Newspoll: 55-45 to Coalition; Seat of the week: Banks
GhostWhoVotes reports Newspoll has strayed from the pack with its latest fornightly federal poll result, with the Coalition holding a relatively moderate lead of 55-45 on two-party preferred compared with 59-41 last time. The primary votes are 30% for Labor (up three), 45% for the Coalition (down six) and 12% for the Greens (up one). In contrast to voting intention, the leaders’ ratings are essentially unchanged: Julia Gillard is on 27% approval (down one) and 63% disapproval (steady), and Tony Abbott is on 34% (up one) and 56% (up one). Results for reaction to the budget presumably to follow shortly.
UPDATE: The regular annual Newspoll budget questions have 18% saying it will make them better off and 41% worse off (compared with 11% and 41% last year); 37% saying the Coalition would have done a better job and 42% saying they wouldn’t have (38% and 41% last year); and 37% rating it good for the economy and 37% bad (37% and 32% last year). Newspoll has been asking these questions after each budget since the 1980s, with mean results over that time of 17.2% better off and 34.9% worse off; 29.8% opposition-better and 47.4% opposition-not-better; 42.3% good for the economy and 27.6% bad. With respect to “will the budget leave you better or worse off”, the five most positive results ever recorded (with some distance between fifth from sixth) occurred consecutively from 2004 to 2008. Outside of this golden age, the mean results have been 13.5% better off and 37.9% worse off.
Today’s Essential Research had the two-party preferred at 57-43, down from 58-42 last week, from primary votes of 50% for the Coalition (steady), 30% for Labor (up one) and 11% for the Greens (steady). Also featured were Essential’s monthly personal ratings, which welittle changed on April (contra Nielsen, Tony Abbott’s net rating has actually deteriorated from minus 12 to minus 17), and responses to the budget. The most interesting of the latter questions is on the impact of the budget on you personally, working people, businesses and the economy overall, for which the respective net ratings are minus 11, plus 7, minus 33 and minus 6. All of the eight specific features of the budget canvassed produced net positive ratings, from plus 5 for reduced defence spending to plus 79 for increased spending on dental health. There was a statistical tie (34% to 33%) on the question of whether Wayne Swan or Joe Hockey was most trusted to handle the economy.
Seat of the week: Banks
A little over a week ago I promised that my Friday posts would henceforth profile a significant federal electorate, but I was diverted on Friday by the onslaught of budget polling. Today I make good the omission with an overview of the southern Sydney electorate of Banks.
Located on the outer edge of Labor’s inner Sydney heartland, Banks has been held by Labor at all times since its creation in 1949, but over the past few decades the margin has fallen below 2% on three occasions: with the defeat of the Keating government in 1996, when Mark Latham led Labor to defeat in 2004, and – most ominously for Labor – in 2010, when a sharp swing against Labor in Sydney left intact only 1.5% of a 10.4% margin (adjusted for redistribution) from the 2007 election.
Labor’s strength in the electorate is in the suburbs nearer the city in the electorate’s north, from Hurstville through Riverwood to Padstow, which is balanced by strong Liberal support in the waterside suburbs along the Georges River which forms the electorate’s southern boundary, from Blakehurst westwards through Oatley to Padstow Heights. As a knock-on effect from the abolition of Lowe, the redistribution before the 2010 election shifted the electorate substantially eastwards, exchanging areas around Bankstown for the Blakehurst and Hurstville Grove area (from Barton) and Hurstville (from Watson), which cut 1.4% from the Labor margin.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Election 2013, Federal Politics 2010-
by victoria on May 16, 2012 at 9:27 am
Question. Why couldnt the Prime Minister speak to the rest of Australia like she spoke to the union movement?
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 9:27 am
bg
It was a good speech by the PM yesterday
by victoria on May 16, 2012 at 9:28 am
Ross Gittins
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/spreading-the-love-to-buy-votes-so-what-it-was-about-time-20120515-1youa.html#ixzz1uz3qjuun
by lizzie on May 16, 2012 at 9:28 am
Cops everywhere here. Can’t get within cooee of musgrave park/tent embassy…creepy. Haven’t seen Brisbane like this since 79…
by Boinzo on May 16, 2012 at 9:29 am
Boinzo
What a crying shame
by victoria on May 16, 2012 at 9:30 am
Boinzo
I really didnt think that Newman would go straight into culture wars. I expected him to be in the back pockets of developers
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 9:32 am
Anyone else get the feeling we’re seeing the reality of life under the RWers starting to bite?
by lizzie on May 16, 2012 at 9:33 am
Lizzie
Good article by Ross Gittins.
