinks she shouldn't be prime minister because she's hopeless. And that's about the size of it. Caucus members now arrange themselves into Team Bloodnut and Team Bowlcut, driven by nothing except the clinical extent of their own despair.

Annabel Crabb is the ABC's chief online political writer. View her full profile here.

Don't mention the war: Labor's silent leadership battle - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

by chief political correspondent Emma Griffiths 

Updated February 14, 2012 14:30:38

Video: Gillard defends Four Corners interview (ABC News)

Related Story: Gillard quizzed on when she knew of leadership coup

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has revealed that she had discussions, either with her staff or Labor factional figures, about mounting a leadership challenge in the days before Kevin Rudd was ousted.

Ms Gillard insists she made the decision to challenge on the day of the coup, but her statement raises further questions about her involvement in the plot to overthrow Mr Rudd.

It follows last night's Four Corners program that alleged Ms Gillard and her key factional supporters were preparing to mount a leadership challenge weeks before it happened.

But the Prime Minister would not identify who she spoke to in the days before the change.

"I was canvassed in the short days before, very close in to me making that decision," she said.

"When people had sought to raise the matter with me earlier I had declined to have the conversation with them.

"No amount of speculation here or media interest will change that simple fact that I made up my mind on the day that I asked Kevin Rudd for a ballot."

It follows an earlier admission from Ms Gillard that she may have known that senior staff in her office were preparing a victory speech before the day of the 2010 leadership coup.

Four Corners  revealed that staff in Ms Gillard's office had started writing the first speech she delivered as Prime Minister at least two weeks before she took power.

In an interview for the program, Ms Gillard avoided answering questions about whether she was aware the speech was being prepared.

Again this morning she side-stepped questions about when she knew about the speech.

"This was a tense few days for me and the Government, so I can't specifically say to you when I came to know about the speech," she told Sabra Lane on AM.

"It could've been on the Wednesday night, it could've been before."

Ms Gillard says the main point is she did not commission the work.

"I didn't direct the speech and the decision I made about seeking the Labor leadership was made on the day that I walked into Kevin Rudd's office and discussed with him having a ballot for the leadership," she said.

Video: Watch excerpts from the Four Corners interview (ABC News)

Polling

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has pointed to the leadership instability as damaging to workers.

"This is a Prime Minister who is focused on saving her job, not on saving the jobs of the Australian people," he said.

When asked whether his staff would write a speech without his knowledge, he said he wrote his own.

"I have very good staff and they do a lot of research for me, but I write the speech."

Four Corners also cited internal Labor Party polling taken in the week before the challenge as proof the campaign was building far earlier.

The polling compared Ms Gillard with Mr Rudd, saying she was more popular with voters, and pointed to negative focus group reactions to the then-leader.

Again the Prime Minister appeared to skirt the issue, saying she did not have "specific recall of pages of party polling at the time".

But a partial transcript of the interview, released by the Prime Minister's office to ABC News Online, shows responses from Ms Gillard that were not broadcast by Four Corners.

On the issue of internal polling she said: "I take it the implication from your question is that some part of the decision I made was motivated by polling, if that is the implication of your question that's wholly untrue."

Momentum

Four Corners also asserted that the US State Department knew a leadership change was gaining momentum before some Labor MPs were aware of it.

It said that about two weeks before the coup, ambassador Kim Beazley was called in to explain to US secretary of state Hillary Clinton what was happening in relation to change in the prime minister's office.

US Embassy cables released through Wikileaks have shown that the State Department had been receiving leaked information on internal ALP politics for months.

ALP right-wing powerbroker Graham Richardson told the program he knew "a week or so" before the change in leadership that a challenge was going to be mounted.

Mr Rudd declined to be interviewed for the Four Corners program, and when the idea of returning to the PM's office was put to him he would not say if the idea appealed.

"Well, that's a matter for history," Mr Rudd said.

"I'm a very, very happy little vegemite."

Video: Watch Julia Gillard's 2010 victory speech (ABC News)

The program had been widely anticipated in political circles because of recent fevered speculation that Mr Rudd was poised to launch a comeback.

In more bad news for Ms Gillard, today's Newspoll shows she has lost ground to Mr Abbott in the preferred prime minister stakes.

Mr Abbott's support rose three points to 40 per cent while Ms Gillard's slipped the same amount to 37 per cent in the poll, published by The Australian newspaper.

The Coalition's primary vote is up one point to 46 per cent, while Labor's is up two points to 32.

The Coalition still leads Labor 55 to 45 on a two-party preferred basis.

This morning Labor frontbencher Penny Wong reiterated her support for Ms Gillard.

"The Prime Minister is the right person to lead the country and the party, and the reason is she's absolutely focused on doing what she believes is right for working Australians and the country," she said.

But the program has prompted more criticism from the Opposition that the Government is divided and dysfunctional.

Coalition frontbencher Christopher Pyne has accused the Prime Minister of showing a lack of judgment in even granting the interview.

"The most senior people on the program were [Labor backbencher] Janelle Saffin and a retired member Con Sciacca - and the Prime Minister," he said.

"Quite frankly the Prime Minister made a bad judgment call by going on the Four Corners program."

Ms Gillard told AM she agreed to go on the program because it was described to her as focusing on the Government's progress and outlook.

"My job is to answer questions and to explain what the Government's doing," she said.

"I'm not someone who runs away from questions, and so I did agree to the Four Corners interview."

Gillard admits leadership talks days before coup - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

By chief political correspondent Emma Griffiths 

Updated February 14, 2012 06:55:43

Video: Watch excerpts from the Four Corners interview (ABC News)

Related Story: Gillard says election winnable with hard work

Related Story: Gillard tells MPs to show more discipline

Related Story: Swan hoses down Labor leadership speculation

Related Story: Increasing speculation over PM's future

The Labor Party’s leadership tensions have been given fresh life by allegations Julia Gillard and key factional supporters were preparing to challenge Kevin Rudd weeks before his eventual overthrow.

