Morgan phone poll: 57-43 to Coalition
Roy Morgan has simultaneously published phone and face-to-face poll results. The phone poll was conducted from Tuesday to Thursday from a modest sample of 697, with a margin of error a bit below 4%. This tells very much the same story as other recent phone polling: Labor on 30%, the Coalition on 47.5% and the Greens on 11.5%. As is generally the case with phone polling, the two-party result is much the same whether determined by respondent allocation (57-43 to the Coalition) or applying the preference distribution from the last election (56-44).
The phone poll also gauged opinion on global warming and the carbon tax. On global warming, 35% believe concerns exaggerated, up three on October last year; 50% opted for “if we don’t act now it will be too late”, up six points; and 12% chose “it is already too late”, down eight points. Support for the carbon tax was at 34.5%, down 2.5%, with opposition up two to 59%. Support for the Coalition’s promise to repeal the tax if elected was up four points to 49% with opposition down five to 43%.
The face-to-face poll combines results from the last two weekends of Morgan’s regular surveying, with a sample of 1770. On the primary vote, this has Labor down a point on the previous survey to 31%, the Coalition up two to 46.5% and the Greens down half a point to 12.5%. As usual with these polls, and in contrast to the phone poll result, the difference between the two measures of the two-party result is cavernous (though terrible for Labor either way): 55-45 using the previous election method, but 59.5-40.5 using respondent allocation.
UPDATE: Spur212 in comments points out the following fascinating finding on the question of “who do you think will win”, which I normally don’t even bother to look at. Since the last Morgan phone poll in early February – before the Kevin Rudd leadership challenge – expectations of a Labor win have plummeted from 31% to 14%, while the Coalition has soared from 57% to 76.5%.
Also:
• The ABC reports that Dean Smith, a lobbyist and former adviser to former WA Premier Richard Court and federal MP Bronwyn Bishop, has been preselected for the third position on the WA Liberals’ Senate ticket at the election, behind incumbents David Johnston and Michaelia Cash. This makes it likely, though apparently not quite certain, that he will fill the casual vacancy created by the death on March 31 of Judith Adams.
• The Liberal member for Hume, Alby Schultz, has made long-anticipated announcement that he will retire at the next election. This sets the scene for what promising to be a bruising contest for the seat between the Liberals and Schultz’s bitter enemy, the Nationals. Imre Salusinszky of The Australian reports relations between the two have fractured over the Liberals’ moves to preselect candidates ahead of time in anticipation of a potential early election. The Nationals say this dishonours an agreement that preselections would wait until the two parties had reached their agreement determining which seats would be contested by which parties and the order of the Coalition Senate ticket, which has not left them of a mind to leave Hume to the Liberals. The most widely mooted potential Liberal candidate has been Angus Taylor, a 45-year-old Sydney lawyer, Rhodes Scholar and triathlete. Taylor is said to be close to Malcolm Turnbull, and to have the backing of Schultz. For the Nationals’ part, it has long been suggested that Senator Fiona Nash might try her hand at the seat, and The Australian now reports that Katrina Hodgkinson, state Primary Industry Minister and member for Burrinjuck, might also be interested.
• Imre Salusinszky and James Massola of The Australian further report that friction between the Liberals and Nationals in NSW might further see the Nationals field a candidate in Gilmore, where Liberal member Joanna Gash is retiring (and where one of the Liberal preselection candidates is Alby Schultz’s son Grant), and Farrer, which Sussan Ley gained for the Liberals when Tim Fischer retired in 2001.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
What hypocrisy. #NewsCorpse hacks screaming for Slipper to stand down on a civil matter. Yet silent on James Murdoch facing criminal probe
by The Finnigans on Apr 22, 2012 at 7:45 am
Gasp,shock horror amazement at Grattan headline + first sentence
Relax folks by sentence number two Michelle had resumed normal transmission.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/gillard-acts-fast-to-create-bold-legacy-20120421-1xdmq.html
by poroti on Apr 22, 2012 at 7:49 am
Sprocket
So this is what labor are reduced to praying about, GrechII. Gillard was crazy if she thought buying Peter slipper would be a good move. Anyway, good old Gillard paid for and is the owner of Liberal trash. To clever by half and Wilkie is pissed and on the war path as well lol.
by rummel on Apr 22, 2012 at 7:50 am
SK
And Rupert.
by Dan Gulberry on Apr 22, 2012 at 7:50 am
Dan,
I don’t care whether it is in the UK, US or Australia. But the day Murdoch goes down I will be having a huge party!
by Space Kidette on Apr 22, 2012 at 7:54 am
The Prime Minister makes more of a positive impact on the world around her in a single day than Grattan does in years of hackery.
