Newspoll: 54-46 to Coalition
GhostWhoVotes reports that Newspoll has the Coalition’s two-party lead at 54-46, unchanged from the previous poll, with the primary votes at 31% for Labor (down one), 44% for the Coalition (down two) and 14% for the Greens (up two). Julia Gillard’s net approval is 4% less bad than last time, her approval up two to 32% and disapproval down two to 58%, while Tony Abbott is respectively up one to 32% and down one to 59%. On preferred prime minister, Gillard is up two to 42% and Abbott is up one to 38%.
It should be noted that most of the polling period (Friday to Sunday) covered what in every state but WA was a long weekend, when an unusually large number of potential respondents would be away from home. Given that absent and postal votes tend to favour the Coalition, it might be anticipated that this would bias the result slightly in favour of Labor, although measures may have been taken to correct for this. As far as I can tell, Newspoll used to abstain from polling over the Queen’s Birthday weekend, but changed this policy last year.
UPDATE: Essential Research has two-party preferred unchanged on last week at 56-44, from primary votes of 49% for the Coalition (down one), 32% for Labor (down one) and 10% for the Greens (steady). The monthly personal ratings have Julia Gillard up a point on approval to 32% and down four on disapproval to 56%, with Tony Abbott down four on approval to a new low of 32% and up one on approval up one to 54%. Funnily enough, Newspoll and Essential concur that both leaders’ approval ratings are 32%. Gillard and Abbott are tied at 37% on preferred prime minister, compared with a 38-37 lead for Gillard last time.
Other questions gauge public trust in various institutions, recording a remarkable drop for the federal parliament from 55% to 22% since the question was last asked in September, and other sharp drops recorded for trade unions (from 39% to 22%), environmental groups (45% to 32%), business groups (38% to 22%) and, for some reason, the Reserve Bank (67% to 49%). The poll also finds 60% disapproving of bringing in overseas workers with only 16% approving, 32% believing labour costs and taxes might drive mining companies away against 49% who expect them to carry on regardless.
UPDATE 2: Roy Morgan makes it three polls in one day by reporting its face-to-face results, which it evidently does on Tuesdays now rather than Fridays. This result is Labor’s best since March, their primary vote up half a point to 33% with the Coalition down 2.5% to 42.5% and the Greens up two to 12.5%. On two-party preferred, the Coalition’s lead has narrowed from 55.5-44.5 to 52-48 on previous election preferences and from 58-42 to 55-45 on respondent-allocated.
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
david – I think it very much depends what you’re looking into or for. If you’re looking into things like your opponents’ families and the like, I think that’s tawdry no matter who does it.
If you’re looking at things like buying shares in industries which you’re publicly spruiking as about to be wiped out, then I think that’s fair play.
by Burgey on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:21 pm
So let me get this straight -
if you are LOTO then it’s your duty to be negative and spread doom and gloom because that’s the only way you will ever kep the government honest and – most important – get to be PM.
If you are the PM then you can’t be positive because that just means you want to stay in the job.
So by using Abbott’s own weird reasoning both the LOTO and the PM, whoever they may be at any given time, should always be negative, pessimistic and should never, ever give us any good news.
Is that right?
by leone on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:22 pm
Ashby meeting with Brough, maybe. Meeting with Pyne? Big deal. Yawn.
by Gauss on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:22 pm
Smithe
You may be interested in this tweet by el slacko
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/who-you-going-to-call-dirtbusters/2007/08/25/1187462581577.html
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:24 pm
@leone/2752
Yup, cuz that’s the only way to win.
by zoidlord on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:24 pm
Gauss
Your hypocrisy is unsurprising!
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Semantic point. The coalition is the dirt unit.
by ratsak on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:25 pm
The Coalition doesnt need a dirt unit – they have many already – #TheirABC, #NewsCorpse #Fairfax and some of them #MSMhacks
by The Finnigans on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Smithe as a non-political person I admittedly do not have any understanding of what constitutes a “dirt” file other than those I have heard about in the media – LNP in QLD, Labor in VIC.
The above quote from the ABC seems a bit more than parliamentary speeches of precuniary interests. But whatever the reality I just accept it’s part of politics.
by davidwh on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:25 pm
Frankly Latika bourke is pissing me off today. Where is her questioning of everything that comes out of Abbott’s mouth. She is a freakin joke
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:26 pm
Ah yes. Short memories, as Peter Garrett might say. That disgusting crap was being peddled around by the Libs as recently as a few weeks ago (according to the Fat Man hisself).
And they don’t have a Dirt Unit?
Riiiiight.
by smithe on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:26 pm
I note David the LNP having a dirt dirt file didn’t stop you from voting for them and I think most people think as you do about the issue – that’s politics.
by Gary on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:28 pm
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:29 pm
Do WHAT?
Research each others public records? How surprisement.
by Bushfire Bill on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:29 pm
smithe @ 2745
Slipper/Ashby? Please elaborate.