Ms Gillard has consistently stated that her decision to take on Mr Rudd was made on the day of the coup in June 2010.

However, ABC1's Four Corners has revealed that senior staff in Ms Gillard's office at the time had started writing the first speech she delivered as Prime Minister at least two weeks before she took power.

In an interview for the program Ms Gillard avoided answering whether she was aware the speech was being prepared.

"Look, I am not surprised that whether it's people in my office or people more broadly in the Government of the Labor Party were casting in their mind where circumstances might get to, of course," she said.

Four Corners also cites internal Labor Party polling in the week before the challenge as proof the campaign was building far earlier.

The polling compared Ms Gillard with Mr Rudd, saying she was more popular with voters, and pointing to negative focus group reactions to the then-leader.

When questioned about the polls, Ms Gillard again appeared to skirt the issue, saying she did not have "specific recall of pages of party polling at the time".

But a partial transcript of the interview released by the Prime Minister's office to ABC News Online shows responses from Ms Gillard that were not broadcast.

On the issue of internal polling, she says: "I take it the implication from your question is that some part of the decision I made was motivated by polling; if that is the implication of your question, that's wholly untrue."

The transcript also shows her stating that she never asked for a speech to be prepared and reiterated that she decided to mount a challenge on the day.

"I'm saying to you I'm not surprised that you're in a position to say that people within government were thinking about alternatives," Ms Gillard said.

"With respect, the headlines of the newspapers were screaming it every day. But in terms of my motivations and when I acted and when I made a decision, I made a decision the same day I acted."

In more bad news for Ms Gillard, today's Newspoll shows she has lost ground to Tony Abbott in the preferred prime minister stakes.

Mr Abbott's support rose three points to 40 per cent while Ms Gillard's slipped the same amount to 37 per cent in the poll, published by the Australian newspaper.

The Coalition's primary vote is up one point to 46 per cent, while Labor's is up two points to 32.

The Coalition still leads Labor 55 per cent to 45 on a two-party preferred basis.

Gaining momentum

Four Corners asserts the US State Department knew a leadership change was gaining momentum.

It states that about two weeks before the coup, Australia's ambassador to the United States, Kim Beazley, was called in to explain to US secretary of state Hilary Clinton what was happening in relation to change in the prime minister's office.

US embassy cables released through WikiLeaks have shown that the State Department had been receiving leaked information on internal ALP politics for months.

Labor right-wing powerbroker Graham Richardson told Four Corners he knew "a week or so" before the change in leadership that a challenge would be mounted.

Mr Rudd did not grant Four Corners an interview.

When the idea of returning to the prime minister's office was put to Mr Rudd he would not say if the idea appealed.

"Well, that's a matter for history," he said.

"I’m a very, very happy little vegemite."

The Four Corners program had been widely anticipated in political circles because of recent fevered speculation that the former prime minister was poised to launch a comeback.

It is likely to trigger another round of questions about the coup and accusations from the Opposition of political instability and division in government ranks.

Gillard quizzed on when she knew of leadership coup - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 By John Masanauskas From: Herald Sun

February 13, 2012 12:00AM

The Islamic Women's Welfare Association says new migrants should get taxpayer subsidies to visit overseas relatives. Picture: Herald Sun Source: Supplied

NEW migrants should get taxpayer subsidies to visit overseas relatives, an Islamic group has told the Federal Government.

The Islamic Women's Welfare Association also says Muslims prefer to live close to their own people and Australia should consider how to "facilitate the purchase of homes for new migrants".

In a submission to a federal multicultural inquiry, the association has urged the Government to give tax deductions to newly arrived migrants so they can visit relatives in their homelands.

"Migrants face a lot of sacrifices such as having to travel long distances to visit relatives, spending on communication costs, missing out on some events occurring in native countries etc," the submission said.

"This loss should be compensated by the Government in one way or the other to retain migrants in their country of adoption."

Victorian Muslim and president of the Australian Council of Bosnian Organisations Senada Softic-Telalovic said while some help might be justified for needy refugees who had to go overseas to settle their affairs, she didn't support travel compensation for all newcomers.

That type of argument will bring out further outrage from those who are so anti-migrant and so anti-multiculturalism," she said. Ms Softic-Telalovic said that Australia was seen as an ideal migration destination and new arrivals shouldn't take the country for granted.

"Migrants and refugees who come out now are in a significantly better position and you could say a more privileged position than those who came out in the 1970s," she said.

Victorian Multicultural and Citizenship Minister Nick Kotsiras said tax breaks for migrant trips abroad was a ridiculous idea.

"We are all equal and no one should get special privileges," he said.

The Islamic welfare association is based in Lakemba, Sydney, which has one of the highest Muslim populations in Australia.

Its submission also said that migrants should be free to build their own places of worship "without prejudice or discrimination from the communities they live (in)".

Pay for our trips home - the Islamic Women's Welfare Association | News.com.au

By ABC's Marius Benson Posted February 09, 2012 15:11:49

Photo: Peter Slipper robes up for Parliament. (AAP: Alan Porritt)

Peter Slipper's term as Speaker is already shaping up as one of the most genuinely diverting cameos in Australia's parliamentary history.

Without a friend and without a future in parliament beyond the next election, Mr Speaker looks determined to be noticed during his limited tenure. In the first active days in his post he has revived traditions not seen for decades and seems hell bent on positioning the Canberra version of the Westminster system somewhere between Charles I and Louis XIV.

The robe is back, the mace is returning as part of a weekly ceremonial progress to the chair. The wig can't be far away.

