GhostWhoVotes relates that the latest Newspoll has Labor leading 52-48, up from 51-49 last fortnight. Labor is up a point on the primary vote to 36%, and the Coalition down one to 40%. More to follow. UPDATE: The Australian report relates that Bill Shorten’s approval rating is up three points to 36%, which is the first time a poll has moved in his favour in quite a while. UPDATE 2: Full tables here; to fill in the blanks, Shorten’s disapproval is steady at 43%, Tony Abbott is up two on approval to 40% and steady on disapproval at 50%, and Abbott’s lead as preferred prime minister nudges from 42-36 to 43-36.
Today’s Morgan result, combining its regular face-to-face and SMS polling from the last two weekends, was the Coalition’s worst since the election, recording a 1.5% shift on the primary vote from the Coalition (to 38%) to Labor (38.5%), with the Greens down a point to 11% and Palmer United up half a point to 4.5%. On 2013 election preferences, this gives Labor a 53.5-46.5 lead, up from 52.5-47.5 a fortnight ago, while on respondent-allocated preferences the shift is from 53.5-46.5 to 54.5-45.5. Morgan has also been in the business lately of providing selective state-level two-party results, which are presumably based on respondent-allocated preferences. From this poll we are told Labor had unlikely leads of 56.5-43.5 in Queensland and 52-48 in Western Australia, together with leads of 54.5-45.5 in New South Wales and 55-45 in Victoria, and an unspecified “narrow” lead in South Australia.
UPDATE (Essential Research): Essential Research has Labor back up a point on the primary vote after it fell two last week, now at 37%, with the Coalition up one for a second week. The Greens and Palmer United are at 9% and 4%, with others down a point and the other loose point coming off rounding. Respondents were quizzed about the attributes of the major parties, which provides good news for Labor in that “divided” is down 14% to 58%, and “clear about what they stand for” is up 8% to 42%. Those are also the biggest movers for the Liberals, respectively down 6% and up 7%, although they are still performing better than Labor on each at 50% and 32%. The worst differential for Labor is still “divided”, at 26% in favour of the Liberals, while for the Liberals it’s “too close to the big corporate and financial interests”, which is at 62% for Liberal and 34% for Labor.
A question reading “as far as you know, do you think taxes in Australia are higher or lower than in other developed countries” turns up the fascinating finding that 64% of respondents believed they were higher versus only 8% for lower, while 65% believed taxes to have increased over the last five years versus 9% for decreased. Forty-seven per cent believe the current level of taxation is enough versus 33% who believe they will need to increase. The poll also finds 50% opposed to following New Zealand’s example in holding a referendum on changing the flag versus only 31% supportive.
kezza
er, that’s exactly what I’m saying — Gillard didn’t understand the value placed on marriage.
Saying there’s a value placed on marriage doesn’t mean that I agree with the value placed on marriage.
Obviously there is one, or the gay community wouldn’t give a flying rats as to whether they can marry or not.
I have said here in the past that I don’t think the government should have anything to do with marriage whatsoever. If people want their relationship recognised by a church, then it should be left up to the churches to work out the regulations.
Some of the commentary about Gillard and her supposed dim view of marriage is not in keepi g with what she said.
She said she opposed SSM because she was traditional, conservative and that marriage between man and woman had a special status.
[“I think that there are some important things from our past that need to continue to be part of our present and part of our future,” she said. “If I was in a different walk of life, if I’d continued in the law and was partner of a law firm now, I would express the same view, that I think for our culture, for our heritage, the Marriage Act and marriage being between a man and a woman has a special status.]
Diogenes @ 1092: Try Noel Barber’s “The War of the Running Dogs”.
Diog
and after she ceased being Leader of the Labor party and thus obliged to toe the party line — as even the humblest candidate is — she said something a little different.
Actions speak louder than words, too…
pedant
Thanks
Diog
actually, I’ll retract that a bit — it was a conscience vote, so it wasn’t as necessary.
