It looks like the only two new federal polls this week are the regular Essential Research and Roy Morgan series, and a solid drop for the Coalition from Roy Morgan brings the two much closer together than they have been since Malcolm Turnbull assumed the prime ministership. Essential is its usual stable self, with the Coalition’s modest two-party lead of 51-49 unchanged on last week. The primary votes are 43% for the Coalition (down one), 35% for Labor (steady) and 11% for the Greens (steady). The voting intention results were derived from online polling conducted over the two previous weeks, from an overall sample of about 2000. From this week’s sample of 1000 only, the poll also offers us Essential’s monthly leadership ratings, which find Malcolm Turnbull steady on 51% approval and up two on disapproval to 27%, while Bill Shorten is steady on 27% approval and up one on disapproval to 48%. Turnbull’s lead on preferred prime minister has increased from 51-18 to 52-15. Respondents were also asked to register two reasons why the government might wish to reform the tax system, for which the most popular response by some margin was “to address the budget deficit”, which was rated first or second by 58%. Favoured possibilities for revenue raising followed the usual pattern in coming in highest for proposals targeting multinational corporations and high income earners, with a GST increase rating last out of seven listed options. When forced to choose between higher income tax or a higher GST, 37% came down for don’t know.
Morgan’s two-party measures record their first significant movement of the Turnbull era, with the Coalition’s respondent-allocated two-party lead down from 55-45 to 52.5-47.5, and previous election preferences down from 54-46 to 52.5-47.5. Clearly rounding and changed preference flows had a fair bit to do with this, because the primary votes are little changed, with the Coalition steady on 43.5%, Labor up a point to 29%, and the Greens up a point to 16%. The poll was conducted by face-to-face and SMS over the two previous weekends, from a sample of 3072.
Tom@466
Yes, ‘branding’. And I listed the antonyms with which you implicitly tag your opponents. They are not appealing.
BTW Tom, an older hand than me in IT snorted about ‘agile’ development methodology saying “we’ve had it for decades and call it ‘time and materials'”. 😉
GG
[ Investors are purchasing properties in the same market as every one else. If it is harder for one segment of buyers to purchase a property because of changes to Lender rules, then there will be fewer competitors for individual properties and less upward pressure on housing prices. ]
Agreed. The changes may reduce the rate at which the bubble is being inflated, but it will probably not by itself deflate the bubble. The real issue ASIC & APRA were addressing was that such loans are more likely to cause the bubble to burst unexpectedly, so removing them is a very good thing – but it does not really address the structural problem.
[Stuart Robert dates overlapped with his personal leave dates. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-10/stuart-robert-informed-department-of-china-visit-upon-return/7155528 … via @ABCNews]
Medicare! Shorten!
As someone with a fair bit of experience as a renter, I can’t see how changes to negative gearing on existing properties would force up rents in any sustantial way(although scrapping NG for new-build could certainly affect supply and therefore overall pricing).
Prices are set by what the rental market will bear – they are entirely unrelated to financing costs of landlords.
Having rented through a period when interest rates (and therefore financing costs) for existing owners basically halved, it was hard not to notice that rents continued climbing regardless. In fact, since property prices were racing up, rental increased faster than usual despite existing owners’ costs decreasing.
Maybe this is because rents are set by something called ‘supply and demand’…
Common sense dictates that any government incentives for housing investment should be directed to increasing housing stock – not to encourage speculation with existing stock.
MB,
Keating was always in favour of markets ruling. But he was also in favour of legitimate competition in those markets.
Keating was able to push his economic reforms because he slaughtered all manner of ‘sacrred cows” and took the unions along as partenrs in the process of reform.
This current Government introduces anti-Union/worker legislation and panders to the bleats of special interest groups. They talk a good fight. But, they are actually Governning for their mates. Shorten’s comments this morning don’t just cover this Government’s Indigenous policies but their whole approach to Government.
