UPDATE (Morgan): The fortnightly Morgan face-to-face plus SMS result sings from the same song sheet, with Labor up 1.5% to 38.5%, the Coalition down 2.5% to 35%, the Greens steady on 12%, and Palmer up a point to 6.5%. Whereas Morgan polls usually combine two weekends of polling, this one is entirely from Saturday and Saturday, so all the responses are post-budget and the sample is somewhat smaller than usual. On two-party preferred, Labor’s lead is up from 53.5-46.5 to 56.5-43.5 on 2013 election preferences, and 55-45 to 57.5-42.5 on respondent-allocated preferences.
After a relatively mild result from yesterday’s Galaxy poll, in which the government may have benefited slightly from an earlier polling period (Wednesday to Friday, the budget having been brought down on Tuesday night), two big name pollsters deliver horror results for the Coalition:
• Newspoll, conducted from Friday to Sunday, has Labor’s two-party lead out from 53-47 to 55-45, from primary votes of 38% for Labor (up four), 36% for the Coalition (down two), 11% for the Greens (down three) and 15% for others (up one). Worse still for the Coalition are the leadership ratings, which have Tony Abbott down five on approval to 30% and up four on disapproval to 60%, while Bill Shorten leaps seven points on approval to 42% and drops two on disapproval to 39%. Shorten has opened up a big lead of 44-34 as preferred prime minister, after Abbott led 40-38 a fortnight ago. The Australian’s report here.
• Even worse for the Coalition is the monthly Nielsen result in the Fairfax papers. Conducted from Thursday to Saturday, it shows Labor’s lead out to 56-44 from 52-48 a month ago. The primary votes are 40% for Labor (up six), 35% for the Coalition (down five), 14% for the Greens (down three from am implausible result last time, but still very strong) and 6% for Palmer United (up two). Tony Abbott sinks nine points on approval to 34% and adds twelve on disapproval to 62%, whereas Bill Shorten is up four to 47% and down two to 39%, and shoots to a 51-40 lead as preferred prime minister after trailing 45-44 last time.
The leadership ratings in particular invite comparison with Julia Gillard’s low points. While Abbott still has a way to go before matching the worst of Gillard’s ratings in Newspoll, his present net approval rating of 28% in Nielsen was exceeded by Gillard on only two occasions, in September and October of 2011, and equalled in July 2011. Gillard’s final result before she lost the leadership in June 2013 was 36% approval and 61% disapproval. Abbott himself scored fractionally worse figures as Opposition Leader in December 2012, of 34% approval and 63% disapproval.
Both pollsters also have results gauging reaction to the budget, with Nielsen finding 63% considering it unfair against 33% for fair. The deficit levy finds support, with 50% in favour and 37% against, but there’s a surprisingly narrow majority of 49% to 46% in favour of abolishing the carbon tax. The poll finds predictably strong opposition to the notion of increasing the GST, with 30% for and 66% against.
Newspoll’s results on budget reaction are particularly illuminating, as it has been asking the same three questions after every budget since 1988. Forty-eight per cent rate this budget as bad for the economy versus 39% for good, with 4% opting for neither; 69% say it will leave them worse off, compared with just 5% for better off and 20% for neither; and 39% believed that Labor would have done a better job, with 46% saying they wouldn’t have.
The latter result can be put into context with the following chart, showing the positive result minus the negative result for the equivalent question going back to 1988, with Labor budgets in red and Coalition budgets in blue. This shows that the only budget to record a net result in favour of yes was in 1993, when the Keating government followed its surprise election win by breaking its L-A-W tax cuts promise. As such, the slight net negative result for this budget is an historically weak one for the government – particularly when taking into account an apparent tendency for governments to perform strongly on this measure when newly elected, and decline thereafter. This takes a good deal of gloss off the consolation the Coalition might have taken in the result being better than the last three for the previous government.
The next chart plots the result for each budget on “impact on own financial position” along the x-axis and impact on the economy along the y, with the current result indicated in red. This shows a clear association between the two results, demonstrating that people generally decide whether a budget is good or bad, and deem it equally so for both themselves and the economy. To the limited extent that variability exists, there does appear to be at least some constituency for the view that the pain inflicted in the current budget will be good for the economy – whereas the trendline indicates that the minus 64% rating on own financial position could be expected to associate with 24.5% on the economy, the latter figure in fact comes in at a relatively presentable minus 9%. Nonetheless, the outstanding fact to emerge from the chart is that the budget inhabits a zone of extreme unpopularity with only 1993 to keep it company. The budget the government might have been hoping to emulate, Peter Costello’s cost-cutting debut of 1996, had a plus 37% rating on the economy despite a minus 21% rating on personal financial situation.
