Monday night Newspoll

I won’t be available to take part in this evening’s fortnightly Newspoll festivities (nor this afternoon’s Essential Research, which Possum tends to be timelier with in any case), but here’s a thread on which you can keep each other informed of the news as it breaks, as well as doing the other things you usually do.

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.

481 thoughts on “Monday night Newspoll”

Comments Page 9 of 10
1 … 8 9 10

  1. No 397

    Finns, Jackson was acquitted of child molestation charges, so please give it a rest.

  2. It hurts me about as much as the thought of a bulldozer cutting down a tree with you chained to it….i.e., not a lot.

    Back to the point, Rudd despite the budget continues to dominate, and the Liberals have no alternative PM waiting. 🙂

  3. Boerwar
    No, the whole thing doesn’t depend on clean coal. But if capture and storage is used, then the impact on coal production is less painful in the short term, that’s all. There are many sectors involved in the reduction process. The world will be using more coal than today by 2050 WITH emission stabilisation at 450 550ppm

    Oz @ 383 – see #381 for correction. Good to see you’re reading closely 🙂

  4. AN Air France 330 Airbus that has disappeared en route from Rio de Janeiro to Paris sent an automatic signal indicating electrical problems while going through an area of strong turbulence.

    Aviation experts say it was clear the plane carrying 216 passengers and 12 crew was not in the air any longer, due to the amount of fuel it would have been carrying.

    Air France said flight AF447 “crossed through a thunderous zone with strong turbulence” at 0200 GMT (1200 AEST).

    “An automatic message was received at 0214 GMT (1214 AEST) signalling electrical circuit malfunction,” Air France said.

    The passengers included one infant, seven children, 82 women and 126 men.

    http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25572607-5005962,00.html

  5. No 398

    And Australia can be influential too considering our per-capita emissions are so high, and that our economy is so reliant on commodities.

    The environment only cares about the volume of emissions, not per-capita emissions.

    Why do you under rate Australia so much?

    I am a pragmatist. If we all agree that emissions need to be reduced, then the only people who are truly going to drive the negotiations are the big emitters, it is as simple as that.

    If our coal industry is going to suffer job losses, then it better do so on the back of a global agreement in which all major coal producers signal a transition to alternative energy sources.

    I am simply not of the belief that we should suffer unless the world is on the same page as us.

  7. There hasn’t been a lot of effort put into telling the public about climate change by the government. It’s importance has hardly been emphasised.

    What absolute tosh. For an intelligent man you say some very silly things sometimes.

    If I attached a much higher level of importance to climate change, that would explain why I think it’s importance has been under-emphasised. And if was as important as I think, I wouldn’t be the silly one.

  8. The environment only cares about the volume of emissions, not per-capita emissions.

    The environment doesn’t care about anything, it isn’t a thinking entity.

    I am a pragmatist.

    No your not, you are talking Australia down as a nation, just the way your party’s leader talks the Australian economy down.

    If we all agree that emissions need to be reduced, then the only people who are truly going to drive the negotiations are the big emitters, it is as simple as that.

    You are completely ignoring the dynamic between developed and developing countries. China and India want to see countries like the U.S., Canada, Australia, and the E.U. make big cuts before they make big cuts. While I don’t think this is fair, if that is what it takes to get them on board, then so be it. GDP per capita in Australia is about US$35,000 compared with US$400 in China, so the average Australian can afford it more than the average Chinese.

    If our coal industry is going to suffer job losses, then it better do so on the back of a global agreement in which all major coal producers signal a transition to alternative energy sources.

    Most of the coal Australia mines is exported, and isn’t even burnt here. So that counts as emissions in OTHER countries! The emissions coal miners pay for are those created during extraction of coal.

  10. Frank C @ 391

    That may be so, but the PERCEPTION of Job Losses wwhich the opposition will use to campaign against the Government and the ETS is what will be in people’s minds.

    If that’s a reason for doing nothing, then the concept of political leadership is dead, and we may as well devolve to just making policy based on current polling on everything, regardless of what is needed.