At this time the obvious differencee between Keating and Turnbull is that Keating was a change agent and Turnbull is simply a historic fugure in search of some history.
victoria
[ Stuart Robert dates overlapped with his personal leave dates. ]
Robert needs to develop a clear signal to tell everyone around him whether he is on “official” or “personal” business.
Perhaps he could roll up one trouser leg to indicate he is on “official” business?
So much for Turncoat being up with things. He says we should be able to transact Medicare on our smart phones in the 21st century. Well, my smartphone has a Medicare Express app.
It might be time that Turncoat looks at the app store.
P1,
Robert doesn’t want to say anything in case he says something.
The further revelations by Conroy today have clearly disrupted the Government’s narrative building.
The direction was clearly Robert may have done some of the things alleged but it was a rookie mistake, no harm came from it and it’s not a dismisal mistake. Conroy’s questions show that it might be a pattern of behaviour issue akin to the Briggs’ drinking problem.
And they wonder why so many people are choosing to go “off grid”!
[ http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-10/abs-energy-stats-show-61-per-cent-increase/7153660 ]
Would the last person left connected to the grid please turn out the lights?
I see that the Coalition has a new method for keeping Truss’s eyelids open: ask him a Dorothy Dixer.
[Express Plus Medicare mobile app
With Express Plus Medicare you can:
view your Medicare claim history
view your profile and update your address and contact details
view and update your bank account details
request a duplicate or replacement card
claim Medicare benefits
view your Medicare Safety Net balance
view your Medicare Benefit Tax Statement
view your Child Immunisation History Statement
view and access documents saved in the Vault
find your nearest service centre
Express Plus Medicare is available for Apple devices with iOS5+ and Android devices with version 2.3.3+.]
https://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/express-plus-mobile-apps#a2
Is there a shouty school of oration just for Treasurers?
“TIP-OFF: @3AWNeilMitchell has been told a “reasonably important part of the community” will start a new push for death taxes tomorrow.”
And if either side of politics listens to that suggestion, they can reconcile themselves to another 3 years sitting on the benches to the left of the speaker.
This tax “debate” has gotten right out of hand. And it was founded on a false premise: that there is any sort of need at the moment for income tax cuts. This was a given for Abbott and Hockey as – after the debacle of the 2014 budget – they saw it as the best way to ensure re-election. Turnbull and Morrison have kept it bubbling along.
But the tax scales at the moment are really pretty good and, if there is a discernible problem in terms of bracket creep, it’s in the $20-50k per annum income range, which isn’t where the swinging voters are generally found. Perhaps a lot of bracket creep is taking people past the $80k threshold, but the higher bracket into which they creep is only 4.5 cents in the dollar higher than the one below $80k. Compared to the bracket creep problems of the tax scales a few decades back, this is bugger all.
The only real urgency around the tax system at the moment is that it isn’t collecting anywhere near enough revenue to plug the deficit: especially when the Federal Government eventually gets over its illusory belief that it can sustain that $80 billion cut to State funding in the forward estimates.
But we are in a period of economic stagnation/downturn. Most major economies are running relatively larger public sector deficits than us.
Get over the fear of a few more deficits, and the ridiculous urge to cut income taxes for the middle to upper income earners, and suddenly we don’t need a higher GST, abolition of negative gearing or capital gains tax concessions, belting the crap out of superannuation concessions for workers who were unlucky enough to be born too late to join a defined benefit super scheme, death duties, and any other unnecessary tax change.
It’s been a debate with faux urgency all along. Labor is playing the most sensible game here. Yes, they want to make those with huge post-retirement superannuation holdings pay a modest amount of income tax, as opposed to the nothing whatsoever they pay now. And they are suggesting that they might want to make some modest, sober changes to negative gearing. And go hard after companies and individuals who avoid tax. They don’t seem to be proposing any income tax cuts at this stage.
I reckon that’s a great package. The Liberals, egged on by the endless drivel in the pages of the Fairfax press, are running from pillar to post coming up with sillier and sillier ideas for solving what is largely a faux problem.