And why not? Much of parliament is pure theatre. Tony Abbott expresses melodramatic dismay at the ruin to which the Government has brought the country. The Prime Minister responds with confected disgust at the Opposition's hijacking of job losses for political ends. Parliament is pantomime and every show needs a dame.

Interestingly wardrobe has not been the only change in Federal Parliament since Peter Slipper replaced Harry Jenkins as Speaker. The new man has issued warnings that he will take a less forgiving attitude to the classroom antics which are the standard dynamic in the House. Harry Jenkins tried to assert control with a mix of bluff and bluster and what always appeared to be the danger that he might actually explode.

Slipper's tones are more measured and a little menacing. He began his tenure by tossing out several Opposition members. Since then he has cut off their endless points of order, well short of the hearing Harry Jenkins allowed. That has produced a slightly better flow in Question Time, but he has yet to show whether he can do what no speaker does in Question Time - that is, get the Government to answer a question.

In fact standing orders don't give the Speaker the power to force the Government to answer a question. Instead there is the endlessly repeated charade of an Opposition member, perhaps Christopher Pyne, interrupting a minister's answer with a point of order:"Relevance Mr Speaker, the minister was not asked....etc."

It will be interesting if Peter Slipper is prepared to lean on ministers or the Prime Minister to make the answers bear some relation to the question, and sit them down if they don't.

Peter Slipper's path to the Speaker's chair has been unique. It came at the end of the parliamentary year when, according to the Prime Minister's account, Harry Jenkins came into her office at 7:30 in the morning to announce he wanted to quit the job he loved and spend more time developing policy with his colleagues. Harry has never been a famed policy wonk and nobody believed that fiction. Fellow Labor backbencher Mike Kelly summed up Jenkins's real motive when he tweeted that in quitting Harry had "taken one for the team".

Within an hour of that supposedly unheralded Jenkins announcement the PM had lined up Peter Slipper and rung independent Andrew Wilkie to assure him nothing would change simply because the defection of Slipper from Liberal ranks made Labor less critically dependent on Wilkie's vote.

The appointment elevated Slipper from the relative privation of the backbench to a better world where salaries are higher, pensions plumper, offices bigger, staff more numerous and a sense of self-importance sumptuously supported.

In fact the inducements are such that a deal like that, if it happened in, say, the NSW parliament, would attract the interest of the state's Independent Commission Against Corruption. But in Canberra Julia Gillard generally got a good press for negotiating the minority Labor Government a little further away from the political abyss.

If Peter Slipper feels at all sheepish about the circumstances in which he came to his lofty position he's not showing it. Nor does he manifest any anxiety over the Opposition possibly using a dirt file against him by asking questions like: "Why do you take so many cabs to Kings Cross around midnight?"

He has taken to his new role with a relish, taking a tougher approach to tossing out members, cutting back time for answers and of course turning the clock back decades in his personal dress code.

It is early days but right now Peter Slipper already looks like he will be a figure in Australian public life as distinctive as any seen since Sir John Kerr was tipping his top hat to the favourite at the Melbourne Cup.

Marius can be heard covering federal politics on ABC NewsRadio's breakfast program each week day morning. View his full profile.

Slipper plays the part in a tough parliamentary theatre - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

By chief political correspondent Emma Griffiths 

Updated February 08, 2012 17:36:11

Photo: Julia Gillard is touting her "new economy" initiatives. (file photo) (AAP)

Related Story: Gillard returns fire to Abbott's Dirty Harry jibe

Related Story: Swan v Hockey on economy

Related Story: Banks tipped to raise interest rates

Related Story: Abbott challenges Gillard to 'make my day'

Julia Gillard has raised the pitch of her attack on the Opposition over economic management, accusing Tony Abbott of being reckless and using "disgusting" tactics by linking possible job losses with the carbon tax.

The Prime Minister told Parliament that Mr Abbott was "making up reasons" why jobs could be lost after he claimed hundreds of jobs at risk at Alcoa's aluminium smelter near Geelong could be saved if there was no carbon tax.

The company says the price on carbon would be an additional cost but its decision to review the plant's operations has not been prompted by the scheme.

"What sort of people would use the distress of working people on hearing about job losses for their own political ends?" Ms Gillard said.

"What sort of people would do that? But we saw that done by the Opposition this morning.

"Every time the Leader of the Opposition hears about job losses, he works out how he can use it to his political advantage just like he did this morning with Alcoa.

"A disgusting approach to the time that working people are in need and under pressure. A disgusting approach."

Ms Gillard spent the morning meeting union representatives and workers from the car industry and announcing two new satellites for the National Broadband Network.

The Prime Minister sought to contrast her "new economy" initiatives with Mr Abbott's intentions to cut $500 million from government subsidies to the car industry and to cancel plans for the NBN.

She said if Mr Abbott won power he would set about "destroying the Australian economy".

"The Leader of the Opposition stands for doing the dirty on the car industry and ending car-making jobs," she said.

"The Opposition is robbing this industry of certainty and therefore robbing these workers of jobs."

Car workers were watching from the public gallery in Parliament at the time.

"I'd invite the Opposition to turn around and look into the eyes of those workers whose jobs they are setting out to destroy," Ms Gillard said.

The Government's attacks continued with Treasurer Wayne Swan forced to withdraw a description of Mr Abbott, the shadow treasurer and the Opposition finance spokesman as "the three stooges of Opposition economic policy".

'Lady Macbeth'

The Opposition struck back with a series of questions about the angry protest on Australia Day and the involvement of the Prime Minister's office.

Manager of Opposition business Christopher Pyne called on Ms Gillard to give a full account of the incident, saying she should answer the charge that a "culture of dirty tricks" exists in her office.

"We know that this Prime Minister would walk on a million corpses to become a Cabinet minister," he said.

