Yesterday’s Queensland marginal seat polling from Roy Morgan turns out to have been a teaser for today’s full suite, which also targets four seats each from New South Wales and Western Australia as well as one each from Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania. With samples of 200 each, the electorate-level results are of little utility, but where results from four seats are available from a particular state we can combine them to get a meaningful picture from a margin-of-error of about 3.5 per cent. The swing of 4.8 per cent to the Liberal National Party in Queensland has not been borne out elsewhere: the four New South Wales seats collectively show a 1.0 per cent swing to Labor, while Western Australia produces an essentially status quo result with a 0.2 per cent swing to the Liberals. The single-seat polling for the other three states is less useful, but for what it’s worth the result from Hindmarsh in South Australia sits well with this morning’s Advertiser poll. Taken in their entirety, the results point to no swing at all from 2007.
| ALP 2PP | |||
| 2007 | POLL | SWING | |
| Macarthur | 50.1 | 38.5 | -11.6 |
| Robertson | 50.1 | 48.5 | -1.6 |
| Eden-Monaro | 52.3 | 59 | 6.7 |
| Macquarie | 50.1 | 60.5 | 10.4 |
| NSW SEATS | 1.0 | ||
| Hasluck | 51 | 50 | -1.0 |
| Brand | 56.1 | 54.5 | -1.6 |
| Perth | 58.1 | 57 | -1.1 |
| Fremantle | 59.15 | 62 | 2.9 |
| WA SEATS | -0.2 | ||
| Flynn | 52.3 | 45 | -7.3 |
| Longman | 51.7 | 43.5 | -8.2 |
| Dawson | 52.4 | 49 | -3.4 |
| Leichhardt | 54.1 | 54 | -0.1 |
| QLD SEATS | -4.8 | ||
| Corangamite (Vic) | 50.85 | 55.5 | 4.7 |
| Hindmarsh (SA) | 55.05 | 56.5 | 1.5 |
| Bass (Tas) | 51 | 62.5 | 11.5 |
| ALL SEATS | 0.1 | ||
Michelle Grattan also notices the bias favouring the xenophobes in Gillard’s opening lines about a community debate on asylum seekers. If there is going to be an open broad debate lead by the government, then I think that’s good, as long as it’s based on the facts. The opening words of the PM are not encouraging. Her use of Howard’s signature expression ‘politically correct’ is an example.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/gillard-gambles-on-asylum-anxiety-20100704-zvtr.html
[Labor insiders say the asylum seeker issue has been costing Labor more votes than the contentious mining tax row Prime Minister Julia Gillard solved last week.]
Got to love the subtle reinvention of history that is now part of Labor’s daily speak.
JGillard solved nothing, in fact she capitulated, in fact she gave away $1.5bn to the mining industry to stop their election damaging advertising. She solved the Labor Party’s problem, not the one that is associated with Australia and the office of PM. It was a corruption of that office in fact as JGillard confirms that was the purpose of the deal in her first press conference. ‘ I will negotiate……you should stop your advertising’
So we should be invoicing the Labor Party for $1.5bn thanks. What’s the address?
No Thomas you should be thanking them for $10.5bn which didn’t exist before the budget. You have counted your eggs welllll before they hatched.
[Psephos has outlived his usefulness – if he ever had any. ]
That’s a silly statement, DarrenL. I’m surprised at how controlled Psephos’s been in light of what he could have told us about the spill and I think, after reading the OO’s article about Kev linked by Boerwar, that Psephos has been very discreet while giving just an insight into how difficult it has been for some of the Labor pollies. When George Mega puts his name to an article I don’t take that lightly.
We’ve always had the benefit of his enormous knowledge of historical events, people, etc. I for one appreciate it.
[JGillard solved nothing, in fact she capitulated, in fact she gave away $1.5bn to the mining industry ]
How can you give away something you don’t have? The government will raise billiions with the new tax – to suggest they have given something away is absurd.
I can only agree with TP and Dio’s comments on the policy shift of Labor to bullying refugees and asymlum seekers. (I won’t call it “getting tough” because it is not “tough” to pick on the weak.)