I will add that (at dinners I attended, in semi private conversations and the like) she seemed to place a great deal of weight to not upsetting her parents!
z
The party line was for SSM. She went against the party line.
Lol! On Howards worthiness.
I will always remember a conversation with a much respected friend of mine back in 97 about Howard. They had jagged an invitation to a Fiberal function not long after they went to work in Canberra. They got to have a 5 minute 1 on 1 conversation with Howard there and it went somewhat to the Hanson thing so prominent at the time.
She was so disgusted at what the duplicitous little hypocrite had to say “among friends” she went out the next day and joined the ALP.
Diog…but it allowed a conscience vote, so the party line wasn’t binding in this case (hence my partial retraction…)
Z
Agree. I think her parents had a lot to do with it.
BH@958
I have flown Malaysian Airlines and would do so again.
It seems most likely that a pilot went nuts so how do you guard against this? It could happen with any airline.
I dare say that for the foreseeable future Malaysian will be ultra cautious and the risk will be lower than most.
My worst airline experience was with Singapore.
SIR Kinkajou TO YOU!!!
1101
I do not agree with the view that the state should have nothing to do with marriage. Marriage is the dominant form for the recognition of couples in societies and people should be able to have their relationships officially recognised if they want to. Official recognition also helps makes administrative procedures easier for both the administrators and the administratees.
“@kimmaree_tweet: Looks like I am the only commoner left in my Twit-stream ..hanging out with the Bunyips”
Tom
The word marriage us the accepted term for official recognition of a relationship now.
Marriage no longer means just a religious recognition. Its a cultural and legal one as well.
If it was just religious then there would not be the fuss there is about equal marriage.
zoomster
I disagree. Gillard knew exactly the “value” placed on marriage, and that’s why she didn’t want same sex couples to go through the bullshit.
Imagine if SSM couples suffered the same divorce rate as hetero couples? Imagine the crap that would surround their children. Because, let’s face it, the kids of SSM are going to be of great concern to the religious moribund of the population.
And, just to throw a cat among the pigeons, I can’t say either that I genuinely think that kids brought up in SSMs/relationships are not influenced by their parents sexuality.
Bemused@1111 – My sentiments also.
I think we need to keep a clear head if we can.
I watched in some kind of awe at the way those guys on the Qantas big airbus dealt with the engine explosion on TV the other night just after they took off from Singapore.
I did not realised what a near run damn thing is was.
In one fell swoop, as they say, the solid gold reputations of Qantas and Rolls-Royce would have bitten the dust in more ways than one.
People would still have had to get on the RR engined jets and it is to Joyce’s credit at the time he grounded the Qantas ones.
He has come in for a lot of flack but due to his actions the faults were found in the engines of a number of other of the big Airbuses and RR was obliged to do some radical engineering on their usually reliable engines to maintain confidence in both the plane, the airline and the engine.
Despite all the conjecture I find it hard to believe that a 777 can stay in the air for 7 hours plus with any kind of really serious damage and fly on autopilot.
I sense there is more to tell in this tale yet.
Tom,
I’d agree with Z’s contention that civil unions can be co-ordinated by the State for those who crave official sanction. However, marriage is something that should be the purview of the churches and can remain the province of males and females.
Homosexual unions are as legitimate as any other civil union. However, they are not a marriage.
kezza2
“I agree with Gillard, marriage is an anachronism. ”
Problem is she has never said nor indicated such a thing so saying you ‘agree’ with her taking that position is profoundly stupid.
GG
If it was a religious only institution there would be no legislation on the subject in parliament.
1115
I agree entirely. That is the point of my comment in reply to the “marriage is no business of the state” view expressed in the final paragraph of 1101.
absolutetwaddle
[Problem is she has never said nor indicated such a thing so saying you ‘agree’ with her taking that position is profoundly stupid.]
Sure she did, or did you miss the Melbourne interview, with Anne Summers?
So, guess who’s looking stupid now, eh absolute?
The mirror beckons.
1118
That sort of bigoted view is one of the reasons that I think the state should remain involved in marriage, so the law can say that it is marriage and it is equal.
