Newspoll: 56-44

Don’t ask me how, but Peter Brent at Mumble seems to have the scoop on Newspoll. Labor’s lead is up slightly on a fortnight ago, from 55-45 to 56-44. Better news for them still on the primary vote, up four points to 46 per cent with the Coalition down one to 34 per cent. Despite this, Kevin Rudd has recorded his weakest personal ratings since October, his approval down six points to 58 per cent and his disapproval up five to 31 per cent. Malcolm Turnbull’s position has improved, his approval up four points to 40 per cent and his disapproval down three to 42 per cent. Kevin Rudd’s lead as preferred prime minister has narrowed from 64-19 to 58-24.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,580 comments on “Newspoll: 56-44”

Comments Page 31 of 32
1 … 30 31 32

  1. [If we’re really going to this level then I suppose you’re precluding a member from choosing staff from their own faction or union as well?]

    Using Dio’s & JV’s logic they want Labor politicians to employ members of the Liberal Party and vice versa.

  2. zoomster
    I know the member hires and fires, but such staff can also be seen as servants of the parliament in that they are paid from a parliamentary allocation of funds. I read that view of them somewhere earlier, but can’t now find it.

    Anyway, whatever the ultimate responsibility or the means of selection, proper ethical standards must prevail, and family members are out.

    A research note by the parliamentary library has some ideas for alternative recruitment methods for the staff of members, such as selection by the party in question, rather than by the member:
    http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/prspub/OJM76/upload_binary/ojm766.pdf;fileType%3Dapplication%2Fpdf

  3. [ltep

    There certainly shouldn’t be an independent process. The pollie should employ someone in the same way 99.9% of the population does (and it seems Ministers do) which is based on an interview, CV and referees. And I think merit should be the sole standard, not family or friend relationship. If the jobs are so crappy and underpaid that only a family relative wants it, I’m more than happy for them to take it.]

    So it’s OK then

  4. [Young Liberals ‘hot babes’ recruitment drive draws criticism from Pru Goward]

    Few days ago, I offered to Glen & GP that I should join the Young Liberals. i was right.

    😎

  5. [A research note by the parliamentary library has some ideas for alternative recruitment methods for the staff of members, such as selection by the party in question, rather than by the member:]

    This would be even worse. It would stop members from employing someone from outside the party if they wanted to.

    I know of a member whose faction wasn’t happy with her because she chose to employ someone from another faction.

  6. GG and ltep

    If it’s all fine, why are Ministers NOT allowed to employ family members? Because it is nepotism. Why is there one standard for Ministers and another for MPs?

  7. Frank
    [Using Dio’s & JV’s logic they want Labor politicians to employ members of the Liberal Party and vice versa.]
    Seems like you’re a little deficient in your understanding of logic as well as ethics, Frank.

  9. Frank

    That’s a straw man argument. A Liberal Party staffer would not do as good a job as a Labor staffer in a Labor Party office.

  11. Diog
    actually, if you read the rule properly, they can employ family members.
    It’s just that they have to ask the PM if it’s OK.

  12. [Why is there one standard for Ministers and another for MPs?]

    I’ve already discussed this. The PM cannot direct the members of other parties to employ certain types of people. They are entitled to employ whoever they choose and would rightly ignore the direction.

    Do I personally think Ministers should be able to employ family members if they chose to? Yes, if they think the family member is qualified for the position. Appointments to any high level position would be subject to the usual scrutiny.

    You seem to be supposing members are employing family members knowing they are unqualified for the job. I doubt this.

  13. [That’s a straw man argument. A Liberal Party staffer would not do as good a job as a Labor staffer in a Labor Party office.]

    Undeniably true. But your assertion that appointments should be ‘merit based’ mean that members should consider everyone regardless of party affiliation. Or is it fine for them to limit the ‘quality pool’ to members of their faction, party, union, fraction etc. etc. etc.