Another issue that will be as popular as a copy of Aristotle’s Ethics in Bill Shorten’s office; old drivers. I was struck by these words in the lead into an ABC story on dementia and ageing drivers:
[Dementia doesn’t automatically make you unfit to drive. But how can you tell when you need to steer clear of the road?]
http://www.abc.net.au/health/thepulse/stories/2010/07/01/2941229.htm
Wrong!!! Dementia makes you less safe to drive than mid-range drink driving. It is highly dangerous. Just because not EVERY dementia sufferer has an accident driving, doesn’t mean they should be allowed to drive. This story is pushing for change in the direction that is the exact opposite of the trend in jurisdictions who are more serious about road safety and have lower per capita road tolls than us (Sweden, Finland). They have regular aged driver testing.
In this case the organisation Alzheimer’s Australia is pushing to:
[The organisation is looking to improve the ways in which driving abilities of people with dementia are tested, as well as increasing community education. It also wants to ensure there is adequate transport available when people with dementia lose their licence.
But it’s a complex issue, which involves balancing the need for public safety against a possible loss of independence when people stop driving.]
I am not sugegsting all old people shouldn’t drive, but they need to have their capability tested; regularly after about age 75. Around 1 in 4 will be found to be incapable of driving safely. The solution is to have more services to transport them, not pretending that their independence should be balanced against safety. The services can be cheap – taxi vouchers work fine.
The comments from John Langford of MUARC are more realistic. But the fact remains that we don’t test elderly drivers nearly enough IMO. The crash rate for those over 75 is no better than for 18 year olds.
The problem is that people with mild dementia can drive safely when conditions are normal. But so can drink drivers. People with impaired cognition and vision have very little ability to react safely when there is a hazard. That is precisely when people have accidents. Austroads does have national Assessing Fitness to Drive guidelines, but they are not legally binding. There will be a lot more Sophie Deledios out there until they are.
[Gillard solved nothing, in fact she capitulated, in fact she gave away $1.5bn to the mining industry ]
As Howard used to say “better 80% of something than nothing’ or wtte.
Morrison again this morning was on about ‘turning the boats back’. He said that he would have an arrangement for them to be turned back to the country of departure. That country would have to guarantee that the refugees would be accommodated safely and not sent back to the country of origin.
Talk about pie in the sky stuff! Can you imagine Indonesia wanting to cope with this. They’ve got enough problems with the thousands of refugees waiting there while we are dealing with a few thousand. It’s ridiculous.
Gg – what do you make of Morrison’s christianity on this. Didn’t he have to declare himself a very devout Christian to get his preselection over David Clarke’s mob.
Tom Hawkins@1203
The party’s version of recent history. Spin.
The mining tax was part of the major Treasury review. The 12b tax was announced government policy in line with that Treasury review, with all the contingent parts readjusting that area of taxation. Then, as Ross Gittins put it about the success of the miners:
Thomas’ dummy spit carries on another day as he blindly avoids observing that Rudd would have made a deal that would’ve had an impact on revenue as well and, going by his logic, he should then have been invoiced by the Australian public.
In his strop, he also mentions Gillards potential move to the right on asylum seekers without acknowledging that Rudd started this move in his abysmal decision to end the processing of Sri Lankan asylum seekers. Even the Liberal Party have criticised this move and want it ended.
One thing the Rudd/Gillard handover has done, I think, is to allow left leaning people disappointed at all of Rudd’s failings, but still loyal to the man, to jump ship and start attacking the ALP.
jv, Like I said to suggest the government have given something away is absurd. You can call it spin – I know it’s a fact. Gittens calls the miners giant killers? The miners will pay billions in taxes and that’s a win for them? Pull the other one.
[I can only agree with TP and Dio’s comments on the policy shift of Labor to bullying refugees and asymlum seekers. (I won’t call it “getting tough” because it is not “tough” to pick on the weak.)]
as a fairly new comer to this site i am very confused re dio and his stances
me think there may be two sides to dio
think carefully about previous posts. And when on holidays why would you post here
The refugee policy has to be handled in a mature and sensible way not
heartless or inhumane like the other lot etc. But the Prime Minister is here to look after the whole country not just the greens and their policy or the liberals and theirs
there is a line down the middle some where. There greens always try to make them selves relevant on a daily basis thats why brown is all over the show, from one day to another you do not no what he stand for.
No Julia will be kind but Firm, and unfortunately that is life. So get over it
as long as we stick the UN policy on refugees then we are doing the correct thing.