Sir Sanctimonious Soapy Brandis on Lateline tonight …
Mad Lib@1038
It’s questions such as that which you ask here which identify you as a total moron.
With FTTH you will be able to select whatever plan you like from the service provider of your choice and pay accordingly. Want high speed with large data limits, then pay more. Want a basic service with slower speed and lower data limits? Well you will pay less.
In actual fact, FTTH plans already being offered with phone bundled with lower speed internet are cheaper than non NBN plans.
Mad Lib, you are simply a liar who denies reality and bases stupid claims on false premises and outright lies.
You are a contemptible troll.
OMG! I’ve been busy and only just caught up with the Knights and Dames business.
WTF was Quentin thinking giving oxygen to this?! I have always had such esteem for her, but now…?
In the 19th century, William Charles Wentworth was pilloried for wanting to create a “bunyip aristocracy”. Now, in the 21st century, Abbott brings us a “bogan aristocracy”!
I know they have this in NZ, but I have always enjoyed looking down my nose at NZ.
I hate all awards of any sort and would never accept one (in the very unlikely event of one being offered to me). So I guess I just don’t understand the motivation behind this sort of a decision.
GG
[However, marriage is something that should be the purview of the churches and can remain the province of males and females.]
Given that the majority of marriages have nothing to do with a church and are carried out by celebrants I’d say that marriage has well and truly moved away from the “purview of the churches”.
Guytaur,
Homosexuals will just have to find another name for their civil unions. They’ve spent the last 40 odd years legitimising their lifestyle choices by stealing mainstream definitions as descriptors. Time to develop a less derivative vernacular if you really want to be credible.
Doesn’t mean you can’t frock up. If that’s what you like.
kezza
actually, she didn’t. She skirted around the issue.
The implication was that she personally saw marriage as unnecessary, but it was an implication, not a clear statement.
You seem determined not to agree with me, even when I’m agreeing with you, so I doubt you’ll agree with that either.
[Greensborough Growler
Posted Tuesday, March 25, 2014 at 10:32 pm | PERMALINK
Tom,
I’d agree with Z’s contention that civil unions can be co-ordinated by the State for those who crave official sanction. However, marriage is something that should be the purview of the churches and can remain the province of males and females.
Homosexual unions are as legitimate as any other civil union. However, they are not a marriage.]
As I’ve commented before, GG, when discrimination is dealt with – a la blacks being allowed to sit down on white busses, the mode of transport isn’t changed. It’s still called a bus.
Likewise, a marriage is still a marriage. Whether it’s between people you don’t consider worthy is irrelevant.
Discrimination of any form needs to be eradicated. Your bigoted stance needs a quantum more prayer.
Just think Jesus.
the nbn would be too expensive at the moment it was taking resources that couldnt be responsibly found with increased taxes or by reasonable borrowing or by defunding lower priorities.
however you are so caught up in the lib talking points you forget both that it is essential economic infrastructure thst would be a natural monopoly and pay for itself and give a rate of return.
you should think for yourself and escape the talking points youd do much better.
kezza
[I disagree. Gillard knew exactly the “value” placed on marriage, and that’s why she didn’t want same sex couples to go through the bullshit.]
She said marriage was an important traditional institution.
Dewy eyed revisionism isn’t a good look.
[Problem is she has never said nor indicated such a thing so saying you ‘agree’ with her taking that position is profoundly stupid.]
And nor has she ever voiced her support for SSM as far as I can tell and you seem to think she once did.
This imperial honours bullshit is just another example of Abbott the Wrecker.
What next, Sir Rodent Cutlet?
And where the hell is Turnbull?
One thought I had was that Abbott knows his days are numbered and like a kamikaze pilot, is going out in flames.
Bugger me! What a week. I have gone from looking on with astonishment, to head scratching, to amusement at this woeful Government’s performance. Now I am just angry.
What’s worse, I live in Queensland and have to put up with this crap from Blieje – a pimply faced second rate conveyancing clerk.
Kezza,
I don’t call an apple an orange either. Should I pray about that?