    If the government would lead on the science and economics of it all a great deal more, then the opposition couldn’t succeed with such pathetic scare campaigns. You always win such debates in the end if what you say is supported by the facts – in this case scientific fact.

  11. Horrible news about the Air France plane – sends shivers down your spine thinking about it.

    Very sad. Will dominate the news (at tad more interesting and important than a no change newspoll…)

  12. If that’s a reason for doing nothing, then the concept of political leadership is dead, and we may as well devolve to just making policy based on current polling on everything, regardless of what is needed.

    If the government would lead on the science and economics of it all a great deal more, then the opposition couldn’t succeed with such pathetic scare campaigns. You always win such debates in the end if what you say is supported by the facts – in this case scientific fact.

    It’s called political REALITY, and why Govts of both shades pander to the lowest common denominator – it is the Kath & Kims that decide Elections, NOT the Well educated.

  13. The environment doesn’t care about anything, it isn’t a thinking entity.

    Figure of speech you moron.

    No your not, you are talking Australia down as a nation, just the way your party’s leader talks the Australian economy down.

    No, I’m not talking Australia down. I’m simply reflecting the simple fact of the matter: Australia’s total emissions are zilch and the real movers and shakers in the world are in the US, Europe and increasingly, China.

    China and India want to see countries like the U.S., Canada, Australia, and the E.U. make big cuts before they make big cuts.

    Rudd’s already committed to 25% but that is dependent on a global agreement. That is more than enough when China is the biggest emitter. It really doesn’t matter what the average Australian can and can’t afford because it isn’t Australia that is going to have to make the tough decision to clean up one of the dirtiest economies in the world: China.

    Most of the coal Australia mines is exported, and isn’t even burnt here. So that counts as emissions in OTHER countries!

    Australia is not responsible for the emissions in other countries.

  14. It’s called political REALITY, and why Govts of both shades pander to the lowest common denominator – it is the Kath & Kims that decide Elections, NOT the Well educated.

    One of the greatest statistics from the U.S. election was that people with post-graduate university degrees supported Obama 65/35

  15. Figure of speech you moron.

    You’re ignoring political reality moron. Other countries like India point to Australia’s PER CAPITA emissions, so you can’t just say “well that’s not an issue” when other countries we are negotiating with say it is!

  16. One of the greatest statistics from the U.S. election was that people with post-graduate university degrees supported Obama 65/35

    But in America Voting is optional, here it is Compulsory. Given the choice, the Kath & Kims would rather spend big at Kmart than rock up at a polling booth.

  17. No 409

    JV the problem is that the science and economics have only ever been propagated in a superficial fashion.

    The PM and the Greens might go on about “Green Jobs” but neither can actually point out with any sufficient detail, where those green jobs would arise, how many and whether the scores of former coal workers would actually be able to get jobs in these new green industries. It’s completely nebulous and that is why the Opposition is not losing any votes by taking its current position.

    And to be honest, no-one actually cares about Australia being some symbolic prophet of hope and awe at Copenhagen. They care about their jobs, families and mortgages.

  19. No 414

    Other countries like India point to Australia’s PER CAPITA emissions, so you can’t just say “well that’s not an issue” when other countries we are negotiating with say it is!

    Well clearly their position in the negotiation is weak considering the actual science revolves around total volumes of emissions, not per-capital emissions. India and China will be more concerned with the US and Europe, rather than Australia.

  21. And to be honest, no-one actually cares about Australia being some symbolic prophet of hope and awe at Copenhagen. They care about their jobs, families and mortgages.

    If these are the only things people cared about, they would’ve re-elected John Howard Prime Minister.

    But they didn’t, because people care about OTHER things as well as their jobs and their families. Such as a clean and sustainable environment for their children and grand children.

    As usual G.P., your superficiality gets the better of you.

  22. No 417

    Why Obama thinks it’s actually worth saving that stupidly ignorant company called GM is beyond me. Honestly, it’s like throwing money into a furnace.

  23. No 420

    But they didn’t, because people care about OTHER things as well as their jobs and their families. Such as a clean and sustainable environment for their children and grand children.

    ShowsOn, it was workchoices that killed the coalition at the last election, not climate change.