Here in our state, the electorate have a sense of it. Not sure if Qld and NSW feel quite the same way about rwing govts.
by victoria on May 16, 2012 at 9:35 am
Have to agree strongly with you here. The pumping of dollars into the housing sector let to bubble in prices that have wound back about 15% since. Young ‘uns taking out these loans were ripped off, in a sense.
Another big issue is negative gearing. Time for some Government to wind it back – say by introducing tax deductions for mortgage payments to first home buyers, while reducing the negative gearing deductions to – say 50% instead of the current 100%.
Negative gearing distorts the market and needs to go.
by JohD on May 16, 2012 at 9:35 am
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/spreading-the-love-to-buy-votes-so-what-it-was-about-time-20120515-1youa.html
as usual a good article from Ross Gillens
by mari on May 16, 2012 at 9:39 am
I’d say start to phase in a restriction so that it only applies to new builds that are rented out. or at least only applies in full to those. Its supposed to be a measure that supports the supply of housing, and applying it to established houses that are rented out is whats really distorting the market.
Politically difficult, but would save a bucket to the budget in the medium term.
by imacca on May 16, 2012 at 9:39 am
bluegreen
Can Do is big on multitasking
by poroti on May 16, 2012 at 9:40 am
Regarding the Thomson statement next week, I hope Anna Burke makes it clear from the outset that he is to be heard in total silence and that any smart arse comments, derisive laughter etc, etc, from the opposition will immediately result in an hour in the sin bin. They will need to be kept on a very strong leash.
by Darn on May 16, 2012 at 9:41 am
Lizzie
Most policy problems can be swept under the carpet for about two to three years at state government level.
We will know the true color of the east coast governments in about 18 months or some when they can no longer put trying to address tough issues.
I already know all the vested interests are at the throat of NSW and Vic governments for acting too slowly with their concerns.
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 9:41 am
Bit of a media scrum here now. Hard to work out what’s happening. High up copper being interviewed. This is so Deju vu…
by Boinzo on May 16, 2012 at 9:41 am
Darn
Agreed
by victoria on May 16, 2012 at 9:42 am
ABC Breakfast was interesting this morning with a report on the Treasury Secretary Martin Parkinson delivering a speech yesterday to Business Economists and basically backing up what Ken Henry had to say on Lateline yesterday.
Well worth a listen if you missed it. http://tinyurl.com/c82k47y
by bemused on May 16, 2012 at 9:43 am
joe2
Agree but where the questions arise from unnamed sources (and not all the questions do, of course), what is the point?
by shellbell on May 16, 2012 at 9:43 am
Its going to be an interesting econpomic year this year. The budget heavily loads stimulus in the front of the budget and is seriously contractionary at the back end.
Watch for a mass boom and bust in consumer confidence.
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 9:43 am
This is precisely the same point made by someone on productivity and the urban sprawl a few weeks ago (sorry, no link). Transport solutions and planning decisions that reduce commuter times are more beneficial to productivity (and community health) than increasing working hours.
by lizzie on May 16, 2012 at 9:44 am
Poroti
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 9:44 am
Bemused
You were correct about the nature of the forensic expert evidence re Chamberlain. Thanks for correcting my error.
by shellbell on May 16, 2012 at 9:44 am
There seems to be a Lateline report on the 11/05/2012 by Emma Renwick that would contradict the above statement.
Emma Renwick reports.
by Ian on May 16, 2012 at 9:44 am
Watch out for continued mass hysteria from Right Whingers
by kezza2 on May 16, 2012 at 9:47 am
Boinzo
Some persons previously arrested in situations such as you are presently describing have commenced proceedings in the Federal Court asserting that the notices to quit given to them by police are unconstitutional – something to do with implied right to freedom of association – sounds a bit far fetched.
by shellbell on May 16, 2012 at 9:47 am
Darn @ 1513
Should not need to be a special case. Anna Burke should just chuck ‘em out any time there is the that sort of behaviour.
by bemused on May 16, 2012 at 9:48 am
re….1523
Should there be a legal or commercial argument refuting the Lateline report I apologise in advance.
by Ian on May 16, 2012 at 9:48 am
I know which one I’d be betting on!
by ltep on May 16, 2012 at 9:50 am
Shellbell, they would provide enough, even if you wish to dismiss the rest, for proper examination. Particularly as the rest of the media has not even engaged in looking at that obvious and confirmed information with an appropriately critical eye.
by joe2 on May 16, 2012 at 9:50 am
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/chat-to-prime-minister-julia-gillard-about-the-federal-budget/story-e6freuy9-1226356520638
Was flicking through, don’t know why as hardly ever look at DT but PM is on at the moment blogging, amazingly the questions comments are mainly civilized and respectful
by mari on May 16, 2012 at 9:51 am
Fed Police are investigating who leaked the Rudd Foreign Affairs video. Could be any of the cabinet
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 9:51 am
victoria – much of what is raised in that article about the HSU and Jackson’s partner is based on supposition. That’s why the alleged phone call to the union official stood out for me. It’s something which ought to be readily verifiable, and there’s one party to the alleged conversation who’s prepared to go on the record about it.