"We know she would despatch a prime minister of her own party to gain the office of prime minister."

"Comparing her to Lady Macbeth is unfair on Lady Macbeth. She only had one victim to her name. This Prime Minister has a list of victims longer than Richard III."

Ms Gillard said the "stream of abuse" was an attempt by the Opposition to divert attention from its own problems.

"They were determined to do anything today to distract from the real debate before our nation ... about the economy, about jobs," she said.

Her press secretary, Tony Hodges, has since resigned for disclosing the whereabouts of the Opposition leader Tony Abbott on Australia Day.

NBN satellites

Photo: An artist's impression of the two satellites the Government plans to launch. (Twitter: Julia Gillard)

This morning, Ms Gillard announced a $620 million deal for two satellites from the company building the NBN.

The satellites, to be built by US-based company Loral, will be launched in 2015 and will provide broadband coverage to about 200,000 homes and businesses based in the most remote parts of Australia.

The satellites will deliver download speeds of 12 megabits per second which the Government says is faster than most cities can currently receive.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy says the deal will help "bridge the digital divide".

"The satellite service that this announcement covers will see a quantum, a leap in service for the most remotest communities," he said.

The Prime Minister again pointed to Mr Abbott's plans to scrap the NBN if he wins the next election.

"What we will see if he is prime minister is the end of the car industry; what we will see if he's prime minister is the ripping of the fibre out of the ground and Australia falling behind the standards of the world on this technology."

Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull says there is no need for the new satellites.

"There is more than enough capacity on existing satellites and satellites that are scheduled to be launched already," he said.

First posted February 08, 2012 14:17:16

Gillard turns up heat in debate over economy - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

By chief political correspondent Emma Griffiths

Updated February 08, 2012 00:43:42

Video: Finance on agenda as Parliament convenes (7pm TV News NSW)

Related Story: Abbott challenges Gillard to 'make my day'

The Prime Minister has shot back at Tony Abbott's challenge to "make my day" in a stoush over the economy, urging him to "bring it on".

In an address to the Coalition party room on Tuesday, the Opposition Leader channelled Clint Eastwood's character Dirty Harry, daring Julia Gillard to "make my day" by focusing on the economy in the year ahead.

The Government has sought to frame the political debate around the economy with a focus on tax cuts and increases to welfare payments associated with the carbon pricing scheme and the mining tax.

And the economy dominated debate on the first sitting day of Parliament for 2012, with both sides trading blows over their record of economic management.

Ms Gillard says Mr Abbott is focused only on misleading claims and negativity.

We should look to the Leader of the Opposition's multiple statements on his commitment to an emissions trading scheme, a tax at various stages, there's so many positions that he'd make the kama sutra redundant.

Kevin Rudd

"On the other side of politics we understand that in this debate they're for standing still, they're for the privileged interests of the few rather than the many working families who need to benefit from our resources boom," she said.

"Mr Speaker, this is the debate of 2012 and I'm very happy to say to the Leader of the Opposition - bring it on."

Mr Abbott wants to highlight the costs associated with the carbon scheme.

"Every time they say economic management, we say carbon tax," he instructed his party room.

Opposition questions followed that trend, with the deputy leader Julie Bishop asking the Foreign Minister why Canadian politicians had likened carbon trading to a "giant pyramid-marketing scheme".

Kevin Rudd accused the Opposition of being "about burying Australia in the past" and Mr Abbott of making contradictory statements about whether he supported a carbon price or not.

"We should look to the Leader of the Opposition's multiple statements on his commitment to an emissions trading scheme, a tax at various stages; there's so many positions that he'd make the kama sutra redundant," he told a rowdy chamber.

Rules of engagement

Photo: Peter Slipper did not wear a wig and lace accessories as reports predicted. (AAP: Alan Porritt)

Before the first question of the session, new Speaker Peter Slipper spelled out his plans for using his casting vote and maintaining order in the chamber.

Mr Slipper, wearing a black robe but not a wig and lace accessories as had been predicted in newspaper reports, resigned from the Liberal National Party to take up the Speaker's role late last year, replacing Labor MP Harry Jenkins.

He says he has already had some support from the two major parties and independents for shortening the time limits in question time and giving extra chances for follow-up questions.

While Mr Slipper's defection has given the Labor Government an extra vote in the House, he made it clear he would not use his casting vote to benefit either side of politics.

"It is my intention to follow the principles set out in House of Representatives practice, that is that the Speaker should always vote to allow further discussion," he said.

"Where no further discussion is possible, decisions should not be taken except by a majority and the casting vote on an amendment should leave a Bill in its existing form."

He also told MPs he would not necessarily warn them before ordering them out of the House.

"I look forward to working with all members to do my best to ensure that the House fulfils what we all know are the reasonable expectations of the people of Australia," he said.

Ms Gillard brought Question Time to an end just after 3:30pm in accordance with the rules, but also after only eight questions and little more than 30 minutes.

In the resulting outcry Liberal frontbencher Joe Hockey had the dubious honour of being the first MP this year to be thrown out for an hour.

Cowen tributes

The first hour of Question Time was taken up by several MPs rising to pay tribute to former governor-general Sir Zelman Cowen, who died in December.

In a touching speech, Prime Minister Julia Gillard said no governor-general served with more distinction than Sir Zelman.

"Sir Zelman came to office when the role of governor-general and the fabric of our political system had been placed under enormous duress," she told Parliament.

"He rightly identified the need for a touch of healing and through his wisdom and dignity delivered it."

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott said Sir Zelman was a "seeker of truth".

"He was truly great and he was truly good and our country is deeply in his debt," he said.

Parliament also congratulated the Queen on her diamond jubilee, while tributes were also paid to AAP journalist Peter Veness who lost a battle with cancer last month.

