Menu lock

Newspoll: 53-47 to Labor

The first Newspoll in four weeks is well in line with other results to emerge from a busy weekend polling cycle, with Essential Research still to come.

The first Newspoll in four weeks has Labor leading 53-47, compared with 51-49 in favour of the Coalition last time. Primary votes are 38% for the Coalition (down five), 34% for Labor (steady) and 14% for the Greens (up three). Tony Abbott is down five on approval to 35% and up nine on disapproval to 56%, while Bill Shorten is up four to 35% and down one to 41%. Abbott’s lead as preferred prime minister has shrunk from 41-33 to 40-38.

This is the latest in a polling avalanche which has followed the interruption of Easter and Anzac Day, to which Essential Research is still to be added tomorrow. Three other polls published over the past two days have produced strikingly similar results on the primary vote, from which Newspoll differs in having Labor lower and the Greens higher:

• Galaxy, for the first time adding an online panel component to its live-interview phone polling to produce an enlarged sample of 1391, has the Labor lead at 52-48, with primary votes of 39% for the Coalition, 37% for Labor, 11% for the Greens and 6% for Palmer United.

• A ReachTEL poll conducted on Saturday, also from a larger-than-usual sample of 4016, has Labor’s lead at 54-46, with primary votes of 38.9% for the Coalition, 39.6% for Labor, 11.2% for the Greens and 6.0% for Palmer United.

• Morgan’s multi-mode face-to-face plus SMS poll, conducted every weekend but compiled fortnightly, has Labor leading 53.5-46.5 according to the conventional two-party preferred method that allocates preferences as per the result of the previous election, increasing to 55-45 when preferences were allocated by the respondent. The primary votes are 37.5% for the Coalition, 37% for Labor, 12% for the Greens and 5.5% for Palmer United.

UPDATE: And now Essential Research comes in entirely unchanged on last week, with Labor leading 52-48 from primary votes of 40% for the Coalition, 38% for Labor, 10% for the Greens and 5% for Palmer United. Questions on the deficit tax show the importance of wording in these situations – just as carbon tax questions got a more favourable response when the rationale for them was laid out, inquiry about “a temporary ‘deficit’ tax on high and middle income earners aimed at bringing the budget back to surplus” has support and opposition tied at 34%. However, 48% favour the proposition that “introducing a new ‘deficit’ tax would be a broken promise by the Abbott Government” versus 33% for “it is more important to reduce the deficit than stick to pre-election promises”.

Other findings have “management of the Australian economy” all but unchanged since a year ago, with a total good rating of 40% (up one) and total bad of 31% (down one), but with results by party support having changed beyond recognition; Joe Hockey favoured over Chris Bowen to manage the economy by 33% to 27%; Labor better than Liberal at “representing the interests of working families (47-20), Liberal a lot better than Labor at “representing the interests of the large corporate and financial interests” (54-13), and Liberal better at handling the economy overall (40-26); 23% very concerned about job losses, 34% somewhat concerned and 29% not at all concerned; 77% believing the gap between rich and poor to have increased over the last 10 years, with only 3% for decreased; 29% thinking their own financial situation good versus 26% for poor; “the cost of living” rated by far the economic issue of most concern (56%, with unemployment in second place on 11%).

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola


Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted

How about the government maintain services and the tax cuts by having a price on emission equivalents of CO2? 😉


The budget will be interesting. I know Abbott and Hockey are babes in the woods regarding finances and government, but I gamble they are using the Howard approach. Make dire announcements leading up to the budget, then reduce the measures on the night in an effort to convince the public that they are nice guys after all. Be interesting to see how gullible the public are… There again, there is no accounting for the stupidity of some politicians.


Yes Deblonay, when I was in the states I was horrified at the gap between rich and poor. The teeming trailer park city outside Chicago was eye opening…It took about half an hour to pass it on the train, it was so large…think of all those people unable to afford a roof over their heads..

But not only was there a gap between rich and poor, the gap was in many cases racial. The people serving in shops or restaurants or toilets’living’ on minimum wage or tips were all non Anglo..This is in NYC.

