The latest weekly result from Essential Research, a rolling average of polling conducted over the past fortnight, shows little change on last week with Labor up a point on the primary vote to 39% and the Greens down one to 9%, while the Coalition and Palmer United are steady on 40% and 5% and Labor’s two-party preferred lead is unchanged at 52-48. The poll also includes the monthly personal ratings, which are the first such results from any pollster showing Bill Shorten leading Tony Abbott on preferred prime minister, the latter’s lead of 42-32 last month crashing to a deficit of 37-36. This is down to a slump in Abbott’s ratings, his approval down six to 35% and disapproval up eight to 55%, with Shorten’s ratings little changed at 35% approval (up one) and 37% disapproval (down one).
In other questions, the poll comprehensively gauged opinion the Commission of Audit’s recommendations, of which three have a positive net approval: university students repaying HELP debt once they earn minimum wage, relocation by unemployed young people to areas of high unemployment to retain access to benefits, and Youth Allowance rather than Newstart for those under 25. The least popular measures were raising the retirement age and increasing interest rates on HELP debts. Respondents thought the Coalition heavily favoured the rich (54%) over the poor (5%) and the average Australian (22%), while tending to place Labor in the middle, with 34% for the average Australian, 16% for the rich and 22% for the poor. The poll found broad awareness that Australia’s national debt was lower than other developed countries (45% believing it lower, 22% higher), and a belief that large companies and high-income earners paid too little tax and small businesses and low-income earners too much.
DN,
You’re assuming Obama or Merkel or Cameron is more persuasive than Abbott’s pride. I really doubt that is the case. The Liberals won’t support a carbon price until Labor win at least another two elections on it, and their support for energy infrastructure for an efficienct and modern, rather than pre-industrial, economy will probably take longer
alias,
I’m confused as to why people bang on about DD elections. Under proportional representation it’s far more likely to see minor party representation increase at the expense of the ruling and opposition party. That’s the last thing Abbott wants. Not only that, the kind of chaos that would trigger a DD is unlikely to favour the Government
Personally, I think Palmer if all bluster.
However, I welcome the recognition that the ALP secured a AAA credit rating,something the media chooses to ignore.
Yes I know what you mean Bugler, but if you take Abbott’s rhetoric seriously, then he would inevitably go down that path wouldn’t he? If Palmer maintains the sort of positions he has foreshadowed.
[I’m confused as to why people bang on about DD elections. Under proportional representation it’s far more likely to see minor party representation increase at the expense of the ruling and opposition party. That’s the last thing Abbott wants. Not only that, the kind of chaos that would trigger a DD is unlikely to favour the Government]
Well maybe not if the Government and Opposition change the voting act to get rid of tickets and to raise eligibility criteria.
[The Federal Government has taken the axe to a generous Rudd-era savings scheme for first home buyers, but will lift restrictions on account holders’ ability to access their money.]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-14/budget-2014-first-home-buyers-changes/5453702
@ Bugler 2202
Small price to pay to be rid of the worst government in Australian history.
http://www.salon.com/2014/05/08/my_personal_wal_mart_nightmare_you_wont_believe_what_life_is_like_working_there/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
This will be Oz very soon
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2014/05/13/4003536.htm?WT.mc_id=Innovation_Innovation-Science|WestAntarcticIceSheetCollapseUnstoppable_FBP|abc
Hang on – climate change is a myth – until it’s too late to do anything about it!
Voter fools elected Abbott, Press fools failed to expose his stupid ideas, Today’s fools called the budget good and the worst fools of all can’t face the truth about what is being done to our planet.
All because the owners of BIG Business are greedy for more profits.
Alias,
[but if you take Abbott’s rhetoric seriously]
No offence, but I find the very idea of that hilarious. I don’t think Palmer takes himself seriously, so I’m not sure why I should 😛
I guess we’ll see, Abbott did, after all, call two politically motivated Royal Commissions that good political sense would have warned him against, as we know they’re not going to report what he wants them to report. His ego is his biggest driver and it’s not known for it’s tactical judgement
[2181
Arrnea Stormbringer
@ zoidlord 2180
If the Greens and Labor don’t get up and block this Budget and force a new election]
It is not open to the Senate to force an election simply by opposing budget measures. The Senate may refuse Supply – fail to pass an Appropriation Bill – but this is not the same as rejecting the budget.
For many very sound reasons, Labor has promised never to block Supply. I think the Greens also have the same policy. Only the LNP, with their profound contempt for the public, have ever withheld Supply.
I am sad that funding for Aboriginal Language Maintenance is to be progressively slashed over the forward estimates.
Programs of this type are a stepping stone for many Aboriginal people into the broader economy.
