Essential Research: 52-48 to Coalition

Australian politicians: overpaid, and more corrupt than New Zealand’s. On voting intention, steady as she goes.

Essential Research continues its regular Tuesday appearance, with Morgan having moved to fortnightly. Newspoll, one suspects, has been holding off for resolution of the Labor leadership. The latest Essential Research result records only the most negligible change on last week, with the Greens up a point to 10% and the balance subsumed by rounding: the Coalition, Labor and others are respectively unchanged at 43%, 35% and 12%, with the Coalition’s two-party lead steady at 52-48, compared with an election result of roughly 53.5-46.5.

In other findings, 71% of respondents considered the current $195,000 salary for backbenchers too high, against 27% for about right and just 2% for too low; 48% considered George Brandis unfit to review politicians’ entitlements given his recent form, against 26% who think otherwise and 27% who don’t know. Respondents were also asked whether politicians should or shouldn’t be reimbursed for various expenses.

Other questions asked whether respondents considered corruption a problem in various sectors, with government and the media coming off worst. Australian politicians were nonetheless considered less corrupt than those of the US and the UK (though not New Zealand), and especially those of Indonesia and China. A question on lobbying found general support for more regulation and disclosure.

On the question of best party to handle another global financial crisis, the Liberals were favoured over Labor 38% to 29% with 23% for no difference.

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.

3,418 comments on “Essential Research: 52-48 to Coalition”

Comments Page 2 of 69
1 2 3 69
  1. There shouldn’t be any compromise, excluding the starting fixed price element (carbon tax) of the ETS.

    You’ve already or will have an ETS, no further compromise is necessary.

    Like I have always said, Abbott is only playing politics with carbon pricing and will continue to do so when the other side play dead!

  2. citizen

    On a couple of occasions Chinese officials have dropped hints that they will impose a tariff on goods from countries that have a lower price on carbon than they do. Grassy arsk Tones. Eejit prime.

  3. [Ho Chi Minh himself told OSS agents during WWII that communism was unsuited to the Vietnamese because they were a nation of traders. ]

    Let’s not get too misty-eyed. That was a barefaced lie. Ho’s collectivisation of agriculture was absolutely ruthless and cost about 100,000 lives and caused acute food shortages. When peasants in Nghe An rebelled, 6,000 were executed and thousands sent to labour camps.

  4. Psephos

    It is not only the generals.

    I saw significant featherbedding just about everywhere I travelled in Vietnam. The worst was the arrivals terminal in HCM – literally dozens of people in uniforms sitting at arrivals desks literally doing nothing for the two hours or so it took a very small cohort of people in uniform to administer our plane load’s worth of arrivals.

    The latter resulted, inter alia, in people sitting and/or sleeping on the terminal floor while waiting their turn.

  5. [- everything going from 1July 2014, all liabilities must be paid for the 2 years operation till then, so a big FU to Clive Palmer]

    Seems a bit of desperado throw of the ball from Abbott, the likelihood of the ALP and Greens giving him what he wants before july 2014 is practically zero.

    Clive has 6 million reasons to decline.

  6. I wouldn’t be surprised if Abbott’s business contacts are telling him they would prefer to see the ETS kept.

    Business is all about ‘certainty’ and they know full well that if the ETS is scrapped the political debate will carry on for another 3 years or 6 years or whatever with maybe the ETS being brought back in when the ALP regain government …

    They want to see the debate stop and the rules bedded down and off the political agenda, and for that reason I’m sure they would be happy to see Abbott drop the complete repeal.

    Obviously almost any sensible advice the government would get would be to keep the ETS. The only obstacle is the political position Abbott has self-wedged himself into.

    But pride is a terrible thing.

  7. [Jack Scott ‏@JackScott700 11m
    @JackScott700 : Mike, Word is Bob Carr is pulling up stumps later this week. Hope you are ready to put your hand up?

    ‏@MikeKellyofEM 4m
    @JackScott700 if a vacancy does emerge I have decided 2 put my hand up 4 consideration. Want 2 keep fighting climate change & discrimination]

  8. Of course ALP could amend “carbon tax” repeal legislation to mandate $550 to each household as Abbott has promised. That would really create a “budget crisis”.

  9. If Clive Palmer is true to his word (and a big IF that is) the Carbon Tax Repeal Bills are DOA.

    No backdating, no refunds for tax paid, tax owed in the 2 years of operation must be paid. You can cash in certificates in some circumstances if you have already accumulated more than you will need.

  10. [Concentrated solar thermal is again making the news, with the world’s largest parabolic trough array with thermal storage – opening for business in Arizona.

