Newspoll: 51-49 to Coalition

Two new polls makes four altogether under Malcolm Turnbull – including one very odd man out.

Two very different poll results today, one in line with the ReachTEL and Galaxy polls that reported in the immediate wake of the leadership change last week, the other not. In the former category is Newspoll, which had the Coalition with a lead of 51-49 – compared with a Labor lead of 54-46 a fortnight ago – from primary votes of Coalition 44% (up five), Labor 35% (down four) and Greens 11% (down one). Malcolm Turnbull opens his account with an approval rating of 42% and disapproval of 24%, and leads Bill Shorten 55-21 as preferred prime minister. Shorten’s approval rating is down a point to 29%, and his disapproval down four to 54%.

The other poll for the day was Roy Morgan’s extraordinary finding of a 10% shift on two-party preferred, which blows out to 12% under respondent-allocated preferences. This leaves the Coalition with leads of 55-45 on the former measure and 53.5-46.5 on the latter, from primary votes of Coalition 46% (up eleven), Labor 29.5 (down seven) and Greens 13% (down three). The poll was conducted on Saturday and Sunday from 2059 respondents, and appears to have have been conducted only using face-to-face polling, which has traditionally shown a lean to Labor. The Newspoll will have been conducted from Friday to Sunday, from about 1700 respondents contacted through robopolling and online surveying.

UPDATE (Essential Research): Essential Research has published a result just from its latest weekly polling, together with its normal fortnightly rolling average, and its debut result for Malcolm Turnbull is 50-50 (52-48 in Tony Abbott’s last poll), from primary votes of Coalition 43% (up two), Labor 37% (steady) and Greens 11% (steady). Turnbull records a 53-17 lead over Bill Shorten as preferred prime minister; 58% approve of the leadership coup, against 24% who disapprove; and 34% say his ascension makes them more likely to vote Coalition, against 14% for less likely. Forty-six per cent expect the government to run a full term versus 26% who expect an early election, and 40% expect the Coalition to win it versus 27% for Labor.

An extended question on Malcolm Turnbull’s personal attributes finds him much more highly regarded as Abbott across the board, with particularly big improvements since the question was last asked of him in February on intelligent (up seven to 81%), capable (up ten to 70%), understanding of the problems facing Australia (up eight to 63%) and visionary (up seven to 7%). His relative weak spots are, on the negative side of the ledger, arrogant (47%) and out of touch with ordinary people (46%), and on the positive, trustworthy (44%) and more honest than most politicians (39%). Bill Shorten’s position has deteriorated across the board since June, the worst movements being on aggressive (up eight to 36%, although maybe that’s a good thing), narrow-minded (up seven to 41%) and capable (down seven to 36%).

Essential also welcomes the Turnbull prime ministership with a question on whether Australia should become a republic – support for which is, interestingly, up five points since February to 39% with opposition down five to 29%, although 32% are in the “no opinion” category. Other questions find 67% support for a national vote on same-sex marriage compared with 21% who say it should be decided by parliament, and 45% choosing “incentives for renewable energy” from a list of favoured approaches to climate change, compared with 11% for an emissions trading scheme, 10% for the government’s direct action policy and 12% for no action required.

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.

1,366 comments on “Newspoll: 51-49 to Coalition”

Comments Page 27 of 28
1 … 26 27 28

  2. daretotread@1298

    Bemused

    You do not understand.

    I am a consultant. I sell my services. For every $10,000 I earn I pay $1,000 GST less the relatively small amount I can claim back for GST I paid for supplies or services. Now for a consultant it makes relatively little difference because you quote prices plus GST and the businesses who pay you can claim it pack. It is just a money shuffle. Your net income does not change.

    However for those businesses targeting consumers- retail, restaurants, hairdresses etc, the GST is a net cost which is mostly on labour. As I explained if the value added by a business after you exclude purchases and services is $200,000 then the GST is a direct tax on this which is mostly on labour. So any business NOT able to pass the GST on in full to customers suffers a net loss which is in effect a tax on Labour 9or to be more precise the value added which except for some odd things like goodwill or capital appreciation is mostly labour.

    WWP put it neatly “…in a buyers market (that is where the price is fixed and the sellers can’t increase it) GST is currently 1/11th of whatever the fixed market price is.”

    So the the GST collected minus any credits is remitted to the ATO.

    You are just complicating things beyond reason, as was fred.

    If a business cannot make a profit after paying its GST then it should close down.

  3. DavidWH @1301

    The most (in)famous resistance was from the House of Lords, whose interests probably don’t align with those of the community.

    Moreover, my understanding was that Knights and Dames have been “reabolished”, so I think we’ve not got Peers of the Realm either?

  4. Just Me one thing would be a PBO with legislative power to carry out proper audits of political party policy and release these to the public at least two weeks before election day.

