Essential Research: 56-44 to Coalition

Monday, March 5, 2012

Essential Research: 56-44 to Coalition

by William Bowe

Federal Politics 2010-

The latest weekly Essential Research survey shows no change on last week, bar a one point drop in the Greens vote to 10 per cent: the Coalition is on 49 per cent of the primary vote and Labor on 32 per cent, with the Coalition’s two-party lead at 56-44. Essential also found plenty of interesting questions to ask about the Labor leadership. Respondents were asked to evaluate the performance of various actors during the challenge, with Kevin Rudd coming out least badly (33 per cent good, 35 per cent poor), “Labor Party ministers” the worst (10 per cent and 52 per cent), the media also very poorly (14 per cent and 43 per cent), Julia Gillard not well at all (23 per cent and 49 per cent) and Tony Abbott hardly better even if it might be hard to recall what he did exactly (25 per cent and 40 per cent).

Sixty-two per cent of respondents said the leadership challenge was bad for the government and 47 per cent that it has made them less likely to vote Labor (64 per cent among Coalition supporters, obviously including many who wouldn’t vote Labor in a pink fit), against 13 per cent who said it was a good thing and another 13 per cent (or perhaps the same 13 per cent) who they were more likely to vote Labor. A question on Kevin Rudd’s future produces a miraculously even three-way split with 29 per cent saying he should stay in parliament and again challenge for the leadership, 28 per cent saying he should stay in parliament and not challenge for the leadership and 30 per cent saying he should resign from parliament.

Respondents were asked to indicate whether they supported the Australian system of leaders being elected by MPs (36 per cent), American-style presidential primaries (31 per cent) and British-style election by both MPs and party members (11 per cent). Fifty-six per cent believed MPs should be guided by public opinion in leadership contests against 30 per cent by who they believed was the best person. The poll also points to a slight increase in support for an early election since the end of January, up three to 44 per cent with support for a completed term down two to 46 per cent.

We have also had Newspoll publish results from last week’s polling on the most important political issues and the best party to handle them. Such figures are invariably very closely associated with voting intention, and since this was a 53-47 poll result, it finds Labor improving considerably since the question was last asked as part of the poll of October 7-9, which was a 57-43 result. Labor has recovered big leads on its traditional strong suits of health, education, industrial relations and climate change, and closed the gap on the economy, interest rates and national security. Full tables from GhostWhoVotes.

Categories: Federal Politics 2010-

2780 Responses

Comments page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 |

b

come clean

just cos u aint a 6.5 stars generals

u have title envy

by gusface on Mar 6, 2012 at 8:56 pm
Perhaps it is time for the Greens also to make peace with ‘The Australian’?

OTOH, here is a tentative list of those who are at peace with ‘The Australian’ already:

(1) AGW deniers
(2) AGW do-nothings
(3) absurdly wealthy and self-important mining magnates
(4) union bashers
(5) reactionaries
(6) economic rationalists

etc, etc, etc…

The notion that the Labor Government has to make peace with ‘The Australian’ is absurd when it has a core aim of destroying the Federal Labor Government.

by Boerwar on Mar 6, 2012 at 8:57 pm
I just sent this email to Nick Davies at The Guardian, because I have absolutely no faith in any Oz journalist having the guts (Robert Manne an honorable exception) to follow up what should be a front page story. If this happened in the UK I suspect the protagonists would be giving evidence before Levenson. The preferred journalistic modus operandi in this case – FOI – may technically be legal but the motivation is the same as phone hacking – digging for dirt to harass and intimidate individual citizens.

Nick thought this piece from a very well regarded Australian academic might spark your interest. As I’m sure you know News Ltd controls 70% of the Australian print media.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3871300.html

Regards

by Rossmore on Mar 6, 2012 at 8:59 pm
I switched to Sky a bit too late to find PvO and Simon Sheikh on the tail end of some criticism of Getup! and I wondered if it was the one aired here about not bothering to open their emails. It was about 15 minutes into Showdown.

by triton on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:00 pm
Boerwar

The notion that the Labor Government has to make peace with ‘The Australian’ is absurd when it has a core aim of destroying the Federal Labor Government.

Meh, why make peace with an organisation that is on the way to being deep sixed ? Leveson = Rupes End.

by poroti on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:00 pm
Sorry, 45 minutes.

by triton on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:01 pm
g

Private 2nd Class (Ret) to you.

The older Royal Navy muster books are littered with, for example, George Jenkins, able bodied seaman, DD.

