Newspoll quarterly breakdown
The Australian today brings us Newspoll’s regular quarterly breakdown of its federal polling by state, sex and age group. Compared with the last quarter of 2011, it finds Labor gained a point to lead 51-49 in South Australia, was steady at 50-50 in Victoria, cut the Coalition lead in New South Wales to 54-46 from 57-43 (59-41 in the July to September quarter), and took a point out of the still enormous Coalition leads in Queensland and Western Australia, which are now at 58-42 and 56-44. The Coalition’s two-party lead in the five main capitals is steady at 53-47 and down from 57-43 to 55-45 elsewhere.
Whereas last week’s Nielsen showed a dramatic widening in the gender gap between polls conducted in late February and late March, Newspoll records no such trend between its October-to-December and January-to-March surveys, which may of course conceal a very recent shift. It is interesting to note that the expectation Tony Abbott would poll badly among women was not realised in his earliest polls as Opposition Leader, but has been over time. Breaking it down by age group, the only change which skirts the roughly 3 per cent margins of error is among the 18-34s: Labor is up four points to 33 per cent, the Coalition down four points to 37 per cent and the Greens down three to 17 per cent.
Both leaders were down three on approval in New South Wales, Julia Gillard to 29 per cent and Tony Abbott to 33 per cent, but Abbott was up five in Queensland to 40 per cent. Abbott took a knock in Western Australia to be down five on approval to 31 per cent and up three on disapproval to 56 per cent. Preferred prime minister was essentially unchanged, although a shift in Gillard’s favour in South Australia – from 40-33 to 44-32 – pokes its head above the margin of error.
UPDATE: Oh yeah, Essential Research. As tends to be the case with polls these days, it’s very, very bad news for Labor, who have suffered a two-point shift away from them on two-party preferred compared with last week’s result – with the Coalition lead now at 57-43 – which is rare given that Essential publishes a two-week rolling average. The Coalition is up two points on the primary vote to 50 per cent – a new high for them so far as Essential is concerned – with Labor down two to 31 per cent and the Greens steady on 11 per cent.
Further attitudinal questions show 73 per cent believe the government should delay returning the budget to surplus if that’s what is required to maintain services and invest in infrastructure, with only 12 per cent supporting cuts to services and tax increases to restore the budget surplus. Although it may be that many respondents can instead be restored by “economic management” 28 per cent blame the present government’s lack of it for the present deficit, with 59 per cent choosing four other options available (16 per cent showing awareness of “lower tax revenues because of the Global Financial Crisis”).
On the question of Tony Abbott’s proposed childcare rebate for nannies, 44 per cent are in favour and 33 per cent opposed. Sixty-eight per cent support means testing as a general principle, while 24 per cent believe “people should receive the same subsidies and benefits regardless of income”. A “party best at” question draws the intriguingly dissonant response of a 12-point advantage to Labor on “representing the interests of Australian working families”, but a 6-point advantage to Liberal on “representing the interests of you and people like you”.
Finally, 78 per cent of respondents believe workers should get a “higher hourly rate” on weekends against only 18 per cent opposed, though how much higher exactly remains a subject for further investigation.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
zoomster
The Greens blocked a downgraded scheme. The Denticare scheme the Greens want and will only accept is the reality of treating teeth as part of the body. So yes they voted down the Labor clay tons fig leaf scheme.
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:02 am
4245 – Janice – because, to the discredit of both sides of politics, they put the kybosh on Badgery’s Creek years ago. When they did, umpteen thousand households (read, voters) moved into areas which would be adversely affected by its flight path. They did that on the basis the joint wasn’t going to be built. Any proposal to bring Badgerys Creek back to life will be electoral poison. So it won’t happen.
by Burgey on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:05 am
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:15 am
4246 – billie – I’m not saying Sydney doesn’t need a second airport, i’m saying you can’t in good conscience tell people it won’t be built at Badgerys Creek, have those people move in and set up their lives, then go back and plonk it in the middle of those suburbs which were established on the very basis that it wasn’t being put there.
People like that buffoon Van Onselen were banging on about Badgerys Creek yesterday. He said it’s akin to the dramas with existing inner city suburbs and the third runway. It’s completely the opposite. Those suburbs grew around an existing airport – people knew when they moved there that the airport existed and was growing.
He irks me that clown. Talking about an airport in the Western Suburbs. Raised in Vaucluse and went to Cranbrook. By “western subrubs” I suspect he meant Anzac Parade.
by Burgey on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:16 am
Burgey,
I see your point, but IMO wherever they want to put the airport will be electoral poison. At any rate, if you put the damned airport out where the population is sparse, it wouldn’t be long before umpteen thousand voters would move right up to its boundaries and then yell and scream blue murder that it is too noisy and the government should move it somewhere else.
by janice2 on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:18 am
Janice and burgey see my comment at 2428.
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:23 am
sorry transposed figures. Why I failed at accounting.
See my comment at 4248
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:24 am
press waiting for abbott to turn up at sleepmaster mattress factory , maybe he slept in.
by mickt on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:24 am
janice – I think they had a proposal to put it at Goulburn at one stage, but there was some wide mouth frog (not O’Farrell, the real kind) which would have been upset so they stopped that going ahead.
Assuming the residential exclusion zone still applies, I think the very real problem is the movement of fuel and other road-bound necessities to the site. one of the virtues of Mascot is it’s proximity to Port Botany I suppose.
Wherever it’s built, there’s going to need to be a huge integrated infrastructure plan in place. Whether it’s Badgerys Creek, Wilton or Goulburn; high speed rail is just one of the issues at play. You can’t high speed rail AvGas to the joint. It needs to come in via heavy rail, truck and/ or ship. If they build the airport anywhere in the Sydney Basin that will mean a lot of acquisitions – not just at the airport site, but for the links to and from.
It’s a pickle. It’s been left so long now. As you say, the city is growing so fast. To me there is a difference between people who move into an area where there’s already an airport and whinge, and those who have an airport put on top of their heads, having moved in being told it wouldn’t go there.
by Burgey on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:27 am
Guytaur,
Yes, I didn’t miss your comment at 4248 and I think you might be right. Won’t matter to me though because I’m living on borrowed time now so will probably be pushing up daisies by the time a decision is made
by janice2 on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:30 am
guytaur – yeah, I agree. I mean, ideally you’d want a second ariport close to the city, for obvious reasons. But the buck passing has gone on too long I think it’s become impracticable.
If I had to choose a spot I’d still say Goulburn, with a HSR link to Sydney and Canberra together with road and heavy rail infrastructure from the Port of Wollongong for transferring the copious fuel required. There’s no perfect solution here.
by Burgey on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:31 am
Paul Keating on Bob Brown and The Greens
http://soundcloud.com/user8766762/paul-keating-on-bob-brown-and
I’m becoming more convinced the Julia Gillard should end the ALP’s hung parliament alliance with the Greens after the policies become entrenched on July 1st. Christine Milne is now claiming inaccurate things about the ALP and blaming Abbott for it all (just gives him ammunition)
by spur212 on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:31 am
janice – I’m sorry to hear that
by Burgey on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:32 am
Has the msm gone to town yet on Christine’s assassination of Bob and Adam’s knifing of Sarah?
by This little black duck on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:32 am
My understanding is the second airport cannot go ahead without State Government support. where ever it is proposed.
The Federal Government wants it done, business wants it done the State Government does not. The ball is in the court of BOF not the Federal Government.
Simple.
by Doyley on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:34 am
There is a rail Freight Centre being built near to Campelltown with a link to Port Botany.
Air Freight will become rarer and rarer in the future. To avoid higher costs associated with carbon people will be willing to wait for most freight. It will only be perishables that will travel by air. This means that a heavy rail line to an airport to connect freight will be less imperative. Especially as there is already an airport or two with freight access. Mascot and Bankstown.
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:35 am
janice2
By borrowed time you mean, because of your age?
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:35 am
Doyley
No argument. We know that means no second airport. O’Farrell promised it during the election.
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:36 am
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2012/s3477815.htm
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:38 am
Burgey,
I agree, except that if people expect things won’t change during the course of a couple of decades they’re delusional. Doesn’t matter where you go, the modern world and its technology catches up and you find yourself in whinge-ville over something or other. Just take a look at our once beautiful Hunter Valley that is now a mishmash of opencut coal mines.
by janice2 on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:38 am
Janice
I think the Hunter is an excellent example of where the coal should have been left in the ground. All that fertile land is not denied for crop production of various types not just the wine vineyards
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:41 am
On the airport – I really enjoyed watching Gerard Henderson squirm on Insiders yesterday (so much that I recorded it) coming up with wtte ‘BOH promised there wouldn’t be one BUT it’s primarily down to the Federal Govt ‘ them ‘Joe Hockey wants one BUT it’s primarily down to the Federal Govt’, ‘waffle, waffle BUT it’s primarily down to the Federal Govt’ ….
Mr Henderson knows what side of the bread has the butter on.
Poor BOF – Trapped between not wanting to alienate voters and all of the NSW business community (except the Sydney Airport Corporation Ltd / Max Moore-Wilton /Macquarie Bank).
Of course the Federal Labor Party can have fun with this – Mr Hawke purchased 1700 hectares of land for the 2nd A/P, Mr Keating then provided for the start of the building of it and then Mr Howard cancelled the building of it.
But Mr Howard didn’t actually sell the land … (which Costello would have wanted to do!).
Leaving it quite open for the Federal Govt to now say to Mr BOF ‘do you want an airport or not?’ ….
And ‘If you don’t want it where we specifically purchased land after extensive consultation with the NSW Govt, where do you want it?’
I almost feel sorry for BOF.
by CTar1 on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:42 am
TLBD
No they have not. The Greens are not the leaking types.
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:43 am
janice – Yes this is true. Mind you, if the Hunter is already ruined, whack the airport there! :p
by Burgey on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:43 am
Ctar1
It does cement BOF with the do nothing tag.
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:45 am
abbott,” carbon tax is a wrecking ball”
by mickt on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:46 am
guytaur @4267,
Exactly.
However, It woulds not surprise me if the government allocated funds in the budget for some initial planing work to be undertaken. Shows they are serious!
What happens after that is up to BOF who has locked himself into opposing the airport.
At the moment BOF looks like the blocker and labor has shown the vision.
A bit of politics is good at any time.
by Doyley on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:46 am
mickt
Sounds like Abbott arrived at the mattress factory and is spewing his bile?!
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:47 am
mickt/4275
Abbott should stop referring to himself as a carbon tax then. :}
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:48 am
yes victoria,also had mirrabella as backup bile gusher .
by mickt on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:51 am
I must admit I am looking forward to the high speed trains of the future for Australia. They will come as pressure builds and builds on that capacity on the current air routes and the costs associated with them.
Bob Brown and Anthony Albanese will be seen as the men of vision on this. Bob Brown for lobbying for High Speed Rail. Minister Albanese for getting the ball rolling. Future generations will remember and be thankful. This Parliament is going to be kong remembered for many things. One of those will be for finally getting real on rail travel in Australia.
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:53 am
http://ashghebranious.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/tony-abbott-tony-abbott-tony-abbott-tony-abbott-tony-abbott/
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:53 am
mickt
Thank goodness I missed it!!
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:54 am
Doyley, do you think it’s good politics for Labor to be setting money aside for an airport bounded by the seats of Greenway, Lindsay, Macarthur, McMahon and Fowler?
by Burgey on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:56 am
Victoria
So far the ABC has given more airtime to Christine Milne on AM this morning and the Prime Minister on the ANZAC Centenary. Maybe they are starting to realise they do not need to cover every presser by Tony Abbott.
by guytaur on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:56 am
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:57 am
Well, I’m still reasonably healthy Victoria, but I do have a few issues. I am content to face the fact that no-one lives forever and therefore I look upon the time I have left as being borrowed time. It doesn’t worry me one bit that I could fall off the perch tomorrow, next week or next year but, like my mother before me, I will make bloody sure I won’t be seeing out my time without any quality to it.
by janice2 on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:58 am
guytaur
I hope you are right. There is no need for the msm to do his pressers. They are repetitive.
Gillard a liar
carbon tax is bad
Thomson is a criminal
Unions are evil
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:58 am
don
[You have confused going to war with the recording of our history.] This is what the war memorial does, systemically. It takes participation in our various wars for granted rather than providing an opportunity for visitors to have the opportunity to think about whether we should have gone to our very many wars in the first place. This is not history, it is the bastardisation of history.
The War Memorial fosters many what have rightly been called the zomby myths about Australian war history. The examples are numerous but the besetting, systemic failure of the War Memorial’s presentation of history is that Australian participation actually made a significant difference to the wars in which we have participated. I accept that ‘significance’ depends on values as well as other assessments, but the War Memorial takes an approach that is indefensible to this. For example, nowhere is it evident to the visitor that Australian participation in the Second World War failed to shorten that war by a minute. Now, I agree that some people think that this should not matter and that other considerations are more important than actually making a difference. But my point is that the War Memorial is not about history, but about distorting history.
Some people say that the War Memorial does not glorify war. This is taken to be axiomatically true. It is almost said as if it were a religious truth. But it is worth taking a closer look because, if you do, the inescapable conclusion is that the War Memorial does glorify war and Australian participation in war. I will give eight examples of this. There are many more.
(1) The presentation is santisied. For example, In the simulation of a the bombing raid has the pilots and crew. All very realistic. But, there is no stench of putrifying flesh, of living in shit, no sight of entrails, and no smell of burning women and children. The latter were what mass bombing raids on cities were all about in WW2.
(2) There is no mention of rape in war. There is no stench of putrifying flesh, of living in shit, no sight of entrails, and no smell of burning women and children. T
(3) War crimes by Australians at war do not get a look in.
(4) The invasion of Indigenous Australia, the massacres and so on and so forth, are not raised.
(5) The history of those who opposed wars and of conscientious objectors is not dealt with proportionately.
(6) While a great deal of attention, space and time is given to Victoria Cross gainers, almost no space is given to the far greater scale of mass panic, desertion, drunkeness and looting done by Australian soliders.
(7) The environmental destruction concomitant with war is not dealth with. There is nothing about the consequences of mass deforestation and massive consequences on a peoples’ health consequent to the mass usage of agent orange.
(8) There is little or nothing about the mass psychological damage that troops returning from war both suffer and inflict on their loved ones.
I put it that the ommission of these examples demonstrates that the War Memorial glorifies war and our participation in war, by systematically omitting the ungloriours bits.
In some respects, the War Memorial is improving. For example, it is now possible to get a much better idea of the impact of our wars on the home front in general, and on women in particular. This is worth supporting. It also does a good, if distorted, job of including art as part of the presentation.
The systematic bastardisation of our history by the War Memorial detracts from what should probably be separate functions:
(1) a place to honour the sacrifice of those who served, suffered and died as well as those whose consciences meant that they did not serve or die. This should ideally have shrine-like functions.
(2) a history museum.
My view is that conflating (1) and (2) causes us to go history blind lest we denigrate those who made the supreme sacrifice. I believe several of the posts subsequent to yours demonstrate this problem.
Finally, I would guess that I would have visited the War Memorial more than most Bludgers. I am always profoundly moved by it. But being moved emotionally does not mean that I have to put my brain out of gear. In fact, from my point of view, I have a duty to those who died not to allow subsequently generations to fiddle with the truth. Because, if they did not die for the truth, in all its diversity and all its manifestations, what did they die for?
Surely they did not die for lies?
by Boerwar on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:59 am
janice2
Hear hear. I am with you on that!!
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 11:59 am
If you’re going to spend $10b on the fast rail as far as Goulburn why would you stop there and build an airport from scratch … you may as well do as BOF has said and save about $5b by building up Canberra A/P – although I imagine the idea would NOT be to popular with the locals.
Again poor old BOF – Wilton is probably the only site that is at least feasible. But he’d have to say to the Feds sell Badgerys, buy Wilton which would be a 5 year project, I’m guessing, …
He’ll want to kick to can down the road but the pressure will just get worse …
by CTar1 on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:01 pm
burgery @4283,
Fair Point. But the federal opposition support it as well so how it works out I do not know.
All I can say is the vision thing looks good. I do not think BOF will change his mind so it well may be off the boil anyway by 2013 with no skin off labor.
Too much politics at stake here from all sides for any airport to be built. The sad but pragmatic truth.
Albanese knows it but labor may as well push it anyway.
At least they tried.
by Doyley on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:07 pm
Yeah, why not? The mines have squeezed the life out of the Hunter so it is no longer much good for anything else, especially the Upper Hunter. At the rate they’re going there will hardly be any room for an airport between the opencut craters.
by janice2 on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:10 pm
Let the rivers be heard
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/let-the-rivers-be-heard-20120415-1x1e1.html#ixzz1sAJviyJV
by lizzie on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:16 pm
Rudd’s older son was married over the weekend. Here is a nice pic
http://instagr.am/p/Jdo4YHsBaL/
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:17 pm
Boerwar @ 4288
You have just convinced me that you are nuts.
by bemused on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:17 pm
Boerwar @ 4288
I’ll tell you what I think of – of how lucky I am to be not living in shit and eating half a cup of rice every second day if lucky!
I think of the sacrifice my father gave and to drop his age 6 yrs so he was eligible to volunteer. I think of his brother who was bayoneted and cannibalized on the Kokoda.
No glorification for me but perhaps a little family pride especially as we didn’t start it.
by Dr John on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:18 pm
http://ashghebranious.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/tony-abbott-tony-abbott-tony-abbott-tony-abbott-tony-abbott/
victoria – I enjoyed that, thanks. Some really good questions among that lot and Abbott may have a hard job answering them.
by BH on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:21 pm
BH
I liked it too. Of course Abbott will have trouble answering these questions. That is why they are never asked
by victoria on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:22 pm
Pegasus:
And you’re right about that too. Labor’s response to it was appalling, more concerned with preserving electoral support than protesting what was a disgusting act. I was angry with them at the time.
I don’t doubt any of that. I’ve got a lot of time for the Greens, and I share some of their beliefs. In fact, in a sense I’m a prime target for them. I don’t, however, have much time for them as political players. I suspect the switch from BB to Milne will probably make me more sympathetic to them.
But I don’t know how that’s going to work with others. My suspicion is that there is a large-ish ‘soft’ vote parked with the Greens at the moment. I do know quite a few people who have voted for the Greens because they’re “newsy” – because BB has been effective at differentiating them from the ALP. And because global warming has been a big issue and the perception was that none of the major parties care about it. I don’t know where their votes will go now.
by Aguirre on Apr 16, 2012 at 12:24 pm