Nielsen: 51-49 to Coalition

GhostWhoVotes reports a federal Nielsen poll to be published in tomorrow’s Fairfax broadsheets will show the Coalition, unchanged on last month. More to follow.

UPDATE: GhostWhoVotes further relates the primary votes are Labor 35 per cent (up one point), Coalition 43 per cent (steady) and Greens 13 per cent (down one), and the poll also shows support for gay marriage at 57 per cent and opposition at 37 per cent.

UPDATE 2: The poll finds little change in the leaders’ personal ratings. Julia Gillard is stable on both approval (54 per cent) and disapproval (39 per cent), while Tony Abbott is up two on approval to 47 per cent and down two on disapproval to 48 per cent. Gillard’s lead as preferred prime minister is 53 per cent (steady) to 40 per cent (up a point). The Coalition leads as best party to handle interest rates (47 per cent to 33 per cent) and create greater competition between the banks (46 per cent to 32 per cent). Fifty-five per cent now believe the government should serve a full term, against 42 per cent who would like a new election as soon as possible.

UPDATE 3: Essential Research also has the Coalition leading 51-49, for the third week running. Julia Gillard’s approval rating is at 43 per cent, down two on a month ago, and her disapproval up one to 38 per cent, while Tony Abbott is up a point on approval to 40 per cent and down five on disapproval to 40 per cent. Gillard’s lead as preferred prime minister has narrowed from 49-33 to 45-34. There are also questions on viewing of sport on free-to-air and pay television, presumably apropos of the anti-siphoning issue – although opinions on this are not engaged directly.

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.

857 comments on “Nielsen: 51-49 to Coalition”

Comments Page 2 of 18
1 2 3 … 18

  2. Abbott reckons Workchoices is dead, buried & cremated. Bullbutter it is!

    [THE push for a more radical industrial relations policy has gathered steam in the Coalition.

    The new chairman of the education and industry committee declared Labor’s Fair Work Act a failure and calling for a return to individual contracts.

    The backbench committee is chaired by West Australian senator Chris Back, who entered the Senate last year.

    Senator Back told The Weekend Australian the Fair Work Act was hurting productivity and he would push for reforms, including the return of individual contracts to create workplace flexibility.

    He said now was the right time for the Coalition to create pro-growth workplace reforms in small and big business.]
    [Opposition Treasury spokesman Joe Hockey has said dismissal laws for small business and prescriptive rules on minimum hours of work should be targeted by the Coalition as future workplace reform areas.]
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/individual-contracts-on-libs-agenda/story-e6frg6nf-1225956833182

  3. Seem there is a chance that the NBN / Telstra legislation will get through this week after all.

    Also yesterday, the Greens revealed they had secured a deal from the government to stop the automatic privatisation of the network five years after its completion.

    … Senator Ludlam said the Greens would now pass the legislation for the structural separation of Telstra,

    Excellent news …

    Seeing progressive forces working together gives me a real happy feeling. 🙂

  4. [Was never happy with the plan to sell the NBN off as soon as it was built and am in favor of it remaining in Govt hands.]
    I agree. This asset is too important to be in private hands. It will be tax-payer funded infrastructure and should remain in a public asset.

  6. The Galaxy poll of 500 Victorian voters, conducted for the Victorian Association of Forest Industries in the middle of last week, gives the Coalition a lead of 42-36 on primary vote.

    This puts Mr Baillieu within touching distance of the premier’s office.

  7. Frank at 34:

    [ That may be so – but like London to a brick – as soon as Julia annunces such a move – the Church, the Libs and their various hangers on will mount the mother of all scare campaigns and they will ensure that it will fail.

    It’s a brave Govt who prevail over that. ]

    It would be, yeah… and you have a problem with that? I’d like a brave Labor government, because the alternative is a bunch of wimps who are too scared to do anything that John Howard wouldn’t have, and make themselves not worth voting for in the process (why do you think the Greens are so popular?). If you think it makes Labor unelectable to champion progressive issues, have a look at how Don Dunstan did in the 1970’s.