Move on and move forward good policy is only obtained from positive thought and good input not narky remarks and jibes i thought this site last night was quite disgraceful .
I have come to like and respect JUlia very much she is a team leader
she get things done QUICKLY things where hanging around far to long and getting bogged down ,kev as much as we love him was just not performing the pace was slow just think how long the ets went on for and the mining tax would still be happening
re nothing done to bring to a negotaion just how much long would it have been in the news with negative comments
there I have said it like a company CEO also a marriage that is not going well the person most in love does not see whats happening and that is a lot of here
It takes awhile to see the difference I think JUlia is a team person who will take us along with her in her team
They won’t necessarily pay any extra tax, but I suppose you could see it as a step forward that they have agreed to pay a certain amount of extra tax if they absolutely must. I’m sure they’d prefer to just continue under the existing tax regime, which they’ve been promised by the Liberals.
my say
dio is the will o’ wisp of PB
I like some of his thinking but never his conclusions
[drive, but they need to have their capability tested; regularly after about age 75]
thats done here every second year from that age for years in tas
I have an aunt who is 88 and passed recently with flying colours becuse since loosing her husband 30 years ago she just keept driving.
But Scopio i wonder how old you are loosing your licence would be the worst thing that could happen to a person not being able to take your self to dr. appointment the hair dresser or just shop.
[dio is the will o’ wisp of PB
I like some of his thinking but never his conclusions]
me thinks he has a foot in all three camps
‘jv, Like I said to suggest the government have given something away is absurd. You can call it spin – I know it’s a fact. Gittens calls the miners giant killers? The miners will pay billions in taxes and that’s a win for them? Pull the other one.”
Agree the miners think they won. Well guess what will happen in future years as the budget becomes further strained – the govt will crank up the rate on mining, remove generous deductions etc. The big step was implementing the framework now all they need to do is tweak it every year to raise another $2bn or so. The miners have been sucked in and the govt cash cow has begun. Just like the states do with royalties this tax will be subject to change in future years you can be on it as health costs sky rocket.
[Psephos has outlived his usefulness – if he ever had any.
That’s a silly statement, DarrenL. I’m surprised at how controlled Psephos’s been in light of what he could have told us about the spill and I think, after reading the OO’s article about Kev linked by Boerwar, that Psephos has been very discreet while giving just an insight into how difficult it has been for some of the Labor pollies]
Yes i second that, and he proably knows even more than he would say
thats his job to be a loyal PS I enjoy his posts.
Perhaps when he retired he should write a book.
Talking of books i am going to get a copy from the library today of the one that Julia was reading in the plane ( in a picture) i thinks its called the fight of my life or something like that to do with obama and the election. I would like to read read what she is reading , i have always liked this type of book a bit on intrigue proably
[3. Come here and are immediately treated better than our pensioners. Get all sorts of benefits Aussies cannot access including brand new cars, new houses, huge cash grants.]
Dee@925. This email that is going around is virtually the same as the one in 2006/7. Howard and Brough made telly and radio appearances to refute it and put ads in the paper to say it was a hoax. The info is on a hoax website.
Julia should do the same because I’ve received several of these emails in the past week. I send them back with a cryptic comment.
Tom Hawkins@1208
I’d like a dollar for every non-sequitur rhetorical question that finishes with ‘pull the other one’. 😆
The miners certainly think they’ve had a win. They’ve clawed back from the people a large recurring chunk of money that the government and Treasury had said they must pay.
I’d like to achieve that if I were hit by a new tax. Don’t like my chances though – I couldn’t afford the advertising.
Is the party going to continue to run the line that it was always negotiable, and, “Well, after all, 10 1/2 out of 12 ain’t bad.”? Probably. Just don’t bother running it with me.
my say
me think he has three feet
🙂
[But I can say this – four women at work who voted Labor, had a heated discussion about Gillard last friday, and they weren’t arguing between themselves. They have switched, as has my wife and her family]
Thomas – for every four women you find switching FROM Labour you will find many more coming the other way.
Only this morning it has been reported that the Liberals are so concerned about Abbott’s bad image with women they have hired a consultant to try and do something about it. Apparently they haven’t heard that old saying – you can put lipstick on a pig but it’s still a pig..
[The miners certainly think they’ve had a win. They’ve clawed back from the people a large recurring chunk of money that the government and Treasury had said they must pay. ]
They’ve done no such thing. No tax exists until is has been legislated on a constitutionally sound basis.
