Budget polling: Nielsen, Galaxy and Morgan
Four polls: one from Nielsen, conducted on the two nights after the budget (Wednesday and Thursday) from a sample of 1200; one from Galaxy, conducted on Thursday evening and during the day yesterday from a sample of 600; a Morgan phone poll conducted on Wednesday and Thursday evening from a sample of 571; and a Morgan face-to-face poll conducted last weekend from a sample of 1004. Galaxy only canvassed opinion on the budget; Nielsen and the Morgan phone poll canvassed the budget and voting intention; the Morgan face-to-face poll, obviously, missed the budget and only looked at voting intention.
First on voting intention. Nielsen and the Morgan phone poll are in agreement on two-party preferred, which amounts to a combined sample of 1771 putting the result at 58-42 to the Coalition. On the primary vote, Nielsen has Labor up a point on the previous poll six weeks ago to 28%, the Coalition up two to 49% and the Greens down one to 12%. Even allowing for the small sample and high margin of error, the state breakdowns offer the truly extraordinary result of a Labor primary vote in Queensland of 19%, compared with a previous worst of 21% in July last year (and perhaps suggesting a honeymoon for the state government has added a bit of fuel to federal Labor’s recent poll collapse). Remarkably, the poll still has Labor ahead 54-46 in Victoria.
Morgan’s phone poll has the primary votes at 29% for Labor, 50.5% for the Coalition and 10% for the Greens. The face-to-face poll has Labor’s primary vote at 29.5%, down half a point on their previous worst-ever result in the last poll of April 21/22 (there was evidently no polling conducted on the weekend of April 28/29). The Coalition was also down two points, to 45.5%, and with the Greens steady at 12%, the slack has been taken up by “others”. At 13%, the latter figure is at levels unseen since One Nation and the Democrats were substantial concerns, although other, more reliable polls aren’t replicating this. Records have also been set on the two-party preferred figures: the 60.5-39.5 respondent-allocated result is Labor’s worst ever, but the gap between this figure and the 55.5-44.5 previous-election result is also at an all-time high, the previous highest being two polls ago in early April.
Regarding the budget:
• Nielsen and Galaxy both asked respondents if it would leave them better or worse, producing results of 27% better off and 43% worse off in Nielsen’s case, and 23% and 46% in Galaxy’s.
• Morgan has 19% rating the budget good, 43% average and 25% bad; 29.5% believing the surplus would eventuate and 60% believing it wouldn’t; and 49% considering a surplus important and 47.5% believing otherwise. The latter result is remarkably different to what Essential Research elicited a month ago when it framed the question thus: “Do you think it is more important for the Government to return the budget to surplus by 2012/13 as planned – which may mean cutting services and raising taxes – OR should they delay the return to surplus and maintain services and invest in infrastructure?” That produced respective results of 12% and 73%.
• Galaxy asked if respondents believed the Coalition would have done better, which is the one question that allows ready comparison with the three questions Newspoll has been asking after each budget since the late 1980s (Newspoll also asks about impact on personal finances, but it explicitly offers respondents an “unchanged” option which invariably proves very popular). The results were 29% yes and 43% no, which is a surprisingly positive result for the government (or, more likely, a negative one for the opposition) – better for them than Newspoll’s 2010 and 2011 results, and close to Newspoll’s long-term averages of 29.5% and 47.6%.
• Galaxy also found only 17% anticipating that carbon tax compensation would be adequate against 62% who said it would not be.
So much for the good news for Julia Gillard. Personal ratings from Nielsen show up the following:
• Kevin Rudd’s lead as preferred Labor leader has further blown out, to 62-30 in a head-to-head contest with Gillard from 58-34 when the question was last asked immediately before the leadership challenge.
• With other leadership options included, the results are 42% for Rudd, 19% for Gillard, 12% for Stephen Smith, 9% for Simon Crean, 8% for Bill Shorten and 4% for Greg Combet.