First posted February 07, 2012 15:38:40

Gillard returns fire to Abbott's Dirty Harry jibe - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Misha Schubert February 5, 2012

WHEN Tony Abbott, at the National Press Club last week, invoked academic Robert Manne dismissing Julia Gillard as ''the least impressive prime minister since Billy McMahon'', the Liberal crowd laughed loudly. Their derision was as much for one of their own former leaders as for the woman who is struggling as Prime Minister.

Manne, considered by conservatives a lion of the left, didn't intend a literal comparison with McMahon, the jug-eared figure of mockery who presided over the Liberals' defeat in 1972 after 23 years in power.

Nor did Manne mean the worst prime minister, mindful of the damage he argues John Howard did to the country. Manne's criticism, and his argument for a resurrection of Kevin Rudd as Labor leader, was about a lack of a narrative, compellingly told, about where and how Australia should chart its course. It's a criticism shared by many of her own MPs, disenchanted and dispirited, as they gather anxiously in Canberra today to hear her pitch for the year and mull over the risks of a switch back to Rudd.

''The Australian people feel the need for some kind of largeness of the Prime Minister, a capacity to dramatise and create a story about the nation, about the world,'' Manne said. ''I thought it might happen [with Gillard] but it just hasn't. I think she just seems to be awkward and mechanical, repetitive and cliche ridden. She doesn't seem to have developed a vision or a capacity to speak in a way that interests people.''

Manne's thesis is qualified. Most of Australia's leaders post-World War II have been impressive, and in that he counts Howard too. His exceptions fall between Robert Menzies and Gough Whitlam - Harold Holt, John McEwen, John Gorton and McMahon.

Historian Stuart Macintyre disputes Manne, arguing Gillard has faced unparalleled political challenges to a prime minister's authority from a hung Parliament with so many bit players. ''She has faced a task that no one has since Menzies and [John] Curtin, and in the circumstances of the war, particularly after 1941, it was inconceivable [the two independents of the day] would desert the government.'' Fate dealt Gillard a much larger coalition to put together and a lesser hold.

''Her political task in managing that circumstance and maintaining office has been uniquely difficult in federal politics and her capacity to do so has been impressive,'' Macintyre said. Yet she may be ''the least effective in articulating a viewpoint since McMahon - we're not talking about too many PMs, here, six, and some of them were unusually eloquent''.

Academic Judith Brett, who has chronicled the history of conservative politics, sees little parallel between the ''bumbling and silly'' image of McMahon and the public's take on the Prime Minister now. Yet there is something ''implausible'' about the public persona of Gillard - stiff and defensive and guarded - which has impeded a connection with people.

''The only person who looks like a leader in the federal parliament at the moment is Malcolm Turnbull. Neither of them [Gillard nor Abbott] appear to be on top of the issues - you don't see them thinking in public, so you don't have any sense of how they are thinking about the problems of the country - you can't believe they are thinking in as simple-minded a way as their statements,'' she said.

Simon Crean, a former Labor leader and one of those in the mix if Gillard loses the leadership, takes a whack back at Abbott for invoking the Manne slight.

''He's the most negative person in the history of the country, a person who stands for nothing, passing judgments about a prime minister who as education minister did more than anyone else to inject the most significant expenditure into the greatest investment a country can make - the education of its people,'' he said.

Liberal tactics chief Christopher Pyne comes to the defence of McMahon's reputation.

''That's clearly unfair on Billy McMahon. He inherited a two-decade-old government with a small majority at the end of its natural life. She took over a two-year-old government with a thumping majority and trashed it in one election. She carries the wooden spoon in this particular race.''

Gillard's friend Warren Snowdon, a parliamentary secretary who has served four Labor prime ministers, insists she is impressive in the psychological strength she has brought to adversity.

''I've served under a number of PMs and she is right up there when it comes to self-control and not allowing herself to be flustered by the idiocy of attacks. She's as tough as teak and has real equilibrium''.

There is scant direct parallel with McMahon, whose personality and circumstances were vastly different. As academic Norman Abjorensen wrote, ''as Prime Minister, McMahon cut a ludicrous figure - a man captive of his own fantasies and seemingly not of this world.'' Gillard, for all her faults, is a realist.

As time went on, both McMahon and Gillard were unable to convince the electorate their ascension was the right choice. After eight months with McMahon as prime minister, in December 1971 one in two voters thought the switch from Gorton was a bad decision. At last count, Rudd outpolled Gillard two to one as preferred Labor leader.

Gillard is the worst PM since McMahon. Discuss

Jacob Saulwick February 5, 2012

A maximum fine of $550,000 is imposed for each curfew breach.

THE Emirates airline could face fines of more than $1 million for multiple breaches of the Sydney Airport curfew after it defied repeated warnings by air traffic control not to fly after 11pm.

The federal Department of Infrastructure and Transport is investigating three breaches by Emirates, and has strong hopes of a successful prosecution for two of the incidents.

The most glaring breach of the curfew - which is intended to prevent planes taking off or arriving at Sydney Airport between 11pm and 6am - occurred on January 8.

The department will allege Emirates flight EK413 from Sydney to Dubai departed well after 11pm despite being refused permission many times during the day to do so.

It is understood several airlines requested permission to breach the curfew that night, after flights were delayed for wet weather. But they were denied permission on the grounds the airlines were given plenty of warning they might not be able to depart.

The Emirates flight, however, departed some time after 11.15pm despite being denied permission.

The maximum fine for a breach of Sydney Airport's curfew is $550,000.

Emirates has provided a detailed response to the department about the breaches. The department will provide a brief to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who will then have to decide whether to press charges.

If Emirates were charged, it would be the first time an airline has been prosecuted for a breach of the Sydney Airport curfew since Jetstar was prosecuted in 2007 over a flight that left Mascot at 11.28pm.