DD = Discharged Dead.

by Boerwar on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:01 pm
Rossmore:

Inasmuch as I was appalled at the shameful approaches by the OO in relation to Manne’s grant funding for his academic work, I saw the Manne article more as raining on a future scoop parade from the OO.

I also laughed at the journo’s reported ignorance when it comes to competitive research grant awards and acquittals processes. I remember the same thing with the AGW Denialists madly trying to discredit climate change researchers by attempting to misrepresent the competitive research grant processes, and getting it horribly wrong.

Good on Manne for getting the facts on the table, cause we know the OO won’t report the facts.

by confessions on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:02 pm
http://hungrybeast.abc.net.au/stories/beast-file-gina-rinehart

Still both fun and scary!

by cud chewer on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:02 pm
OTOH, here is a tentative list of those who are at peace with ‘The Australian’ already:

(1) AGW deniers
(2) AGW do-nothings
(3) absurdly wealthy and self-important mining magnates
(4) union bashers
(5) reactionaries
(6) economic rationalists

Anti feminists.

by confessions on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:03 pm
triton:

No. PvO put it to Sheikh that GetUp would have criticised the Malaysian Solution more solidly had it been posited by a coalition govt.

Sheikh countered that his org had been fairly robust in its criticism of the arrangement with Malaysia.

by confessions on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:05 pm
fess

and knuckledraggers

by gusface on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:06 pm
Mr Abbott is at peace with ‘The Australian’. The Coalition is at peace with ‘The Australian’.

by Boerwar on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:07 pm
extract of NSW Parliament joint sitting minutes for Bob Carr:

3. PERSON PROPOSED TO FILL THE VACANT PLACE IN THE SENATE CAUSED BY THE RESIGNATION OF SENATOR THE HONOURABLE MARK ARBIB

The President announced that he was now prepared to receive nominations with regard to a person to fill the vacant place in the Senate caused by the resignation of Senator the Honourable Mark Arbib.

(1) The Honourable Robert John Carr was proposed by Mr J C Robertson MP, Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly, to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator the Honourable Mark Arbib. Mr Robertson announced that the candidate was willing to hold the vacant place if chosen. He further announced that Senator the Honourable Mark Arbib was, at the time he was chosen by the people of the State, publicly recognised to be an endorsed candidate of the Australian Labor Party and publicly represented himself to be an endorsed candidate of that party, and that the Honourable Robert John Carr is a member of the same political party.

The Honourable L A Foley MLC, Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Council, seconded the proposal.

(2) The President inquired if any member desired to propose any other person to fill the vacancy.

No other person being proposed—

Question: That the Honourable Robert John Carr be chosen to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator the Honourable Mark Arbib—put and passed.

(3) The President then declared—That the Honourable Robert John Carr has been chosen to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator the Honourable Mark Arbib.

4. NOTIFICATION OF THE ELECTION TO HER EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR

The Premier, the Honourable B R O’Farrell MP, moved: That the President inform Her Excellency the Governor as soon as practicable that the Honourable Robert John Carr has been chosen to hold the place in the Senate rendered vacant by the resignation of Senator the Honourable Mark Arbib.

The Honourable D J Gay MLC, Leader of the House in the Legislative Council, Minister for Roads and Ports, seconded the motion.

Question put and passed.

by shellbell on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:08 pm
Possum Comitatus
@Pollytics
The Stutchening strikes again RT @AndrewSCasey: Barrister takes AFR to task for misreporting ABCC reform proposals

bit.ly/w5FEpP

by victoria on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:08 pm
Sohar , The League of Gentlemen was one of my favorites and Psychoville has just finished up in QLD on abc2. You have to watch the whole series to really know what’s going on.

by Lord Barry Bonkton on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:09 pm
http://www.cfmeu.asn.au/news/media-misstatement-boosts-resistance-to-abcc-reform

by victoria on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:10 pm
poroti
Posted Tuesday, March 6, 2012 at 8:35 pm | Permalink
oyster

channel 10 could counter with Bolt interviewing Rhineheart

Fortunately the 8 people that watch the program are rusted on Coalition voters so no damage

How are Bolt’s ratings going still heading south with a bit of luck?

by mari on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:10 pm
Did Mr Sheikh put it to Mr van Onselen that had the Opposition:

(1) argued for onshore processing
(2) decried the tragic psychological destruction associated with TPVs
(3) decried the destructive terms such as ‘illegal migrants’, etc, etc,

‘The Australian’ would have been far more supportive of onshore processing and far more negative about TPVs?