Thomson thing. You mean the FWA report is a dirt file?
by Gauss on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:31 pm
My point exactly – nothing to see here.
by Gary on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:31 pm
Was hugely significant, because is wasn’t just “meeting” with Pyne. It was a drinking session.
Remember that Ashby was, by that stage, no longer a member of the LNP and he worked for an Independent MP. Even if Pyne was on official business, he should have asked for a message to be left for the Speaker, offered to come back at a time he was present or some such like. What he should NOT have done was fraternised with the man’s staff behind his back.
I can’t believe there are Fibs around seriously justifying the behaviour. It was seven shades of wrong.
by Danny Lewis on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:31 pm
BB
It seems that Latika is being very partisan in her interpretation of this.
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:31 pm
I tend to agree. Don’t think some PBers do.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/democracy-running-low-on-ink-20120613-20af8.html#ixzz1xjNqsrTP
by lizzie on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:32 pm
Next thing Gauss will be telling us all Liberals are pure, white knights in shining armour.
by Gary on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:33 pm
Gary agreed. I think a person would go insane trying to decide on who to vote for if they tried to pick a side who doesn’t play politics hard, fast and at times downright dirty. It should always be about the substantive issues. Hey nut I have always been naive, self confessed.
by davidwh on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:34 pm
Regardless of whether it’s a legitimate comparison or not, Gillard’s comments and QT performance in 2007 will be compared to today’s “dirt file.”
Not much can really be done about that as it’s too easy for the press gallery
by spur212 on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:34 pm
And precisely wht is wrong with gathering that sort of data?
It’s all on the public record is it not? And could well be relevant to a person’s discharge of their public duties as a parliamentarian or fitness for office.
Let’s face it, aren’t we entitled to know, for example, whether a particular MP or Minister (Shadow or otherwise) posted homophobic or racist comments on some social media webpage like Facebook?
I’d want to know. Wouldn’t you?
by smithe on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:34 pm
Everything gauss posts.
Yawn.
by Dan Gulberry on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:34 pm
@Gary @davidwh
Politics should never be about being dirty, however, finding information is critical to beating your opponents, that’s what Competitors do when competitors technology comes out.
by zoidlord on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:35 pm
victoria @ 2756
So re Pyne I have, based on the evidence available, a different opinion than some on this blog. Please explain how this is hypocritical?
by Gauss on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:35 pm
I think you’re over stating the case. Most people I would think won’t blink at this. They expect it given what they’ve been up to recently. You have to remeber on recent polls Abbott is less popular than Gillard and that’s saying something. Why would people trust him and not Gillard or vice versa?
by Gary on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:38 pm
Smithe as I said I accept it is the way politics is played and as long as everyone agrees that what’s right for one side has to be right for the other side and vice versa.
by davidwh on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:38 pm
Surely you lot don’t really think the Fibs are silly enough to have a real ‘Dirt Unit’ and a stack of files clearly labelled ‘Dirt on (insert name of MP here) just lying around in Abbott’s office. Not today they don’t.
Of course the Fibs don’t have a Dirt Unit. Well, not any more, not since about 11 o’clock last night. It’s been re-named. It’s now known as the Political Intelligence Tracing System and will operate from a top-secret location not far from the Lodge. As soon as Kevin hands over the keys to his garage they’ll be up and running.
by leone on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Do your own homework Gaussman, these issues have been flogged to death here and elsewhere.
And if you can see nothing wrong with the conduct of the Tories in regards to them, then perhaps there’s something wrong with you.
by smithe on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Are you saying Pyne is his own dirt unit?
by Lynchpin on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Latika referring to Julia’s speech in 2007.
by lizzie on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:40 pm
@latikambourke: @@JeremyTravers you know what I’m most struck by in that speech? How strong a communicator she was.
by guytaur on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:41 pm
gauss
As smithe said, if you see nothing wrong with the Slipper/Ashby and Thomson matters, Labor having information on the coaltion is a big fat yawn
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:41 pm
lizzie
Snap!
by guytaur on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:41 pm
lizzie
I am not going to bother with Latika anymore today. She has again lowered her colours
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:43 pm
Is Bourke backtracking?
by Lynchpin on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:43 pm
IMHO Naming it a “dirt file” is instant way of smearing the govt.
by lizzie on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:43 pm
lizzie
I shall see how Latika regurgitates tomorrow’s proceedings re Slipper and Jacksom
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:44 pm
lizzie
Precisely. latika can do that, but yet Stephen Long had to apologise for his comments.
Perhaps someone should complain to Mark Scott about Latika smearing the govt.