TPOF
[ So much for Turncoat being up with things. He says we should be able to transact Medicare on our smart phones in the 21st century. Well, my smartphone has a Medicare Express app. ]
Hey, be fair – Mal only invented the internet. He can’t be expected to keep up with all new developments!
Roberts still stonewalling. No answers.
Wow he’s gone. Maybe Turnbull likes damaging the party and government and himself by dragging these things out for some reason.
guytaur
Dreyfus looks like he is having the time of his life. Every non-answer looks more and more evasive.
TPOF
Certainly not very agile on the part of the government minister 😀
[And if either side of politics listens to that suggestion, they can reconcile themselves to another 3 years sitting on the benches to the left of the speaker.]
Probably you are right but the idea of taxing wealth and unearned wealth transfers is a tax mix change that massively increases the equity of out tax system.
A sensible retirement incomes package, including the family home, that requires super inherited to flow into a super fund could help.
The super confessions could phase out at a $2 million threshold and the death duty phase in starting at a $3 million cap.
The failure, particularly of the Howard Government, to ensure the wealth boom of the Keating economy went to reducing inequality rather than increasing it, created an undercurrent that a smart leader could tap to drive such changes with massive popular support.
It is of course much better here tan the USA where it is probably too late for a change of direction towards more equity and there is a real risk of civil unrest.
Barnaby talking, bench behind him bored and disengaged. (I’ve got the sound off)
Have Labor got the letter of appointment?
LNP must be wondering.
Dreyfus is a dog with a bone.
vanOnselenP: The problem for Turnbull now is that the tactic of waiting till a non sitting week to sack isn’t worth it. PM looks weak now for not acting.
Lol!
[Peter van Onselen
Peter van Onselen – Verified account @vanOnselenP
Not everyone agrees, but I’ve always rated Stuart Robert. I even suggested cabinet promotion one day. But I think he needs to step down 🙁
7:41 PM – 9 Feb 2016
2 RETWEETS2 LIKES]
lizzie
[Barnaby talking, bench behind him bored and disengaged.]
Like us, they’re thinking fair dinkum is this guy our future deputy PM.
SSO
Sorry not quite yet but soon I think
Bracket creep was an issue when inflation was running at 7-10% for nearly two decadex (from 1973 to about 1991) and wages always increased faster than prices. With inflation and wage growth practically comatose (2% or less p.a), bracket creep is the least of owr problems: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6302.0/
Mal loves a condescending lecture doesn’t he…
Did Turnbull say promptilously or some made up word like that?
Look, before Mal can act on Stuart Robert, he needs to conduct a full and wide ranging discussion with the electorate. All options are on the table, except those that aren’t, or have been proposed by Labor. Mal will commission a green paper, and then a white paper, and then forget about both and say something about being agile and innovative and that it’s the best time ever to be Stuart Robert.
srpeatling: OL Shorten to PM:” Isn’t the PM waiting for Parliament to rise before he takes out his trash?” (He gets a language caution for that.)
Now the SSO
Shorten with notice of motion on Robert. Will Pyne close it down before it starts?
zoomster
😀
[With inflation and wage growth practically comatose (2% or less p.a), bracket creep is the least of owr problems:]
I think you are underestimating the real impact of stagnant wage growth, particularly if it is less than inflation.
You are right that the actual impact of bracket creep is low but its importance will be magnified if / while the income tide is running the wrong way.
I honestly think this has been one of the biggest politics drivers post GFC, even though I’ve only seen mumble mumble about it.
mb
[The Dem leadership has put all its eggs in the Hillary basket, and I reckon they could end up having a problem, especially if the highly charismatic and populist Trump is her eventual opponent.]
Actually Hillary would be hoping Trump will win. He’s the only candidate she is beating in the polls head to head. Cruz and Rubio both lead her head to head.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/education/activists-push-taxpayerfunded-gay-manual-in-schools/news-story/4de614a88e38ab7b16601f07417c6219
[Eleven-year-old children are being taught about sexual orientation and transgender issues at school in a taxpayer-funded program written by gay activists.
