Essential Research is still the only opinion poll operating to its regular schedule, Morgan having sat out last week and Newspoll presumably holding off at least until Labor sorts out its leadership. The latest weekly result has the Coalition’s two-party lead steady at an unspectacular 52-48, from primary votes of 43% for the Coalition (steady on last week), 35% for Labor (down one) and the Greens on 9% (steady). Other questions relate to internet privacy, including a finding that US surveillance programs such as Edward Snowden revealed are opposed by 45% and supported by 24%, and the importance of our various foreign relationships, showing “very important” ratings of 56% for New Zealand, 51% for the United States, 46% for China, 42% for the United Kingdom and 35% for Indonesia.
UPDATE: And now Morgan comes through with its normal multi-mode poll which was skipped last week, carrying the striking headline that Labor leads 50.5-49.5 on respondent-allocated preferences. However, Morgan produces a strikingly different result from preference flows as per the recent election, with the Coalition lead at 53-47. But I find this hard to reconcile with the primary votes: the Coalition is at 42%, 3.5% lower than at the election, Labor at 37%, which is 3.6% higher, and the minor parties only slightly changed at 9% for the Greens, 4.5% for the Palmer United Party and 7.5% for others. Somehow though, two-party preferred comes out as very similar to the election result, which as best as anyone can tell is about 53.5-46.5.
davidwh
Its easier here. If not valid expenditure its breaking the law and comes under fraud.
Very black and white. The AFP and Prosecution may have to determine if its a community event or that they cannot make that decision and it has to go to court.
Sean the amounts involved are only relevant in determining the seriousness of any alleged breach but first it has to be determined if a breach has happened in the first place. To a large extent one person’s $900 is irrevelant to another’s $10,000 if the first did in fact break the law and the second didn’t.
davidwh
I don’t care whether TA is charged with anything. I just want him to be embarrassed about his behaviour.
Guytaur #1601 I think you will find it’s Parliament and the guidelines which determines what is legitimate and what is not.
guytaur,
How did Gillard and Rudd use $1 Mill more in entitlements than Abbott?!
[How did Gillard and Rudd use $1 Mill more in entitlements than Abbott?!]
Oh then Abbott is ok then? That means Rudd and Gillard are ok too. Yes?
lizzie I think Abbott is being exposed whether he is actually embarrased or not who would know. Look I am not justifying what Abbott has claimed as I think it’s shocking but the problem is the guidelines and the system which helps politicians cover each others backsides. What the major parties did earlier this year to protect this stuff from FOI is really disturbing.
Animals @JewelNature 6m
“@YaThinkN: WOW! Not one repayment on a claim in 17 years for Albo? He must not claim much at all? Give the man a medal!!” #thedrum
dwh
I think you will find that parliament passes law and the separate justice system enforces and interprets the law. We call this the police and courts
[On Sunday we’ll have a new Labor Leader, elected for the first time by grassroots members together with members of Federal Parliament.
It’s an historic vote and we want our members and supporters to be the first to know the result.
That’s why we’ll be emailing members and supporters on Sunday afternoon to let you know who the new Labor Leader is before I stand up in front of the cameras at Parliament House.
Sign up here to make sure you receive that email http://www.alp.org.au/stay_updated and why not forward them this email to friends and family who’d like to know first too?
Together, we’re building a stronger Labor Party for the future.
Chris Bowen]
leone
Posted Thursday, October 10, 2013 at 5:56 pm | Permalink
Abbott has been busy making up stuff in an attempt to justify spending taxpayers money on his obsession with fitness. He never thought anyone would ask questions or come up with any proof he was lying. He thought we were all mugs who would believe any old garbage. We aren’t, we didn’t.
————————————————–
Kinda interesting – since this Toady Rabbott PM – pig snouts in the trough – crap blew up – even our normal vocal resident Peta’s *Rent A Troll* gang have been very subdued ….. a quick nose poke out from under TROLL BRIDGE – the run back under for cover
Lizzie
If all this ramps up further, i’m hoping for a political penalty, which would hurt him far more than a penalty a magistrate might give him.