And did Mr Sheikh put it to Mr van Onselen that were the Opposition to criticise the crackpot pseudo science of various named deniers, then ‘The Australian’ would not have given same not nearly as much space?

Did Mr Sheikh point out that Mr van Onselen was indulging in holier-than-thou hypocrisy, cant and double standards?

by Boerwar on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:12 pm
Yes, LBB, have seen all the Psychoville – series one a while back and series two twice (BBC iPlayer a few months back and ABC2 recently). Brilliantly done – amazing comedy actors.

by sohar on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:16 pm
more and more voices are coming out protesting Murdoch antics, just like in the UK. NewsLtd is truly a corruption of our national fabric.

The Australian is of course not interested in the vast majority of the authors who receive grants from the ARC and publish commercial books - those who write for example on literature or military history or Australian 19th century gardens. It is exclusively interested in harassing those it regards as left-wing intellectuals and, a fortiori, the critics of the Murdoch Empire against which it wishes to use its vast resources and influence to intimidate and to wound and if possible to discredit. In cases like this, it can often seem that an editor whistles, and the well-trained team of attack dogs - Andrew Bolt, Piers Akerman, Miranda Devine, Tim Blair et hoc genus emerge from their various kennels, teeth bared, snarling, moving in for the kill. This is the kind of culture that now prevails in the media corporation that dominates between 65 per cent and 70 per cent of the Australian newspaper market.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3871300.html

by sprocket_ on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:18 pm
Good, conf. I’m glad someone saw it all. I didn’t want to start a wild goose chase.

by triton on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:19 pm
Interesting piece from Clive Hamilton on IPA

abc.net.au/unleashed/3849…

by Rossmore on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:19 pm
Must go sleep.

by Boerwar on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:20 pm
MTBW

You are welcome, I was really amazed when I saw it. No media ever mentioned what these people did.
Amazing numbers 350,000 at Dunkirk almost 500,000 in New York.
Anyone that calls a sportsperson, actor or the like a hero doesn’t know what heroes and heroism are.

by HaveAchat on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:21 pm
Boerwar:

Not a chance! Sky uses left-of-centre panelists only as ‘balance’, but still as a vehicle for bashing Labor.

by confessions on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:26 pm
Gadzooks, a press conference with actual policy questions and no leadership crap: http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/transcript-joint-press-conference-canberra-22

The question about Swan’s Monthly article is also useful for showing the approach the Government is taking now:

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, some elements of the environmental movement are foreshadowing a plan to try and fight the development of the coal industry. Do you worry about that and what it means to the jobs of many Australians?

And secondly, in an allied question, what is your response to the suggestion that Wayne Swan’s attacks on a couple of high wealth individuals are divisive and unhelpful?

PM: Well if I can take them in reverse order, firstly on The Monthly article – have you read it?

JOURNALIST: I have.

PM: Good. That’s good. Well I’d commend it to anybody in the group who hasn’t read it, to make sure that they read the whole thing and when you do read the whole thing obviously Wayne Swan is talking about how the overwhelming, vast majority – indeed he uses the term ’99 per cent’ of the business community work motivated by community interests and the national interest and we’ve just seen that on display today. And you’ve just seen on display today the partnership that there is between the Australian Government and the business community.

On the article overall, I think it is important for us as a nation to recognise that public policy has to be at the forefront of interventions in national debates. Interventions in national debates shouldn’t be about how loud a voice is, it should be about the quality of the contribution.

by rishane on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:30 pm
Gina looking for some lurve ?

Rinehart meets Fairfax management on home turf

THE richest Australian, Gina Rinehart, has met senior management of Fairfax Media for what is believed to be the first time since taking a significant stake in the company

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/rinehart-meets-fairfax-management-on-home-turf-20120306-1uigx.html#ixzz1oKdOUjtq

by poroti on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:37 pm
Lord Barry Bonkton,

“This is a local shop for local people!”

(the strangest tv I have seen is Tubs feeding a piglet after she and her husband/brother? have just tarred a surveyor for the “New Road”)

by 1892CFC on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:41 pm
rishane, it was a good trick to reverse the order to answer the question she wanted and spend enough time on it that everyone forgot about the first question. That’s the risk they take asking two questions: the politician can choose the easier one. Unfortuntately, she didn’t quickly go to someone else quickly enough so the same journalist got in and reminded her.

by triton on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:43 pm
Readers should choose a ‘quickly’ to delete.

by triton on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:44 pm
Evening Bludgers.