• Tony Abbott’s lead as preferred prime minister has blown out from 48-45 to 50-42, returning him to where he was in September.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
@3588 – I doubt his Electorate agrees with your opinion.
by Compact Crank on May 14, 2012 at 3:51 pm
CC @ 3587
I have never detected that but he does not suffer fools gladly. I guess that is what you are referring to. Plenty of fools in the coalition.
by bemused on May 14, 2012 at 3:52 pm
Leroy
Thanks for the link. Highly recommended reading.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-14/janda-doing-a-job-on-employment-figures/4009594
by lizzie on May 14, 2012 at 3:53 pm
Its a shame that Neilsen didnt publish a state by state breakdown for this. And also a prefered PM Rudd v Abbott.
by bluegreen on May 14, 2012 at 3:54 pm
I notice Tim Costello has joined Tony Abbott and Andrew Wilkie in insulting those who will receive the child school payment as likely to use it on the pokies, plasmas and booze.
His organisation has just been officially cut off my donation list.
These people should stick their sense of moral superiority up their jumper. And in Mr Abbott’s case, isn’t he the bloke who walked out on his pregnant girlfriend, fall asleep pissed in parls and bend a street sign when louting?
He has no right to judge anyone.
by joe2 on May 14, 2012 at 3:56 pm
Tweeters – ask Emmo to tell Beattie to put a gobstopper in his mouth. I couldn’t stand the media tart when he was Premier and he’s worse now. He loves to get his face on SkyNews and put the boot in, always with the holier than thou look and sorrowful tone, but Labor doesn’t need his input.
by BH on May 14, 2012 at 3:56 pm
joe2 – thanks for that. Our donation is going elsewhere now as well.
by BH on May 14, 2012 at 3:58 pm
Oh FFS #3598 as it seems you really may be having trouble understanding rather than wilfully seeking to mislead I’ll try to make this simple.
On the FWA site we have
From this you seem to be deriving
No. Lets try it with some other nouns and see if the logical mistake is clearer.
cannot validly be said to mean
Are we there yet?
by Marrickville Mauler on May 14, 2012 at 3:58 pm
I finally caught up with the Australian Story’s Clive Palmer expose (on iview).
Well, didn’t he remind me of every overstuffed Nats twat I ever had the misfortune to meet in my (farming background) youth.
Not sure his migrant (I must be the most pampered) wife will go over too well in Sunny Jingoistic Queensland either. But, hell, maybe they’ve reformed after their little (oh, okay, long) flirtation with Hansonism.
by kezza2 on May 14, 2012 at 3:58 pm
More encouraging signs for democracy in Queensland. A mandate does not require things to be passed without adequate scrutiny Mr Newman. No Government drafter is perfect!
by ltep on May 14, 2012 at 3:59 pm
FWA is the Old Industrial Relations Commission. It was abolished by Tony Abbott, he then instigated workchoices and the untested regulated organisations legislation.
HSU was being reported on under the regulated organisation provisions of the Fair Work Act.
The act was drafted so badly by outside lawyers not using parliamentary staff, that nobody will ever face an action over anything.
Oh and by the way, why did Costello always delay implementation of criminal penalties for company directors?
by ruawake on May 14, 2012 at 4:01 pm
joe2 – thanks for that. Our donation is going elsewhere now as well.
Ditto, also doesn’t sound good for Q&A tonight, poor Penny will have to battle at least 4 to one including the odious Judith Sloan
by mari on May 14, 2012 at 4:03 pm
William, don’t know if anyone else has asked this – but how do Essential come up with the preferred Treasurer numbers. Are the Greens weighted much less or something?
Swan 77 + 6 + 51 = 134 =34%
Hockey 5 + 65 + 6 = 76 = 33%
Dunnos 18 + 29 + 43 = 90 = 33%
The above makes NO sense to me
by jenauthor on May 14, 2012 at 4:05 pm
by lizzie on May 14, 2012 at 4:05 pm
Except in a pork exercise he increased the number of LNP members sitting on every committee by two. Given them thousands in extra salary and perks. Snouts in the trough already.
Dear Mr Can’t Do. If you are going to ignore them anyway, why not reduce the number to 4 on each committee? How much would this save?
by ruawake on May 14, 2012 at 4:06 pm
Lynch
a few of us breathing a tiny bit easier here in the trenches!
by Lyne Lady on May 14, 2012 at 4:06 pm
Could be worth some qld votes.