Finally, a table showing the net result for all three measures at each budget, with averages by party at the bottom. This shows that despite the current results, Coalition budgets tend to be better received than Labor ones, with the gap being wider on impact on the economy. Partly this is down to historical circumstance – Labor was marked down for the recession-era budgets of the early 1990s, while the Howard government made political hay out of the revenue boom in its later years in office (though obviously not to the extent of saving them from the electoral cycle in 2007). However, it also reflects the tendency for the Coalition to outperform Labor in “best party to manage the economy” polling, a point illustrated by the averages for “would the opposition have delivered a better budget”. For more context on the individual budgets, here’s a very helpful resource from the Sydney Morning Herald.
“@AustralianLabor: “Tony Abbott says he has no plan to increase the GST. Here is a tip, he will be lying about that too.” @billshortenmp #auspol”
Graphs from government Library Clive Palmer filled his PUP speech yesterday are sobering, if not disheartening. After usual ones about Australia’s low debt, he presented some which reveal, compared to other countries, how low our government expenditures on social safety net programs etc. already are.
My OH finished watching it a few minutes ago – – – – – first thing she mentioned was Palmer’s criticism of the GST because his billion dollar companies don’t pay it.
“@ABCNews24: Bill Shorten: The Liberal premiers know these are real cuts to hospitals and schools #Budget2014 #auspol”
“@Simon_Cullen: Tony Abbott: “Labor are being fiscal vandals” by vowing to block parts of the budget.”
“@AustralianLabor: “If Joe Hockey wants to have a fight with pensioners, he has a fight with us” @billshortenmp #auspol”
“@CliveFPalmer: Think Australians expect a bit better from a minister and NP deputy leader after @Barnaby_Joyce resorts to derogatory comments #auspol”
Shorten is using very strong language. Good to see.
markjs, victoria, mikeh, guytuar…thanks, you’re all very kind. 🙂
(Like you, I’m sure, I’m conscious that William provides an excellent forum for a continuing, lively and interesting discussion. I feel very fortunate to be able to contribute to and learn from everything that passes here.)
Shorten attacking Abbott attempt to get states to increase GST. Says Baird and Campbell agree with Labor on this. Go Bill!
“@CliveFPalmer: I’ve spent time in Marsden on Brisbane’s southside today to hear concerns from pensioners about the cruel & heartless Abbott govt budget”
I had to look to make sure this was not Bill Shorten
BK
Loved the cartoon of Abbott and Bill!
Ripper of a presser by Bill Shorten
“Tony Abbott is Australia’s lying champion” , and not holding back on the “lie” word.
One stupid gotcha attempt “would you pledge now to never alter Super rules when you come back to government?” beautifully handled ….question just totally ignored and a seamless reply, smooth as silk, about Joe Hockey being out of touch with ordinary people.
Hockey’s superannuation comment on Q & A seems to be overshadowing his “avuncular” performance with the journos, if Shorten’s presser is any indication.
A caller to ABC radio opined that perhaps there will be a leadership challenge by Turnbull.
Jon faine the host laughed and said that Turnbull is immensely disliked within the party, and he has nowhere near the numbers to mount any challenge. He said the religious right have a firm control over the Liberal party at present
Geez, isn’t Palmer one huge thorn in the side of Abbott & Co…
Not sure I trust him (time will tell) …but I’m LOVING his rhetoric ..Lol!!
Z
Would the National Conference be able to direct the States to change their rules?
An opinion piece from Nicholas Stewart, described as a Canberra writer:
[It took a long time, but Bob Santamaria’s finally done it – we’ve got our first ever DLP Prime Minister. There’s no other way to describe someone who rips the guts out of education yet finds money for a school chaplaincy program; for a person who eviscerates payments to single mothers but still has a few bucks left over for family planning. This Budget marks a waypoint on a long march to possess the soul of the Liberal party. It’s intellectually incoherent: cutting services to all listening to a special interest group.
And this is its weakest point. The claim is that this is somehow akin to John Howard’s first budget in 1997. It’s not. That was good to business and established the country for decades of growth. This, by contrast, is a flabby effort that reflects its self-indulgent craftsmen. It genuflects, grudgingly, towards everything discovered since the 1930s but the Catholic mafia (Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey, Kevin Andrews, et al) have demonstrated convincingly that they can shape government in their image. Indulgence available upon application; see the padre.]
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/tony-abbott-has-morphed-into-bob-santamaria-20140519-zrh4g.html#ixzz32DJ1XhYq
Another great presser by shorten
[(Like you, I’m sure, I’m conscious that William provides an excellent forum for a continuing, lively and interesting discussion. I feel very fortunate to be able to contribute to and learn from everything that passes here.]
Here, here! Our great appreciation of William and so many perspicacious PB posters needs to be re-stated more often!
The truth is diog there will not be real reform at best there will be some window dressing – these people are not about to give up power in their home state nor at a national level.
ditto to all of the the compliments to briefly and William above!