  15. zoomster
    [actually, if you read the rule properly, they can employ family members.
    It’s just that they have to ask the PM if it’s OK.]
    No, it’s banned in their own offices, but subject to PM approval when the employment is to be in ANOTHER minister’s office.

  16. If someone from a different party was the best qualified they’d have to be a bloomin’ fast typer and some sort of prodigy of everything officeworkish!

    I have listened to the arguments of both sides carefully and yet for now am still sitting on the fence. It seems to me that political staffers are in a sort or public service-private employee limbo. On the one hand they are member of the public service union and paid for by the taxpayer but on the other hand they are by definition partisan.

  17. Any news on the quarterly Newspoll state breakdowns? I bet the Qld figures wont be as nice to the opposition as the bogus poll the OO trumpeted yesterday

  18. ltep

    It should be based on their ability to meet the job and person specifications. Those would be written such that sharing the MPs goals and understanding of policy would mean only someone like-minded and able to be a “team-player” would be the best fit. A “fellow traveller” in whatever faction would fit better than someone who was not.

  20. Ans as you know, when you’ve just had an election, it’s hard to get your figures up again for a while. (And the older a government gets, the longer it takes.)

  22. [It should be based on their ability to meet the job and person specifications. Those would be written such that sharing the MPs goals and understanding of policy would mean only someone like-minded and able to be a “team-player” would be the best fit. A “fellow traveller” in whatever faction would fit better than someone who was not.]

    Who would select the criteria and assess which candidates best met the criteria?

  25. jv, sorry, you’re right – I’ve been speed reading again!!

    I contemplated once employing my spouse (if I was elected, which I wasn’t), because of the absolute trust factor. Spouse said under no circumstances.

    I was disappointed at the time, but understand better now the ethical considerations.

    However, you’d have to have some flexibility. We ended up employing non ALP members, simply because we couldn’t get the staff. And they were nuff nuffs.

    If we’d had a half decent family member to employ, the electorate would have been better served.

    As I said, the pay is low, conditions poor, and the skills required can be picked up by a 15 year old in 3 days.

    Being left with only your spouse willing to work for you is a very feasible scenario.

    (Ministers have extra resources, both in their electorate offices and in the Ministry. They may not be as desperate for staff.

    Of course, we could double electorate officers salaries. That might help).

  26. Itep
    [Do I personally think Ministers should be able to employ family members if they chose to? Yes,]
    Why then do you think the code of ethics precludes it?

    The fact that the PM can’t control members of other parties doesn’t alter the ethical outrage of using public funds to benefit a family member or friend. It isn’t on. There should be legislation or regulation covering it. It may even be technically illegal in NSW under the anti-corruption legislation, but I’d have to check.

  27. Tell me again blugers why WA voted agains day light savings Was it about the chickens laying eggs and not being able to adjust o the time, or the farmers not being able to work out the clocks?

  28. Why is it corrupt to employ a family member, and not a friend, an ex-girlfriend, or a member of your union, Masonic lodge, sporting club or church choir?

  29. Jaundiced View

    We had ‘ethics training’ where I work (Dept of Mines and Petroleum in WA) it was stressed that being ethical required more than simply doing things that were ethical it also involved making sure you avoided as much as possible doing anything that could be PERCEIVED as unethical. That this is perceived as unethical is enough to make it… well… unwise to say the least.
    Uh oh, they also said that using the internet at work, for non-core duties… or at least perceived non-core duties was also bad… I think I am unethical 🙁

    Vera
    could you have a worse time? Shopping is bad enough, but doing it with Malcolm??? Blergh.

  30. Centaur009
    I voted no because it’s too darn hot in the afternoon. Why make the heat linger for an extra hour? I cycle home at around 5pm during summer with daylight saving (4pm really) this is almost the hottest time of the day. No thanks!
    Besides it fades my curtains too.

  31. I don’t know…

    “Malcolm, could I have that ducky looking new Ferrari?”