    Also on the gay marriage issue, Joe de Bruyn really annoys me. He runs a union which I’m a member of, and speaks for all us members warning against Labor ever even thinking about changing their policy. Funny, I don’t remember being asked for my (agnostic, pro-gay) opinion, and I doubt the Muslim / Hindu majority on my shift would be too impressed if they knew the leader was using his job to push Catholic political positions. Y’know what’d be interesting? Polling the membership of the SDA on gay marriage. The results might annoy the conservative leadership. Stuff ’em.

  8. [Bird of paradoxPosted Monday, November 22, 2010 at 2:59 am | PermalinkFrank at 34:
    That may be so – but like London to a brick – as soon as Julia annunces such a move – the Church, the Libs and their various hangers on will mount the mother of all scare campaigns and they will ensure that it will fail.
    It’s a brave Govt who prevail over that.
    It would be, yeah… and you have a problem with that? I’d like a brave Labor government, because the alternative is a bunch of wimps who are too scared to do anything that John Howard wouldn’t have, and make themselves not worth voting for in the process (why do you think the Greens are so popular?). If you think it makes Labor unelectable to champion progressive issues, have a look at how Don Dunstan did in the 1970’s.
    Also on the gay marriage issue, Joe de Bruyn really annoys me. He runs a union which I’m a member of, and speaks for all us members warning against Labor ever even thinking about changing their policy. Funny, I don’t remember being asked for my (agnostic, pro-gay) opinion, and I doubt the Muslim / Hindu majority on my shift would be too impressed if they knew the leader was using his job to push Catholic political positions. Y’know what’d be interesting? Polling the membership of the SDA on gay marriage. The results might annoy the conservative leadership. Stuff ‘em.
    ]

    Another Head in the Sand advocate – Have you listened to Talkback Radio lately – people on 2GB are Contemplating Tea Party styled Rallies.

    You want to commit political Suicide go Right ahead – in this climate it is NOT the time to stir the rabid right.

  10. I don’t have the foggiest notion why Gillard is digging in like a Victorian era prude of same-sex marriage.
    She was happy to bonk the married Craig Emerson.

  11. Morning PBers – Poll not too bad for the PM plus 55% thinking the Govt. should run a full term is good news.

    Frank & TSOP – looks like some of you and twitterverse may have upset little Mike and he is worried about looking stupid.

    With that kind of success over one doltish announcer perhaps twitterverse could get going on the Alan Jones types. Ridicule may be the answer because trying to debate issues seriously and factually with them gets nowhere.

    Barnaby Joyce uses ridicule and hysteria to make his points – let’s use them in reverse.

  12. Frank, stop being a concern troll. Being very quiet and not ‘committing political suicide’ plays right into the hands of that rabid right – it means they’ve won the argument by forfeit. For example, this is why everyone now knows that Labor can’t manage the economy and can’t control asylum seekers: it’s not that Labor made a bad argument which was beaten by that of the Liberals, it’s just that they vacated the field and left perfectly good arguments un-made. The same way, they failed to handle that TV advert during the WA election campaign: the Liberals’ voiceover asked “Name three things Labor have done in government.” I could’ve named three things, and you could’ve named ten, but Labor let it go through to the keeper, and the accepted wisdom became whatever the Liberals wanted it to be, so now they’re the government. Sometimes you have to fight, eh.

    I don’t listen to talkback radio, either… I’ve got better things to do with my time than listen to the ravings of One Nation voters in the fear that they might not vote for Labor. RTR FM, please. 😉

  13. [shepherdmarilyn
    Posted Monday, November 22, 2010 at 5:34 am | Permalink

    I don’t have the foggiest notion why Gillard is digging in like a Victorian era prude of same-sex marriage.
    She was happy to bonk the married Craig Emerson.]

    I think she may be just playing politics with the issue , keeping it up her sleeve to trade off with against the Greens for their support on another issue.

  14. [Also, have to say that i think its a good outcome policy wise. Was never happy with the plan to sell the NBN off as soon as it was built and am in favor of it remaining in Govt hands.]

    I hope this will please the Green-bashers on here. 😉

    I am getting very disillusioned with Julia. She’s not the same person who was the DPM – where’s that fire gone?

  15. [I am getting very disillusioned with Julia. She’s not the same person who was the DPM – where’s that fire gone?]

