Morgan: 57-43

Roy Morgan has come through with the first poll of this election year, and it’s a peculiar beast combining face-to-face results from last weekend and the distant weekend before Christmas (December 19/20). Labor’s primary vote is down 3.5 per cent to 45.5 per cent and the Coalition’s is up 1.5 per cent to 37 per cent, with the Greens up two to 10 per cent. On two-party preferred, Labor’s lead is down from 59-41 to 57-43.

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.

1,640 comments on “Morgan: 57-43”

Comments Page 30 of 33
1 … 29 30 31 … 33

  1. “and as diogens , …..he proudly boasts Doctors do not have wives ”

    Diogenes “ don’t really recall saying that somehow.
    And most people who become doctors NOW are female ”

    and do not hav wives
    th gays will be disappointd doctors support Christianity

  2. Their ABC are wRONg 🙂 The Premier in WA in 2000 was one Richard Fairfax Court 🙂

    [Wheatbelt farmers are worried that if government plans to close down part of the state’s grain freight rail line go ahead, their farms will become unviable.

    There has been speculation about the future of the grain freight network since it was privatised by the Labor government in 2000.]

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/14/2792709.htm

  3. Abbott is lost for words, Hurty Tooth is whinging, the fact is that the Rudd/Swan stimulus has been sensationally successful. Unemployment right now is much lower than what anybody had forecast.

    The issue of economic management all belongs to Rudd for the election. What is there left for the Liberals to fight on? The environment, what a joke!

    Fair dinkum, the only way Rudd could lose the next election is if he was caught having a threesome with Roseann and Gusface 😆
    😆

  4. Ron

    I agree with you about the MDB but if you look at your list, a lot of those problems apply equally to the Feds taking over Health (which Abbott has also said he’d do, and Rudd is getting close to saying)

    [well apart from th constituton , states refusing , chalenging , lack of accountablty of a Fed burocracy , useless expense of Canberra run public servants , lack of expertise unlike MRB authority , th States where th rivers do run being actualy party to th soluton via MRB , no caping unlike MRB authority , no costing of proposel ,]

  5. From the mouth of the great man himself (insert $2 emoticon here):

    [At, say, an average cost of up to $50,000 a year per place, a 15,000 strong conservation corps would be expensive – although not on the scale of the Rudd Government’s unfunded stimulus measures.]

    Well, for a start, you might PAY them $50 000 (on average, taking into account the supervisors would get more than this, the grunts less) but their actual costs would be far higher.

    He visualises a permanent standing force, moving around the country as needed, so you would have to (besides the usual ‘on costs’, which I think are 10% plus on top of the wage you pay them) factor in accomodation, transport and food costs.

  7. #1454

    I would have thought the states would only be too glad to get rid of health.

    Give em more time to concentrate on what they do best – making discretionary planning decisions (nudge nudge, wink wink).

  9. Fyi – The labour force underutilisation rate is 13.6% comprising an unemployment rate of 5.8% and an underemployment rate of 7.8%. The proportion of part-time workers who preferred to work more hours is 27.1%. Discouraged job seekers, for example those who are involuntarily retired and are too young to access super but prefer to live off savings rather than applying for unemployment benefits, do not appear in these stats.

    http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/6105.0Main%20Features3Jan%202010?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=6105.0&issue=Jan%202010&num=&view=

    Source: 6105.0 – Australian Labour Market Statistics, Jan 2010

  10. The costings for the Green Army will be interesting. Labor hire oncosts alone are probably closer to 30%-40% than 10%. I doubt that they will be getting $50,000 a pop. It would be the dole plus a little bit extra. Then, as noted above, there will be equipment costs, chemical costs, fencing costs, etc, etc.

    The basic problem with the Green Army idea is not the cost. It is that even 15,000 people cannot put Humpty Dumpty together again. Humpty Dumpty is being broken again and again by systemic problems that Abbott does not wish to confront:

    1. Increasing pressures due to increasing population.
    2. Increasing pressures due to CC.
    3. Cost structures that basically force farmers to destroy the environment in order to make a quid.
    4. Several squillion paddock trees that are senescing and not being replaced because of grazing pressure. The systemic issue: private property rights.
    5. Desertification because of overgrazing in the rangelands.
    etc etc.
    6. Overallocation of inland waters.

    The speech was an exercise in conflating ‘enviromental repair’ in general with climate change.