Brigadier Slog@BrigadierSlog
$3K a day for Peter Costello though RT @vexnews Campbell Newman says Queensland has no money for NDIS #qldpol #auspol http://bit.ly/JsnlCn
by Schnappi on May 14, 2012 at 4:07 pm
jenauthor@3611
They’re weighted less in the end result because there is less of them.
The total rating depends on the number of people voting for that option, not the average of the per party vote.
by ShiftyPhil on May 14, 2012 at 4:09 pm
Much as I like Penny Wong there’s no way I’m going to sit through an hour or so of Judith Sloan. Q&A will be a must miss tonight.
by leone on May 14, 2012 at 4:13 pm
Lyne Lady
Call me misguided, sentimental, ideallistic, “Comfort Troll”, whatever – but in my quiet moments, in a reverie, when I delve into the political optimism that sometimes creeps into my consciousness – I see a future where Julia Gillard rises above the doubters, whingers and evil doers, and slays the Tories.
O, happy days!!
by Lynchpin on May 14, 2012 at 4:14 pm
Someone else, like Peter Beattie, notionally aligned with the Labor Party, who I wish would stick his erroneous sanctimonious opinions up his jumper
by C@tmomma on May 14, 2012 at 4:14 pm
Agree it is now 4 to 1 against Penny Wong, guess what first question will be on School payments, now Tim C has come out same as TA etc
by mari on May 14, 2012 at 4:15 pm
You know what? I’m really fed up with over-paid do-gooders and over-hyped polliticians dragging out that tired old ‘plasma TV’ line whenever a government gives out some cash. It’s been doing the rounds at least since the baby bonus came in. Don’t these well-off fools know that no-one wants plasma TVs any more? It has to be LED these days. LEDs use less power which means us disadvantaged bludgers have more money to spend on booze and the pokies after paying the electricity bill.
by leone on May 14, 2012 at 4:16 pm
Newspol out tonight I believe – let’s just get all the stock standard comments out there now:
Not meant to get a poll bounce.
Won’t effect now – wait for the money to flow.
Governments don’t get bounces from Budgets.
Wait till they see the CO2 Tax isn’t as bad as they thought.
Feel free to add. . .
by Compact Crank on May 14, 2012 at 4:18 pm
Youse are all missing the action on 2GB, where Tim Flannery’s remarks re. the effects of a warming climate on Western Sydney are receiving the usual bandwagon mockery, slagging off and guffaw treatment.
Chris Smith read out bits and pieces of the Tele article this morning with canned laughter (a la sitcom TV) in the background. It went on for about 10 minutes.
Then, of course, came the regulation callers. They all call each other “mate”, and just go on and on about whatever Smith has pointed them at. Frankly they mostly sound like the same person: in the car (or ute), on speaker phone, “maaaate” this and “maaaate” that, lamenting the fact that Quentin Bryce doesn’t get the shits one day and sack the lot of them.
The big objections about Flannery are that he lives near the water (why would he do that if sea levels are rising? Well, he’s about 300 feet above the water, I heard, on an escarpment) and that he earns $180,000 per annum (who’d know if he does or doesn’t? That’s the figure Smith uses) and that he said the dams might empty in 2007 (whic of course they didn’t, but 25% was pretty close before they built the desal plant).
With signs of a drying trend on its way (callers to Macca are already whingeing about not enough rain, and it was the hottest May for yonks), another drought may not be too far away. What they forget is that a month without rain in some areas is devastating. A year is a disaster. A decade is a catastrophe… and that is about what we had in the last drought, from memory.
But in the meantime, the few blessed months we have that are cool, free of pelting rain and floods and relatively benign have brought all the doubters, deniers, whingers and elitist-haters out in full force on 2GB.