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 7:56 am
You don’t get to slide out that easily, dummel. The “owners” of Liberal trash are supporters like yourself, Abbott, and the billionaires who bankroll the so-called “Liberal” party.
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 7:58 am
A timely warning to us about what the Coalition wants for us.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/economic-epidemic-avoid-american-diseaselike-plague-20120420-1xcn1.html#ixzz1siN8hHIW
by poroti on Apr 22, 2012 at 7:59 am
Good Morning.
When people stop looking at the flashy disco story that is Slippergate they might notice this.
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:01 am
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/abbott-hit-by-friendly-fire-as-liberals-fill-labor-void-20120421-1xdkq.html
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:01 am
{Kidette Posted Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 7:54 am | P{}
Can i come sk
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:03 am
Guytuar
Would u mind piuttig a bit of text,
Is it positive, sort of ?
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:05 am
my say,
The more the merrier!
by Space Kidette on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:05 am
As Tones admits to “feeling uncomfortable” when near gays I wonder if this news may curtail his annual UK pilgrimage to pay homage to the Tories.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/apr/20/gay-tory-conservative-party?intcmp=239
by poroti on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:07 am
my say
I reckon all Bludgers, ALP members and a lot more will be at that party.
by Dan Gulberry on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:07 am
(osted Sunday, April 22, 2012 at 7:59 am | Permalink
A timely warning to us about what the Coalition wants for us.
Economic epidemic: avoid American disease-like plague.)
Is th e SMH news, murdoch msm
I
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:11 am
my say
This is the first paragraph.
The opposition ranks are peppered with those speaking out against the unshakeable views of their leader. Political correspondent Stephanie Peatling analyses the contradictions.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/abbott-hit-by-friendly-fire-as-liberals-fill-labor-void-20120421-1xdkq.html#ixzz1siQnZpk6
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:13 am
poroti
Is that a pink flank manoeuvre?
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:14 am
Cuppa
I’m happy to boot this lib out on his ass however Gillard is protecting him. So there is not much the libs can do when the Pm has got your slippery back.
by rummel on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:14 am
Was catching up on some of last nights posts and came across another uninformed discussion on a “carbon tax”.
A tax is to impose a financial or other levy on individual or legal entity by a state or the functional equivalent of a state and that a failure to do so is punishable by law.
Or
A tax may be defined as a “pecuniary burden laid upon individuals or property owners to support the government a payment exacted by legislative authority
These definitions because they are so broad means that everything that we pay to Government is a tax. However, economists have a different view and consider a large number of payments to a Government or a Government equivalent not to be a tax like licence fees which are more in line with acquiring a right or rubbish removal fees as paying for a service.
Other considerations are whether the tax is direct or indirect or if it is progressive or regressive.
Income tax is direct and regressive because it is levied on the individual and the individual pays what is due to the government. It is regressive becasue the more ones earns the higher the rate.
The GST on the other had is indirect and progressive because those remitting the funds to the Government do not generally pay the tax and that the rate paid by high income earners is the same as paid by those on the basic wage.
However, to leave this discussion at this point means it is incomplete. What Gillard said was that she would not have a carbon tax but would have a price on carbon.
The terms “carbon tax and “price on carbon’ mean two different things though both are a tax.
A carbon tax is paid directly by the consumer each time they spend a dollar – like the GST. You buy a shirt and the price includes a carbon tax as a certain percentage and the GST. Like the GST unless the full amount is rebated then the heavier burden is placed on the less well off.
With a price on carbon as purposed certain entities have to pay a price for polluting the atmosphere and of cause they can and will pass on some or all of that cost to their customers. The effect on their customers is akin to an increase in the “Company tax rate” or as purposed by the Government the lowering of the Company Tax rate – of cause the exception to this is the MRRT.
