Newspoll: 55-45 to Coalition
The latest fortnightly Newspoll – the first in some time to be released on Sunday rather than Monday night – has Labor’s primary vote down a point on last time to 30%, the Coalition’s up two to 46% and the Greens’ down two to 12%, with the two-party preferred out from 54-46 to 55-45. Julia Gillard has lost most of her lead as preferred prime minister, which narrows from 42-38 in her favour to 39-38, but the individual personal ratings are essentially unchanged, with Gillard down two points on approval to 30% and up one on disapproval to 59%, while Tony Abbott is down one on each to 31% and 58%.
UPDATE: Essential Research has voting intention unchanged on last week, with the Coalition leading 56-44 from primary votes of 33% for Labor, 49% for the Coalition and 10% for the Greens. The poll also gaugues opinion on the carbon tax for the first time since November last year, up to which point it had asked every month after the policy was first announced in late February 2011, and it finds support at a new low with 35% supportive and 54% opposed. Forty-five per cent believe it will increase the cost of living “a lot”, 26% “a moderate amount”, 20% “a little” and 2% that it will have “no impact”, while 44% think it likely and 40% unlikely that Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party would repeal it in government. More happily for the government, its marine reserves policy has 70% support with 13% opposed. The poll also finds 88% rating themselves not likely to pay for online newspaper content against only 9% likely.
UPDATE 2: The latest Morgan face-to-face poll, covering the last two weekends, has Labor down half a point to 32.5%, the Coalition up three to 45.5% and the Greens down 2.5% to 10%. The Coalition’s lead is up from 55-45 to 56.5-43.5 on respondent-allocated preferences and from 52-48 to 54.5-45.5 on previous election preferences.
Matters federal:
• ReachTEL last week published results of two automated phone polls from the electorates of Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott, finding both to be headed for defeat. In New England, Nationals candidate-presumptive Richard Torbay was rated at 62% of the primary vote against 25% for Windsor (after distribution of the undecided), which on 2010 preference flows would put Torbay ahead 65.7-34.3. In Lyne, David Gillespie of the Nationals (UPDATE: Commenter Oakeshott Country notes I’m jumping the gun here: the Nationals are yet to confirm their candidate) led Oakeshott 52% to 31%, or 55.4-44.6. The electorates were polled in October last year by Newspoll, at which time no information on likely Nationals candidates was available, which showed Windsor trailing 41% to 33% and Oakeshott trailing 47% to 26%.
• Ben Packham of The Australian reports a “factional brawl” looms in the South Australian Liberal Party over the Senate vacancy created by the retirement of Mary Jo Fisher, who suffers a depressive illness and was recently reported to police for shoplifting for the second time in 18 months. Packham reports that Ann Ruston, former National Wine Centre chief executive and owner of a Riverina wholesale flower-growing firm, might emerge as a moderate-backed candidate. However, the Right’s position – contested by the moderates – is that she would have to renounce her existing claim to the number three position on the Senate ticket for the next election if she wished to contest the preselection. Kate Raggatt, a former adviser to Nick Minchin, is “seen as a possible right-wing contender for the vacancy”. Brad Crouch of the Sunday Mail lists Cathy Webb, Andrew McLaughlin, Paul Salu, Chris Moriarty and Maria Kourtesis as other possibilities.
Matters state:
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-
guytaur:
I am still not sure I get it, but assuming what you mean is Turnbull wanted to cross the floor to support the Malaysian solution, and negotiated with Abbott to the effect that Abbott backed away from objections to the NBN (because apparently you think Turnbull really actually thinks the NBN is grand) otherwise Turnbull would cross the floor.
If I have that right:
1) I disagree that Turnbull thinks the NBN is good policy. He might think its grand, but I don’t think he thinks it is a wise way to spend 40 billion
2) I disagree that Turnbull thinks the Malaysian solution is good policy. He might, I don’t know, but Malaysia has been rejected as it doesn’t provide adequate protections (what I said from day 1 of the policy and have said consistently since).
I see no reason why moderate liberals would be racing to a policy to send teenagers to a place where they are regularly beaten with sticks.
by Mod Lib on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:04 pm
guytaur
I am surprised Latika straight out asked Mal Brough this question.
by victoria on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:05 pm
my say
I understand you. I only get annoyed by posts here when the meaning is not clear. I think that’s impportant. But I can’t help wanting the correct spelling – it’s in my nature
by lizzie on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:06 pm
@abcnews: Peter Slipper spent $56,000 on flights, including a visit to NZ to discuss parliamentary procedures and art procurement http://t.co/FWTPYd5V
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:06 pm
Angus Houston will be on ABC PM program after 6PM
by MTBW on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:06 pm
guytaur
Yes she is obviously there
by victoria on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:06 pm
victoria
So am I. If she keeps stuff like that up she could lose the nick El Slacko.