For example, you could say the polluters were handed a huge win when the Coalition, Family First, Greens and Xenophon blocked the CPRS and thereby clawed back from the people a large chunk of money that the Government and Treasury had said they must pay.
The Government, of course, has no such right. All taxes must be passed by the legislature before an obligation to pay said tax arises.
Gillard could do a lot worse in the new refugee ‘debate’ than use this sort of language from Julian Burnside. Or is it too ‘politically correct’ for her?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/05/2944693.htm
[me think he has three feet]
i find it very hard to fathom out perhaps he is three people
my say
two for walking ,one permannently implanted in his mouth
[The miners certainly think they’ve had a win. They’ve clawed back from the people a large recurring chunk of money that the government and Treasury had said they must pay.]
The miners are putting on a brave face as they have suffered the most serious setback in memory. I don’t mind if they still think they can’t be touched as the events of the last week show otherwise.
[Is the party going to continue to run the line that it was always negotiable, and, “Well, after all, 10 1/2 out of 12 ain’t bad.”? Probably.]
Seems to have worked very well so far. Just wait until the government start to spell out what the extra tax will mean to communities across the country.
[Just don’t bother running it with me.]
Well then precious, how about spelling out the rules one must follow when replying to your posts. 🙂
I don’t come here to cahnge
[iOnly this morning it has been reported that the Liberals are so concerned about Abbott’s]
the news clip of him playing on the play ground equipment like a 12 year old with those old frumpy clothes on gee pm material dont think so.
[I don’t come here to cahnge]
Now where the heck did that come from?
I dont think getting in some one to change abbott personality re woman
would work we have all known abbott for tooooooooooooooo many years
espcialy us older ones. I have read a couple of face book sites that say dont vote for abbott or you will put your rights back 50 years.
Spot on girls and thats the 20 plus /30 plus generation this is one time i like face book
i think thoman p is pulling our leg.
jaundiced, Burnside perfectly puts the Greens argument on asylum seekers.
ltep@1222
They’ve done no such thing. No tax exists until is has been legislated on a constitutionally sound basis.
Of course it had to go through parliament.
But the multi-national miners through their advertising blitz got the government to fundamentally unravel the Treasury review’s inter-related and complex new mining tax regime – one that they had adopted as the position to be legislated.
That is unsettling and significant.
ltep@1230
Is what Burnside said Greens policy? Either way it is hard to disagree with, isn’t it?
Tom Hawkins@1228
Too much mouth froth. 😆
I must say that Gillard has done a much better job of trashing Rudd’s legacy than any Liberals could have done
Whether it is
– The mining tax
– border protection
– regional cooperation
– Sorry for bad policies
Gillard have trashed the competence of the Rudd government which she was a large part of
[Time you realised that members sole role now is to hand out leaflets on election day or to organise fundraisers.]
markymarky@977. My personal history is that I’ve been lucky in choice of branches even when moving interstate. I only joined 1 branch which concerned itself more with infighting between the left & right members and stacked accordingly. It was in a National Party seat so was never likely to have a sitting pollie. I think it was probably frustration which led to the infighting.
My boundaries changed and I was glad to move to a new Branch in the new electorate. What a transformation. These people are intelligent, hardworking and conscientious bout policy debate, both State and Federal. They’re quick to let the pollies and Head Office know if they’re not happy about something. In 2010 I think you would find many branches similar to mine.
Thank God for people like this too otherwise we’d be led by the types who inhabit Young Libs forever.
[But the multi-national miners through their advertising blitz got the government to fundamentally unravel the Treasury review’s inter-related and complex new mining tax regime – one that they had adopted as the position to be legislated.
That is unsettling and significant.]
Negotiation and compromise happens with every largescale reform (particularly relating to tax). I’m sure a lot of negotiation happened around the CPRS and will happen around any scheme to put a price on carbon. Expecting the government to not listen to the concerns of affected parties is unreasonable.
[Is what Burnside said Greens policy? Either way it is hard to disagree with, isn’t it?]
I don’t disagree with it. The question is whether a mainstream political party, which has to appeal to a broad range of voters in order to maintain government, can afford to frame its own arguments in the same way. Burnside presents the perfect argument to the Greens demographic, but is it necessarily going to persuade voters in certain marginal seats?