The Safe Schools Coalition teaching manual says that asking parents if their baby is a boy or a girl reinforces a “heteronormative world view’’.]
That was, I am told, the front page of the Australian today. Needless to say it’s ridiculously biased.
Bill doing a good job.
Bob’s Uncle@504: “Prices are set by what the rental market will bear – they are entirely unrelated to financing costs of landlords.
Having rented through a period when interest rates (and therefore financing costs) for existing owners basically halved, it was hard not to notice that rents continued climbing regardless. In fact, since property prices were racing up, rental increased faster than usual despite existing owners’ costs decreasing.
Maybe this is because rents are set by something called ‘supply and demand’…”
Totally agree. But, if the price people are willing/able to pay for a good – is less than a seller is prepared to accept in terms of covering their costs and making a profit, then the supply is going to dry up and then, if the demand persists, prices are going to rise rapidly.
The generally accepted rule is that, in order to make ends meet, average income households can’t generally afford to spend more than 30 per cent of their income on rent. For lower income households, it’s probably more like 15-20 per cent, but let’s focus on the average for now.
You can’t use average household income for this purpose, as this is skewed downwards by the large number of retired people who live on pensions. (eg, average household income is typically less than average weekly earnings).
So let’s posit an “average” economic family in Sydney or Melbourne with one parent on AWE and one on 50% of AWE so the combined income is around $120k per annum. Such a family, if they choose to rent would be able to pay an annual rent of no more than $40k per annum: a bit less than $800 per week.
To provide a dwelling that costs around $800 per week, a landlord is likely to be paying rates, insurance, land tax, agent fees and repairs and maintenance costs that I would expect to average out at least at $300 per week, if not more.
So, ignoring mortgage costs, we’re looking at a $500 per week net return. Averaging across Sydney and Melbourne, the median price for a dwelling in these cities is around $850k. Let’s assume rental dwellings are typically a little below the median so let’s say that the average economic family is living in a dwelling that costs $750k.
A $500 per week net return on a dwelling that costs $750k is around 3.5 per cent: and that’s if the dwelling is occupied 52 weeks of the year.
You can get 3% if you deposit that amount in a bank for the long term, with no risk of vacancy or unexpectedly expensive repairs, or governments suddenly escalating rates and land taxes (as has happened in the ACT).
So, as I said, the supply would quickly dry up without negative gearing unless house prices fall and/or rents go up significantly.
It’s just basic mathematics, not complex economic theory.
As predicted, Prissy gags the SSSO motion.
michellegrattan: Christopher Pyne ticked off by Tony Smith – he must be pining for Bron
Turnbull can’t sack Robert until Parkinson completes his investigation.
I suspect he’ll get the arse after that though.
PvO really gets narky when guests cancel on him. It’s like a jilted lover getting stood up.
Shorten&Co doing a good tactical effort of tying Turnbull as much as possible to the sinking barbed wire canoe.
barriecassidy: Absolutely, if true… https://t.co/iHTMZl6vaG
MB,
The industry rule of thumb for landlord expenses is 20% of the rental value of the property.
This covers expenses such as RE agent fees, insurance, rates, maintenance etc.
If you are proposing to purchase a rental property the Banks will only accept 20% of the propsed rental as income for assessing the loan.
And a double LOL!
[Peter van Onselen
Peter van Onselen – Verified account @vanOnselenP
And let’s call a spade a spade – this whole story was a drop from the Abbott camp to hurt one of Turnbull’s backers. Dirty business…
8:01 PM – 9 Feb 2016
26 RETWEETS10 LIKES]
But the Herald Sun journo responds
[Ellen Whinnett
Ellen Whinnett – @ellenwhinnett
@vanOnselenP you are completely wrong.
8:05 PM – 9 Feb 2016
2 RETWEETS5 LIKES]
[Ellen Whinnett
Ellen Whinnett – @ellenwhinnett
@vanOnselenP you didn’t break the yarn. You have no idea how we got it. You’re wrong.]