[1671….mikehilliard]
This depends on your expectations about inflation. If you think inflation is going to take off and interest rates will follow, then a fixed rate is a good idea.
But if you think the risks are for weak growth and low inflation, then stick with a variable rate loan.
For what it’s worth, long term money market rates have been falling – a sign that wholesale investors are not worried about inflation and are happy to buy long-dated assets on modest nominal yields.
Personally, considering the weakness in the Euro economy, the pattern of slow growth here, the weakness in China and the slowdown in exports, I think there is a negligible chance of interest rate rises so there’s no need to fix your mortgage rates. In any case, if mortgage rates were to go up, there would likely be plenty of advance signs.
Btw Chris Bowen will address NPC tomorrow
Diog,
You are one of the most perspicacious of all PB posters, and your thousands of posts evidence a deep concern for future generations as well as daily political issues. So, I humbly ask you to please not create imaginary “tests” or “criteria” for evaluating Shorten’s leadership.
Of course, party reform is worth attention (let’s have no more Arbib’s and Bullock’s #1 on Senate ballots, for starters), but party reform is less important than Labor’s myriad policies and communication of those policies in terms of how effective a leader he proves to be.
briefly
Thank you. 🙂
It is reported in The west Australian today that the falling iron ore price and the high Australian dollar are are already blowing holes in the WA state budget, only weeks after it was delivered.
Just more proof that when politicians would have us believe they are pulling the levers on the economy they are having a lend of is.
There are far greater, and sometimes darker, forces at work.
Sorry if this has been linked. Consumer confidence dives…
http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/federal-budget-sinks-consumer-confidence-20140520-38l08.html
What did they expect?
[guytaur
Posted Tuesday, May 20, 2014 at 11:04 am | PERMALINK
“@CliveFPalmer: I’ve spent time in Marsden on Brisbane’s southside today to hear concerns from pensioners about the cruel & heartless Abbott govt budget”
I had to look to make sure this was not Bill Shorten]
It looks like Clive is at least fulfilling his duty as an MP to meet with his constituents and others.
liyana,
Ta for link —-otherwise, would’ve missed it.
You’d think Gerry Harvey and all retail lobby spokespersons would have screamed bloody murder about Abbott ripping disposable income out of the pockets of the very people who would keep their business in profit.
Consumer confidence takes a big hit with the budget
[ANZ-Roy Morgan Consumer Confidence fell a further 3.2% to 100.4 in the week ending 18 May, after the 2014-15 Commonwealth Budget was handed down. Consumer Confidence began weakening noticeably four weeks ago when some significant policies were leaked ahead of the Federal Budget’s release and is down a sharp 14% since then; the steepest decline over a four week period since the series became weekly in October 2008.
]
This is unbelievable, the smokey job had purposely set out to sabotage the economy and bring on a recession he could not have done better.
Never seen anything like it
I told you Palmer is a greater asset to Labor than the Greens 😀
[1662
markjs
Briefly…
Your posts are anything but “tedious”
I’ve learned so much about how our economy works from reading your excellent contributions. Thank you & please keep posting….]
Once again, +1.
1654
psyclaw
As I remarked to Fran, it’s obviously possible to compensate households for the regressive effects of indirect taxes, but it’s also a lot more easily said than done, not least because Tory Governments will try to undo the compensation.
As well, as LU correctly points out, it is also possible to avoid GST.
GST is a flat-rate tax. It’s obviously bound to be regressive. This is already a problem, so by tripling the amount it collects we would be tripling its regressivity.
We also have to take good note of the effect taxes have on the economy. Taxes that reduce the real disposable incomes of the lower three income quintiles (those on average earnings or less) will disproportionately affect demand, jobs and overall output and should be resisted for those reasons alone.
In particular, access to work has been the single biggest contributor to disposable income growth for the least-well paid, and we should therefore be trying to strengthen the labour market. We cannot do this by also suppressing demand.
I can only reiterate: We do not have a tax problem that cannot be easily fixed. Instead we have problems with very slow real disposable income growth and an inequality problem. We can fix all these without increasing regressive taxes. Indeed, if we increase regressive taxes we will fail to fix any of the problems we have.
Socrates
Doubtful. Those qualifying for free or highly concessional dental service could be given a stored value card to be used via the HiCaps system. There would be a value for dental service on it. Dentists couldn’t simply push up the price as the cost of these services could be made part of a schedule.
Obviously I favour building/acquiring public housing stock rather than private rental as the main way of achieving housing services. Childcare already attracts a state-based copayment. Transport has an established concessional system and with the roll out of stored value cards a tweak of these wouldn’t be too hard.
I wonder if Clive might see the great symbolism of him supporting the mining tax (at personal cost to himself). I wouldn’t be surprised. He knows the importance of a good gesture does Clive.