Tony Abbott sems to be missing in action. Oh well, here’s a cfmeu take on his attitude to those doing-it-tough Mining Bllionaires.

“Fair Go for Billionaires”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyxTX8ozLGI&feature=relmfu

by smithe on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:47 pm
I choose the second one

by gusface on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:47 pm
BRING BACK FRANKER!

by ShowsOn on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:52 pm
Shows

why dont u go on his blog?

by gusface on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:53 pm
Good, gusface. I thought the first might work better.

by triton on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:55 pm
smithe
Hows about

Fair Go For Billionaires - Tough Times

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9evMeUqfOFU
Mind you back in the day we BLFers called the authors the Can’t Feckin Make Em Work Union !!

by poroti on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:55 pm
Hey Rossmore have you a direct link to that piece on the IPA? I cannot find it…cheers

by joe2 on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:56 pm
Vested interests, lobbying and the two major political parties……the real story.

http://www.thepowerindex.com.au/analysis/lobbyist-regulation-nothing-to-see-here-say-the-major-parties

The politicians said it so it must be true. The regulation of lobbying in this country is running like a dream and can't be improved.

That's the conclusion of a parliamentary inquiry into the lobbying code of conduct and lobbyist register introduced by John Faulkner in 2008.

The inquiry, which conducted only two hours of public hearings, did not make any recommendations for reform.

There's no need, the major parties assure us, to worry that only 'third party' or 'consultant' lobbyists need to register as lobbyists. Representatives from corporations and interest don't count -- even though their job is to influence public policy and they're often staggeringly successful at doing so.

We're talking Anthony Ball at Clubs Australia, Mitch Hooke at the Minerals Council, Heather Ridout at the Australian Industry Group and in-house operatives at BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Qantas. Union bosses and NGOs also lobby.

1. Home page to report on Lobbying Code of Conduct and the Lobbyist Register: http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Committees?url=fapa_ctte/lobbying_code_2011/report/index.htm

2. Media Release by Lee Rhiannon: http://www.democracy4sale.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=586:lobbyist-inquiry-a-whitewash-greens-seek-tougher-regulation&catid=1:general&Itemid=6

3. Greens dissenting report: http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Committees?url=fapa_ctte/lobbying_code_2011/report/d01.pdf

One of the eight recommendations that the Greens advocate is to strengthen disclosure requirements, so that any scheme should require the disclosure, in a timely manner, of when the lobbying occurred, who stood to benefit, who was lobbied, the subject matter of the lobbying and the meeting outcome.

Why are the two major political parties in lock step in their desire to stymie actions that would provide greater transparency and accountability to the public they serve?

by Pegasus on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:56 pm
Shows

why dont u go on his blog?

He banned me after I made one post!

And it wasn’t even inflammatory!

by ShowsOn on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:58 pm
They do do a pretty good line in satire though poroti.

by smithe on Mar 6, 2012 at 9:58 pm
smithe
They do so how about some ” What have the ~~Romans~~ unions ever done for us”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9evMeUqfOFU

by poroti on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:00 pm
triton

ha

the youngest does that a lot-

ie he writes the double action thingy a lot

i have noticed that he went from the verbal to written

now he says it aloud, then writes it

prob solved

by gusface on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:02 pm
shows

maybe try a new nom de plume and email address

by gusface on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:03 pm
Now here is a question from the Drop Kick Murphies what answer do ye give ?

Which Side Are You On

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKWfnO7fhQM

by poroti on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:05 pm
maybe try a new nom de plume and email address

OK, how about “Mr Garseface”?

by ShowsOn on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:06 pm
1892cfc , yes the poms are good at black comedy.Tubs and the piglet , or the special meat from the butchers? So much going on , you have to watch it twice.

by Lord Barry Bonkton on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:10 pm
Joe2 @ 1087

joe2
Posted Tuesday, March 6, 2012 at 9:56 pm | Permalink
Hey Rossmore have you a direct link to that piece on the IPA? I cannot find it…cheers

In case Rossmore has gone … http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3849006.html

by bemused on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:12 pm
shows

you would need to ask your alter ego, greentard that Q

by gusface on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:14 pm
ShowsOn @ 1083
Why do you want Frank back?

by bemused on Mar 6, 2012 at 10:15 pm

« Previous | Next »