    Secondly give the ACCC real teeth to report on market power, again for public release and real teeth to police misuse of market power.

  5. bemused

    [I am waiting for the day he lapses into ‘tongues’ in the middle of an interview. 👿 ]
    Judging from some comments here about Morrison on 7.5 tonight he may have already done so.

  6. Scott’s response:

    Scott Morrison ‏@ScottMorrisonMP 5m5 minutes ago

    Tax reform does not require you to increase the tax burden – it requires you to change the tax system so it can support a growing economy

    So tax is apparently a burden, but is ok to increase the GST anyway (aka GST is a tax).

  7. I just watched Tony Jones vs Chris Bowen. Jones yet again was an annoying interruptor who was very unhappy not getting the answers that would further his career.

    Now what would happen if Jones and Morrison were together in an interview. Could you power a small city on the nuclear fusion, or would one crush the other?

  8. DavidWH

    The GST is probably a fairly wise tax in an expanding economy, where there is full employment and wages growth. Lots of money comes in and the government provides services.

    However in a situation of stagnant wages growth, people have not extra money in their pockets to cover that extra 5% of almost all purchases. So if a businesses – restaurants, shops, hairdressers, tradies put up their prices to stay revenue neutral post GST, the waged consumer has not enough money so will need to cut back on some services to make up the shortfall. Alternatively business owners will opt not to increase prices and take an income cut or will cut staff to keep profits the same.

  11. (input_cost*0.9 + labour_cost)*1.1 — what is you problem consumer pays?

    (input_cost + (Labor_cost*1.1) — cost on labor; we have a problem.

    Same result different point of view.

  13. [I had to turn off Morrison because he had started practically shouting.]

    Yes, don’t forget, Morrison dealt with the pressure of Immigration by shutting down the press conferences to one a week and avoided questions with the ‘on water’ description.

    Shouting back is how he deals with pressure. I don’t think he’ll be able to take the body punches the way Joe Hockey was able to absorb them ..like Ali did against Fraser,

    Sco Mo is clever, but I don’t think he can take punishment over a sustained period

  16. Poroti

    Morrison really was talking in tongues. It was a truly terrible interview. Actually interview is not the right word. Presentation is a better fit. It was a rant interspersed with “but Minister”, “but” “However”, “But” which was about all Leigh Sales was able to utter.

  17. DTT all business in a sector would, in theory at least, be equally impacted by any change in the GST rate. Also given the current economic circumstances it would be wise to stagger any increase over a few years.

  18. Fred

    After Scotty’s rant tonight I am certainly in the come back Joe camp.

    yes ask me a week ago and I would have laughed at the idea. But a week is a long time!!!!!!

  19. daretotread@1308

    DavidWH

    The GST is probably a fairly wise tax in an expanding economy, where there is full employment and wages growth. Lots of money comes in and the government provides services.

    However in a situation of stagnant wages growth, people have not extra money in their pockets to cover that extra 5% of almost all purchases. So if a businesses – restaurants, shops, hairdressers, tradies put up their prices to stay revenue neutral post GST, the waged consumer has not enough money so will need to cut back on some services to make up the shortfall. Alternatively business owners will opt not to increase prices and take an income cut or will cut staff to keep profits the same.

    Apart from getting rid of the complexities of the WST, the rationale of the GST was to start taxing services as consumer spending patterns moved to a greater percentage of services. e.g. Internet, mobile phones services etc.

    It was also supposed to replace a number of inefficient state taxes.

    So service businesses such as hairdressers were the ones who felt the effect as their previously un-taxed services were taxed. If they all passed on the GST, the effect on their businesses would be negligible.

  20. davidwh@1304

    Just Me one thing would be a PBO with legislative power to carry out proper audits of political party policy and release these to the public at least two weeks before election day.

    Secondly give the ACCC real teeth to report on market power, again for public release and real teeth to police misuse of market power.

    In other words, broadly speaking, transparency in politics, and a level playing field in business.

    Yes?

    With which I agree.

  21. David

    Obviously businesses in poorer areas will suffer most because their clientèle a less likely to have extra cash in hand. The hamburger joint in Logan will suffer more than one in Moggill. I guess those in deception Bay would suffer a bit. Not sure of the income level on Bribie, but if retirement incomes stay constant then they would suffer greatly.

  22. frednk@1311

    (input_cost*0.9 + labour_cost)*1.1 — what is you problem consumer pays?

    (input_cost + (Labor_cost*1.1) — cost on labor; we have a problem.

    Same result different point of view.

    Inscrutable.

  23. davidwh @1317

    You may recall that with the introduction of the 10% GST there was a negative growth quarter, believed to have been caused by the GST.

    I.e. increase of GST leads reduction in spending power / consumption in real terms.