Nothing is spared, and no-one.
by Bushfire Bill on May 14, 2012 at 4:18 pm
leone@3617,
I thought similarly about Q&A, until I read this from Stephen Mayne in Crikey today and reconsidered:
by C@tmomma on May 14, 2012 at 4:19 pm
CC
I don’t expect Newspoll to be any different to the recent polls.
by Lynchpin on May 14, 2012 at 4:19 pm
http://bit.ly/JsnlCn
Hey, thanks for your earlier link to:
http://theconversation.edu.au/class-warfare-in-australia-we-should-be-so-lucky-6970?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+conversationedu+%28The+Conversation%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
Good read.
Re the link in this post, I have a theory re Costello’s throwing his hat back into the ring fracas over the weekend:
Peter Costello wanted to get back into parly ASAP so that he could get out of the Future Fund (returns under his guardianship were less than investing in a savings account) and BEFORE Can’tDo and acolytes REALISED Costello’s economic credentials were absolute shit (as Treasury officials have documented since he slunk out of office, too proud to be an oppo leader).
Ha, farking, ha.
And to think Can’tDo abolished the literary prize to afford Costello.
I thought Costello won the literary prize for fiction.
by kezza2 on May 14, 2012 at 4:21 pm
The disqualification of members of Parliament is prescribed by s.44 of the Constitution. Thompson is not likely to breach any of those prescriptions before the next election.
The power (privilege) of members of Parliament to regulate their own affairs, including a power to suspend one of its members, is undoubted. In R v Richards; Ex parte Fitzpatrick and Browne, Dixon CJ, speaking for the whole Court, said:
“it is for the courts to judge of the existence in either House of Parliament of a privilege, but, given an undoubted privilege, it is for the House to judge of the occasion and of the manner of its exercise”.
Section 49 of the Commonwealth Constitution provides that, until declared by the Parliament , “[t]he powers, privileges, and immunities of the Senate and of the House of Representatives … shall be those of the Commons House of Parliament of the United Kingdom … at the establishment of the Commonwealth”.
In separating the necessary power of Parliament to regulate its own affairs from infringing on the undoubted power of the judiciary to determine legal disputes the doctrine has been applied that Parliaments have only that power which is reasonably necessary “to the existence of such a body, and the proper exercise of the functions which it is intended to execute”.
It is beyond argument that whatever Thompson has done does not impede Parliament from the proper exercise of its functions. Such allegations as there are relate only to matters entirely outside his role as a Parliamentarian. It is not a constitutional function for Parliament to determine where the truth lies in respect of those “allegations”. In the words of the Privy Council (in 1842):-
“In conformity to this principle we feel no doubt that such an Assembly has the right of protecting itself from all impediments to the due course of its proceeding. To the full extent of every measure which it may be really necessary to adopt, to secure the free exercise of their Legislative functions, they are justified in acting by the principle of the Common Law. But the power of punishing any one for past misconduct as a contempt of its authority, and adjudicating upon the fact of such contempt, and the measure of punishment as a judicial body, irresponsible to the party accused, whatever the real facts may be, is of a very different character, and by no means essentially necessary for the exercise of its functions by a local Legislature, whether representative or not. All these functions may be well performed without this extraordinary power”.
For those interested, see the separate judgments of McHugh , Callinan and Kirby JJ in Egan v Willis [1998] HCA 71.
by Windhover on May 14, 2012 at 4:21 pm
C@tmomma
Interesting, but I’m still not going to watch. I may be tempted to watch it later online so I can skip over Sloan’s over-bearing nastiness. She’d have to be in the running for Rudest Woman on the Planet.
by leone on May 14, 2012 at 4:23 pm
Jenauthor the Coalition has 50% of the primary vote compared to 30% for Labor and 10% for the Greens. Therefore you have to weight the individual results for preferred treasurer to account for this. Roughly a coalition score is 50/30′s of a Labor vote and 50/10′s of a Green vote.