    I doubt that the general run of Green voters will fall for Abbott’s thimble trick.

  11. A full takeover of the MDBC inland water by the Feds is long overdue.

    However, if the Coalition is willing to prop up a naval ship building program in a silly place like Adelaide for electoral reasons, and put Defence headquarters out in a paddock in the seat of Eden Monaro for the same reasons, it would not doubt skunk the water allocation system for the same reasons.

  12. One of the things it might get the courage to do is to stop what is happening now, which is an extremely inefficient exit strategy for farmers. What is happening is that irrigation farmers are leaving voluntarily. This means a few from this channel, a few from that channel, a few from this district and a few from that district. This shot hole approach means that there is not an efficient approach to closing channels or districts.

  14. HSO
    Hi. Nice to see you back on the boards. I am very curious to see how effective they are at picking low hanging fruit to get 5%. I anticipate that it should be reasonably good in some ways but (a) inefficient becasue the market isn’t getting a look in and (b) unscaleable. So, if we have to move beyond 5%, which we do, they will be in trouble. Their real problem will be that ‘climate is crap’ is going to get a fair old run in the next election.

  16. As a principal i do not favor Fed takeover of hospitals for all th normal reasons includ too far away from coal face even eg about beds

    Unfortunate some States ar not uptodate with agreed national reform benchmarks , and still too much presures on emergensy depts , waiting lists long and sometimes lack of accountability or bean counters instead of doctors calling prioritys blah blah

    othr thingy is preventon is better than cure , then no doctors need ! well only when it is actualy needed , so maybe more research and then actons in how to decrease numbers who go to hospital wwhen pre alternitives may make it unnecesarys

    politcaly think Kevin Rudd will go to next electon with this opton in kitty bag if reform progress is not quicker

    But for Abbott to say he will , without a reform agenda first , or anything but a one liner , again for those (lots) unhappy with hospital outcumes then his one liner we Feds will take over & fix , a la his MRB one liner , feel good 10 second grab , no substanse again

    you see th pattern don’t we , Abbott has a one liner for every problam , we Feds will takere over and fix At that rate 100 one liners (all in a 1 minute speach) and then ALL th countrys problams hav been fixed by Abbott , th more Abbott talks th more I think thinking tone is a thinking mans stink

  18. Ron
    No matter how much prevention there is, people have to die of something, some time and it is the last year of our existence that backloads medical costs.

  19. Ahh, the true colours of the WA Libs are being revealed re privatisation. BTW, that is my local public hospital.

    [The West Australian Government is considering using a public private partnership to build and operate the new $360 million Midland Health Campus.

    The new hospital will have more than 300 beds and be built on the site of the former Midland railyards.

    It will replace the aging Swan District Hospital.

    The Commonwealth has allocated $180 million to it, with the remaining half to come from the state.

    The WA Government is now also considering going into partnership with the private sector, which would build and operate the hospital.

    The Health Minister Kim Hames says the model would be based on the Joondalup Health Campus and would have significant benefits.

    Tthere are long term savings to be made because there are predictable costs,” he said.

    “They are paid according to occasions of service.”

    Dr Hames says the proposal is being discussed with the Commonwealth before any decision is made.]

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/14/2792761.htm?site=news

  21. Nice to have a chance to talk with some compadres, Boerwar. My home computer has been hauled off for diagnostics as it stopped some time ago and we’ve had to find someone willing to have a go at repairing it. Boring, I know, but haven’t been able to say much as Himself Indoors has been using his computer to see if he could rescue mine. Just recently have been able to use HI computer, as he retreats from computer dysfunctional syndrome, poor darling.
    Did you have a look at what has been posted on Possum’s most recent blog and the postings?
    I’ve got to say Zoomster is an absolutely sterling, perhaps rolled gold, real politician. Zoomster, perhaps you’ve got to move to where we can vote for you.

  25. The Finnigans
    Posted Thursday, January 14, 2010 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

    Gus “Centre centre,wherefore art thou?”

    Amigo finns “Gus, with Juliet, Juliet, Juliet.”

    you did invite to th threesome , imagine couldn’t find , so settled for Vanstone

  26. Ron, got to go to bed now, but would like to continue this conversation later. It would be quite possible for the Fed level of government to fund acute health care but give the $ to Boards to administer. This is how it operates in Victoria currently. Sort of. There’s been lots of problems as people have had to learn how to do it properly. And it’s still not really sorted, as much because of different funding sources and when those monies become available to the organisation. Also been a lot of very bad practice along the way. Nightmare territory I can tell you.
    So possible, but with a lot of caveats to do it.
    Night all.