    Roxanna – of course she’s not. She’s now the PM and knows due process. Every word she utters will be twisted. I agree with you that the Mogadon stuff has to go and we need to see more of the ‘fire’ from QT last week in some of the day to day stuff.

  16. In other words, they have not got a clue how to stop from getting stuffed. Dont cry for Uncle Rupe and friends, they have had it too good for too long. Oh how sweet it is to see the mighty has fallen into the helpless.

    That also apply to the MSM Journos, they also had it too good for too long. The quality of their products and services are no longer good enough for the consumers to want to pay and read. Now, they resort to interviewing each other to prop each other up. Sad and pathetic really.

    [At tomorrow’s briefing, Fairfax will speed plans to embrace new tablet devices such as Apple’s iPad, but questions remain on whether digital revenues – advertising and subscriptions – will support the high costs of journalism.

    So far, online advertising rates have been a mere fraction of the amount charged for print, and the push for paid subscriptions is in its infancy. There are no guarantees that consumers will be willing to pay for news they can get from free sites.

    For Fairfax and all newspaper companies the equation is simple: do nothing and you’ll be stuffed. Panic, or do something and get it wrong and you’ll be stuffed more quickly.]

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/fairfax-wrestles-with-digital-dilemma/story-e6frg996-1225958013179

  19. [That also apply to the MSM Journos, they also had it too good for too long]

    Finns – they are going to have fun today. Just heard Xenophon on AM making fun of the NBN after the Business Plan confidentiality time span being dropped from 7 years to 3 years to 2 weeks!

    Just what are Conroy and his advisers doing? This is grist to the journo’s mill and the ridicule today will be nonstop as it should be. I thought Conroy was on top of his stuff – it’s no good knowing the techo stuff if you can’t get the politics rights.

  20. I note that Gittins seems to have got the wobbles over the NBN, citing the things that “only economists see”. If they hadn’t missed the GFC, I might have taken that seriously.

    What Gittins et al don’t seem to realise is that the NBN should stop media proprietors from having control of the information ducts into our homes. If Rupert is allowed to have that sort of control, he’ll control us and he’ll control the government. That’s why the OO is so feral about the NBN. Like all capitalists, Rupe doesn’t want competition or diversity.

    e their homes. to

  21. Ross Gittins has a blog

    [Monday, November 22, 2010NBN plan has the signs of a historic stuff-up
    I am starting to get a really bad feeling about Labor’s plan for a national broadband network. The more it resists subjecting the plan to scrutiny, the more you suspect it has something to hide.

    I fear Julia Gillard is digging herself in deeper on a characteristically grandiose scheme her swaggering predecessor announced without thought to its daunting implications, when she should be looking for ways to scale the project down without too much loss of face.

    The obvious way to start that process would have been to accede to calls for the Productivity Commission to conduct a cost-benefit analysis. The determination of governments to keep their schemes away from the commission is always prima facie evidence they know the scheme’s dodgy.

    But as each day passes the issue is becoming more politicised, with too much of the government’s ego riding on pretending the plan is without blemish. Part of the problem is the role the plan played in winning the support of the country independents.

    The independents and Greens are doing the government no favours in using their votes to allow the plan to escape scrutiny. Are they, too, afraid it wouldn’t withstand scrutiny?

    This is not to support the inane demands from the opposition and the media for the government to release its ”business case” immediately rather than in a week or two’s time. Mere impatience is no virtue in the eternal quest for good policy.

    But by the same token, the government’s implication that we can’t delay the broadband rollout by pausing to check whether it’s a good idea, or is being done as cost effectively as possible, is insupportable. If it’s a flawed idea, better to know now rather than after the money’s spent.

    It’s no doubt true the Liberals are being quite hypocritical in demanding the release of a government report when the Howard government refused to release so many reports, and in demanding a cost-benefit analysis when John Howard never bothered with them.

    But such objections make sense only to those more interested in party-political point scoring than achieving good policy.

    The case for a thorough cost-benefit analysis needs no stronger argument than that, at $43 billion, this is the most expensive piece of infrastructure this country has seen.

