After an anomalous drop to 51-49 last week, the Labor two-party lead in the Essential Research rolling average is back to 52-48 this week, from primary votes of 40% for the Coalition (down one), 38% for Labor (up one), 11% for the Greens (up one) and 2% for Palmer United (up one). Further questions find the Liberal Party rated too right wing by 34%, too left wing by 7% and about right by 26%, whereas only 20% think Labor too left wing compared with 16% for too right wing, and 28% about right. The poll also features an occasional question on best party to handle various issues, which finds the Coalition improving from a low point when the question was last asked in February, with the biggest movement in education, health, environment and climate change, generally smaller ones in its economic areas of strength, and no movement on national security and asylum seekers. A question on the ABC’s Q&A program finds is to be considerably more popular than its critics in the government, with 46% rating it good and 11% poor (including 37% and 23% among Coalition voters). After given a precis of the two parties’ National Broadband Network policies, 38% favoured Labor’s and 29% the government’s. On the economy, 35% rate it as headed in the right direction against 41% for the wrong direction, essentially unchanged on May.
“A question on the ABC’s Q&A program finds is to be considerably more popular than its critics in the government, with 46% rating it good and 11% poor (including 37% and 23% among Coalition voters).”
This again shows just how out-of-touch the government is with the voters. And of course, yet another poll showing the governments inexorable slide. ESJ, TBA & Happiness haven’t had much to say specifically about the polling, not much to say I suppose given that after 171 polls nothing has changed.
William, are Essential primaries being heavily rounded?
Constructing the TPP from Essential’s primaries gets me 52.9 to Labor.
Bernard’s analysis – paywalled. Worth a read if you can.
http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/09/01/essential-is-your-party-too-far-to-the-left-or-the-right/
[Essential: is your party too far to the left or the right?
Bernard Keane | Sep 01, 2015 1:03PM
Voters prefer Labor’s original national broadband network and remain gloomy about the overall direction of the economy, this week’s Essential poll shows.
Asked if they prefer the government’s cheaper, slower version of the NBN (the cost of which has recently blown out by several billion dollars) or Labor’s more expensive and faster version, 29% of voters prefer the government’s NBN while 38% prefer Labor’s NBN, with a third saying they don’t know. Partisanship heavily flavours responses, with 62% of Labor voters and 66% of Greens voters favouring Labor’s plan and 63% of Coalition voters preferring the government’s plan.]
I suppose it’s much easier to opt out of watching Q+A than it is to opt out of the Current Government…
More’s the pity.
Last comment on the previous thread therefore repeated.
http://www.fairwork.gov.au/about-us/policies-and-guides/fact-sheets/rights-and-obligations/right-of-entry
Condition that a union official, actually ‘organisation official’, has to meet if wanting to enter a worksite.
Lots of road blocks.
[Millennial
Posted Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 1:16 pm | PERMALINK
Darn #2438
How did you calculate that?]
Millenial
As I said I am no expert, but my back of the envelope calculation was:
Labor primary 38%
Greens – 80% of primary 11% = 8.8%
Palmer plus others – 42% of of primary 12% = 5%
Total 51.8%
I suspect the percentage of greens preferences, based on the last election, should have been a bit higher, perhaps 83%, which would lift the Labor 2pp to 52.1. I also believe the percentage at the next election for both greens and others, including Palmer, will be considerably higher than in 2013.
I would be interested to know from William or Kevin how the “Management of the Economy” question has fared over the years. Is a 16/17% gap between the parties close to standard?
briefly,
[The now-scrapped tax was not a tax on transactions. It was a tax on deposits. In fact it should be imposed on borrowers.]
Simlar to a national LMI scheme? I could think of worse things for the Govt to get involved in.
Of course, financial regulators could just try harder to ensure that commercial banks earn a level of profit that is commensurate with their levels of risk (which they seem to be doing some of).
4
Rates Analyst
At least the premise of Q&A is that relevant questions might be answered. The opposite premise applies to the Abbott Government. Nothing pertinent will be disclosed at any time. Anything true will be denied.