Even if you totally disregard the cultural rights of people to preserve what they can of their ancient languages, slashing these types of programs makes no overall social, and ultimately financial sense.
Stupid, ignorant policy.
[2200
ShowsOn
Abbott’s climate policies are becoming a (relatively) minor issue for me, mainly for the simple reason that the rest of the world is clearly starting to take CC seriously, and their collective economic and political power will easily be able to force Australia to adopt effective carbon reduction.
We simply won’t have any choice.
According to the budget papers, the $2.55 billion for Direct Action is all the funding the program will receive for the next TEN years!]
This is a policy that will never be implemented.
@Briefly.
Blocking Supply is the only way that Abbott will be forced to listen, negotiating with him will not work.
@ briefly 2211
Is the Budget not packaged as an Appropriation Bill?
Morgan polls shows Abbott-Hockey Budget massively unpopular
__Even 75% of Libs say they will be worse off…….
______
http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/5581-budget-2014-reaction-201405140642
SO,
[Well maybe not if the Government and Opposition change the voting act to get rid of tickets and to raise eligibility criteria.]
I don’t mean micro parties, I mean the quota is lower, which would result in a Greens senator in every state, as well as two in WA, Tas and Vic, maybe a PUP senator from every state, depending on how long that fashion can last, and maybe two from Xenophon’s team (I guess, as you say, that would be entirely dependent on how the system’s reformed) and probably a FF candidate (or goodness forbid, two). That would be an expansion of the crossbench, regardless of what reform is passed, provided PP is maintained. However, I grant that I’m not terribly familiar with the intricacies of the Senate voting system and the proposed reforms.
2212
Norwester
I wholly agree.
[2215
Arrnea Stormbringer
@ briefly 2211
Is the Budget not packaged as an Appropriation Bill?]
No, they’re quite different. The machinery is set out in S.53-55 of the Constitution.
PUP won’t have any senators until after 1 July. It seems to me that the Appropriation Bills will go to the Senate before then. Also I would think any of the enabling Bills for budget measures that need legislative change. So the PUP view will only be of interest for measures that will be rejected by the current senate.
So what measures might be re-presented and become DD triggers and are there any measures that may be delayed and not take effect by planned date causing a few problems?
Arrnea Stormbringer,
Hmmm, yes, it all depends on how cocky and stupid Abbott is. It’s always difficult to tell what’s him and what’s his advisors, though.
2202
There are 2 reasons that a DD is possible.
Firstly, Abbott may blow a fuse at the Senate or impending leadership change and spring a DD on us.
Secondly, the Whitlam government did not want a DD in 1975 but the opposition did. These was a DD.
@ briefly 2219
According to:
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/House_of_Representatives/Powers_practice_and_procedure/00_-_Infosheets/Infosheet_10_-_Budget_and_financial_legislation
the full title of the Budget is “A Bill for an Act to appropriate money out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the ordinary annual services of the Government, and for related purposes”.
I would have thought that’d make it an appropriations bill for sure.
Net neutrality – should you care about it?
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27397857?ocid=socialflow_twitter
“The details of what the FCC proposes will be revealed on 15 May.”
“Anyone thinking this is a US-only issue should note that, following its agreement to pay a fee to Comcast and Verizon, Netflix put up the price for its monthly streaming service in Europe as well as America.”
A world wide issue at that.
I think Shorten should call Abbott a liar tomorrow during his address in reply speech just to piss Bronwyn Bishop off. She will force him to withdraw, which will just make a lot of voters think “well, Abbott is a liar, why can’t Shorten say it?”
@ ShowsOn 2225
I think Shorten should call Abbott a liar tomorrow during his address, refuse to withdraw the comment and then have the entire Labor caucus walk out the door when he’s kicked out.
And then vote against everything the Liberals propose by default in the Senate.
Tom,
As I’ve been saying, the first is always possible. I don’t think Abbott is actually a very good tactician and can be quite unstable. When he actually holds responsibility, he tries to shirk it as much as possible and despite being a former minister and long-term politician is a rank amateur when he actually holds the cards. He can’t even bluff.
I don’t think a 1975-type situation is at all likely… as unpopular a view it may be, I certainly hope Shorten doesn’t go all Fraser on us. It could backfire, badly.
ShowsOn # 2225
Shorten already referred to Abbott’s “lies” in QT and had to reframe today did you see?
[2214
zoidlord
@Briefly.
Blocking Supply is the only way that Abbott will be forced to listen, negotiating with him will not work.]