[Either way it is hard to disagree with, isn’t it?]
No. Burnside isn’t interested in the political reality.
[Gillard have trashed the competence of the Rudd government…]
Ah yes, I remember your almost daily posts tell everyone that the Rudd government was doing an outstanding job.
Burnside presents the perfect argument to the Greens demographic, but is it necessarily going to persuade voters in certain marginal seats?
That’s Gillard’s job – and not just in the marginal seats. Wherever the left side of the bell curve lives.
[Cheap and nasty is what it is. It may be ‘poltical reality’ for the ALP, but it’s still cheap and nasty and I want Labor supporters here to understand that in the grab for power you are using people less fortunate as a political tool.]
And you and the Greens are doing the same thing, Astrobleme. I haven’t heard SHY say what number of refugees she considers is OK. I’m of the opinion that we get so few that they should all stay unless they are considered terrorists. I’m in the minority group according to the polls and from what I hear in discussions with people I considered to be compassionate.
Howard’s mantra of ‘we will decide’ has led normally compassionate people to think of boat people differently to the way we did with the Vietnamese. Back then, of course, Fraser had bipartisanship on this.
Have the Greens a cutoff point for the numbers of boat people.
re 1239 – sorry ltep forgot (again) to quote your bit at the top.
Tom Hawkins
Which points of Burnside’s are incorrect?
[That’s Gillard’s job – and not just in the marginal seats. Wherever the left side of the bell curve lives.]
Her job is to provide the best outcomes across the board, and it is largely based on whether voters in key marginals buy her message. I suppose she could just throw all caution out the window and lose the election with a clear conscience. Alternatively, she can try and spin the least bad policy that is electorally acceptable.
[That’s Gillard’s job] and Abbott’s job too.
Once again the Labor government will be placed between the hard right Liberals and the loony left Greens which is about where Australians like their government to sit on most issues. I think JG will have a big job to win the argument that the Liberals way is a wrong way on this issue. She’d have no hope at all in arguing that the Greens way is the right way. Thankfully this issue is the Liberal’s last gasp policy.
[Ah yes, I remember your almost daily posts tell everyone that the Rudd government was doing an outstanding job.]
I remember well professor Dovifs daily dissertations on the wondrous Kev
put mine and others adulation to shame
😉
I’m obviously talking to myself here, but I did locate a Galaxy poll from 24 January 2010 that might be the basis for briefly’s “70% of Australians”. The problem is that respondents were asked if they thought there should be a cap on immigration – to which 72% answer in the affirmative. Yet in April 2010 Newpoll found that 44% felt the LNP was best party to handle immigration up from 27% in April 2009.
So it appears that a “a step to right” isn’t necessarily the answer to Labor’s problems on A-S. You can see ground work is being laid for Gillard to out manoeuvre Abbott on this. Gillard’s statements regarding voters concerned about immigration not being racist is a clever move towards inclusive politics – and securing the 28% who are concerned about immigration but don’t necessarily like the Fibs solutions.
The well timed marriage proposal during the Gillard/Brumby presser at Marysville sends a clear message about immigration, and it’s definitely getting mileage on News Ltd sites.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/wedding-proposal-gets-pm-julia-gillard-and-victorian-premier-john-brumbys-blessing/story-e6freuy9-1225887755491
ron@1039 – good post re educating public. It was the photos and clips of people behind razor wire that showed the voters how inhumane that policy was.
Humanising the problem would help.
[I must say that Gillard has done a much better job of trashing Rudd’s legacy than any Liberals could have done
Whether it is
– The mining tax
– border protection
– regional cooperation
– Sorry for bad policies
Gillard have trashed the competence of the Rudd government which she was a large part of]
And she will do your boy in old son.
I noticed in passing without quite getting it that some Liberal Party advertising material referred to Gillard as ‘girl’.
If so, perhaps they are making a virtue out of necessity, foresaking the Doctor’s wives and other latte-sipping wymyn entirely, and are going for locking in the outerburban, boatie-hating, female-fearing bogan vote?
Or was it just a cockup?
Tom Hawkins 1238
Yeah the Rudd-Gillard government was incompetant at best
But it is good to know that Gillard agrees with the truth
now where is truthy
So PMJG should spend the next few months quoting Birnside and changing the population’s mind on AS? Welcome to Fantasy Island.