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:44 pm
No one’s going to blink at this “dirt file” … yet they are going to blink (positively) when Wayne Swan says Glenn Stevens is the Mal Meninga of Central Bank Goveners and all the other BISON’s …
First point, they’ll just say “typical” … second point they’ll tune out or think of this classic moment http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt–SGmIKIQ
by spur212 on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:46 pm
Wait until it is called a dirt file on air before complaining. Then complain via twitter just as Morrison did. Then ABC will have no excuse for a different response.
by guytaur on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:47 pm
Barry ofarrel in his newsltd talkback will not have the guts to reply to this
Andrew Stoner, Hansard, 24 June 2010
“The Government can reject the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal\’s recommendations. I call on the Government to do so.”
“The government should reject these costs and come back to something families could afford,”
“They’ve done it (rejected determinations) quite often in the past. This is in the government’s hands, what they do”
by Meguire Bob on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:48 pm
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/business-leaders-reject-gillard-company-tax-plan-20120613-20akk.html#ixzz1xjS26bKe
by Lynchpin on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:48 pm
The marine parks strategy was bipartisan. The broad parameters were set during Howard/Costello years. Labor adopted them. It was bipartisan.
Some points:
(1) Mr Abbott, recognizing the populist appeal, casually but shrilly promised no more marine parks. He was hoping for some votes, particularly in Queensland coastal seats.
(2) Whatever either Mr Howard or Ms Gillard came up with was never going to be enough for the Greens. Guaranteed.
(3) In general in Australia, commercial fisheries are well-managed in the sense that they are more or less sustainably harvested. There are around two or three species out of the top 20 for which is probably an iffy proposition. But I am talking in general terms.
(4) There is no reason why, provided there is a sustainable management plan in place, pelagic fish should not be harvested in reserves. Most of them move freely in and out of reserves in any case.
(5) The critical issues that reserves can contribute to sustainability are spawning grounds, nursery areas and the benthic structures.
(6) It is virtually impossible to have a sensible discussion with many recreational anglers. They think fishery scientists are nuts and that reserves are the spawn of the devil. Left to their own devices recreational anglers will destroy any fishery. Unfortunately, most angler equipment outlets are polemically rabid.
(7) The commercial fishers have various interests in the marine parks. Those wishing to sell out in industry restructures have a gifted safety net that they might otherwise not have got. Fishing for those remaining generally improves – and, with it, their effort per unit is reduced = better money.
(8) Regardless, we are reaching the limits of wild catch harvests. This has, and will increasingly, send the price of fish up.
(9) The slack is increasingly being taken up by aquaculture. This, in turn, is based on non-sustainable use of energy, nutrients and changes to hydrology.
(10) The tourism industry is seriously conflicted. A lot of tourist money is based on anglers. A lot is based on viewing, snorkelling, diving and marketing of a pristine ‘product’.
(11) Australia seriously needs to consider having a seal management strategy which would include keeping populations stable at a lower level by killing seals greater than that number. My preferred method for this would be shooting.
The reason I say this is that, as seal poplulations recover from their skin and blubber trade near-extinction, seal populations are exploding and are consuming an ever-greater proportion of wild fish. Make no mistake about it. Seals are in direct competition with less-well off Australians who already cannot afford to buy fresh fish. In the absence of predators, the seal population will increase until seals are the main fish harvesters and engage in boom/bust ecological cycles.
Shorter story: too many people are chasing a limited resource. Some are saying, ‘Hang on, let’s do it in a sustainable way so that future generations can share in it.’ Others are saying, ‘Piss off, I want it all and I want it now.’
As for Autralia, worse for most of the globes’ seafood, aka marine biodiversity.
As for Mr Abbott: he has consistently demonstrated that he is incapable of serious policy debate on important issues such as these. His instinct is to gut the environment. His instinct is to pander to the loudmouths. He has once again demonstrated that he is the most destructive LOTO we have ever had.
by Boerwar on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:48 pm
Meanwhile the Greens are deeply disappointed.
by CTar1 on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:48 pm
El Slacko just faithfully swallows whatever Factual hairball is spewed-up by Abbott at his pressers, then faithfully regurgitates it for us on twitter.
Some say this is a useful function, although I’s much prefer it if she left the furballs where they lay.
by smithe on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Lynchpin
I will give Ballieu some points for attending, unlike his counterparts. Says more about the popularity of fed Labor in Victoria. He knows which way the wind is blowing here in Victoria
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:49 pm
Digging dirt on Thonson = dirty liberals bringing the standard of parliament down and could cause Thomson to think about self harm. This breathless pity for Thomson conveniently forgets FWA dug out a pile of stinking allegations.
Labor digging dirt on every lib = nothing to worry about, your stupid if you did not think it happened and oh! It’s only publicly available dirt. Que PM on the attack on the media because who would dare think the PM team could be digging dirt…. Mabe there is another rouge media advisor in the PM’s office making steam like during Australia day.
by rummel on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:51 pm
smithe
But she does not faithfully swallow what the PM says. She takes the initiative by going the extra mile in creating an issue. ABC Fair and balanced. My arse!
by victoria on Jun 14, 2012 at 12:51 pm