There’s no point in negotiating with Abbott. But it is far too soon to think of rejecting Supply. Such a course would have very far-reaching consequences. There would be no good for the country in re-living the tumult of 1975. None at all. The Senate should not force the House to an election in the absence of some proven corruption or dereliction of office. Labor and the other parties just have to oppose the LNP as best they can and get themselves into shape to win the next election. That shouldn’t be too hard. Abbott is giving his opponents a lot of free help.
[ShowsOn # 2225
Shorten already referred to Abbott’s “lies” in QT and had to reframe today did you see?]
I heard it, but didn’t see it. I honestly think Shorten should do it again tomorrow night.
I think Shorten should do it again tomorrow night. Let’s face it, the address in the reply is one of the only times that the average punter hears the Opposition leader speak.
ShowsOn@2225
Better still, call him a “lying liar who lies”. 😀
Because I know you just can’t get enough of seeing Christopher Pyne getting beaten up by a girl – here it is again:
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2014/s4004718.htm
@Briefly/2229
You are being too easy on Abbott, by then the economy will be in worse shape than it is, there is no time to be relaxing.
Nice way to spin it…
Abbott wanted Cabinet documents released to the Royal Commission, but it’s all Rudd’s fault anyway.
(By the way, dig the headline in bold… almost an article in itself, just in case we didn’t get the intended spin).
I’ll bloody BET it was the last thing Hanger expected!
FFS, it was Abbott who wanted Cabinet confidential documents examined, not Rudd. Brandis set it up, perhaps thinking Rudd might baulk, or maybe he just wanted to put the frighteners into his erstwhile foe.
For whatever reason, the potential for Cabinet confidential documents was written into the Act setting up the Commission.
Rudd’s just calling their bluff.
And, as usual, they’ve gone to water.
But don’t expect to read the truth about any of this in the Daily Telegraph.
@ briefly 2229
Arthur Sinodinos. Karen McNamara. The Budget.
If Shorten uses the phrase *twisted priorities* more than twice I’ll be pissed off.
Put some meat on the bones this time, Bill. Right now a few more people than usual will be watching or listening to what Labor has to offer as the alternative government. So give some good examples.
From an ALP perspective, Palmer is proving a very effective communicator. His constant repetition of no debt crisis and our Triple A rating is I think beginning to cut thru.
The LNP are showing every sign of losing control of the narrative to defend their policy positions. Even their normal supporters are hedging their bets …. All of sudden one gets the impression the narrative of the last ten years are being rewritten.
I just hope the ALP dont think they can cruise to victory in 2016 …. iHope they r doing the hard policy development yards.
Ok, just in case anyone out there is daft enough to think that Abbott is *actually* putting money into infrasctructure: check out Albo’s complete demolition of their flimsy lies here.
Its all money cut from existing rail and local roads projects. ie, from infrastructure.
Albo and a white board on video: more entertaining than just about any commentary Ive seen to date
http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/may/14/albo-explains-the-budget-video
Japan residence slowly fighting against rearming Japan:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2014/05/japans-pacifist-constitution?fsrc=rss&utm_content=bufferff2b0&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
“The quest for Nobel recognition was launched last year by a Japanese mother-of-two, Naomi Takasu. Michio Hamaji, a former Middle-East oil executive, lent his support, drawing on his business and political connections. A supporter of Mr Abe in “general terms,” Mr Hamaji is nevertheless alarmed by the threat of war with China. He has been joined by Hiroyuki Konishi, a Diet lawmaker who says the government’s attempt to reinterpret the constitution’s legal basis is effectively a “coup d’état””
[2223
Arrnea Stormbringer
@ briefly 2219]
There is more info further into the document you cited…The budget is not “Supply”…
[The Parliament’s control. . .
The Parliament has the ultimate control over government finances. This control is two-fold. First, taxes are imposed by legislation which must be agreed to by the Parliament. Secondly, and more importantly, government expenditure must also be authorised by legislation.
Australia’s Constitution states that ‘no money shall be drawn from the Treasury of the Commonwealth except under appropriation made by law’. This means that however much money the Government has, whether raised by taxation or by loan or even by sale of government assets, the money cannot be spent unless the Parliament has authorised the expenditure by an Act of Parliament (an appropriation Act). Such authorisation is often known by the term ‘supply’, for example, when it is stated that ‘the government has supply’ or that ‘supply has been withheld’.]
Here are S.53-55. They need t be read together…
53. Proposed laws appropriating revenue or moneys, or imposing taxation, shall not originate in the Senate. But a proposed law shall not be taken to appropriate revenue or moneys, or to impose taxation, by reason of it only containing provisions for the imposition or appropriation of fines or other pecuniary penalties, or for the demand or payment or appropriation of fees for licences, or fees for services under the proposed law.
