Essential Research: 58-42 to Coalition
This week’s Essential Research poll gives Labor its worst result since the company opened for business in 2008: a primary vote of 29%, down two points on last week, and a two-party preferred deficit of 58-42. The former is particularly alarming for Labor, as Essential typically has Labor’s primary vote a few points higher than the phone pollsters. The Coalition and the Greens are steady on 50% and 11%.
With respect to the economy, 66% allowed that it had performed better than other countries’ over the past few years (although this was down from 70% in August last year), with 15% believing it to be worse (up from 10%). In the event of another global financial crisis, 42% would better trust the Liberal Party to deal with it than Labor, on 25%. Forty-six per cent anticipate the economy will get worse over the next 12 months against 23% who think it will get better (the figures when the question was asked a year ago were 37% worse and 27% better).
Sixty-two per cent believe a politician accused of an offence should stand down from their positions, against 27% who believe they should be allowed to continue. Questions on banking suggest the public to be well to the left of the elites on these matters: 55% would support the establishment of a government-owned bank, 74% forcing banks to charge rates in line with the Reserve Bank, 81% capping chief executive’s salaries, 92% limiting bank fees to the costs of the service and 59% a super profits tax on banks (the numbers opposed were respectively 23%, 16%, 12%, 5% and 21%). Fifty-nine per cent would support a levy on large transactions of currencies, bonds and shares, with 16% opposed.
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
Or, to take this question further:
What is the practical difference between Thomson being paid $100,000 pa and also being allowed discretionary credit card spending to bring his salary package up to $150,000pa and Kathy Jackson being paid $250,000+ pa without extra benefits?
Apart from the fact that Thommo would cost the union $100,000 less per year, that is …
by Danny Lewis on May 9, 2012 at 4:46 pm
Shellbell,
Not familiar with Mr Barton or his work. What has he done? Anything out of the ordinary for the avearge undereducated soccer (playing) yob?
by Roy Orbison on May 9, 2012 at 4:46 pm
Then again, Hinch is a man of honour:
by shellbell on May 9, 2012 at 4:46 pm
Doyley
The FWA used a ATO ruling on what would be a reasonable amount for an employee to spend on accomodation and meals
by Geoff D on May 9, 2012 at 4:47 pm
DL@4043, presumably Thomson’s defence will be along those lines. And it is worth noting that unions are not public entities, they are private.
by susan winstanley on May 9, 2012 at 4:48 pm
Disposition is the latest Rabble word. Tee Hee.
by ruawake on May 9, 2012 at 4:48 pm
Doyley
some perks are open ended – for example, in Victoria, mayors are granted use of a car as part of their ‘package’, with fuel paid for. There are no limits set (mayors have been known to drive their families around Queensland at ratepayers’ expense).
by zoomster on May 9, 2012 at 4:48 pm
shellbell
Assuming that parliament does not find him guilty and turf him out (if that is possible in the Consitution), is it likely that Mr Thomson would be able to do a Jarndyce v Jarndyce delaying strategy such that he is still in the House in 16 months?
by Boerwar on May 9, 2012 at 4:49 pm
Roy Orbison
Joey Barton stubbed a cigar out in the eye of a team mate at a Xmas Party and served time for kicking the shit out of someone at a pub
by shellbell on May 9, 2012 at 4:49 pm
Sorry, I aven’t read it yet, but
by lizzie on May 9, 2012 at 4:50 pm
Poroti,
In a sane world cranks like that would be the media fringe dwellers.
by Cuppa on May 9, 2012 at 4:50 pm
Derryn Hinch was kind enought to include the word “destablise” in his press release. Sounds like a broad hint that the Liberal Party Dirt Unit has been at it again. They must be in overdrive these days.
by susan winstanley on May 9, 2012 at 4:51 pm
I wonder who was pushing the rumour?
by ruawake on May 9, 2012 at 4:51 pm
Mr HInch appears to be attracted to the merde end of civil discourse.
by Boerwar on May 9, 2012 at 4:51 pm
ruawake
was abbott in disposition or that position,wink wink nudge nudge
by Schnappi on May 9, 2012 at 4:52 pm
ah, shellbell….
‘…and so are they all honourable men.’
by Boerwar on May 9, 2012 at 4:53 pm
Pyne was hinting at some smear today, I assume it came from his orifice.
by ruawake on May 9, 2012 at 4:54 pm
shellbell
There must be something in the water. My great great aunt lives there and going strong at 96
by poroti on May 9, 2012 at 4:54 pm
Susan Winstanley. I agree. I think Hinch has shown some fortitude in this case.
by Lynchpin on May 9, 2012 at 4:54 pm
Both Abbott and Morriscum used the word “disposition” instead of policy several times each today. Peta Credlin come on down!!!!
by jenauthor on May 9, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Dirt, not policy. Tories for you.
by Cuppa on May 9, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Geoff D and Zoomster,
thanks for your feedback.
cheers.
by Doyley on May 9, 2012 at 4:56 pm
So now we know that poroti and shellbell may well be related. That would be nice.
by Boerwar on May 9, 2012 at 4:56 pm
Ashby is almost an annagram of “shabby”.
by Lynchpin on May 9, 2012 at 4:56 pm
The Missionary Disposition.
by Lynchpin on May 9, 2012 at 4:57 pm
by lizzie on May 9, 2012 at 4:58 pm
Thompson must be a pretty good actor. Watched him yesterday and today in QT and he looked more relaxed than ever. Doubt, however, that his 15 minute statement in two weeks time will end the matter – but speculation will be rife on the front pages every day until he rises. Then it will likely turn into a free-for-all about what is legal and what isn’t. In the meantime, there’s still Pete …. What fun.
by al palster on May 9, 2012 at 5:00 pm
So does that mean they now have “aspirational dispositions” ?
by poroti on May 9, 2012 at 5:01 pm
This is funny but there was something in the House today were Abbott was almost going disposition, disposition , disposition. Must check Hansard.
by ruawake on May 9, 2012 at 5:01 pm
I assume this is connected to Hinch’s retracted rumour.
by lizzie on May 9, 2012 at 5:01 pm
The Opposition doing dirt not policy on day after Budget. Makes it crystal clear.