  24. Well clearly their position in the negotiation is weak considering the actual science revolves around total volumes of emissions, not per-capital emissions.

    You are ignoring political reality again.

    India and China will be more concerned with the US and Europe, rather than Australia.

    You are ignoring political reality again.

    INDIA says it will not accept anything less than the right to lift its greenhouse gas emissions per head to Australian levels.

    Addressing a minerals conference in Canberra, India’s high commissioner, Sujatha Singh, spoke bluntly.

    “You cannot have an agreement whereby countries that reach a certain standard of living, a certain level of development, turn around and tell the rest of the world that what we have we get to keep; what we have, you can’t even aspire to,” she said.

    “That would be what a restriction on India’s emissions would amount to.

    http://www.theage.com.au/environment/why-should-we-suffer-asks-india-20090526-bm43.html

    I couldn’t care less if you don’t think India’s argument is a strong or weak one. The point is that is the position THEY are taking which a developed country like Australia MUST take into account!

  25. Frank – It’s called political REALITY, and why Govts of both shades pander to the lowest common denominator – it is the Kath & Kims that decide Elections, NOT the Well educated.

    The concept of political leadership is one where, among other things, the ‘well educated’ in government make policy on behalf of the uninformed and informed voter alike that is for the common good. If something difficult needs to be explained, and enthusiasm engendered in parliament, or at large, for a good policy, then that is part of the politicians’ job.

    Real political leaders don’t look at the polling on every issue and simply say, “Well, that’s what they want, so that’s what we’ll do.’ That is the politics of the living dead.

  26. ShowsOn, it was workchoices that killed the coalition at the last election, not climate change.

    Climate change was important, because Howard looked completely old fashioned by refusing to ratify Kyoto.

  27. GP, I’m starting to get very very frightened 🙂 I agree with you about workchoices at the last election and about people worrying more about their jobs, mortgage and families

  28. No 425

    Kyoto is signed, and the world hasn’t changed. Sure, it proves Howard’s opposition to it was semi-futile, but it also proves what a pointless agreement Kyoto was.

  29. No 424

    Yes, but real political leaders are not going to cause tens of thousands of people to lose their jobs in as a result of a global agreement unless there is a commensurate commitment from other participating countries.

  30. Sure, it proves Howard’s opposition to it was semi-futile, but it also proves what a pointless agreement Kyoto was.

    I guess the US is right and every other country is wrong then…

  31. Kyoto is signed, and the world hasn’t changed. Sure, it proves Howard’s opposition to it was semi-futile, but it also proves what a pointless agreement Kyoto was.

    It wasn’t a pointless agreement, it was the very START of reducing emissions! Copenhagen is the new agreement that sets out the next decade.

    That’s how backward Howard was, he couldn’t even START dealing with climate change.

  32. GP, I’m starting to get very very frightened 🙂 I agree with you about workchoices at the last election and about people worrying more about their jobs, mortgage and families

    Same here, which is why Rudd’s ETS is designed to placate those fears – but of course the MorallImpotent aka The Greens would rather the economy go down the craphole at any cost.

  33. No 423

    It will be taken into account and swiftly ignored. India’s position is environmentally barbarous in the context of science which indicates global emissions must be reduced significantly if apocalyptic climate change is to be avoided.

  34. GP – My humble guess would be that the GM bailout probably has something to do with keeping GM’s 250,000 employees, employed.

  35. No 430

    ShowsOn, you of all people should know what an abject failure Kyoto was in achieving a reduction of emissions.

  38. No 429

    Bob, please point to a single achievement of Kyoto. It was bull and bluster and achieved absolutely nothing. Australia met its target to increase emissions for goodness sake. Canada failed miserably. China’s emissions have exploded, as have India’s. There’s only one word for Kyoto: pointless.

  39. It will be taken into account and swiftly ignored. India’s position is environmentally barbarous in the context of science which indicates global emissions must be reduced significantly if apocalyptic climate change is to be avoided.

    Oh OK, so let’s all do nothing then. You’re position defies logic.

    ShowsOn, you of all people should know what an abject failure Kyoto was in achieving a reduction of emissions.