  27. Thanks, HSO.

    Years ago some of the party bigwigs visited me here in my humble abode, looked out at the view for a while, and said word to this effect, “Well, we know why it’s no use offering you a safe seat. What surprises us is that you come to Melbourne at all.”

  28. ruawake #1419

    “It’s high time that the green movement rethought its habitual preference for Labor because actual environmental improvements are more likely to come from conservative governments (that get things done) than from Labor ones (that have a tendency to lock land up without maintaining it).”

    That’s Abbott’s pitch for Green preferences? Dill.

    As the next logical step after Abbott’s Overturn the Qld Government’s “Wild Rivers” legislation would be a promise that, if he’s elected PM, he’ll overturn the Hawke’s Federal “Gordon-below-Franklin Wild Rivers” legislation (ie World heritage listing); I’m waiting with bated breath for Bob Brown to applaud that initiative by urging all green voters to preference the Libs ahead of the ALP! 🙄 😆

    One look at Mr People Skills tonight (I hit “mute” after the first excruciatingly tortured minute), and I could almost hear my mother (RIP) saying, “He does look constipated. He should take something for that!”

  30. Boerwar
    Posted Thursday, January 14, 2010 at 10:42 pm | Permalink

    “Ron No matter how much prevention there is, people have to die of something”

    something , getting run over by a semi trailor would do it

    boerwar saw a guy from maybe AMA , or some doctors group about 12 months ago on TV arguing for more medical based preventon & better health based efforts and thought he made a good case

    wouldn’t help too much with th semi trailor but

  31. would some one explain to me what abbott is talking about re his green army
    i seem to remember in the first weeks he said something about his abbott army
    What is he talking about.?

  33. my say

    Tone is back in the 1930’s and jack lang rules the country.

    Think De Groot and add a dash of One Nation and mix in the National Front/action.

    Tone is Bonkers in other words!

  34. my say

    tony’s major announcement in his speech tonight was that he would create a Green Army of 15,000 people who would move around the country fixing environmental problems (pulling weeds, mostly, it seems).

  36. so this Tone’s 15,000 strong green army complete with buckets , ar going to carry buckets of water all th way down to th Murray river to fill it up

  38. I disagree with most on this post tonight.

    I liked Tonys speech tonight. For several reasons-
    1. I see see no reasons why conservatives cant be conservationists
    2. The issues he raised- land degradation, invasive species, biodiversity loss have been off the federal agenda for a decade now
    3. Government funding of these issues have been rapidly declining in real terms over the last decade likewise and alomst all of this funding is now being wasted through inefficient state agencies rather than ngo’s, community groups and landholders.

    It does highlight a Rudd inconsistency, just because you believe in climate change, doesn’t mean you then get to ignore the environment proper. Garretts Caring for our Country is effectively the merging of the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water and the Natural Heritage Trust (at the same budget of just the NHT). It has entrenched funding pathways through bureacratic state agencies. And yet has led to the mass contraction of practical NGO’s. Great people have been lost from the natural resource managment industry forever in the last few years at the hand of garrett and rudd.

    What Abbott is promising is essentially a doubling of the national NRM budget.

    However Tonys biggest mistake is to confuse Climate Change for a environment issue. When reality it is much more social and economic issue.

  39. blue_green
    Good points.
    [However Tonys biggest mistake is to confuse Climate Change for a environment issue. When reality it is much more social and economic issue.]
    Yes.The things he listed are all crucial and must be addressed forthwith, but they don’t replace a global emissions reduction scheme; they are also necessary. Typical of a politician to fall into the trap of the false dilemma.

  40. no blue-green

    no j/v

    Tones biggest mistake is to BELIEVE voters will think his aleged interst in environmnt
    means he (a CC denier on th public record) both believes in CC and CC acton , th peoples suport and th votes ar in CC which is anglin for (dismaly)

  41. JV,

    If you take out the climate change bits I think it is a good conservative conservationist speech. If it was put, perhaps by Malcolm, post supporting an ETS it would have become a point of difference for an election campaign and given the coalition some good imagery of doing stuff with landcare groups etc.