    The 280MW Solana Solana Generating Station constructed by Spanish group Abengoa has six hours of molten storage capacity that will allow it to produce energy into the evening, and deliver output according to the needs of the customer.

    solana“Solana is a monumental step forward in solar energy production,” said Don Brandt, the president of APS, the local utility. “This provides a huge boost toward our goal to make Arizona the solar capital of America.”]

  11. rua @ 55

    Yes, proves Abbott has been playing politics with this since day 1 when he got the job from Turnbull.

    Abbott wants it rejected, keep the revenue then blame Labor for not lowering electricity prices.

    This is stupid. There is more fight in a kindergarten kid fighting over crayons than the Labor Party.

    Abbott is running riot doing and playing the way he wants.

  12. Psephos@39

    Saigon, ie HCM City has been pretty well back to its previous capitalistic and entrepreneural ways for years apparently even though ruled from the North.

    But the crunch for the Vietnamese Politburo is whether they are willing to risk their domestic power and privilege for the sake of an alliance with the west. They have seen the Burmese generals’ cautious liberalisation bringing a flood of money into the country, without the generals actually giving up power (yet). But their fear is that once they start to liberalise they won’t be able to stop.

    The other factor is how the Chinese treat their neighbors now and later as they become stronger and more assertive.

    They will do what they damn well want when it suits them, as all superpowers have done in the past.

    As Hugh White wrote today – “….where {abbott’s} meetings with the leaders of China and Japan brought him face to face with Asia’s most dangerous rivalries”.

    Having some Western friends might come in handy for VN down the track.

    Interestingly the West’s thaw in relations with Burma also had the aspect of balancing some of China’s big influence in Burma.

  13. Psephos

    Oh he was an A Grade murderous bastard all right. But if he did not end up having to suck up to the Russkiys and Chinese and the good US relations were maintained then things would have been very different.
    For me the villain of the piece were the French trying to restore some “La gloire de France” in the post war wash up.

  14. There is an easy response to any claim that Direct Action is a reasonable plan – or even some sort of market mechanism, ha ha – and that is to ignore that furphy altogether and point out that Abbott has already demonstrated no intent that it be a reasonable plan by saying it will only be funded as far as it goes and no further.

  15. Actually, I wonder if Plibersek’s comments about ‘waiting to see the legislation’ with regards the repeal … maybe there is an expectation that Abbott may compromise. I had thought it was just standard opposition tactics – don’t reject outright something before you’ve seen it that just looks negative. Abbott did that all the time.

    But given the leadership debate comments that both candidates were promising to stand up for the carbon price I thought Plibersek’s comments were strangely weak.

    BUT if there are genuine signs that Abbott is going to do another “policy shift” and could do a deal with the ALP … not that the draft legislation shows any hint of that, but it is potentially just an opening bid in a negotiation.

    I guess we’ll see.

  16. [63
    Posted Tuesday, October 15, 2013 at 6:44 pm | PERMALINK
    Won’t Palmer have to find another $3 million for 2015 if he does reject the legislation and then market prices after that?

    The Carbon Tax Repeal Bills have a fixed end date of 1 July 2014 irrespective of when it is passed. There are provisions for the pre June 30 2014 taxes to be collected up till February 2015, but no new liabilities entered into.

  17. If Greg Hunt now believes some of the nonsense he is repeating, he must surely have been “reprogrammed” at Menzies House. He has the charisma of a robot.

  18. Regarding the ETS element of carbon pricing, i.e. excluding the starting fixed price (carbon tax) Labor should not compromise.

    If Abbott wants to bluff his way to a DD on the issue – you let him!

    We have an ETS, tell the Monkey to put up or move on!

  19. If the Carbon Tax is not payable “on the nod” from Abbott, then will it be charged?

    If it is not charged, and the amendments are successfully blocked, and a Labor government is re-elected in 2016 – hey, it’s possible – or the balance of power situation for the Coalition worsens as a result of a Double Dissolution, and the tax remains, will either a future Labor government or a reinvigorated Parliament demand that the tax be paid?

    What is the legal position here?

    Will base (the “500 polluters”) tax payers who didn’t pay the tax because of an Abbott promise (an oxymoron, I know) then try to charge it retrospectively to, say, electricity retailers?

    And will the retailers pay up?

    If they do, will they try to pass it on?

    What will shareholders say about a payable tax that is not paid?

    What will public servants, charged with a statutary duty to enforce the law, do? Will they send out reminders? Will they resign en masse? Will they prosecute?