The federal Transport Minister, Anthony Albanese, said: ''The curfew at Sydney Airport is not optional. It is a legal requirement, which the community expects to be enforced.''

Mr Albanese, whose inner-west electorate of Grayndler suffers heavily from aircraft noise, has long maintained that Sydney needs a second airport.

But a study commissioned by Mr Albanese two years ago, due to report in weeks, is unlikely to propose an imminent solution to Sydney's airport noise woes.

The study is likely to entrench the role of Mascot as Sydney's main airport, recommend improved transport links to Mascot and suggest alternatives for a possible future second site.

The study will state the most attractive site remains Badgerys Creek, which the government has ruled out. Wilton, in the south-west, is likely to be the second-most attractive site.

A spokeswoman for Emirates said the January 8 flight was delayed because of fuel delivery problems caused by a thunderstorm. She said the airline decided to continue the flight to limit any inconvenience to passengers.

"Only on rare occasions such as this does the airline seek dispensations, and when doing so follows the normal process,'' the spokeswoman said, adding the airline was discussing the regulations with authorities and could not comment further.

Curfew breaches risk $1m fine

February 6, 2012

Climbing the polls ... Julia Gillard has pegged back some of Kevin Rudd's lead as preferred leader. Photo: Andrew Meares

KEVIN RUDD has a healthy lead over Julia Gillard as preferred Labor leader, but among Labor voters Ms Gillard is ahead by a nose.

The latest Herald/Nielsen poll shows that, after a week of fevered leadership speculation, 57 per cent of all voters prefer Mr Rudd as Labor leader compared with 35 per cent for Ms Gillard.

Ms Gillard has made up some ground on the Foreign Minister. When the question was last asked, in October, Mr Rudd was ahead of Ms Gillard by 61 per cent to 30 per cent.

However, among Labor voters, support for both is more evenly split, with 47 per cent backing Mr Rudd and 50 per cent backing Ms Gillard.

Mr Rudd is strongly backed by Coalition voters, with 61 per cent preferring him as leader, whereas 26 per cent of Coalition voters back Ms Gillard.

Despite Ms Gillard negotiating a deal with the Greens to put a price on carbon, Greens voters prefer Mr Rudd to Ms Gillard by 58 per cent to 38 per cent.

Of the 57 per cent who back Mr Rudd, 72 per cent believe Labor should change leaders, while 23 per cent believe the party should stick with Ms Gillard.

In Mr Rudd's home state of Queensland, where federal Labor desperately needs to pick up seats, he is preferred over Ms Gillard as Labor leader by 65 per cent to 27 per cent, the largest lead he has in any of the states.

In NSW, Mr Rudd leads Ms Gillard as preferred Labor leader by 59 per cent to 34 per cent and in Ms Gillard's home state of Victoria, Mr Rudd leads by 50 per cent to 39 per cent.

The poll of 1400 voters was taken from Thursday night to Saturday night, amid feverish speculation about a leadership change.

The boost for Labor and Ms Gillard should buy her breathing space given her detractors have warned there would be a move unless the polls improved. Senior MPs and ministers warn the improvement must continue if Ms Gillard is to survive.

One who is sympathetic towards Ms Gillard said she had run out of time and had to start turning around Labor's fortunes.

''She has got to do something soon,'' he said, adding the party needed more than yesterday's pep talk. He said if she could not succeed it would be best if Ms Gillard stood aside.

''If not, she's got to be honest with herself about that,'' he said.

Although Mr Rudd is not actively campaigning for the leadership, Ms Gillard's camp blames him for a passive program of destabilisation.

Senior ministers, including the Treasurer, Wayne Swan, described the media speculation as a beat-up, but the opposition is watching carefully. The Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, said yesterday it did not matter who led Labor.

''In the end the government doesn't have to change leaders - they have to change policies because if they have Rudd or Gillard they'll still have the carbon tax, they'll still have the mining tax, they'll still be a government which is addicted to spending,'' Mr Abbott told Network Ten.

Rudd still leads Gillard but Labor voters reject change

Jessica Wright February 6, 2012 - 9:46AM

Click to play video

Labor MPs have expressed anger that they are being counted among supporters of former prime minister Kevin Rudd, who is accused of inflating his numbers in caucus to destabilise the leadership of the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard.

A Fairfax/Nielsen poll published today revealed Labor's primary vote has risen by 4 points to 33 per cent, its highest level in almost a year, while in the two-party-preferred stakes the Coalition's lead has been cut by 8 points, although it still leads Labor 53-47 - an election-winning margin.

The opposition's primary vote fell 4 points to 45 per cent.

Labor MPs have accused Foreign Affairs Minister Kevin Rudd of inflating his support in the party room in his leadership struggle with Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

Ms Gillard's personal approval rating rose by 5 percentage points to 40 per cent and she leads the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, as preferred prime minister by 2 points - a six-point increase up to 48 - for the first time in nine months.

But the poll carried a slight sting in the tail for the Prime Minister with 57 per cent of all voters nominating Mr Rudd as the preferred Labor leader compared with 35 per cent for Ms Gillard.

In October, the same question revealed Mr Rudd ahead of Ms Gillard by 61 per cent to 30 per cent.

But among Labor voters, Mr Rudd trails Ms Gillard by 47 - 50.

During a specially convened caucus meeting yesterday - at which Mr Rudd and about 20 other MPs were absent - Ms Gillard urged her MPs to display discipline after a week of intense speculation over the Labor leadership.

Ms Gillard told the party room to focus on the government's achievements and said the only group to benefit from party disunity was the opposition.

A number of Labor MPs were incensed by a weekend report in News Ltd newspapers that published a list of MPs purported to be supporters of Mr Rudd for a tilt at the leadership.

But sources accused the Foreign Minister of "overplaying" his support in caucus.