Much of the rest of it draws some longish bows without much in the way of substance.
by Burgey on May 16, 2012 at 9:51 am
mari
Good find!
by victoria on May 16, 2012 at 9:53 am
Hope he then banged on about the NBN and it’s critical importance in our future productivity. This should be stressed constantly, imo.
by joe2 on May 16, 2012 at 9:54 am
bluegreen @ 1519
It is a contractionary budget by definition (surplus) but has managed an element of stimulus by redistributing income to lower income groups. This continues throughout the year via increased social security payments and changes to the income tax system. The payments for school students will also occur each 6 months.
The stimulus in it will assist the retail sector in particular where things are seriously depressed.
by bemused on May 16, 2012 at 9:55 am
Could be any one of a large number of people including Liberal moles – they are still in the PS
by Tom Hawkins on May 16, 2012 at 9:56 am
In the heat of the QLD election campaign it was reported that the wife of someone close to Anna Bligh was also an assistant commissioner in the CMC with all the insinuations the actions against Newman were tainted as a result. It was later reported that woman had no involvement in the Newman investigations. I think people have to be naive to believe that organisations like the CMC and FWA are not fully aware of relationships that could be perceived to create conflicts of interest and take proper steps to ensure investigations are not tainted as a result. In fact I would be very surprised of personal selected to be involved in a particular investigation were not required to disclose any potential conflicts of interests.
People here confuse the type of intrigue that infests politics and the proper process that statutory bodies and enforcement agencies are required to follow. Sure there are officers who cross the line as shown by the News scandal in the UK but these tend to be exceptions rather than the rule.
by davidwh on May 16, 2012 at 9:57 am
We all know who Poss is talking about here don’t we?
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 9:57 am
mari – a number of offensive questions would not have been posted. And rightly so.
by Burgey on May 16, 2012 at 9:57 am
DWH:
David, Lawler’s Jackson’s LOVER. He heavies union officers on her behalf. He initiates complaints to the police.
That’s more than a casual connection.
by Bushfire Bill on May 16, 2012 at 9:59 am
bg
No I dont. Enlighten us?
by victoria on May 16, 2012 at 9:59 am
Davidwh
Well said.
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 9:59 am
shellbell @ 1522
What a tangled tale it all was!
Did you ever read the book ‘Evil Angels’? That did a great job.
I was working in Far North Qld at the time and was buying a paper at the newsagents when some big fat female redneck in front of me pointed to a pic of Lindy Chamberlain and pronounced her guilty on the spot. I recoiled in horror and from that point was very careful in my evaluation of the case. I guess a starting point for me is I find it hard to understand how any parent (or adult for that matter) could harm a child.
by bemused on May 16, 2012 at 10:00 am
Ian
Here is the proper story with comment from a Turner Freeman solicitor.
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3501270.htm
If someone dies before they bring a claim, the relatives bring an action for loss of dependency and get compensated for that loss. That has been the law since 1897 in NSW.
If the the person dies after they bring a claim their estate gets money for pain and suffering and the money is distibuted as per the will. Jeff Shaw QC under Bob Carr brought that in 1998.
The lateline article addresses a further payment which sufferers have sought which appears to have been denied (by Greg Smith) which was first raised but not addressed under the previous government.
The assertion that the family members get nothing at all (Wicks) is bullshit. Wicks of course also dressed it up by implying that Smith had taken something away – wrong again.
by shellbell on May 16, 2012 at 10:00 am
Vic
Poss blames Shorten, Feeney, Arbib and Farrell for the current malaise.
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 10:00 am
Yep, it’s a 2-speed econpomy alright.
by Bushfire Bill on May 16, 2012 at 10:01 am
I am sure you are right, but look at where this forum is DT, CM and I guess HS? She got her message across about things that worry people and unfortunately a lot of people who read them
by mari on May 16, 2012 at 10:01 am
Greg Smith is one of the most interesting politicians in Australia.
by bluegreen on May 16, 2012 at 10:02 am
bg
What malaise? Our economy is the envy of the world
by victoria on May 16, 2012 at 10:02 am