    Non-payment of tax is one thing. When prosecution for non-payment occurs, then other departments get involved. Is the whole country going to be acting on a promise and a prayer?

    To me, the simple (and customary) thing is this: if a tax is payable,no matter how onerous or out of the government’s control, it is paid.

    If it is paid, will it be refunded? What about contractual obligations regarding loans to green companies? November 4 (this year) seems like an awfully short period of “consultation”.

    If the tax is repealed then the repeal takes effect inthe next financial year.

    At the moment, the next available financial year is 2015-2016, when the tax will be defunct anyway.

    This sounds like Abbott’s “whirling dervish” approach, only this time it involves billions. Ray Hadley and his Bogan listeners won’t save Abbott on something as big as this. We’re talking REAL money here, REAL companies and REAL environmental damage.

    The whole country could be cast into a legal limbo.

  20. lizzie

    [He has the charisma of a robot.]

    Hang o,n Robots in Isaac Asimov’s books have lots of charisma!!!!! A lot more than cHunt or rAbbott.

  21. Oh, and what about Senate voting reform?!? I hope there is some serious discussion going on between the major parties about this as we speak.

  22. The first test for Labor comes when the repeal stuff is presented in the HoR.

    Much will depend on the nature of the actual proposed Bill but if Labor votes against it in the Reps, where it will pass, then they are obliged, I would have thought, to oppose it in the Senate.

    I still think Labor can oppose the Bill with honour in both Houses.

    If, at some future point in time, the new Senate, possibly with Labor either voting against or abstaining, the whole failure of the Abbott government having nil policy in the area, is theirs to carry alone.

    Any failure by Labor to stand on their own committed policy to a price on carbon will leave their supporters wondering the purpose of any opposition.

  23. [Won’t Palmer have to find another $3 million for 2015 if he does reject the legislation and then market prices after that?]

    He hasn’t paid the first 6 yet, and says he will take it to the HC. If Abbott wants to pass legislation that forces Clive to pay, its a dumb way to pass anything.

    Plus his exposure draft time for comment is pathetically short.

  24. Don’t you all love the fine mess Christine Milne and her carbon tax has created for Labor?

    It could all have been over ages ago. All they had to do was support the CPRS – but NOOO!

    The Greens have played a huge role ending the careers of two Labor PMs, don’t worry about that 😯


  25. Centre

    The original CPRS also had a fixed price for the first three years. Business wanted it so they could bed down the required systems . The fixed price period was not some crazy Greens scheme It was also supported by the Coals until the Orcs took over the party ……….by 1 vote.
    That said the Greens wanting perfection rather than what was on offer makes them feckwits.

  26. Very messy, I suggest the Senate send the bills to a very Select Committee so Erica and George can be called.

    [“This legislation does not deal with the scenario that the repeal is not passed by the abolition date,” de Wit said.

    “If that happens companies will still be liable and as a lawyer I would be advising my clients that they still need to comply with the existing laws because they would not know if the repeal was going to be passed, or when, or in what form.

    “It would be prudent for them to continue to pass the price through to their customers, but once the repeal goes through those customers may want a refund … that is going to get very complicated.”]

  27. The draft legislation, unless I’ve missed something, is only about repealing current legislation and there is also something specific about power prices reducing. I think that the DA legislation awaits another day (if ever).

    I think that Abbott’s tactics are brilliant and he has Shorten wedged already because two senate rejections keeps the issue and the narrative boiling: 1.Labor lied and was wrong to introduce carbon tax (as Rudd admitted in campaign); 2.Labor is still in bed with the Greens who they said they’d ditched; 3.Labor doesn’t want your power prices to reduce. Then Labor may have to face a one-issue DD election on this narrative and the “ETS later” argument is non-existent in the public’s eyes because the waters are so muddied. It just means that the tax could cost less, or it could cost more, and what on earth was Rudd trying to sell? Good if it costs less?? … but then the exercise is pointless. And in the DD election the Greens will be wiped out as they scream from the side: put up the price of power with a higher tax.

    I’ll be amazed if Shorten doesn’t agree to the repeal lock, stock and barrel, and excuse it away somehow (mandate .. we didn’t have one, Libs now do). Otherwise Abbott will have a DD option or a third try with Palmer’s senate, and still a DD option. And all the time the public will be reminded who refuses to bring down power prices, and how the carbon tax is doing nothing to reduce emissions (even if it is doing so but who knows).

    The fun then can start with the Direct Action nonsense which I predict will never see the light of day in the form of legislation, and nobody will care. He repealed carbon tax, as he said he would! The quicker Labor let’s him do it, the quicker the issue and memory of this sorry chapter will fade into history.