"It is typical of Kevin to assume that because there may be some concerns, and they are real concerns, that automatically he has a right to consider that vote in the party room as his," the MP said. "This sort of arrogance was his problem last time. There may be hard decisions to take down the track but we will not be bullied into it, especially not by misinformed leaks showing false numbers."

Trade Minister Craig Emerson also dismissed the report that listed him as one of 19 MPs who were undecided about who should lead the party.

‘‘No one has phoned me,’’ he said on ABC radio this morning.

The News Ltd report listed cabinet ministers Chris Bowen, Anthony Albanese, Robert McLelland, Martin Ferguson and Chris Evans as Rudd backers.

The list also included dumped cabinet minister Kim Carr and the embattled Labor MP Craig Thomson as supporting Mr Rudd in a leadership spill.

Ms Gillard moved further to assert her dominance over the leadership last night with an interview on the Seven Network's Sunday Night.

"If you are asking me if you think I can win the 2013 election, yes I can," she said.

Asked if she would lead the Labor Party into the same election, Ms Gillard replied, "yes."

"I'm leading a government that has of course been under a lot of political pressure and of course will continue to be under a lot of pressure," she said.

Ms Gillard reacted angrily when it was suggested she had failed to convey the strengths of her personality to the electorate and instead displayed a perceived lack of warmth.

"I'm not a talk-show host . . . I'm the Prime Minister," she said.

"I don't remember people looking at John Howard and saying, 'Gee, I wish he would be warmer and cuddlier and more humorous'. I think the same stand should apply for me."

Ms Gillard also received a measure of support from one of the figures who helped her to form government in 2010.

Key rural independent MP Tony Windsor said his support for the government was not guaranteed in the event of a change in the Labor leadership. Arriving at Parliament House this morning, Mr Windsor said a new leader would most likely need to call a snap election as the numbers on the floor of the house could not be relied upon.

''The Labor Party, or those few that are actually raising these things, should stop and think a little bit about the big items that are out there,'' Mr Windsor said. ''The National Broadband Network, the Murray Darling, the climate change agenda, the rent resource tax stuff. They are long term issues and if there was a strategy to change leaders at this moment . . . there would have to be a snap election otherwise it would be a waste of time doing it.''

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet today defended Ms Gillard’s performance, saying she displayed ''nerves of steel'' in cobbling together the passage of the carbon tax.

''She is a tough and intelligent prime minister,'' he said. ''She has seen through some of the most difficult reforms you can take.''

The government will face a tough two weeks in the first parliamentary session of of the year with the opposition vowing to probe the government on two credibility issues, namely the investigation into Labor MP Craig Thomson and the Australia Day tent embassy debacle.

''The Craig Thomson affair...drags on and on and endlessly on,'' Mr Abbott said today. ''It really is up to the Prime Minister to state whether she has full confidence in Fair Work Australia's investigation. It is up to the Prime Minister to state whether she thinks it’s acceptable for any Fair Work Australia report to remain secret.

''. . . as long as Craig Thomson remains under this terrible cloud, this will be a tainted government because it relies on the support of a tainted member.''

It will also be the first full sitting week for the new Speaker, Peter Slipper, who resigned from the Liberal National Party last year to sit as an independent.

The government will also be without the guaranteed support of independent MP Andrew Wilkie, who withdrew his backing after Ms Gillard reneged on her deal on poker machine reform - leaving it with a single-vote margin in the Parliament.

Gillard Meet MPs | Poll Shows Improvement For PM

By chief political correspondent Emma Griffiths and Sabra Lane 

Updated February 03, 2012 17:15:17

Video: Leadership speculation dogs Labor (The Midday Report)

Related Story: Forget being PM, Crean tells Rudd

Related Story: Labor fails to gain ground in Newspoll

Related Story: Roxon slams interference in protest policing

The Prime Minister, the man she ousted from the job, and senior Labor ministers have publicly laughed off or dismissed suggestions of a leadership coup, but there is no escaping speculation that Julia Gillard's prospects in the job are terminal.

The renewed focus on the Labor leadership comes after an abysmal start to the year for the Government.

It began with ditching the pokies deal, continued with the involvement of a prime ministerial staffer in the angry protest on Australia Day, and has been topped off with continuing dismal polling.

There is growing despondency among Labor MPs, with some concluding that Ms Gillard's leadership is in "deep trouble" and suggesting there could be a leadership challenge before the Queensland election on March 24.

Ms Gillard's backers insist there is no appetite in caucus to return to Kevin Rudd.

One MP told the ABC that "the adults in the party are urging Mr Rudd's supporters to shut up and get on with their jobs".

Those who want Mr Rudd back in the job are keenly suggesting his return to the Lodge is on the cards; it is just a question of when.

Another has put forward the option of Ms Gillard bringing on the challenge to "lance the boil".

'Year of Kevin Rudd'

Last night Mr Rudd attended a dinner in Sydney to celebrate Chinese New Year and took questions from the floor.

The Foreign Minister laughed when he realised a journalist was in the crowd.

"I know where this is going to go," he said to the amusement of the audience.

"Who invited him?"

The journalist asked if 2012 would not only be the Year of the Dragon, but also the Year of Kevin Rudd.

Mr Rudd would only smile before giving a version of his stock-standard answer to leadership questions.

"I am delighted to be the Foreign Minister of this country and I am delighted to be out there working on Australia's behalf, and I'm delighted to take the excellent brand of this nation Australia to the world wherever I can," he said.

Employment Minister Bill Shorten, who was instrumental in ousting Mr Rudd from The Lodge, triggered laughter on morning radio by giving a series of monosyllabic answers to questions about another leadership change.

"Is it time for the Prime Minister to call a vote?" asked 3AW host Neil Mitchell.