My visit to the US was revelatory…seeing Native Americans bathing in the drains was a shock , any suggestion we should take the US as a blueprint for social policy is outrageous.


[I’m pessimistic – the Libs are literally crapping upon the Australian public from a great height and a six point deficit is the worst it’s getting?]

No, they’re not – they’re only figuratively crapping upon the Australian public from a great height. No matter how bad it gets, they won’t be literally doing that until Abbott and Hockey are actually flinging turds from the window of A36-1.



Two things

Yes its true that the setting of wages is based on a number of factors

-Educational levels
-Range of and number of tasks performed
-Business ability to pay
-Economic factors such as supply of workers available

Our wage structure is for the most part very good and doesn’t need changing.

This brings me to your dismissing of Indonesia on the bases that its GDP is lower than ours, GDP is only one way to measure an economy ad the political poisition of a country.

For example the U.S doesn’t include rural communities within its GDP read which as the effect of increasing it ever so slightly.

Indonesia has come a long way in the past two decades and is on track to become a regional power, when that happens i am sure it will remember the dismissive attitude that many once had for it.

ANZ Bank, IAG and Ramsay Healthcare etc have coem to recongise the Indonesian story and the potential it holds.

Sure it has issues but it has for the most part become a stable country which is heading in the the right direction economically.


From the census….

In May 2012 there were 509,200 full-time employees and 20,500 part-time employees receiving $2,500.00 or more per week.

The census stats do not show the breakdowns for these persons (those on incomes above $2500 per week – their incomes are aggregated.)

But the information in the income tables implies the number in the top decile was around 1 million in May 2012. The median income for this decile appears to have been about $2220 per week. Each 1% in income tax levied on this group would bring in about $1.2 billion pa. This would apply if wages and salaries equaled taxable income, which they do not.

The stats from the ATO are also interesting. In 2010/11……statistics/…/cor00345977_2011TAXSTATS.pdf

Taxable Income $80,001-$180,000
Individuals 1,613,234
17.2% of all taxpayers
Tax payable $46,940 bill
35.4% of all income tax
Average tax per taxpayer $29,096
Mean Taxable Income per person $ 111,205

Taxable Income $180,001 and over
Individuals 251,397
2.7% of all taxpayers
Tax payable $34,773 bill
26.2% of all income tax
Average tax per taxpayer $138,319
Mean Taxable Income per person $ 366,153

So in 2010/11 19.9% of taxpayers paid 61.6% of income tax.

If Abbott sets out to raise, say, $1 billion from the the $80-180k range, he would have to increase their tax bills by $619 each. Their average income tax rate would rise from 26.2% to 26.7%

If Abbott sets out to raise $1 billion from very high earners, he would have to increase their tax bills by about $3980 each. Their average income tax rate would rise from 37.7% to 38.8%

These rates compare with an average tax rate for those in the $37-80k bracket of 18.2%.


[There is an argument for Labor letting the deficit tax through. And that’s Labor needs to promise to raise tax at the next election and all it would have to do now is to promise to leave the deficit levy untouched.]

No there isn’t Abbott promised to remove 2 taxes, not raise any others, bring the budget back into surplus and to improve Government services, and provide a better NBN sooner.

that is what he should be required to do – or he should call an election


Re Minimun wage
In the US the Tea Party has worked to remove Minimun wage regulation from the law booksin many conservative states

In State like West Virginia and many other people actually work for tips and that’s legal;…no pay…perhaps a modest $3 an hour …then they rely on tips knowing this fact one gives out of compassion or the person serving you goes un rewarded for their labor…all the payment on the bill goes to the management %100 …that what some stupid people like ESJ and others would like to see here

If you travel across West Vinginia as I did last year,one is struck by the poverty ridden towns clustered around the defunct mining operations ,in which people live or exist on food stamps..and tips something from the 3rd world …and a world away from the affluence of Washington or New York


A US writer in Reader Supported News Blog in LA,writes a very readable if rather deplorable history of the Ukraine since WW2,with the terrible history of murder and genocide commited by the groups leadf by a man called Bandera who with some accomplices murdered thens of thousands including many many Jews during WW2

These groups had aid from abroad abd have revivied according to this article ,and have been part of the great surge to the far- neo-fascist right seen in Europe recently…e.g Le Pen in France,and the neo-Nazi New Dawn Party in Greece
very alarming story but ESSENTIAL READING

cud chewer

There is an argument for Labor letting the deficit tax through. And that’s Labor needs to promise to raise tax at the next election and all it would have to do now is to promise to leave the deficit levy untouched.