    Why is now a good time to reduce consumption? or even to start to do so? (staggered over a few years)

  24. bemused

    “if they all pass on the GST” is the crux of the problem. In our economy today with stagnant wages growth, an increase in GST will translate to a direct reduction in living standards.

    Now obviously the government may compensate pensioners etc, but the worst affected will be those just above any compensation threshold.

  25. Maybe good govt will start tomorrow

    [Joan Evatt
    Joan Evatt – ‏@Boeufblogginon

    Work. Save. Invest.
    from Scott Morrison.

    Those who said 3 word slogans would die with Tony Abbott just hang your heads in shame. #Lateline]

  27. daretotread@1324

    bemused

    “if they all pass on the GST” is the crux of the problem. In our economy today with stagnant wages growth, an increase in GST will translate to a direct reduction in living standards.

    Now obviously the government may compensate pensioners etc, but the worst affected will be those just above any compensation threshold.

    When the GST was introduced…
    1. WST was abolished so some prices of goods should have fallen.
    2. Services became subject to GST so prices rose.
    3. Compensation via the income tax and social security was supposed to cover low income earners.

  28. EG now isn’t a good time. However now may be a good time to start the discussion and planning so when growth returns to normal levels the spade work has been done.

  32. E. G. Theodore

    [No one said it would be easy –]
    I have no idea if it is a good idea or a bad idea. However even if it is a brilliant idea it will face ubermegaultra resistance. Especially as , naturally, those that pump out TV, newspapers etc are very much members of the group that will see their burden increased. So “fair and balanced” reporting of the idea’s merit to the public would barely, if all, get a look in.

  34. Very interesting news out of the EU about digital privacy and the extent of US surveillance:

    [“The access of the United States intelligence services to the data transferred covers, in a comprehensive manner, all persons using electronic communications services, without any requirement that the persons concerned represent a threat to national security,” Bot’s opinion noted in one of its most damning sections.]

    [“Such mass, indiscriminate surveillance is inherently disproportionate and constitutes an unwarranted interference with the rights guaranteed by Articles 7 and 8 of the charter (of fundamental rights of the EU)”.]

    [The Luxembourg court found the Safe Harbor agreement between the US and Europe, which gives spies access to huge banks of data, does not stop watchdogs from investigating complaints or bar them from suspending the transfers.]

    [The arrangement allows the NSA to use the Prism surveillance system exposed by Snowden to wade through billions of bits of personal data, communication and information held by nine internet companies.]

    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/23/us-intelligence-services-surveillance-privacy?CMP=soc_568

  39. Red Ted@1323.

    [ … with the introduction of the 10% GST there was a negative growth quarter, believed to have been caused by the GST.

    I.e. increase of GST leads reduction in spending power / consumption in real terms.

    Why is now a good time to reduce consumption? or even to start to do so? (staggered over a few years) ]

    I have been wondering this. I am a partner in a business where the cost of goods has a strong relationship to the amount people spend. It sells discretionary items (luxury food), and so when the price increases above a certain amount (now around $32 for a main course), people stop buying. As all such businesses will need to raise their price by the same amount, after a quarter or so, the new “maximum-reasonable-price for a main” will increase, but many businesses will go to the wall during that quarter of negative growth?

  40. Another reason for introducing GST into the taxation mix, in place of income or profits tax, is that it encourages savings. Income tax, on the other hand, discourages savings as interest is taxed.

    GST is effective because it hits the things that people cannot avoid buying. This is akin to the Ramsey pricing rule, where the most inelastic demand is priced the highest.

    But I’m glad someone else brought up property taxes. It’s usually just me. 🙂

  43. [WWP that only applies where you are a real price taker. I would think that would be rare in our domestic economy where all firms have to account for the same change.

    More likely to relate to exporters but they are exempt from GST in any case.]

    Well in a strong economy this might be true, but we have a very weak economy where consumers are very concerned so it is much less true.

    And exports are only GST free if they meet the strict time limits or apply to the ato to extend those timelimits …

  44. [But I’m glad someone else brought up property taxes. It’s usually just me. :)]

    I’m not around that much but i always support you on this one!

  45. Douglas and Milko @1339

    I think in the middle of a boom (as at the introduction of the GST) there is a sort of controlled crash that leads only to extremely marginal businesses failing and this is probably a good thing in the medium term.

    However, when growth is already below trend and there is a the distinct possibility that a negative quarter will turn up anyway it the deliberate inducing of a quarter-long fall in demand might cascade into something more extended …

  46. (input_cost*0.9 + labour_cost)*1.1 — what is you problem consumer pays?

    (input_cost + (Labor_cost*1.1) — cost on labor; we have a problem.

    Same result different point of view.

    This is not how gst works.

    cost to the consumer is always (input cost + labour cost)*1.1

Comments Page 27 of 28
1 … 26 27 28

Leave a Reply

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