Oh, Tony, and when you negotiate with him, don’t forget this is a man who locked his OWN supporters out of their ground to save money. Good luck.
LOL
Even if Abbott got all his austerity measures through the Senate with the current global financial circumstances, Australia is not going to fall into recession.
It’s pie in the sky dreaming if you believe otherwise.
I see Mr Abbott is reported as running a line that he expected people to respect the government after the budget, even if they didn’t like it.
This is hauntingly similar to the despairing line the ALP used in the 1996 campaign: “Keating: you may not like him, but you’ve got to respect him”.
The coalition, it seems to me, are now basically in the situation which John Howard would have been in had he attempted to bring in both the GST and Workchoices in his first term.
Hockey is on. It’s Labors fault their lying.
[You’d think Gerry Harvey and all retail lobby spokespersons would have screamed bloody murder about Abbott ripping disposable income out of the pockets of the very people who would keep their business in profit.]
Maybe they’re expecting Abbott to have GST applied to internet purchases for OS
pedant:
[I see Mr Abbott is reported as running a line that he expected people to respect the government after the budget, even if they didn’t like it.
This is hauntingly similar to the despairing line the ALP used in the 1996 campaign: “Keating: you may not like him, but you’ve got to respect him”.]
This also reminds me of Barry Goldwater’s refrain: “In your heart, you know he’s right”
The counter to this was: “In your gut, you know he’s a nut.” Which could equally apply to Abbott.
Atticus
I agree that achieving reform isn’t the defining aspect of assessing Shortens leadership but it is one if the important ones.
Achieving a One Term Tony is more important.
But governments lose elections rather than oppositions winning them so is like to see some reforms so whenever Labor gets back into power they are less likely to toss it away with the circus we saw under Rudd-Gillard.
they’re not their 😛
Finding it almost impossible to sit through another Hockey spin session.
Really, the spin from all sides is frustrating as all hell.
The constant spin is so regular I’m sure they all actually believe the garbage that flows from their mouths.
Briefly
[GST is a flat-rate tax. It’s obviously bound to be regressive. This is already a problem, so by tripling the amount it collects we would be tripling its regressivity.
]
That isn’t necessarily true. It depends on what percentage of your income is spent on goods and services.
Abbott’s personal popularity is so low that there’s no way he’s going to gain respect
markjs
[Geez, isn’t Palmer one huge thorn in the side of Abbott & Co…
Not sure I trust him (time will tell) …but I’m LOVING his rhetoric ..Lol!!]
I have been saying that for months – he is playing with Abbott’s head and good on him.
Loved Q&A last night Hockey was absolutely stonkered.
If Q&A was stacked with Liberals last night I will eat my hat (if I had one)!
[ You’d think Gerry Harvey and all retail lobby spokespersons would have screamed bloody murder about Abbott ripping disposable income out of the pockets of the very people who would keep their business in profit. ]
Liberal voters are inherently prone to voting against their own interests. 🙂
Besides, they will just lobby for the Govt to shutdown online purchasing to a greater extent.
One of the lines that worries me though is that they are pushing and pushing the “We have made hard decisions”. They are using repetition to try and reinforce the idea of strong man Abbott and its for the good of the country.
Needs to be countered by repetition. These were not hard decisions, they are BAD decisions.
briefly
[As well, compensating for such taxes with services or goods-in-kind is not enough. It is intrinsically paternalistic. People not only need these things, they need cash in their pockets. This is necessary for a dignified life.]
In principle I agree with but it is worth keeping in mind that cash payments, by definition, go to a head of household — whereas non-cash benefits can be targeted. Having spent a lot of time teaching the children of the marginalised in Sydney’s deep South West and West, it’s really clear that those children are often missing out on things they need which could have been had if ther benefits were non-liquid or at worst semi-liquid.
Being marginalised all your life doesn’t generally equip you well to make good decisions on your own behalf, and still less for good decsions on behalf of dependants. Substance abuse is tragically common, along with gambling addiction. Children are often “fed” with the poorest quality “food” — typically from the major convenience outlets, if they are fed at all.
It would be far better if the actual targets of assistance got appropriate assistance in sutiable quantities and if it were delivered in ways that allowed them to achieve better control over their lives. So while not removing existing cash benefits I’d strongly favour adding those non-cash benefits to the mix. Those amongst the marginalised who actually are doing a pretty good job — and hubby’s mother years ago would have been an excellent example — would have been thrilled to have that system. As it was, hubby’s father (an employed sparky and occasional chippy) would be drunk every day bar Sunday. His long-suffering mother managed to make ends meet even so — just barely — but more money would not have helped, but made things worse.
Tom Hawkins # 1739
I thought Abbott promised to fix that by March. Surprised he broke a promise to his backers.
Abbott wants the respect he has never shown for anyone else
Just remember Bernie Banton.
One incident among many.