"No," Mr Shorten answered.

It went on.

"Is Kevin Rudd a prima donna?"

"He's fine."

"Has Kevin Rudd accepted that he'll never be prime minister again?"

"I believe so."

"Will the Prime Minister lead to the next election?"

"Yes."

"Will she win the next election?"

"Yes."

"Was Simon Crean unwise to kick Kevin Rudd on the program this week?"

"No."

"Was he right?"

"He didn't kick him."

"To criticise him?"

"Ex-leaders, I think, have more flexibility to range around topics. I'm a brand new cabinet minister. I'm not going to fuel any of the leadership speculation."

Sober assessment

Defence Minister Stephen Smith gave a more sober assessment of the leadership situation.

"I'm a strong supporter of the Prime Minister and I'm confident the Prime Minister will lead us to the next election in the third or the fourth quarter of 2013 and I'm absolutely confident we will be very competitive in that respect," he told Sky News.

The Prime Minister has been asked the question most days in the past week and has once again dismissed it.

"I don't worry about chatter in the media. I get on with the job and I think we've got to be very focused," she told commercial radio in Canberra.

Labor MPs will gather for the first time this year on Sunday at the Lodge for what is being described as a brainstorming planning session ahead of the resumption of Parliament on Tuesday.

Ms Gillard says the meeting will not be focused on opinion polls.

She has told Capital Radio speculation about her leadership is "media chatter" and there are more important issues for the Government.

"I'm not in the camp that says you sit here with your eyes on the opinion polls and that's all that matter to you," she said.

"I'm here to make the changes we need to ensure our nation is stronger for the future."

First posted February 03, 2012 12:51:39

Increasing speculation over PM's future - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

By ABC's Annabel Crabb Updated February 03, 2012 16:44:36

Photo: Both Australia's major political leaders have made a tacit agreement to stop making promises. (Alan Porritt: AAP)

Political promises are having a bad season. If they were a currency, they'd be trading at several hundred to the Aussie dollar right now, and flagging fast.

If they were a dog, you'd run them out of town. So both Australia's major political leaders made a tacit agreement this week - to stop making them.

On Tuesday, the National Press Club heard an hour's worth of Tony Abbott's positive vision for the nation, during the course of which he revealed that he remains absolutely positive that Julia Gillard is a no-good, lying, incompetent buffoon who holds power only by the vote of a scoundrel.

He also indicated that he would definitely be interested in maybe making dentistry services available through Medicare. He made an unshakeable public commitment to remain fairly keen on a disability insurance scheme. And he promised that by the end of the first term of an Abbott government, further tax cuts would on no account be laughed out of town.

Bill Shorten popped up immediately to excoriate the limpness of Mr Abbott's resolve, especially on disabilities, where Labor also has authored a series of sensibly-priced motherhood statements, the major difference being that they have commissioned a scoping study, also sensibly priced.

Julia Gillard had an aspirational week, too.

In her first major address of the year, she painted a picture of the Australian economy as she would like it to be. It certainly sounded compelling; a place of quiet industry and expertise, where plumbers and farmers and mechanics would use the National Broadband Network to diagnose tumours and trade carbon credits and check our suspension and do other such wondrous stuff.

It's all about productivity, the PM says. (It's one of life's little paradoxes that -nationally - access to superfast broadband is expected to help with productivity, even though individual employees, testing this hypothesis personally, often find the reverse to be true. If you don't believe me, I can refer you to an amusing YouTube clip of a drunk lemur making exactly this point, only more cutely).

"This is why I've asked the Minister for Skills, Senator Evans, to bring forward a major proposal for a sweeping overhaul of the vocational training system in Australia."

When the proposed sweeping plan (which involves deferred fees and subsidies for VET students) is brought forward, the PM prudently reminded her audience, it would need to meet with the approval of the state and territory governments.

Now, I'm no wet blanket, but any country in which rail gauges are still a problem needs to be cautious when assuming the cooperation of states and territories in any sweeping new plan.

The cold truth is that the present political environment is an inhospitable one for promises. Uncertainty is rife. Julia Gillard's promises are historically unreliable. Tony Abbott's are currently unnecessary, as he figures he'll get there on the deficiencies of his rival rather than the detail of his dental plan. And both are stalked by the prospect of a global economic debacle that would make matchsticks of their undertakings, at any rate.

And thus, at least for the meantime, we can expect significant wiggle room in the undertakings made to us by our leaders. Readjust your expectations accordingly, all ye who enter here. Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you might, depending on global financial conditions, be prepared to commission a feasibility study into doing for your country. We aspire to fight them. Possibly on the beaches, weather permitting.

Aberrations do exist, of course. Mr Abbott remains entirely wedded to his $2 billion paid parental leave scheme, which is to be funded by an increase in company tax and is, as far as most of his colleagues are concerned, the policy with a face only a parent could love. Publicly, they grit their teeth and defend it. Privately, they wish he'd drown it in a bucket.

The other uncertainty derives from the person of the Foreign Minister.

This week has undeniably heralded an escalation in hostilities; where last week ministers were privately describing Mr Rudd as a prima donna and non-team-player, this week they did it in public. The reason for the escalation is fear, among the courtiers of the Red Queen, that some Caucus members are converting to Ruddism.

The Foreign Minister had nothing to say on the subject of conversion. But events in Syria allowed him to talk at length about Damascus, instead; was ever an aspiring leader so comprehensively blessed by way of ready-made political allegory?

At the time of writing, the Foreign Minister had just departed for the Munich Security Conference, where he will appear on a panel with Henry Kissinger, thus evading the Prime Minister's butcher-paper-and-crayons event in Canberra.

He, too, is not promising anything.

Annabel Crabb is the ABC's chief online political writer. View her full profile here.

Pie crust politics: promises made, promises broken - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)