  28. Mick77

    [The fun then can start with the Direct Action nonsense which I predict will never see the light of day ]
    How Coalition of you. Supporting deceit and blatant lying to the whole country.

  29. I’ll be amazed if Shorten doesn’t agree to the repeal lock, stock and barrel, and excuse it away somehow

    Then you will live to be amazed.

    The quicker Labor let’s him do it, the quicker the issue and memory of this sorry chapter will fade into history.

    The reason why this is a “sorry chapter” is because of the LNP lies and scare campaigning, and their abandonment of rational policy formulation.

    That’s only going to fade into history when the LNP returns to valuing reason.

  30. [The prime minister said he could not remember whether any of the world leaders he had met during his recent overseas visits had raised concerns about the government’s plan to abolish the tax…]

    FFS it was only a week or two ago, has be forgotten already? NO Liar.

  31. […Labor may have to face a one-issue DD election …]

    Elections have a life of their own, Abbott will never call one, does he want Clive to get 7 Senators?

  32. Put our pollie expense claim in the shade. Fancy paying more income tax for being Catholic.

    [The ‘Luxury Bishop’, the bath, and the €31m palace: Free-spending German cleric summoned to Vatican

    Limburg diocese officials have confirmed that last summer he spent €31m renovating his residence – more than double the original €13.5m estimate. Some reports suggest the total figure might be €40m……..
    Germany’s 24 million registered Catholics make a compulsory contribution to the Church from their income tax. ]

  33. [ will fade into history ]
    not if something crazy happens like 97% of the world’s climate scientists turning to out to be right

  34. [I think that Abbott’s tactics are brilliant and he has Shorten wedged already because two senate rejections keeps the issue and the narrative boiling: 1.Labor lied and was wrong to introduce carbon tax (as Rudd admitted in campaign);]

    Sorry Mick, but all your guff about Rudd and “Labor lied” goes back three years to another political era.

    The government is in government. They have different responsibilities.

    It’s not a blame game anymore. It’s not “Gotcha!” It’s government.

    You just don’t go around, when in government, advising tax payers not to pay their taxes, based on a promise that “it’ll all be alright on the night”.

    Doesn’t work that way.

    There are BILLIONS involved. Investments. Shareholders, Lawyers. Courts. Public servants.

    You don’t just pick up the phone and tell the punters not to bother coughing up.

    For one thing, the world hears about it. They start to think that Abbott isn’t runniong a proper shop. Ignore this tax today… ignore what else tomorrow?

    Ray Hadley and his bogan followers might think it’s as simple as a word in the right ear, but countries aren’t run like that. Not really. Just in Fantasyland.

  35. Oakeshott Country (from previous thread)

    Stop being so modest about your academic achievements, I can remember you and Diogenes speaking one time about certain letters after both your names and quite rare. Correct?

    BTW Do wish Lyne was still Oakeshott Country

  36. [shellbell
    Posted Tuesday, October 15, 2013 at 7:03 pm | PERMALINK
    Bob Carr was here for a self-important time not a long time.]


    Mike Kelly will make a very good Senator

  37. The odds of Abbott giving up his precious to go to a DD is zero.

    His “brilliant tactic” is to try to hector/bully/shame Labor (“Repent!”) into support his crock.

    Labor can afford to take its time and either support, support in part or opt out – depending on what can be maximum damage to the conservatives.

  38. @ Bushfire Bill 42

    [I’m making a prediction that abbott will do a deal with Labor to

    (a) get rid of the “Tex” part of the tax by June 30, 2014 (which was Labor policy anyway, under Rudd);

    (b) Merge “direct Action” with the ETS into one big policy – each side giving a little ground;

    (c) try to claim it was all his idea.

    His reluctance to “remember” whether any of the Asian leaders had chipped him about cancelling the CT/ETS, the fact that no matter what he says, if he doesn’t get it through this financial year, then the next available financial year will be 2014-2015 for repeal after July 2015 (when the CT segment will be finished anyway), his lust for tax revenue, and his general sneakiness lead me to conclude the “Carbon Tax” will be repealed only in the strictest sense and definition of the words “Carbon Tax”]

    This is more or less my prediction too. If Abbott’s unable to pass the repeal, he’ll put through whatever pissy amendments to the CPRS legislation he can, change the name to something like the “Pollution Scheme” (or maybe “Direct Action”!), and then proudly announce that his government has repealed the Carbon Tax.

    You know it makes sense.

Comments Page 2 of 69
1 2 3 69

Leave a Reply

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