The ultimate would be a negative political momentum going to his character and judgement that was so fierce that he would have to voluntarily stand down.
I’m probly just dreamin.
davidwh –
Thomson and Abbott are indeed similar. Both had stuff paid for by the ‘company’ that most people don’t think qualify as legitimate expenses. Thomson was apparently a ‘tainted vote’ – what does that make Abbott?
psyclaw
There’s no law against dreamin’.
I’m with psyclaw on this one. I think the chances of Abbott ending up before a court would be pretty remote based on what we have seen so far.
dwh
There has been nothing from the AFP on this. Not even no case to answer.
If there had been that tweet from Margo Kingston would have read differently.
An interesting thing in itself.
davidwh
[I think the chances of Abbott ending up before a court would be pretty remote based on what we have seen so far.
]
He will however be tried in the court of public opinion
And rightly so Poroti.
Funny I haven’t seen any Daily Telecrap posters around Sydney with huge headlines about Tony Abbott making dubious travel claims. Also, there’s nothing about the matter on the landing page of the Daily Telegraph site. Why would that be?
dwh
Not rightly so if Abbott broke the law. Note IF.
so is some one going to correct sean
about 1600
on twitter there is a list of expenses
for the prime minister Julia Gillard,comparing to his leader abbott which nothing near what his dear leader spent
and when is mr bowe going to ask sean
to show some respect and stop using the word
DILL,, ard
professors with law degrees are far from being dill s
it about time Mr bowe pulled up sean for being disrespectful. if not why not?
You don’t compare the travel and expenses incurred by a prime minister with those racked up by a mere LOTO. Howrd as PM cost us millions just in flights between Sydney and CAnberra because his wife refused to live in Canberra. His supporters justified that as something he was entitled to do and they’ll use the same justificataion for Abbott spending more millions with Margie and the girls opting to remain in Sydney.
BEing PM means you travel, both withing tAustralia and internationally. It goes with the job. A PM is also expected to attend all sorts of events including football grand finals, rugby cup matches, Olympic and Commonwealth ganes and whatever. It’s puerile to carry on about the expenses Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard incurred while PM.
Abbottt as LOTO however, travelled constantly. Take a look at his entitlement claims, the amount of travel and the comcar usuage is staggering. Hardly any of it was genuine official business as described in the parliamentary guidelines. Much of it was blatant rorting.
what is so good about twitter also you can block rude people
which sadly on twitter is 90 percent of liberal posters.
Links for the above comment –
Entitlements claims –
http://www.finance.gov.au/publications/parliamentarians-reporting/
Rules, guidelines, other stuff.
http://www.finance.gov.au/parliamentary-services/parliamentarians-entitlements.html
guytaur if Abbott broke the law then every politician who has incorrectly claimed an expense has broken the law as well. The guidelines allow a member to repay where Finance determines the claim falls outside guidelines. I am not aware of any circumstance where Abbott has been requested to refund and has refused.
There are no comedy photo-shopped front pages for the Daily Smelly showing Abbott as a rat or a pig at a trough either.
[If all this ramps up further, i’m hoping for a political penalty, which would hurt him far more than a penalty a magistrate might give him.]
Abbott admits he tells lies, we now know he fudges his expenses, I guess the voters will decide the ultimate price he pays.
leone
Posted Thursday, October 10, 2013 at 6:34 pm | Permalink
There are no comedy photo-shopped front pages for the Daily Smelly showing Abbott as a rat or a pig at a trough either.
——————————–
Amazing that ….. not
The disturbing thing is the justifications that Abbott uses, as far as I can tell, apply equally to any MP or Senator.
If it’s just accepted that this is the standard for MPs and Senators then every single one of the 230 or so of them should all be booking flights to every tin pot little event anywhere in the country and claiming it as community engagement.
I suppose Abbott thought that if he paid back one or two items the whole thing would go away.
davidwh
Is that legislated and tested in court yet?
Like what time period is reasonable to discover a mistake and pay back.
How many times before the same mistake is an excuse to do fraud?
Its grey. Such laws are usually through history resoved either in court or by rewriting the legislation.