    It’s true the plan has a lot of attractions. Top of the list is the structural separation of Telstra’s network from its retail business so its retail competitors get fair access to the network. This is something the Howard government should have seen to before it privatised Telstra.

    I accept that, if city people are going to continue cross-subsidising the bush – as they will; it’s clearly the electorate’s ”revealed preference” – there’s no more sensible way to do it than ensuring the bush has access to high-quality telecommunications, thereby doing what we can to reduce the tyranny of distance.

    I don’t have an in-principle objection to a network with natural-monopoly characteristics being owned publicly rather than privately, provided governments don’t use their powers to shore up or abuse that monopoly in a way any private owner would and should be prevented doing.

    And I admire the government’s consciousness of the need for us to be ready to adopt and exploit the opportunities for benefit that future technological advance will make possible.

    The Productivity Commission could be required to ensure its cost-benefit analysis ranged far more widely than a mere commercial evaluation, taking account of present and potential ”social” benefits (”positive externalities”) and acknowledging those whose value it can’t quantify.

    But there are three aspects of the plan that worry me. They’re things economists are trained to see but to which non-economists are often oblivious.

    The first is the mentality that says we’ve got a lot of messy and inadequate telecom arrangements at present, so let’s scrap ’em all and start afresh. Copper wire to the home – make Telstra turn it off. Telstra and Optus’s existing rival optical fibre-coaxial cables to many capital-city homes – close ’em down.

    This Ruddish approach would be fine if resources were infinite, or if getting a brand spanking new broadband network was the Australian public’s only desire.

    But resources are finite, both sides of politics have sworn to eliminate all government debt and we have an infrastructure backlog as long as your arm. In two words: opportunity cost.

    Second is the idea of building a gold-plated broadband network up to eight times faster than any present application needs, so we’re ready for anything that may come along some time in the future.

    If you think that shows vision and foresight, you’re innocent of ”the time value of money”. Every dollar you spend now rather than later comes at an extra cost: the interest you have to pay between now and when you start using the idle capacity.

    True, it’s false economy to build something today without allowing for reasonable growth in your use of the item. But there comes a point where allowing for more growth than you’re likely to see in ages becomes a waste of money.

    Private businesses that do this – such as home owners who overcapitalise their properties – do their dough. Government businesses survive either by overcharging their customers or falling back on the taxpayer.

    The final worry is the way that – notwithstanding the break-up of Telstra – the plan involves deliberately reducing competition from other networks in the telecommunications market. Why’s that a good idea?

    And why would the government plan to do it? Because it knows its network will be hugely over-engineered and the only way of charging consumers the high prices needed to recoup that excess cost is to turn broadband into a monopoly.

    If Gillard had any sense of self-preservation she’d be using the Productivity Commission to get herself off a nasty hook.]

    http://rossgittins.blogspot.com/2010/11/nbn-plan-has-signs-of-historic-stuff-up.html

  26. Hartcher on the Nielsen gay marriage result

    [
    And today’s poll shows that by running with gay marriage, Labor could stymie – the preferred word among political operatives is “wedge” – Tony Abbott’s Coalition.

    Because Coalition voters are divided right down the middle on this, Abbott would be reluctant to take a position that risks offending either side of the argument.

    He would be politically immobilised on the issue if Labor took it up, probably retreating to the position of allowing his MPs a conscience vote.

    By hewing to her position, Gillard is instead defending a view at odds with the mainstream and two-thirds of her own party’s voters.

    But Gillard will not budge. Why not? First, because she would prefer to remain consistent with the policy she took to the election. Second, because her union and parliamentary support base is deeply divided on this matter and she would rather avoid alienating the Right – where gay marriage has its most avid opponents.

    Third, because she has a list of big reforms to work on and doesn’t want to distract from a carbon price, national broadband and health reform.

    ]
    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/support-for-gays-offers-a-way-out-for-gillard-20101121-182mq.html

  27. MadCyril,

    Its a shame that it takes a political wedge to get Gillard to stand for something.

    Its funny, the figures for supporting an ETS are eerily similar. The climate change wedge is still there.

  28. Umm, Ross, because if you allow so-called competition for the NBN, that competition will just cherry-pick the best areas (and let the rest rot) and then the govt can’t afford to build the NBN, because it can’t get a good return, and then we’re all hostage to Rupert Murdoch, etc etc.