The Greens are more ready to govern than they are. At least the Greens have policy.
by guytaur on May 9, 2012 at 5:03 pm
So who’s got a press secretary called “Peta”?
by Bushfire Bill on May 9, 2012 at 5:03 pm
“Disposition” is Abbott’s new favourite word. He’s always keen on a word that will allow him to talk about doing something without committing to it.
I’m probably the only person left listening to parliament at the moment. It’s degenerated to the point where members are simply trying out one-liners and tones of voice.
by Aguirre on May 9, 2012 at 5:04 pm
al palster
[Thompson must be a pretty good actor.] What? You presume he is guilty as well?
by Lynchpin on May 9, 2012 at 5:04 pm
just watching the PM on Ch 9 news,she comes across as a person,not a srtutting imbecile.
by Schnappi on May 9, 2012 at 5:05 pm
Before our Blue Mountains Odyssey, there was some desultory discussion on Poll Bludger about the meaning of ‘post-materialist’ issues. A couple of posters thought that a conceptual framework that divorced political issues (post materialist) from what they considered to be environmental reality was a short-sighted conceptual framework.
Anyway, while I was away, by far the most important political/economic/social event was that Suncorp has decided that it will not insure some houses at all. Fancy the big end of town walking away from a dollar!
It was a tacit actuarial acceptance by Suncorp that AGW has already changed the base.
by Boerwar on May 9, 2012 at 5:05 pm
BW
The ordinary course of events will see the FWA case heard in 2014 or at least not decided until then, I think.
Nothing will be filed for months because the FWA’s solicitors (I assume the Australian Government Solicitor) will get a barrister it draw it up.
The original court document will be 50 to 100 pages long.
There is a bit of starting again with the evidence because the report is not evidence – months and months. However long it takes, Thomson will get as long to reply with his evidence.
Maybe it will be ready early to mid next year to get a hearing date – how long will that be. A colleague of mine is defending someone answering 97 criminal charges – hearing is 8 weeks long. Could be 10 weeks or more for Thomson. Courts dont allocate blocks like that exceptt well in advance say 9 months.
ASIC filed charges against James Hardie directors in 2006 or 2007. Judgment was in 2009, appeal in 2010 and High Court ruling last week.
Whereas normal people talk about time in hours, days etc lawyers would look at all of this as an olympiad if the FWA go the whole hog.
The most pressing issue is Thomson’s ability to fund a defence if the FWA go said hog.
Shoter version. Thomson will defend the case when he is no longer a federal politician, I think.
by shellbell on May 9, 2012 at 5:05 pm
Lynchpin
I’ve got no idea.
by al palster on May 9, 2012 at 5:05 pm
Let’s not forget Bolt is pushing this, just as he pushed the “Gillard Love Nest” story.
Remember also, that when he admitted the Gillard Love Nest story was untrue he turned the whole thing into a “test” of how Gillard would react to an untrue story.
by Bushfire Bill on May 9, 2012 at 5:06 pm
So that’s the Opposition’s answer to a good Budget…spend the day spreading salacious rumours about a government MP. They are truly contemptible and a waste of space in parliament. No wonder the PM was having a very pointed go at them in Question Time re their involvement up to their necks in the Ashby merde.
by C@tmomma on May 9, 2012 at 5:08 pm
BB
How quickly some of us forget. Dead right about Bolt – and his motives,character and ambitions.
by al palster on May 9, 2012 at 5:08 pm
shellbell @ 4086
Thank you. You are a significant Poll Bludger resource because, unlike some of us intuiters, you clearly know what you are talking about.
by Boerwar on May 9, 2012 at 5:09 pm
Do not think abbott or his dumbells have a Cheerful disposition.
by Schnappi on May 9, 2012 at 5:09 pm
As I said earlier today, the govt need to go hard at the opps. They are getting desperate indeed. They are despicable.
by victoria on May 9, 2012 at 5:09 pm
How many people knew this
http://afr.com/p/national/aec_won_investigate_abbott_bribery_VThx8amkMmPZ7fCFYs4BnJ
The government has a good case agaisnt abbott
by Meguire Bob on May 9, 2012 at 5:10 pm
Tony abbott did not stand down as the leader of the opposition
by Meguire Bob on May 9, 2012 at 5:10 pm
Danny Lewis
I think there is a scope for argument on the authority that comes with a credit card given to you by your employer even if it is a perk or unconditional. Presumably if it had no limit, the employee could not go and buy a house with it etc.
The issue I think is academic because:
(a) Thomson does not suggest the card was a perk;
(b) denies the impugned expenditure.
by shellbell on May 9, 2012 at 5:11 pm
If there’s an upshot to this, if the Opposition plans fail, it leaves them very little time to try and get policies in coherent order.
by rishane on May 9, 2012 at 5:12 pm
…or I am an artful bullshitter
by shellbell on May 9, 2012 at 5:12 pm
Ah I’ve heard that rumour about a government minister getting his press secretary pregnant as well. Been around for months and months.
by Burgey on May 9, 2012 at 5:12 pm