Edwina Wages works like this 1. Cut $100 off the wages of Fred on a very low income. 2.Austalia’s GDP falls by $100 per week 3. Now Jessica, john Jeremy, jake, jaci, joe, james, judy, Jason and joelene each pay $10 less tax. 4. fred and family only had $50 per week for discretionary expenses even before the pay cut, so now he looks for savings. He moves to smaller accommodation and saves $30 per week 5.Old landlord loses tenant and has to let to someone else. Because everyone’s wages are cut Landlord cuts rent by $15 per week 6. New landlord has a tenant but probably would in any case so no net change 7. fred still must cut $20/week so he cuts out $5 of beer per week, buys cheaper coffee and bikkies and cuts out some fruit and chops from diet saving $10, delays buying little Fabio soccer spikes and kit this year and cancels little Franny’s ballet lessons for at least one term, saving $260 ie ($5 per week) So at the end of round one of cuts Fred is in a smaller house (Fabio and franny are sharing a room Fred and family have cut expenditure on “luxuries” ie soccer boots, beer, ballet The family diet is a little bit less good – cheaper meats and a bit less fruit The landlord is $15 worse off Woolworths is $10 worse off The pub/bottlo is $5 worse off The ballet teacher and local sports store are worse off by $5 per week 8. The landlord being $15 worse off also cuts back a little say $5 on beer and $5 on food and $5 other wise spent at the hardware shop doing repairs 9. The sports store is about $1.50 worse off and the ballet teacher $2.50. The Chinese manufacture of the soccer kit is about $1 worse off. The shop owners and teacher also cut luxury food items So at the end of round 2 we have Fred and family worse off as before the landlord has cut back on beer and food The teacher and sports store owner have cut back on luxuries The hardware shop is $5 worse off Woolworths is now $19 worse off the pub is $10 worse off 10. The hardware shop owner who is $5 worse off cuts back on beer and luxury food So we then have the… Read more »
Fulvio Sammut

Good to know, BB.

Bushfire Bill

They get paid a lot, and the street behind Packers isn’t anywhere near as salubrious.

Fulvio Sammut

How does a channel 9 cameraman get to afford to live across the street from James Packer?

Yesiree Bob

There is really a disgusting cult of personality in Australia when it comes to the ilk of Packer.
They both should be charged and Packer should be stripped of his Cashino license

Bushfire Bill

Wow, Paul Sheehan has been eating his Wheaties. He’c come out full-on for Packer over the stoush.

[David Gyngell has behaved like a thug and he should be charged for the crimes he has committed. He stalked. He threatened. He assaulted. Now he can pay.
If Gyngell is not charged under section 93c of the Crimes Act then the police have a problem. We will find out soon enough if our two-law system – one for the rich and one for the rest – is rammed down our throats yet again.

The spark was the action of the company he runs, Nine Entertainment Company, parent company of the Nine Network. All the news reports of this incident have reported that Nine had a news van parked outside the home of James Packer, the billionaire casino operator. As to why it was there is a matter of contention.


He conveniently ignores the story about why the ENG van was outside Packer’s house (the cameraman lives across the street, and they’re allowed to take the vans home when on call… it was locked, so the story goes), and goes in hammer and tongs against Gyngell.

You’d think he was there from the way he describes the scene.

Which of course he wasn’t.

Nevertheless, a stirring defence, one might even say, passionate, in Packer’s favour.

Judging by the procession of worthies spied entering and leaving Packers apartment today, Sheehan isn’t the only one.

Personally, I couldn’t care less. They’re both thugs.

Yesiree Bob

There is inherent racism in the Abbot Government, full stop.
How else to explain there wanting to repeal 18c of the RDA