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:06 pm
BB:
I am not questioning the Parliament’s right to change the law so that the reasons for the High Court’s decision to stop the Malaysian solution are not longer realised.
I am saying that the High Court made the decision because the Malaysian solution did not provide the required protections, and that I agree with their decision, and that I disagree with Parliament changing the rules so that they can get around this provision (even though they can if they choose to).
by Mod Lib on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:06 pm
a. because it’s true
b. it takes one to know one
c. calling him a muddle headed DLP culture warrior tory cheer leading warmongering bozo without a clue just doesn’t roll off the tongue as nicely
d. all of the above.
by ratsak on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:07 pm
guytaur
Yes indeed
by victoria on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:07 pm
ML
I have heard tech heads in the US on tech shows waxing lyrical over the NBN. I am sure Turnbull knows this reality. He would think it is grand. He may think we did not need grand. However he knows it is grand.
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Fran Barlow,
Thanks for providing the link to the Piping Shrike article on asylum seekers.
Pithy conclusion:
by Pegasus on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:10 pm
They’ve made up a SONG? How sexy!
by lizzie on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:10 pm
Fairfax Board have told Gina Rinehart to launch a takeover bid if she want to control the agenda and dictate terms.
by MTBW on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:11 pm
lizzie
It is going to be interesting to hear it. Will it be Country Music. House Music. Rock. or other genre?
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:12 pm
To clarify, the NBN is a grand plan, however, that doesn’t mean it is a good idea. It is a grand plan but the case has not been satisfactorily made that we need to spend that much money.
The issue is the expense, not the functionality.
by Mod Lib on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:13 pm
lizzie
Where is she and what is happening ?
by poroti on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:13 pm
ML
Well I for one am happy the government is spending that much money. For me it was not only the functionality it brings that makes me happy. It was also seeing the green faces of Silicon Valley types going green with envy
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:15 pm
poroti
Just found this
by victoria on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:16 pm
You tried to make a moral point out of a legal one. You failed.
The protections were only required because the legislation included them. Don’t cite the High Court as your moral authority.
It was a Howard government law that was never tested in the HC until Gillard was in government.
by Bushfire Bill on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:16 pm
ml
8867 Edit: delete first green.
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:17 pm
Mod Lib
Not so. What has to be changed in the legislation is way the protection can be demonstrated. For example binding legal obligations between A and M, UNHCR support statements, compulsory supervision of send-backs by Australian observers etc etc are other ways to ensure protection.
And as I pointed out earlier, ignoring the HC for a moment, being a signatory to the Convention is in fact not a guarantee of protection.
by psyclaw on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:17 pm
I’ve thought all along they would bring forward sale of the NBN or listing it on the stockmarket ala Telstra.
Oh, and they will cut back some scope etc in suburban areas so as to not step too much on the toes of Foxtel and murdoch and their outdated HFC.
The other point is NBN Co and the Government have through a range of way let the libs with little alternative but to preceed because the whole thing has been structured so that it will cost a fortune to cancel. They have been snookered.
As usual the way to read this stuff is to look closely at what they do not say.
Also I wonder how long the cross subsidisation of pricing by the urban areas to the bush will last?
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/government-it/we-will-not-cancel-the-nbn-turnbull-20120629-217f3.html#ixzz1zAStGiSq
by dave on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:18 pm
“@mashable: Teen Chat Bot Wins Largest Turing Test Challenge in History – http://t.co/MoJ65Gy2”
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:19 pm
Fran Barlow,
Was going to post about Labor4Refugees support of Greens AS policy but c that u have already done so.
According to so many Labor members and supporters here these people condone drownings at sea and therefore have “blood on their hands”
by Pegasus on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:19 pm
How so very Tory, unless it is rain-making schemes.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:19 pm
@Mod Lib/8865
It’s nothing to do with being a ‘grand plan’ it’s the right one with the use of the ‘right’ technology for the climate that we live in.
Once again your liberal masters been telling you things you should be told.
by zoidlord on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:19 pm
victoria
Thanks. I suppose the “HOPE REWARD OPPORTUNITY SONG!!!! ” will be sung to the tune of Land of Hope and Glory
by poroti on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:19 pm
Mod Lib 8857
Wrong again mate.
The HC did not comment at all on the actual and real existence of protection or non=existence..