    I would have thought a brilliant economist like you would have been able to see that, at least.

  30. [Third, because she has a list of big reforms to work on and doesn’t want to distract from a carbon price, national broadband and health reform.]
    These are the reasons the Greens should consider first, as these are more important than Gay marriage. Most if not all legal and financial barriers have been removed, which were discriminating against the Gays. Just tread slightly more lightly stop trying to have everything at once and stop behaving like a spoilt child.

  32. [These are the reasons the Greens should consider first, as these are more important than Gay marriage. Most if not all legal and financial barriers have been removed, which were discriminating against the Gays. Just tread slightly more lightly stop trying to have everything at once and stop behaving like a spoilt child.]

    I am usually one of the more pragmatic or conservative ones here. But really what is the big deal about gay marriage. I just don’t get why not.

  34. as far as NBN goes it would be nice to ask details even ask for a business plan without feeling one was helping demolish the thing. for instance, how much download required to stream HD TV as consumed by average family? will uncapped download plans be available, and at what cost? tetrabyte monthly plans now available at $99 – is that enough for full video usage? can the system cope with unlimited use by unlimited consumers (assume answer is yes), or will it reach capacity like electricity? is current planning assuming current usage, not the vastly increased usage required and encouraged by high quality television and videoconference etc. Forget 20G plans. These are constructive questions but the opposition hell bent on using questions to destroy what is basically a great infrastructure.

  36. [ am usually one of the more pragmatic or conservative ones here. But really what is the big deal about gay marriage. I just don’t get why not.]

    I’m afraid the ALP still have a few too many dinosaurs like Joe de Bruyn in positions of substantial influence, b_g.

    Until they get the boot or realise that they have passed their use-by date, Labor is always going to have trouble with issues like this.

  38. GEOFFREY – according to Malcolm Turnbull the NBN will cost families $65 a month – so according to Malcolm, it’s a winner.

    Further, the allegation is that the NBN will have too much capacity – not too little.

  39. [I’m afraid the ALP still have a few too many dinosaurs like Joe de Bruyn in positions of substantial influence, b_g.]

    Why does a unionist have control over social policies? Was he speeking in his role as unionist or as party official? Very confusing.

  40. If, as suggested on AM this morning, the “commercial in confidence” constraints on disclosure of the NBN plan has now been reduced from 7 years to 2 weeks, it is a bit hard to see why they are being retained at all. Surely there can’t really be any real “commercial in confidence” matters that are genuinely going to be of significance within such a short period?

    I just don’t get it.

  41. Geoffrey,

    Th government component will only be offering Wholesale pricing, it will then be up to the retailers to offer their retail packages to the consumers.

  43. [I’m afraid the ALP still have a few too many dinosaurs like Joe de Bruyn in positions of substantial influence, b_g.

    Until they get the boot or realise that they have passed their use-by date, Labor is always going to have trouble with issues like this.]

    But what is the argument against? Is there something other than ‘God said so’.

  48. madcyril,

    X is pushing himself into a corner. The senator is chucking a tantie because he has been sucked into the coalition BS. The government sets the timetable not the coalition.

  49. [Umm, Ross, because if you allow so-called competition for the NBN, that competition will just cherry-pick the best areas (and let the rest rot) and then the govt can’t afford to build the NBN, because it can’t get a good return, and then we’re all hostage to Rupert Murdoch, etc etc.

    I would have thought a brilliant economist like you would have been able to see that, at least.]

    Rosa – how right you are. I read Gittins and wondered if he, too, is trying to protect Fairfax in the same way Murdoch is having a go for limitednews. With the NBN we will find our info via many outlets and Fairfax will be another sufferer.

    As for Xenophon – his long interview with Fran Kelly was a little strangled. Will he/won’t he – even he doesn’t know but he wanted his moments of importance today.

  50. Xenophon,
    Total waste of space.

    Picking on details instead of substance, just like during the ETS debate.

    I have written him in my black book of climate deniers. He will be amongst the first against the wall when the revolution comes.

Comments Page 2 of 18
1 2 3 … 18

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *