ReachTEL: 53-47 to Labor

The monthly ReachTEL poll for the Seven Network gives Labor its biggest post-election lead to date, the slow-moving Essential Research also ticks a point in Labor’s favour, and Morgan records little change.

UPDATE (Essential and Morgan): The fortnightly Morgan multi-mode poll, conducted over the past two weekends from a sample of 3019 by face-to-face and SMS, shows little change on the primary vote, with the Coalition up half a point to 39.5%, Labor down one to 37%, the Greens up one to 11.5% and the Palmer United Party down half a point to 3%. Labor’s lead is up half a point on the headline respondent-allocated two-party preferred measure, from 52.5-47.5 to 53-47, but the precise opposite happens on the previous election preferences measure. Today’s Essential Research moves a point in Labor’s favour on two-party preferred, which is now at 50-50. Both major parties are down a point on the primary vote, the Coalition to 42% and Labor to 36%, with the Greens and the Palmer United Party steady on 9% and 4%. See bottom of post for further details.

GhostWhoVotes relates that the latest monthly ReachTEL automated phone poll conducted for the Seven Network gives Labor its biggest post-election lead to date, up to 53-47 from 52-48 in the December 15 poll. Primary votes are Coalition 39.8%, down from 41.4%; Labor 40.6%, up from 40.4%; and Greens 9.1%, up from 8.7%. The poll also has 20.3% reporting being better off since a year ago compared with 39.3% for worse off and 40.4% for neither. Prospectively, 23.5% expect to be better off in a year, 39.4% worse off and 37.1% neither. On the economy as a whole, 34.9% think it headed in the right direction and 39.3% in the wrong direction, with 25.8% undecided. A very similar question from Essential Research last week had 38% rating the economy as heading in the right direction versus 33% for the wrong direction, which while better than the ReachTEL results was a substantial deterioration on post-election findings which had it at 44% and 27%. These figures here courtesy of Ryan Moore on Twitter.

The poll was conducted on Thursday from a sample of 3547. Full results will be available on the ReachTEL site tomorrow, which will apparently include personal ratings that have Tony Abbott up and Bill Shorten down. Stay tuned tomorrow for the weekly Essential Research and fortnightly Morgan.

UPDATE (Essential Research): Crikey reports Essential Research has moved a point in Labor’s favour on two-party preferred, which is now at 50-50. Both major parties are down a point on the primary vote, the Coalition to 42% and Labor to 36%, with the Greens and the Palmer United Party steady on 9% and 4%. Also featured: privatisation deemed a bad idea by 59%, including 69% for Australia Post and 64% for the ABC and SBS; 24% think we spend too much on welfare, 41% too little and 27% about right; 64% believe the age pension too low, but only 27% think the same about unemployment benefits; 78% believe alcohol-related violence is getting worse, and perhaps also everything they see in the news media; “87% support harsher mandatory sentences for alcohol-related assaults; over 60% support earlier closing times for bottle shops, pubs and clubs; 76% support lockouts and 59% support lifting the age at which you can buy alcohol”. UPDATE: Full report here.

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.

2,159 comments on “ReachTEL: 53-47 to Labor”

Comments Page 37 of 44
1 … 36 37 38 … 44

  1. YB

    [I would have thought that what Madoff and Pratt did also posed a threat to the legitimate interests of others and therefore Gaol is indeed warranted.]

    You left out the last bit — the bit about sequestration being the only way of abating the threat.

    [You don’t think ripping off someone of their lifesavings is a threat to that persons interests ?]

    Well yes, obviously, but once Madoff was convicted that threat vanished. Gaoling him doesn’t change the threat he poses.

    [How many suicides have occurred because of a shyster ripping some poor bugger out of their whole lifes toil ?]

    I don’t know. We should definitely make it harder for people to be defrauded by spivs, but of course, capitalism itself is one quite complex and world scale scam that is destroying the lives of billions. Very few from amongst Madoff’s peers and even his victims are calling for that system to end. At least some of his victims were his fellow rich, who surely knew his promised returns were much too good to be true. Some were fund managers acting on behalf of pension funds who also ought to have known better but whose poor judgement was settled on the naive and the poor. They too ought to have been dealt with as I’ve suggested.

  4. [It seems to me that Psephos is right when he argues that misuse of private corporate funds is a lesser ethical breach than misuse of Union funds. ]

    That is dumb, dimwitted, stupid and reflects the 3 seconds thought put into it.

    Private corporate corruption just crashed the global economy, countless suicides no doubt, many thrown into poverty, miserable lives… These people destroy ordinary peoiples lives scamming and cheating the system, often with govt/regulator inaction, to add a few extra million to the millions they have they quite willing to destroy people whose few thousand stand between them and their family living on the street, or to pay for life saving medical treatment and so..

    These elite, self entitled scum, rather than community work should have their necks severed by guillotine.

    And since this economic white collar crime wiped out the US middle class, as well as global economic disaster…..how many of them have actually even been prosecuted or gone to jail…. they are safe from the law no matter what they do.

    Make these people personally responsible, put a few in jail…see just how quickly they stop.

  5. It would actually be very funny if he gets off because the police/DPP stuffed up.

    [Mr Rozencwajg said instead of alleging a deception of the Health Services Union, the charges alleged a deception of the Commonwealth Bank and Diners Club, the lending institutions that issued the cards at the centre of the alleged offending.

    But he said he couldn’t see how either institution had been defrauded.]

  6. Everything

    [These are items actually involved in the crime, which is quite different. ]

    Really? You’ve changed your tune on ‘boats’ then … It’s not a crime to seek protection.

  7. Diogenes,

    [On law and order, I heard them talking about the mandatory one-punch laws.

    It seems the issue isn’t at all on party lines. From what I can guess the WA and NSW govs are for them as are Vic Labor, whereas SA, Vic and Qld govs are against.]

    Vic Labor is proposing a “new” crime of assault causing death, with a maximum penalty of 20 years. As has been pointed out, the penalty is the same as manslaughter, which it presumably would be charged under anyway. No specific “one punch” laws. Vic Labor has been against mandatory sentences, I believe. I haven’t heard that has changed.

  10. Fran

    If I recall correctly alan bond was bankrupt and presenting himself an ailing old man when he was sent to jail. How would you confiscate a bankrupt’s assets to ensure he lived a modest life for the rest of his days? Few people believed Bond really was broke and much money was spent and books written and TV programs made in the search for his assets. last time I heard Bond was alive and healthy and living much better than some of the people I know who were defrauded by him.

  11. Diog…

    Well, it is an important principle in law that a person cannot be convicted of something he/she hasn’t actually been charged with… isn’t it?

  14. I wonder whether forcing those convicted of fraud to work at Hungry Jacks on a 15 year-old’s minimum wage in Ringwood on permanent night shift would be considered “cruel and unusual” punishment…

    (also, no comments on Herr (almost?) Doktor Bowe appearing on ABC news about the WA senate count. Odd. You weren’t given near enough time.)

  15. Of course Pratt should have been jailed. He stole mega millions from consumers and competing organisations.

    A jail sentence can only act as a further deterrent.

    If the Loons were in government, Pratt wouldn’t need to be jailed, there’d be no capitalism and no money.

  16. Edwina StJohn@1794

    I think Thommo should be given the max jail sentence and the max fine suspended on the basis that he gives full evidence against who had knowledge of his crimes in the Gillard government.

    So, ESJ, just what law, exactly, has Tomson broken ?
    Has he acted contrary to the law or to the regulations of the HSU’s credit card policy.
    If not, why should he go to Gaol ?

  18. [Fran Barlow
    Posted Wednesday, January 29, 2014 at 8:20 pm | PERMALINK
    Everything

    These are items actually involved in the crime, which is quite different.

    Really? You’ve changed your tune on ‘boats’ then]

    Well no, I haven’t changed my mind. It is not illegal to seek asylum, however, it is illegal for the boat driver to enter Australian waters without permission.

  20. Well the folks above have come up with some great suggestions for deterring the dodgy and non-dodgy rich from offending social justice with their conduct. I’d quite enjoy giving such folk English lessons or having them hug trees or be in a primary class run by me (though having them with primary kids mightn’t be best).

    I doubt these would suffice however.

    None of them has yet guessed what measures might restrain the wealthy from doing over the disempowered. This ought to be surprising on an ALP-leaning site, but tellingly, it isn’t. Even in this place, a social system that so seriously misdistributes wealth as to permit the richest 87 people on the planet to hold as much wealth as the poorest 3.5bn is beyond fundamental question.