It simple said that the current legislation required certain bits of evidence to demonstrate “protection”, which were not provided.
by psyclaw on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:20 pm
ML -
Nonsense as usual. howard gave away $330 Billion from the Minerals Boom Mk1 – that would have almost built 10 NBN’s at 2005 prices.
by dave on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:21 pm
What does Shy have to say?
by victoria on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:22 pm
Peg,
It is the Greens who are oblivious to deaths in the water, but the purity of their intentions will at least pave their road to hell.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:22 pm
The NBN makes money, the Abbott plan costs $4 Billion in subsidies. Its a no brainer.
by ruawake on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:22 pm
puff
Along with the labor members linked to by fran earlier.
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:23 pm
Nonsense, ModLib. The case for spending money on the NBN has well and truly been made.
From an article by Nick Ross, posted online earlier this year:
So the health savings alone pay for the entire rollout.
But…
So the savings on energy alone pay for the entire rollout.
But….
Whereas:
And, in the end, of course, having saved Australia the cost of installing it three times over…
Note the figure there – $27 billion. Not $40.
Now, at the end of the process, I don’t particularly want the NBN sold. But the point is, we could if we wanted to, and that alone would cover the cost of building it.
****Apologies for not linking directly to the article, which has numerous references to support each point above; I cut and pasted it at the time for future reference but foolishly failed to cut and paste the link as well!!
by zoomster on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:23 pm
Pegasus
Once again …….. the Oakshott Bill does not increase or decrease the level of protection.
It merely changes the way that “protection” can be legally shown to exist.
by psyclaw on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:24 pm
How very like a party that is dominated by unionists, who love to spend the money of the workers siphoned off into union coffers….not very different spending tax payers money on grand schemes to make them feel that they have made their little contribution to Australian history.
When you build and run your own companies, like Coalition MPs, you tend to be a little more circumspect about how you spend money.
Hence Coalition governments doing better on economic indicators over the last 40 years eh? LOL
by Mod Lib on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:24 pm
my say
Did you see my posting earlier regarding Senator Conroy promoting the NBN in New York and mentioning Tasmania in particular?
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:24 pm
guytaur
I don’t read Fran.
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:24 pm
HOPE…we get into government.
REWARD….all our rich mates.
OPPORTUNITY…..to line our pockets.
by zoomster on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:25 pm
Lizzie and i keep re sewing their ( children) buttons on
I know what you mean
by my say on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:25 pm
Even though the NBN will mean billions (I think I read some $50 billion) to the economy in just a few years? Turnbull is probably thinking that when/if the coalition get the keys to the Lodge, it may be the NBN that helps fill in that great big black hole in their budget.
by janice2 on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:26 pm
No guytuar
I didnt
What a sweetie he is
by my say on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:26 pm
puff
It is the Labor Refugee Protection group spokes people from Victoria and NSW.
by guytaur on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:26 pm
Gave away $330 Billion.
Really? WOW…..Who got it, dave?
by Mod Lib on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:26 pm
The Australian is currently reporting better than the ABC over the LOTO’s refusal to consider the findings of the expert panel on asylum seekers.
ABC:
In other words, Mr Abbott won’t change his mind, so the expert panel is a waste of time and we might as well all go home.
Australian:
At least according to the Australian, the expert panel will do some real work and will not be tampered with.
by citizen on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:27 pm
ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL ROFL
by Puff, the Magic Dragon. on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:27 pm
For the life of me I can’t help but get this picture of a wizened, dusty little man hunched over a battered rolodex, in a dark, mouldy recess in the basement of Menzies House. A single dim light bulb fighting valiantly against the forlorn shadows as our little man finds the reference number, then trots off into the darkness of the shelving and returns with a yellowing, ink faded file. He undoes the tatty ribboning, moves to the vacuum tube and sends scandal #57689 upstairs to be distributed to the waiting media.
by Ian on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:28 pm
peg
Incorrect. As they don’t have a vote in the Senate, they aren’t responsible.
What they are doing is expressing a different view to that held by the party as a whole. According to fran, if they did that in the Greens, they’d be booted out.
Of course, the Labor party, being a much broader church, tolerates – nay, encourages – a wide range of viewpoints.
Coming from an authoritarian party, you wouldn’t understand that.
by zoomster on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:28 pm
Perhaps, but more likely it would be too expensive not to keep.
I guess your argument above could well be used in the case of the GST which the ALP shouted about from the rooftops….. until the money started pouring in, and then there was an eery silence!
by Mod Lib on Jun 29, 2012 at 6:28 pm