I hope that makes sense.
by davidwh on May 14, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Squashed your nuts on the crossbar.
by ruawake on May 14, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Thanks Windhover. In other words, the FWA report is a great doorstop unless Thomson is charged and convicted.
by Lynchpin on May 14, 2012 at 4:25 pm
BH
Ha ha. And 2 City Circle stations or 10 minutes apart. Vis. Wynward, Town Hall, Central.
by Gauss on May 14, 2012 at 4:28 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9fs_6v20Cw&feature=youtu.be
love this
by mari on May 14, 2012 at 4:29 pm
BB re climate change
__________
A recent book shows how Murdoch’s empire has been at great lengths to oppose the scientific opinion on CC…in fact deriding scientists like Flannery and others to appeal to the Doubters …I fear the Doubters have captured a large segment of public opinion
Of course that won;t stop CC ..and the effects will be just a severe in the long term
by deblonay on May 14, 2012 at 4:30 pm
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/13/magazine/can-you-call-a-9-year-old-a-psychopath.html?pagewanted=1&_r=3&smid=tw-share
For anyone interested in child behaviour/psychology as well as the development into adult sociopaths/psychopaths.
The article is confronting and yet comforting, because it distinguishes between children with ADHD and similar, and the child who will become a psychopath.
The latter, I suspect, are those who have given rise to the “born evil” label.
No silly comments about Abbott, please. This article will clear your mind.
by lizzie on May 14, 2012 at 4:30 pm
deblonay
Agreed. That’s why Abbott can’t get his hands on power.
by Lynchpin on May 14, 2012 at 4:32 pm
leone@3628,
I agree about the clueless Sloane. I often wonder how a person whom Stephen Koukoulas regularly pings on the lack of evidence for her baldly stated and wrong assertions could have ever gotten to the exalted position in academe that she has. However, I watch Q&A on my laptop, so I just mute her whenever she is given the call.
by C@tmomma on May 14, 2012 at 4:33 pm
@3630 – another deeply insightful psephological analysis.
by Compact Crank on May 14, 2012 at 4:35 pm
Yet, leone, she did her little bit of consciousness-raising over the dole.
Was it to do with Sloane suddenly finding a compassion gene?
Nup, not on your nelly. Sloane was using her contribution solely as means to up the ante. To break the budget.
Go away Sloane. And all of you who think that we actually live it up on $35 a day.
We don’t. After paying cost of living, we’ve nothing left. We’re in the red. We rely on friends to help out.
So, I don’t blame you for not watching an A GRADE hypocrite in action.
by kezza2 on May 14, 2012 at 4:36 pm
This is interesting from Windsor”
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/howes-warns-union-movement-could-be-wiped-out-20120514-1ym2x.html#ixzz1up78Lwxl
by Lynchpin on May 14, 2012 at 4:37 pm
Labor have zero per cent of the mainstream media, which explains the imbalance in public political perceptions. It’s thanks to the inherent goodness of millions of Australians that the polling figures don’t lean even more to the forces of greed and fear.
by Cuppa on May 14, 2012 at 4:37 pm
bluegreen @ 3602
They obviously didn’t want to send PB into meltdown.
Rudd v Turnbull would have been interesting too, as would Gillard v Turnbull.
by bemused on May 14, 2012 at 4:38 pm
From their Poll today it appears 75% of online Telegraph readers think that Global warming is not occurring.
by ruawake on May 14, 2012 at 4:40 pm
Actually William, I worked it out
LNP = x whatever percentage of LNP voters in poll & same for others
by jenauthor on May 14, 2012 at 4:42 pm
http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/media/s3499689.htm
I wonder if they’ll remove the Interruptor Gear from Chris ‘Eindecker’ Uhlmann and fit it to Sales before she resumes her stint in the big chair.
I hope not.
One Fokker on the show was quite enough.
by smithe on May 14, 2012 at 4:42 pm
Labor supporters can not afford to show any sign of grief, this is what the coalition supporters are looking for
Labor supporters so far has won the debates every day of this month
by Meguire Bob on May 14, 2012 at 4:42 pm
Evidently according to Twitter the exact opposite to Ch 10 Poll
by mari on May 14, 2012 at 4:43 pm
GG
Medicine is in a similar position to the pollies. They are both areas where you are meant to be able to tough it out and show no weakness and not seek help.
Unfortunately that results in a high rate of mental illness and even suicide.
I hope that someone has Thomson’s back, whatever he has or hasn’t done.
by Diogenes on May 14, 2012 at 4:43 pm