  22. Game. Set and Match.

    [Mr Rozencwajg said instead of alleging a deception of the Health Services Union, the charges alleged a deception of the Commonwealth Bank and Diners Club, the lending institutions that issued the cards at the centre of the alleged offending.

    But he said he couldn’t see how either institution had been defrauded.

    Any alleged fraud, Mr Rozencwajg said, would have been committed on the Health Services Union.

    “Isn’t his fraud on the HSU … but you haven’t charged it that way,” he told prosecutors.

    While prosecutor’s argued Mr Thomson had no authority to use the bank cards for non-union business, Mr Rozencwajg said that didn’t prove he had deceived either the Commonwealth Bank or Diners Club.

    He said the cards were issued to Mr Thomson, were valid cards, bore his name and could be used to purchase goods and services.]

  25. [Well, it is an important principle in law that a person cannot be convicted of something he/she hasn’t actually been charged with… isn’t it?]

    Certainly is. That’s why I would have thought a competent prosecutor would charge someone appropriately.

  26. I rate the following from the very worst to the least worse:

    1. Pratt – he stole multi millions from ordinary consumers and competing businesses.

    2. Abbott – he claimed for taxpayer expenses to promote his book for personal gain.

    3. J Bishop and B Joyce – they charged expenditure to the taxpayer to attend weddings.

    4. Thomson – the total cost of escort services was less than the thieving from all of the above.

  27. Fran,

    [None of them has yet guessed what measures might restrain the wealthy from doing over the disempowered.]

    My 1814 was a serious suggestion.

  28. Everything

    [Well no, I haven’t changed my mind. It is not illegal to seek asylum, however, it is illegal for the boat driver to enter Australian waters without permission.]

    A distinction without a difference. If one can seek relief by boat journey legally, one can contract someone to convey you. Strictly speaking, there’s nobody at the maritime border to ask and so the boat may proceed to a place of safety where the IMAs can seek protection.

  29. [bemused
    …..Typical Tory absence of morality.

    Madoff’s liabilities far exceeded his assets. No doubt much of those assets were obtained ‘legally’ as a huge salary and commission he paid himself from the funds invested.]

    The point Fran and I were debating is whether or not you can take everything a criminal owns after a crime, or only those assets gained through crime. I say throw the book at Madoff and strip him of all the assets he gained illegally, I am just making the point you can’t take any more than that from him.

    [So who should have first call on his assets, his victims, or him?

    You have shown where you stand. Why am I not surprised? ]

    So what is your view of Thomson using union funds to pay for his prostitutes?

    Fer or Agin?

  30. Fran, RE#1801

    The thing about incarcerating these people, is that by doing that you put them into contact with people they would not normally associate themselves with; Armed Robbers, Thugs, Hit men, Murderers. People that they would be intimidated by. People that they would not even go near in a “pink fit”.
    If only for a portion of their sentence (they should also be stripped of all material possessions), it would act as an adequate punishment.
    At the very least, they’ll get pause to think.

  31. Seizure and forfeiture orders are a common tool used by Government to penalise criminals, particularly in the area of drug related offences.

    A drug dealer could have worked honestly all his life and amassed wealth in the form of savings, land, houses commercial properties, cars, boats etc. and after being convicted of one dealing offence involving a few thousand dollars or less can lose it all to the state.

    How is that more draconian than stripping rip off merchants of their stolen assets?

    Are middleaged housewives convicted of growing a few cannabis plants to augment their pension worse than the Maddoffs and Pratts of this world?

  32. Centre

    [Pratt got what he deserved.]

    Improbable, since just desert is a quasi religious concept with its roots in the mediaeval and not amenable to evaluation. Yet even if one accepted purely for the sake of argument, the notion of just desert, one ought to ask each time someone is confined to gaol whether the public got what they deserved, and how much that was diminished by the bill.

  35. Pratt did five things:

    (1) He stole lots of money from lots of people.
    (2) He used that money to help fund the political people who run the systems who who kept him out of jail.
    (3) He passed some of that money onto his successors who have it now.
    (4) He contributed to the erosion of trust in governance.
    (5) He contributed to the general sense that there are two sets of laws: one for the spivs and the other for their prey.

    At about the same time that Pratt avoided a custodial sentence, Aboriginal people were being put into the slammer for the theft of a packet of buscuits under the mandatory three strikes and you are jailed laws operating in the NT at the time.