From ReachTEL thread:
[
2421
Darn
I have always believed that {the medical research fund} was just a stunt to placate the plebs over the multi billion dollar cut to health and the attacks on Medicare.
]
That, and the usual Coalition handing over of vast chunks of public wealth and civil rights to plutocratic mates, in a manner increasingly difficult for the hypothetical layperson to distinguish from bribery & corruption.
[2431
adrian
Raising the debt level is probably all part of the grand masterplan, so that it’ll get to a stage where it is so bad the government will be forced to face up to the problem.]
They are trying to bankrupt government, to make it easy pickings for corporate vultures. Worked in the USA. Just about to work here, if we let it.
[8
Libertarian Unionist
briefly,
The now-scrapped tax was not a tax on transactions. It was a tax on deposits. In fact it should be imposed on borrowers.
Similar to a national LMI scheme?]
That is an element. However, those who lend to the banking sector – especially European banks – also benefit from the Guarantee. Perhaps the Commonwealth should be obliged top hedge its potential liabilities in the CDS market and the cost of the hedging should be borne by the banks, who could then relay the cost to their borrowers.
In this way, the whole cost would be transparent and would manifest as a charge against bank assets. That should certainly make taxpayers feel a lot better.
Briefly
That would be several thousand times the total size of the Australian CDS markets…
And just who would sell that protection? The banks?
Hmmm 7% think the “lib” party is too left-wing. So the fact that 9% (if I remember correctly) gave David the Lion-man their Senate vote wasn’t because they couldn’t read – it was because the Libs complaining about his party’s name gave them some free publicity just before the election, and those 9% thought “fair enough, a true extreme small-government man just like me”. Thought so at the time.
Another 7-9% for the LDP in Canning if they’ve campaigned enough so that their potential voters know who they are. And another worry, Isuppose, for the moderates who’d really like to get 51% of the vote and do some moderately conservative governing.
Millenial, Darn
The reported primaries add up to 101, so an adjustment needs to be made for this in the calculations, multiplying by 100/101.
So my calculation is:
(38 + 83% of 11 + 47% of 12) * 100/101 + 0.15 = 52.4%
The additional 0.15 is for leakage from Coalition parties to Labor in three-cornered contests.
I’ll have to think that all through another time, but on the face of it there is a lot to like in that proposal, briefly 🙂
Darn #6
I don’t think Essential uses Respondent-allocate preferences, it uses preferences from the 2013 Election.
Which were: (Just to Refresh our Memories):
Greens: 83.03 to ALP
Palmer United: 46.33 to ALP
Others: 46.97 to ALP
Thus, one would construct the TPP from the primaries by:
38 ALP + (0.8303*11) Greens + (0.4633*2) PUP + (0.4697*10) Others + 0.14 (Preference Flow between Libs and Nats)
= 52.8969 to Labor ≈ 52.9 to Labor.
But I suspect, judging by the fact that the Liberals lost a point on the primaries and Labor, the Greens and PUP each gained a point, that those primaries are rounded.
My ER calculation, ignoring rounding:
ALP 38
Greens 11 x 83%= 9.1
Pup 2x .46= .9
Others 10 X .47= 4.7
Assume 100% Nationals -> COALitiom
ALP 52.7
Therefore I assume rounding is the culprit.
I’ve just been talking to my fairly-but-not-completely- one-eyed Liberal-supporting barrister mate on the phone. He waded through Heydon’s 67 pages of FIGJAM and said for the first few pages he thought it was fairly persuasive, but as he read further he became less and less persuaded. Interesting.
dendrite #14
Ah, missed that. Thanks for clearing that up.
Oh damn, NOW I see dendrite’s post, after I’ve commented.
Grrr.
[That would be several thousand times the total size of the Australian CDS markets…]
Would it have to be purchased in the CDS market, or just the size of the hedge linked to the CDS price? Would this, in effect, make the scheme a whole-of-financial-system CDS offered by the Govt? Am I lost in an open-loop convolution?
briefly
Wouldn’t the size of the wholesale market exclude foreign banks from the deposit protection scheme?
Essential’s Border Farce Bounce!