The Senate may not amend proposed laws imposing taxation, or appropriating revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government.
The Senate may not amend any proposed law so as to increase any proposed charge or burden on the people.
The Senate may at any stage return to the House of Representatives any proposed law which the Senate may not amend, requesting, by message, the omission or amendment of any items or provisions there in. And the House of Representatives may, if it thinks fit, make any of such omissions or amendments, with or without modifications.
Except as provided in this section, the Senate shall have equal power with the House of Representatives in respect of all proposed laws.
54. The proposed law which appropriates revenue or moneys for the ordinary annual services of the Government shall deal only with such appropriation.
55. Laws imposing taxation shall deal only with the imposition of taxation, and any provision therein dealing with any other matter shall be of no effect.
Laws imposing taxation, except laws imposing duties of custom or excise, shall deal with one subject of taxation only; but laws imposing duties of customs shall deal with duties of customs only, and laws imposing duties of excise shall deal with duties of excise only.]
2217
It looks like we will be getting NSW style above the line optional preferential voting (with a bellow the line optional preferential voting option).
That means that it will be very hard for micro-parties to get preferences and thus elected, all be it less so a DDs.
Palmer would indeed be in with good chance in every state.
The Greens would certainly get a Senator in every state and 2 in Tasmania (if their vote really bounces back up to some of their previous highs, they could get 3 here in a DD) Victoria and WA likely and other states still giving a chance.
Maybe the SA FF Senator would be reelected. I do not know.
Senator Xenophon`s running mate, Stirling Griff, nearly beat the Second Lib in SA in last year`s half-Senate election under the current system (which would have made the Xenophon Party the only party to win more than 1 seat in SA that year), beaten only because the ALP and the Greens preferenced Stirling Griff (but not Senator Xenophon) bellow the Liberals (which may tuen out to be a mistake).
In a DD his Party (providing it still meets registration requirements) could get over 3 quotas.
This is were it gets really interesting because the JSCEM seemed not to be looking at following the NSW system in one respect, in that it does not appear to be following NSW in increasing the number of candidates required for a group from 2 and thus the Xenophon party could poll over 3 quotas but elect only 2 Senators and have a surplus quota to distribute and that would have a significant exhaust component under OPV.
Who bloody linked me to PYne’s bullshit session?
WARNING: Don’t fess up. I have a gun.
[2235
Arrnea Stormbringer
@ briefly 2229
The Senate should not force the House to an election in the absence of some proven corruption or dereliction of office.
Arthur Sinodinos. Karen McNamara. The Budget.]
This is all trivial compared with the turbulence that rejecting Supply would induce. Really, it is a deeply divisive and unpredictable course to choose. It would be a very rash thing to do. There is no crisis here. simply a budget that can be defeated in its most offensive parts, and the LNP can then be hounded from office.
@Briefly/2243
You are again thinking that it can be defeated in the offensive parts.
The thing is, some things have already happened, like the National Broadband Network being chopping into a MTM, The Disability Commissioner, and so forth.
That is why you are being naive.
Tom,
[This is were it gets really interesting because the JSCEM seemed not to be looking at following the NSW system in one respect, in that it does not appear to be following NSW in increasing the number of candidates required for a group from 2 and thus the Xenophon party could poll over 3 quotas but elect only 2 Senators and have a surplus quota to distribute and that would have a significant exhaust component under OPV.]
That is indeed interesting, I may look into it further… anyway, night all, work tomorrow
Albo – great stuff
http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/may/14/albo-explains-the-budget-video
This is a must watch, Senator Conroy destroys Malcolm Turnbull:
Kenneth Tsang (MyNBN) uploaded the video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqeHXxaIgIc&feature=youtu.be
[2233
zoidlord
@Briefly/2229
You are being too easy on Abbott, by then the economy will be in worse shape than it is, there is no time to be relaxing.]
I’m not being “too easy” on Abbott at all. I just recall the bitterness that engulfed the nation in 1975. It took many years for the division to heal. What Fraser and Withers did in 1975 was terribly toxic for the country, for political life and Government in general. We should not go there unless there is really absolutely no other way to resolve a real crisis.
[2244
zoidlord
@Briefly/2243
You are again thinking that it can be defeated in the offensive parts.
The thing is, some things have already happened, like the National Broadband Network being chopping into a MTM, The Disability Commissioner, and so forth.]
These things are serious, but they are not the equivalent of a breakdown in government or a crisis that could only be resolved by sending the House to an election. Think of it. The power to refuse Supply enables the Senate to send the House to an election. The House has no such power in relation to the Senate. Such a power should be used most sparingly if at all.
2248
The current is government toxic.