Of course Abbott will have to go under current law. Unless he gets support to do it retroactively which I doubt.
Expense entitlements to pollies is black and white.
I made a typical superb post on it yesterday and don’t really want to repeat myself 😀
Tisme, where did Rudd and Gillard claim a million more than Abbott in unallowable expenses?
Idiot fair dinkum!
Unfortunately I don’t think the voters know too much and are told not enough for this to harm the protected Monkey.
Centre,
$2 Million Dollars of Taxpayers money is $2 Million dollars of taxpayer money.
Please stop being a rusted on douche bag.
Sean Tisme –
“@senatormilne: Greenpeace activists let down by Abbott who failed to raise issue with Putin at APEC. NZ PM did. Time for PM to stand up for our citizen.”
So Albo has never needed to make a repayment on claimed expenses.
Why?
Maybe Tisme can answer that one?
Hope Albo gets the nod 😐
ST
Do you get drunk before you post? You lack sense and logic and you are very rude.
Tisme you are the biggest dope on this site. Truly!
As someone said the other day, there is great scope for a competent investigative journo, with the skill level Chris Masters so often demonstrated in the past, to find out in detail what he did every second of his PtMacq visit.
Ditto for a raft of other claimed sporting events that he participated in.
Matters like the Tamworth CMAA festival are a bit hard to pin down as inappropriate, given that he didn’t ride his bike whilst there, and made many formal public appearances during the day. But the quantum seems to be ripe for investigation and some political flagellation.
I was there, as I have been for 25 years, and assiduously avoided every venue/event that involved the jerk.
davidwh
[if Abbott broke the law then every politician who has incorrectly claimed an expense has broken the law as well. The guidelines allow a member to repay where Finance determines the claim falls outside guidelines. I am not aware of any circumstance where Abbott has been requested to refund and has refused.]
This misses the point. If it falls outside guidelines, then it is at best unethical, and given the nature of the disputed matters, recklessly so. At this stage, they are not even conceding that their claims were wrong, but merely repaying, so that in principle, they could continue claiming recklessly unethically.
No rational person could imagine that all of these claims were for matters that were of public benefit. Moreover, if one has even a doubt, ought one to refrain from claiming until such time as one were sure something was indeed an allowable expense? I’d say so.
Moreover, Abbott claims that those “ironman events” in Port Macquarie were “community events” when quite clearly, they were not, so like Slipper, he is showing bad faith — an indication that he knows his claims were unwarranted.
Lizzie,
Centre is pretending he is the judiacator of what constitutes a “allowed” and “unallowed” rort of the Australian taxpayer.
He said it was black and white which I assume means if it’s the ALP doing it it’s allowed but if someone from the Coalition does it, it’s a rort.
This is interesting because Abbott has been charged with nothing, has been accused by no legal authority and has voluntarily paid back any money he thought would be in violation of the rules. In other words Centre, much like you are making shit up.
Abbott has used his rorts legally, fully, within the boundary of the law, except he used $2 Mill less than Rudd and Gillard in the same period doing so.
lizzie
Posted Thursday, October 10, 2013 at 6:47 pm | Permalink
ST
Do you get drunk before you post? You lack sense and logic and you are very rude.
————————————————
The Kennet-Peacock Telephone Guide Book provides examples of how to talk to each other in the party and to talk to other people…
Rudd and Gillard using $1 Million each more in rorts for the same period than Abbott show that the ALP are much better rorters.
“@andrewbolt: Tony Abbott is right not to review entitlements. How else could his daughters afford to go to the Spring Carnival? #auspol”
What’s a “judiacator”?
That is fake Andrew Bolt at 1646
guytaur
Posted Thursday, October 10, 2013 at 6:56 pm | Permalink
That is fake Andrew Bolt at 1646
———————————————–
Andrew Bolt is a fake ?????? well I never ….
[Rudd and Gillard using $1 Million each more in rorts for the same period than Abbott show that the ALP are much better rorters]
Where is this information coming from? Abbott outspent PM Gillard on Office Expenses by 10s of thousands.