The Government has structure this “price on carbon” so that those who are “less well of” are more than fully compensated” while those who can afford to pay the tax do so.
So those like Abbott and his fellow travellers are really telling lies by arguing that what we are getting is not what was promised. The contributions of those on the blog supporting Abbott’s argument that Gillard is lying, are in my view being childish.
What Abbott and hie followers are doing is distorting the terms used by Gillard by placing all the emphases on the word carbon tax and ignoring the meaning of her comments and what she promised. The sorry part of it is that so many cannot see the difference.
A rose is still a rose under whatever other name you wish to use. In this case the Governments carbon pricing model is not a carbon tax regardless of what name you wish to use
In this case it is words over substances.
Gillard has done exactly what she said she would do – nothing more nothing less.
by Ratsars on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:15 am
SK,
Trouble is, if and when Murdoch goes down there is the bloody army within his organisation who will carry on his rotten work.
by janice2 on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:15 am
rummel
See dubious history of Ashby. This one might yet bite the Murdoch Press.
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:15 am
Tiger are returning to hobart but not till november, beat this one, 250 one wa average y to go to melbourne one way average, tiger have said 45 dollars, interesting ,
Our touism minister scot bacon, has worked very hard to get them back, i wrote to Wilkie
The greens, nothing. Back
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:17 am
Well they have moved to very small premises here and there office up’for sale
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:18 am
dummel,
Fly the flag as a Liberal and you buy the lot, warts and all.
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:19 am
Sunrise at about 8:30 usually goes to politics. I think worth watching as highest rating brekke programme last I looked. This is what most voters see. An alternate for most to Murdoch views.
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:19 am
Boy does this comment from a French presidential candidate apply to Australia at the moment.
by poroti on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:20 am
janice2,
Every NBN FTTH connection is another nail in the Newscorpse coffin.
by Space Kidette on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:20 am
Ratsars
Thats worth coppying pasting and put in my file for future reference, best explantion i have seen
Thankyou
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:22 am
James Ashby and Peter Slipper met in June or July 2011 when both were members of the LNP and Liberal Party respectively.
Slipper twice offered Ashby a job in October 2011 before Slipper resigned the Libs.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/aide-says-it-began-at-home/story-e6freuy9-1226334903107
Passing strange that Ashby accepted a job with Slipper.
by kezza2 on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:22 am
Good morning, bludgers.
1. But can’t help unleashing the CPG bitch in the 1st paragraph
2. I see (ABC Just In) Abbott calling for what was reported hours before he opened his mongrel mouth so he could pretend it was all his own idea (as he is also doing over Disability Insurance) – referral of the Slipper affair to the Fed police.
Interesting, because the more I read yesterday, the more suss it sounded – especially when Steve Lewis seemed to be up to his utegate neck in it.
Slipper has a long-held shady reputation for various reasons, and was long a member of Oz’s sleaziest political outfit, SEQ Liberals which included Santo Santoro (sacked by Howard over the Nursing Homes corruption scandal) and others of well-reported notoriety.
But, hey, the Liberals-Nationals, knowing for decades what he was – including throughout the Howard government (which reportedly covered up a similar scandal) and in Opposition until late last year (so Abbott is quite aware of it) – kept re-endorsing him.
If Abbott goes for this as a reason for a SSSO as a Budget Session diversion, the gov could sell exorbitantly over-priced QT tickets to the HoR galleries to benefit Swan’s surplus ambitions. The Government’s reply would be covered by Parliamentary privilege!
by OzPol Tragic on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:23 am
That’s what Abbott supported/supports. Here he tells Their ABC about how it would work on fuel… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12PN66IBoPs&feature=related
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:23 am
Your assuming people who know how the press work care much what is printed.
by fredn on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:24 am
More froth. At least you and ML are consistent. Consistently writing confected nonsense.
Most would call it trolling.
Gillard is not protecting Slipper, who was, however, protected by the odious Howard, Abbot, Costello and the other Lib clowns since 2003.
by muttleymcgee on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:25 am
You can argue all you want about innocent until proven otherwise, but the nature of the allegations puts the PM between a rock and a hard place. It is untenable to keep the speaker with the cloud of these allegations over his head.
Ashby would have to be a seriously deranged to make up this stuff up to help the Libs, and this needs to be exposed quickly. Unlikely.
Slipper has to go. Labor can’t catch a break. We have a great PM and a government that has performed very well under difficult circumstances but it is a negative for them whether Slipper goes or stays.
by Dr Phibes on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:25 am
Cuppa wehave not seen that many liberals here , considering
I was wondering why
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:26 am
Just heard on ABC radio morning news that the NSW Chamber Of Commerce (or similar type of body) has found that business activity (repeat: activity, not just “confidence”) is down at GFC levels.
Reason? “The high dollar” and “Uncertainty Over The Carbon Tax”.
If this is not an example of an economy talking itself to a standstill, I don’t know what is.
The Chamber Wallah interviewed claimed he and his bretheren had no way of telling what the effect would be.
So they’d given up, just like a supplier of mine had when he “worked out” last week that his “Carbon Tax Bill” would be an extra $30,000 ($2,500 per month) on top of a $16,000 electricity bill. In fact, when I checked for him, it was an extra $2,200 on top of the $16,000.
This guy worked himself into such a funk about it that he was telling me he’d close his business on July 1.
Three things, in my opinion are necessary:
1. The business types stop sooking and start learning.
2. The federal government blitzes them with information.
3. Abbott must stop actively talking down the economy.
Now.
I know politics is involved, but the scare campaign seems to be starting to bite, and in the worst possible way.
Carbon pricing will add some costs to businesses, but that businesses have been scared into virtually shutting down, in effect bring on a second GFC over it is taking scare campaigns too far.
For what?
An Abbott fantasy that the government is going to fail mid-term (Slipper? Thomson? Wilkie?) and hand over power to him without an election. That and the cheap thrill of winning a few opinion polls.
Yes, the government is ham-fisted with its publicity, too afraid of its own shadow to roll out a proper, educational, interesting carbon pricing information campaign, but on the other hand the Opposition is being seriously derelict in its duty by magnifying the effect way beyond what it will be.
Abbott is an absolutist kind of guy. There are few shades of grey in his world view. According to Abbott, businesses will not only be affected by carbon pricing, but they will be ruined, whole towns will close down, entire industries will disappear. This is reckless, and factually wrong.
It must stop.
by Bushfire Bill on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:26 am
O i spoke to soon
Dr phibes
Hy
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:27 am
Google members bb
by my say on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:28 am
rummel,
Funny that you can blithely accuse the PM of protectionism when Howard protected the man during his long decade of rotten government. If the man was so vile, what excuse did Howard and the Lib Party have for protecting and covering his ‘sinful’ ways?
The truth of the matter might well be that the coalition forces are rife with lying, cheating mongrels who would besmirch their own mothers if it meant getting their hands on power.
by janice2 on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:28 am
I am going to start watching Agenda on Sky in a minute.
The question is “How long can I last?”
by BK on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:29 am
While he proposes putting a Great Big New Tax on 3,300 businesses (as compared to the 500 that will pay Labor’s carbon price)
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/maiden-tonys-great-big-tax/story-fn6br25t-1226295921746
by Cuppa on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:30 am
Really, Centre, you should show a bit of mercy for others just coming to PB after breakfast.
by Gorgeous Dunny on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:30 am
Even if one assumes there is anything in it, whats it got to do with the prime minister. The speaker belongs to the house, not the government. You all seem to be a confused bunch of sparrows.
by fredn on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:31 am
Erica Betz to come on Agenda. I don’t think I’ll make it that far.
by BK on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:31 am
For those that missed it.
In 2002, Mr Ashby resigned from Newcastle radio station NX-FM and pleaded guilty to making abusive calls to a drivetime host from a rival station.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/james-ashbys-abuse-conviction-for-making-threatening-phonecalls/story-e6freuy9-1226335222553
by guytaur on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:31 am
BK,
Think of it as a comedy club routine. It helps me.
by Space Kidette on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:33 am
guytar
Ashby may be a shocking person but the question of why Slipper apparently so vigorously pursued him is one that will linger.
by BK on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:33 am
keep us posted please bk (for as long as you are able) – we don’t get sky here
by Lyne Lady on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:34 am
Lyne Lady
Greg Sheridan started by (awkwardly) reading a piece praising Hockey’s “entitlement” speech.
by BK on Apr 22, 2012 at 8:35 am