[12
Rates Analyst
Briefly
That would be several thousand times the total size of the Australian CDS markets…
And just who would sell that protection? The banks?]
Trade it in NY or London. This obligation is opaque but is not inconsequential for the economy or for taxpayers. It also constitutes a subsidy on the discount rate – a subsidy to those who buy and sell financial assets. There is no reason for such a subsidy to be available.
If Goldman Sachs can hedge their liabilities, surely the Commonwealth of Australia can do the same….
[22
mexicanbeemer]
The Deposit Protection scheme applies to retail liabilities. The sovereign guarantee is imputed to all offshore wholesale liabilities.
I rang my lawyer son and asked if he knew how to use an email. He seemed to think he did (not sure I have evidence- he is terrible with phones).
Thanks Briefly
General comment, I can’t think of any reason why the government can’t hedge in a similar manner that the GS’s of the world do, if anything I would expect the government to seek to hedge its position.
[After given a precis of the two parties’ National Broadband Network policies, 38% favoured Labor’s and 29% the government’s. ]
Another of the select policy differences that Shorten and the ALP should plug mercilessly.
FACT: Australian think their internet is shit.
And they’re right. It is shit.
Not if the Commonwealth of Australia is hedging the entirety of the Australian deposit book.
The ABC’s Jihad on Tony Abbott continues: Factcheck finds his claims about Australian emission targets to be “Incorrect”.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-01/tony-abbott-emissions-reduction-targets-paris-2015/6711330
How biased! Calling a PM incorrect just because his version of the “truth” does not conform to the views of a few ratbag scientists and statistics put about by discredited bodies like the ABS and OECD. Shame!
It is getting to the point where a Liberal PM or Minister cannot tell an honest lie in his efforts to get re-elected without a plague of left-wing, Trotskyist, Small-l Liberal, Femi-Nazi journalists descending on the poor Liberal politician like hungry wolves upon a poor lamb, assaulting them with facts and rationality on all sides.
@ those trying to recalculate the Essential Result from primaries.
You have calculated that Labor gets 52.7 votes out of every 101, once preferences have been distributed. This works out to be 52.178%, which rounds to 52%, not 53%.
So I don’t think Essential are doing any miscalculation or rounding at preliminary stages.
re: my 31: just listen to dendrite, who is 17 posts quicker than me…
RA
I was thinking more in terms of the government protecting its own finances.
By endlessly repeating this statement about TURC, Abbott is giving a future Labor government carte blanche to launch a RC into the Liberal Party.
[“It’s actually the key to better unions, more honest unions and a better, more honest Labor party,” Mr Abbott said.] news.com.au
In a true democracy you do not misuse the judicial system to try and hobble your political opponents. However we now have an “Abbott democracy” where hard fought conventions are discarded like scraps of rubbish. Many true conservatives in the Liberal party will find this a most disturbing development.
Has Brandis reminded Abbott of the implications of what he is saying?
I wouldn’t worry too much about trying to work out answers to 1 decimal place from numbers already rounded to 0 decimals. You only get bad maths. Essential will be getting their rounded 2PP from unrounded Primaries, but without the unrounded Primaries you could be out by 0.9% and have no way of knowing.
What we can be pretty confident in saying is that the sample two weeks ago that gave us a 51 was almost certainly more random variation than any ‘real’ movement to the government.
And so the good ship SS Clusterfuck sails on towards the rocks.
[29
Rates Analyst
Not if the Commonwealth of Australia is hedging the entirety of the Australian deposit book.]
Surely the C-of-A could hedge a proportion of its (contingent) sovereign liability in NY or London. The price of such an instrument would be a proxy measure of the overall integrity of Commonwealth finances and the prudential balance in the financial system. That would be good to have!!!!
Don’t mention the war!
[
Dutton’s media gripe foolish
CHRIS KENNY
Fairfax Media and the ABC are on a mission to bring down the Abbott government, but Peter Dutton was foolish to say so.]
[Not if the Commonwealth of Australia is hedging the entirety of the Australian deposit book.]