Jesus was good with wine and water. And the things he could do to with feeding a multitude that drops in unannounced.
Discrimnation only occcurs when people are denied access to services, jobs and facilities. Words don’t quite meet the criteria.
kezza
well, if we’re going to go by Jesus, then he was big on marriage being between a man and a woman. Not even a hint he’d support gay marriage.
(I repeat that I do. I’m just saying that, in an ideal world which I don’t think will ever exist, I’d separate church and state entirely. However, marriage has symbolic importance, even for people who aren’t religious, so it will remain a government responsibility, and I recognise that reality).
GG
No. People like you will just have to accept that equality is just that.
The definition of marriage worldwide now includes same sex couples and you are in a similar position to Abbott on denying climate change.
Hate it as much as you like but thats the facts.
Abbott and the knighthoods – what a ddumb move !
Thommo and the appeal – another dumb move. I reckon take the 3 months and get on with life – instead wait 10 months for a potentially longer sentence! Go figure?
@Bemused/1125
That why Mod Lib says every time she’s here, “I’ve caused enough mischief for the night” and then leaves.
Apparently, Liberal Memebers would be outraged at the chance imperial honours would be re-introduced.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/pm-tony-abbott-rules-out-reinstating-knights-and-dames-in-oz/story-fni0cx4q-1226788026229
[She said marriage was an important traditional institution.
Dewy eyed revisionism isn’t a good look.]
The Gillard fundamentalists are not good with facts, their whole world view and Rudd hate needs good solid imagination and revisionism dewy eyed and other.
GG
As for symbols just look at what Labor has done in a creditable effort for indigenous people
The NSW Government proposes social/class cleansing in Sydney to remove the last remaining poor from the city.
My great x 4 grandmother was born on the Rocks in 1794, the daughter of two convicts. The Rocks area has for 228 years been an area of the convict/poorer classes.
This appalling Liberal class cleansing of Sydney should be opposed.
though I realise Liberals (and probably nowadays most Australians) hold artificial monetary “values” supreme.
(and all the mini-“leftists” see the greatest disaster facing us is the odd knight, hahaha)
With 3 months – he’d just do his time on a prison farm – very low risk of sexual assault too!
Abbott wants the relatives of MH370 passengers to know if they go to Perth that they are “coming to a decent country”? WTF is that supposed to mean? Was there some doubt about this? Is this a contrast with some other country? (I immediately took it in context as a swipe at Malaysia but maybe my Abbott hate has blinded me).
Aw Jackol – I thought waiving the visa fees is kind of petty.
Oh FCS Zoomster,
She didn’t skirt round the issue, she said fulsomely that she didn’t agree with the concept of marriage, full stop.
Yeah, sure, she held her own parents situation in high regard, but it didn’t stop her from saying what she really felt.
That you didn’t see it, is possibly because of your bias.
Did you ever think of that?
BTW, my son went to Gillard’s Melbourne appearance, and (while it wasn’t televised at all) he told me that Gillard most definitely, most definitively, did not agree with marriage – from her own mouth.
Umm, have you seen the interview.
My son was furious, he was next in line for a question, and rather than ask spurious shit about SSM, he wanted to ask what it was exactly that constituted “national security”.
A rather more important question that this bullshit about marriage.
Surely there is absolutely no doubt why JG was against SSM: to stop the Shoppies from ditching her and going over to the Ruddster. I liked Gillard and despised Rudd, but it was always clear to me that this was the reason for her stance: Ockham’s razor and all that.
“@GMegalogenis: More than half the Oz population is either immigrant or Indigenous.
Government introduces Imperial honours and bigots’ rights.
Weird stuff.”
Edwina Dame?
[Abbott and the knighthoods – what a ddumb move !
Thommo and the appeal – another dumb move. I reckon take the 3 months and get on with life – instead wait 10 months for a potentially longer sentence! Go figure?]
Anyone who ends their regurgitation with “go figure” is not worth reading. I assume they are a MacDonalds add, or at least as nutrition-less.