    Oh OK, so why aren’t you proposing Australia cuts its emissions by say 50% to convince other countries how serious the situation is?

  41. So does anyone else have a song they liked at the time of Howard’s defeat which expressed how they felt, and has become their “Howard’s defeat” song? Or am I just strange…

    For me, it’s Eric Prydz – Pjanoo.

  42. Yes, but real political leaders are not going to cause tens of thousands of people to lose their jobs in as a result of a global agreement unless there is a commensurate commitment from other participating countries.

    Tens of thousands? Is there a link to this prediction? Didn’t notice anything like that in the Stern update or the Treasury modelling. All I noticed was continued growth under all scenarios for action. Some changes in the type of power generation and other industries, but more jobs overall.

    Otherwise, of course a world-wide agreement is essential. Countries are going to Copenhagen armed with their various approaches to what must happen to achieve atmospheric stability, and are going to attempt to map out a way forward. Australia needs to go to that meeting armed with its commitment to reduce emissions and take as strong a role as it can in getting a course that results in the necessary reductions up to 2050.

  43. Bob, please point to a single achievement of Kyoto. It was bull and bluster and achieved absolutely nothing.

    It was a START! What are you saying? Should we have been cutting emissions by 50% 10 years ago?

    China’s emissions have exploded, as have India’s. There’s only one word for Kyoto: pointless.

    Of course, because China and India are developing. Are you saying that millions of Chinese should live in poverty just so Australians can keep polluting?

  44. Oh OK, so let’s all do nothing then. You’re position defies logic.

    Waiting six months for a global agreement does not mean doing nothing. If the US and Europe together commit to significant reductions, that is going to be much more influential than Australia committing to an economy-killing 50%.

  45. Waiting six months for a global agreement does not mean doing nothing.

    There is no reason to wait for anything. The CPRS is DESIGNED to be adjusted EVER YEAR so that the cap is adjusted so that we reach our internationally agreed targets.

    Likewise, the legislation enables the Government (via the relevant minister) to commit Australia to new targets as it forms new international agreements.

    In sum, there is absolutely no reason for Turnbull to continue opposing the legislation. He just needs more time to get is back bench on board.

  46. No 440

    No, I’m saying that the Chinese and Indians should be actively and seriously investing at whatever cost in the technology that will keep emissions low. Solar everywhere, nuclear power everywhere. They have over 2 billion people between them, which means they need to actually do something concrete, rather than saying the entire burden rests with the Western World.

  47. GP -Australia committing to an economy-killing 50%

    That is simply not so. There is nothing in the scenarios for stabilization that are going to stop continued economic growth. Here are the links – you clearly need to read up on this topic.

    Stern update lecture:
    http://www.atypon-link.com/AEAP/doi/pdf/10.1257/aer.98.2.1?cookieSet=1

    Treasury modelling Chapter 6 Mitigation Scenarios – Australian Results:
    http://www.treasury.gov.au/lowpollutionfuture/report/html/06_Chapter6.asp

  48. No 439

    JV, the coal industry has expressed that tens of thousands of its workers will lose their jobs over time. Now you may think this is scare tactics but whatever it is, that is a significant amount of jobs.

    Furthermore, where will these net job increases come from, according to the Treasury modelling/Stern review? It is almost as if it they are automatically presumed rather than any detailed analysis considering what opportunities there are and what industries currently exist to support a transition from coal to renewables and/or nuclear.

  49. No, I’m saying that the Chinese and Indians should be actively and seriously investing at whatever cost in the technology that will keep emissions low

    You aren’t proposing that Australia do that, so why are you saying India and China should do that? They need to balance their economies too.

    Why is Government spending bad in Australia, but OK in China and India?

    They have over 2 billion people between them, which means they need to actually do something concrete, rather than saying the entire burden rests with the Western World.

    They have NEVER said “the entire burden rests on the Western world”. Stop making stuff up.

  50. JV, the coal industry has expressed that tens of thousands of its workers will lose their jobs over time.

    And yet the CFMEU wants Turnbull to stop opposing the bill!

Comments Page 9 of 10
1 … 8 9 10

Comments are closed.