    “Of course, darling – take it out of petty cash….”

  32. ltep

    The MP would choose the criteria (although it would be easy to have a generic one). The MP, a staffer and a HR person from the relevant Party could be the committee. I’m not completely unreasonable.

  33. Astrobleme, It’s be bad doing anything with Malcolm. I wonder if he was telling the shoppers to stop spending that wasteful $900 Rudd gave them 😉

  34. [Tell me again blugers why WA voted agains day light savings Was it about the chickens laying eggs and not being able to adjust o the time, or the farmers not being able to work out the clocks?]

    I’m going to throttle the next person who says something like this, if only I can lay my hands on them.

  35. Vera

    Maybe that’s why the management shoo-ed him away… Maybe he was aiming to sabotage the stimulus??? Maybe it was shoppus-interruptus?

  37. zoomster
    Thanks. Yes, I can’t see any problem with party members being employed – the nature of the work really demands it. A bit of a shame to have to employ someone from outside. However, I think sometimes enthusiastic party members are employed for that reason itself, as some sort of reward, rather than their electorate office skills. Still, that’s a matter for the member (as long is it isn’t family or friend!)

  40. I suspect it was the water issue that swung the referendum. Obviously if you have an extra hour of daylight, particularly in the WA summer, there will be more water evaporation and so less water in the rivers and reservoirs, making the state’s water problems worse. No doubt many people thought this a foolish risk in the current climate. What do you think, William?

  41. Perhaps a more considered answer is due. We get half an hour more sunlight naturally than Sydney and Melbourne due to our position within the time zone; the sun sets over the ocean rather than mountain ranges and other landward obstacles, so its intensity is greater for longer; and it’s not a particularly pleasant time of day in Perth in any case due to our howling afternoon sea breezes (the so-called “Fremantle doctor”, a term I’ve never hard used by anyone who lives here). I suspect a lot of waverers were also persuaded to vote no by the arrogant and immature attitude of many of its champions, with their endless stream of stupid jokes about faded curtains and confused chickens.

  42. Psephos, there have been environmental explanations as well, but they tended to involve power consumption rather than water use. Indeed, Labor MP and no campaigner Andrew Waddell was mocked on Insiders for saying so, so I was pleased to learn that the modern era of daylight saving began when Tasmania introduced it in the 1960s to reduce electricity consumption, and thereby water use, during a drought.

  43. Astrobleme at 1529
    Yes, the perception is an integral part of the ethical consideration, especially with public office and public funds involved.

    Psephos
    [Why is it corrupt to employ a family member, and not a friend, an ex-girlfriend, or a member of your union, Masonic lodge, sporting club or church choir?]

    There’s no distinction in theory – just the question as to whether there is a conflict of interest. With family members the conflict is self-evident, and then there is a sliding scale down through friends, acquaintances, and the sorts of more tenuous relationships you mention. It depends on the circumstances with the more apparently distant relationships. With public officials the perception of conflict of interest is part of the ethical consideration, as Austrobleme points out.

    The ethical guidelines for ministers should go further in my view and use the umbrella term ‘conflict of interest’ for relationships outside family as well. This would assist in ruling out jobs for the boys.

  45. To take the immortal words of chopper Reed ” Harden the (SNIP: See article 2 of comment moderation guidelines – The Management) up” We didn’t get a referendum here. Put the country on the same time adjustment instead of they have they haven’t.

  47. Psephos
    It’s just that late summer afternoons in Perth are not that pleasant… Hot. A lot of people look forward to the cooler (very slightly cooler mind you) period after dusk. Daylight saving means the day seems hotter for longer in Perth.

    That and we’re all anti-progress and suspicious of anything ‘eastern-staters’ do. 🙂

  49. [With public officials the perception of conflict of interest is part of the ethical consideration]

    Backbench MP staffers are not public officials.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 31 of 32
1 … 30 31 32