    However it was said in the context of changing the level of protection of Cape York, rhetoric of reducing restrictions on land clearing (man up the pole etc), whale flip-flop and climate change is crap.

    In marketing it is not just the product but the packaging. Pepsi in a coke can always scores better in taste tests etc. So the product/policy per se is a good one, but the packaging leaves a lot to be desired.

  42. r/Ron
    [Tones biggest mistake is to BELIEVE voters will think his aleged interst in environmnt]

    That’s also true – but the fact that he purports to say the local ‘direct action’ is an alternative to a global emissions reduction scheme is all part of the Minchinists’ denialist agenda. The whole mess is all part of the one ‘bigar’ mistake. 🙂

  43. “If you take OUT the climate change bits I think it is a good conservative conservationist speech.”

    and what othr than CC is th bigest threat to th environment ?
    you can not ignore CC , and then say I’m intersted in th envionmnt ,
    thats Tone being ilogical & hypocriticol

  44. The funny thing about many of the practical conservationists- bushcare and landcare people is that they tend to be located in coalition seats. Have you ever been to Mosman on weekday morning? Drop into one of the local bushland reserves and you will come across a little old lady with a bottle of roundup and a cordless drill. I know some who pay a gardner to look after their home garden while they spend their free time killing weeds in the bush.

    I think this policy is a reach out to those people- moderate coalition voters who would have been mightily pissed by the takeover. It is not a reach out to Greens or soft labor voters.

    I have to say the NRM movement is mighty pissed that both parties have ignored them for the past decade. Ask any landcare group. These people spend private money and time for what is mainly a public good outcome with very little govt support.

  45. blue-green
    “In marketing it is not just the product but the packaging.”

    if th pakaging is pretty with red roses , but inside its empty , then it still goes to th dusty bin , by voters

  46. I agree Ron. However, we will need to mitigate strongly and take major adaptive measures as well.

    All the adaptive measures for the environment are NRM 101 stuff (just on a grander scale). Its kill weeds and ferals, manage fire, protect vegetation, replant riverbanks, manage grazing.

    I don’t disagree that Tony is a tool but I am hopeful that these issues will reappear on the national agenda.

  47. b_g

    Yes, it could work as an ‘add-on’ to the ETS, but will never work as a stand alone ‘alternative’. The expert derision will be emphatic.

    I suspect the Abbott/Minchin camp know that, but will go down the US path of appealing to the ignorant masses (and encouragng their ignorance) saying that the smart-arse intellectual ‘experts’ are elitists who don’t care about the ordinary battler; don’t have the country’s interests at heart etc. I think they reckon they can win on an anti-intellectual drum beating talk-back redneck denialist campaign. The line might be: “We can do it all here in Aus because we Libs/Nats know the land and can save it without the interference of bloody international scientists, do-nothing meetings, the UN, Copenhagen, Mexico, or anything else un-Australian.”

    That’s their campaign I’d say. True fantasy if they think they’ll succeed. 😆

  48. So the world agrees to a 5% reduction scheme. Fantastic. We will all feel good.

    BUT freakin’ useless.

    And Rudd knows it. And Rudd won’t do anything about it.

  49. I think it is a strategic mistake to start his headland speeches with a enviro one.

    It signals a break from the textor crosby strategy of talking only about your strengths to make them more prominent in the minds of voters. A textor crosby inspired speech would have talked about either 1. some international danger (in a defence context) 2. govt spending leading to inflation 3. govt spending leading increasing interest rates.

    Perhaps Tony should have been doing an ‘early’ latham and found something unexpected to talk about like reading to kids. He is disadvantaged in that he cant talk health and fitness because he personally stymied preventative health. He could have done a ‘we will invest in velodromes and surf life saving clubs’ (oh but the stimulus package did that)

    I am rambling now I need to go to bed.

  50. [Its kill weeds and ferals, manage fire, protect vegetation, replant riverbanks, manage grazing]

    More support for that sort of community based action cannot be derided.

    I only hope the debate doesn’t now devolve into the government saying or implying that because Tony has suggested those activites as an alternative, it is all worthless crap. That would be a worry.

    That’s the trouble with politics in this country (and others) , it reduces every issue to two options in conflict, when they may both be good ideas.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 30 of 33
1 … 29 30 31 … 33