    The hugely disproportionate policing and jailing of Indigenous people then, and now, contributes to the hugely disproportionate number of Indigenous people who die in custory. But Pratt was OK. Uh huh.

  39. Well, I don’t know about deserts but I do know about desserts. I still feel vaguely agrieved at the very large theft and the fact that he was not forced into a jail cell with other common criminals.

  40. [Fran Barlow
    Posted Wednesday, January 29, 2014 at 8:33 pm | PERMALINK
    Everything

    Well no, I haven’t changed my mind. It is not illegal to seek asylum, however, it is illegal for the boat driver to enter Australian waters without permission.

    A distinction without a difference. If one can seek relief by boat journey legally, one can contract someone to convey you. Strictly speaking, there’s nobody at the maritime border to ask and so the boat may proceed to a place of safety where the IMAs can seek protection.]

    Absolutely wrong. An individual can seal asylum. The driver of a boat is responsible for ensuring that all preparations for the trip are in order (enough fuel, enough food, enough lifejackets and the appropriate authorisation).

    Just as it is not my responsibility as a passenger on Qantas to make sure that the pilot has appropriately weighted the aircraft- the pilot has to do this, not me- it is the driver of the boat that is responsible for his or her authorisations.

    If you cross national borders in a car/truck and you speed you can still be fined, saying that you have asylum seekers in the car/truck doesn’t get you off! :devil:

  42. Everything@1829

    The point Fran and I were debating is whether or not you can take everything a criminal owns after a crime, or only those assets gained through crime. I say throw the book at Madoff and strip him of all the assets he gained illegally, I am just making the point you can’t take any more than that from him.

    So who should have first call on his assets, his victims, or him?

    You have shown where you stand. Why am I not surprised?


    So what is your view of Thomson using union funds to pay for his prostitutes?

    Fer or Agin?

    What Thomson paid for is totally irrelevant and just introduced by the likes of you for its salacious value.

    If he was authorised to use the cards for spending, including personal spending, presumably up to some limit, then he has not broken any law.

    The same would apply in the absence of any spending guidelines.

    His ethics are another matter.

    On the matter between you and Fran, how do you decide which assets are legitimate and which were obtained as a result of criminal activity. Particularly when legal and illegal activities may have overlapped?

    Treat it with similar rules to bankruptcy as to what the offender can retain.

  43. I suspect that Fran’s idea of punishment is to force miscreants to listen to 100 hours of Greens Party policy discussions, without ear plugs, followed by 100 hours of the Koala suit begging routine.

  44. BK
    Posted Wednesday, January 29, 2014 at 8:23 pm | PERMALINK
    Was there a big union whistleblowing story on 7:30 tonight?

    I was wondering that too Leigh Sales was tweeting about it this afternoon

  45. Rossmcg

    [If I recall correctly alan bond was bankrupt and presenting himself an ailing old man when he was sent to jail. How would you confiscate a bankrupt’s assets to ensure he lived a modest life for the rest of his days?]

    You could order that he live in an approved group home, with no access to anything but a trust account controlled by Corrections. That account would be open to public scrutiny. If he becomes non-compliant he goes into a higher security facility. He gets to work and keep modest sums to cover basic personal effects and food. Simple enough.

  46. [THE police fraud case against former Labor MP Craig Thomson could be in doubt with the revelation that Victorian prosecutors offered to drop all 173 charges over alleged misuse of union credit cards if he pleaded guilty to a single offence of “obtaining benefits by deception”.]

    Sorry this was Nov last year. How many thousands have Naptimes Keystone cops pissed against the wall?

  48. People were going broke in the business I was in all the time. The margins were lousy. IMHO there is little doubt that Pratt would have helped some of them over the edge.

    He deliberately and cold-bloodedly (when he was already filthy rich) decided that he was going to steal money off as many businesses as he could as well as all the people who bought stuff out of the cardboard boxes.

    They should have just stripped him of all his money and made him live in some second hand cardboard boxes.

  49. Bemused

    I think part of the problem is some people confuse wasteful or extravagant spending with fraud.

    As Chris Bowen rightly points out there should be no tolerance for corruption.

    Many here tend to overuse the corruption word

Comments Page 37 of 44
1 … 36 37 38 … 44

Leave a Reply

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