Not all, just a sufficient amount to keep the financial system running. And no, I’m not going to put a figure that 🙂
[Many true conservatives in the Liberal party will find this a most disturbing development.]
True conservatives like true Liberals were eradicated from the party under Howard. It’s just reactionary religious nutters, chancers, spivs, lurk merchants, and the delusional now.
The bond rate is a reflection of the risk of Australia’s liabilities although that isn’t a hedge as such from the government’s point of view
[Dutton’s media gripe foolish
CHRIS KENNY
Fairfax Media and the ABC are on a mission to bring down the Abbott government, but Peter Dutton was foolish to say so.]
One nutter who hears voices in his head tells another nutter who hears voices in his head to shut up or the voices will hear him.
Just how did batshit insanity become a precondition of membership of the right?
Wasn’t Labor accused of over-promising Broadband?
http://www.zdnet.com/article/nbn-october-map-update-extending-to-three-year-outlook/
[ ratsak
Posted Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 3:05 pm | Permalink
Dutton’s media gripe foolish
CHRIS KENNY
Fairfax Media and the ABC are on a mission to bring down the Abbott government, but Peter Dutton was foolish to say so.
One nutter who hears voices in his head tells another nutter who hears voices in his head to shut up or the voices will hear him.
]
Reminds me of the Angels “The Dogs Are Talking ” ….. maybe Kenny thinks he is a cousin of ‘The Son Of Sam’- you know those mangy howling dogs in the neighborhood keeping him from from sleeping and in his deranged mind, he turns their howls into messages from demons to spout in his weird and wacky opinions of things …..
Where is Fireman Tony?
ABC Current Affairs @amworldtodaypm 4m4 minutes ago
Bushfire researchers say that a complex set of whether patterns might mean a worse bushfire season than usual http://ab.co/1NJVhwJ
[I rang my lawyer son and asked if he knew how to use an email. He seemed to think he did (not sure I have evidence- he is terrible with phones).]
Your lawyer probably has an assistant to pick up the handset as lawyers are notorious for having difficulty with technology thingys
These blind fools – don’t they know – “Coal is good for Humanity”
Another mine bites the dust in Australia’s struggling coal sector
Australia’s struggling coal sector has taken another blow, with the announcement that a long-standing mine in the Illawarra region will shut, at the expense of more than 80 jobs.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/mining-and-resources/another-mine-bites-the-dust-in-australias-struggling-coal-sector-20150901-gjchp7.html#ixzz3kSjVu3Su
ACMA dismisses complaints of Barnaby Joyce against Kyle Sandilands
The complaint was in regards to a segment from June, where Sandilands interviewed Joyce on the subject of Johnny Depp’s dogs being brought into Australia, allegedly without following quarantine procedures.
A bit of back and forth then came to a head with this statement from Sandilands: “Sorry Barnaby, you might not be able to hear what I’m saying properly, but what I said was, I’m not saying that the guy didn’t do the wrong thing. I’m not saying that he shouldn’t be fined or the dogs shouldn’t be quarantined. What I’m saying is, you sound like an absolute clown telling the guy to bugger off back to Hollywood or we’ll kill his dogs. You sound like an idiot. You should have reworded your statement. Sound like a classy guy. You’re a Government Minister, not some idiot off the street mouthing off to a news camera. Have some decency.”
Read more at: https://www.radioinfo.com.au/news/acma-dismisses-complaints-barnaby-joyce-against-kyle-sandilands © Radioinfo.com.au
phonex
[These blind fools – don’t they know – “Coal is good for Humanity”]
In Lib speak this reads “Coal is good for our backers wallets”.
[ CTar1
Posted Tuesday, September 1, 2015 at 3:42 pm | Permalink
phonex
These blind fools – don’t they know – “Coal is good for Humanity”
In Lib speak this reads “Coal is good for our backers wallets”.
]
Yep …. its the COALition after all ….
Leroy Lynch@7
Yes. In Jan 2011 (Gillard govt not yet on the nose) it was only 10 points, in Nov 13 (Coalition government still new) it was 26, all others through 2012-15 it has been somewhere in the range 14-19.