Essential Research: 52-48 to Labor

No change on voting intention from Essential Research, but Malcolm Turnbull’s personal ratings improve slightly after post-election dip.

No change in the two-party preferred reading of the Essential Research fortnightly rolling average this week, with Labor maintaining a lead of 52-48. On the primary vote, the Coalition is up a point to 40% and Labor, the Greens and the Nick Xenophon Team are steady on 37%, 10% and 4%. Monthly leadership ratings find Malcolm Turnbull recovering slightly from his post-election dip, with approval up one to 38% and disapproval down five to 43%, while Bill Shorten is respectively down two to 37% and steady at 41%. Turnbull’s lead on preferred prime minister is up from 39-31 to 40-30. Other questions find opinion finely balanced on the effect on Australia of “globalisation” (29% gained, 29% lost, 18% neither). Forty per cent of respondents were ready to subscribe to the frankly idiotic view that “Australian trade with other countries” causes Australia to lose more jobs than it gains, with only 28% providing the correct and obvious answer. The poll also finds 45% approving of the census keeping names and addresses versus 39% disapproving; 47% saying the state of the economy is getting worse, with only 13% saying it’s getting better and 25% saying the recent interest rate cut will make them better off versus 29% for worse off.

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.

3,566 comments on “Essential Research: 52-48 to Labor”

Comments Page 1 of 72
1 2 72
  1. Tony Abbott’s Back And He’s Causing Plenty Of Chaos For Malcolm Turnbull

    Tony Abbott’s back and he’s declared war on factional enemies within the Liberal Party. Just in case dealing with a hostile Senate wasn’t a hard enough challenge, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull now has to contend with a vocal and angry Abbott, and a resurgent conservative wing of his own party.

    On last night’s Four Corners Abbott emerged from whatever dark cave he hides in when he isn’t being bitter on TV in order to… be bitter on TV. He attacked a group of lobbyists aligned to the moderate wing of the NSW Liberal Party, describing them as “factional warlords” and accusing them of creating “a potential for corruption”.

    Read more at http://junkee.com/tony-abbotts-back-hes-causing-plenty-chaos-malcolm-turnbull/82274#9kKAY4ebX055zVgt.99

  2. Tonight Is Census Night, Or Next Month If You’re Busy

    Can’t make it onto the Census website tonight? The ABS says its server infrastructure is pretty sturdy, but as with all things running electricity through silicon there are no guarantees. If you don’t complete your Census form tonight — for whatever reason — you won’t automatically be fined the government’s default $180 per day penalty. The actual deadline is around six weeks away.

    The deadline for delivering a completed Census for every Australian household is September 23. That’s the word from general manager of the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Census and Statistical Network Division, Chris Libreri, who told News.com.au that despite August 9 being D-day, “no-one has ever been fined for being late with their Census form.”

    That $180 daily fine, along with another $1800 one-off penalty, is for those that refuse to complete the Census entirely, for whatever reason — including an ideological objection to the idea of any Census whatsoever, rather than just an objection to supplying personally identifiable data. Senator Nick Xenophon will not be supplying his name, but going on the ABS’ comments it’s not likely that he’ll be fined — even if it’s just to make a public example.

    http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2016/08/tonight-is-census-night-or-next-month-if-youre-busy/

  3. 4 Corners was pretty tepid stuff. No revelations. Just a bunch of Lib hacks and has-beens engaging in some hand-wringing & spleen-venting. (Abetz is cranky coz he’s not in cabinet… wow, who knew?) The Killing Season it wasn’t.

  4. Whilst the 2 pp is not affected the vote for Liberals was 37 and the Nats was down from 3% to 2 giving 39 as it was in the the previous fortnight.

  5. 4 Corners was pretty tepid stuff.

    Yup. Seemed to me that it was really just a platform for Abbott to creep the Turnbull camp out. Trying to position himself as some wise and honest broker?? FFS, after the crap that happened on his watch?? “scholarships”, Arfur’s dodgey donations, the long term and smelly Parakellia stuff………

    As well as a term of remarkably poor economic management and embarrassment for the country that a ham-fisted idiot like him was PM.

    Still, the more damage he can do the Libs from the inside the better for the country.

  6. Reading from a short statement outside today’s meeting, which lasted more than three hours, deputy leader Mia Davies said there had been no spill motion.

    She said Mr Redman resigned from the leadership and it had “been agreed that Brendon Grylls will become the leader of the Nationals”.

    “I would like to put on the record a great deal of thanks and appreciation to Terry who has led the party well,” she said.

    So Redman resigned. He was saying yesterday it was the leader’s responsibility to “fight” for the leadership.

  7. jackol @ #9 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 2:55 pm

    Adds up to 101%

    Rounding. The answer to this silly point whenever it comes up is always rounding.

    I am rounding my age on the census to the nearest 100. Also my house number in my street address.

    If PB has taught me anything it is that rounding is a valid statistical technique.

  8. Trying to position himself as some wise and honest broker??

    He’d administered his suppository of wisdom before going on Four Corners.

  9. (Just saw this new thread had been created while writing something for an earlier thread. Here follows what I wrote there)

    Those wondering what “all the fuss is about” with respect to the census should take a listen to the “law radio” blog at https://lawradio.net/2016/08/06/whats-in-a-name-the-census-question/ (where there are links to both iTunes & SoundCloud version)

    It is not in the slightest “sensationalist” but it does provide a very good guide to the pros and cons of different ways of approaching the matter, with commentary from the excellent Dr Caroline Henckels – Monash University expert on Constitutional and Public Law.

    She also has some useful advice about the pros and cons of using your own name, using no name, or using an alias, for those who do have concerns.

    People might also take a look at Ingrid Matthews blog at https://imatthewsblog.com/2016/08/07/trust-and-the-census-who-definitely-benefits/

    Ingrid lectures in law at the University of Western Sydney, and has some interesting perspectives on the way many educated indigenous commentators see the issue.

    I’m afraid I reckon the ABS are being rather disingenuous about some of the security aspects of the name processing. Yes, they will remove names from the census data set itself, but only after creating a seperate name based “key” which allows the data to be compared with other data sets for which name based “keys” will also be created, now and in the future. Once such “keys” are created the possibility of malfeasance or a subsequent change in government policy being used to undertake “matching” and reverse engineering to establish names undoubtedly exists.

    Yes, they are clearly trying, but the only “guarantees” they can really give are ones of “best endeavours and current intent”. they should be much more upfront about such things.

    And hey, providing a link on the ABS Census website’s Privacy page to a copy of the Privacy act which has subsequently been amended no less than 9 times to include increased powers for enforcement agencies etc doesn’t exactly fill you with confidence about their competence!

  10. Forty per cent of respondents were ready to subscribe to the frankly idiotic view that “Australian trade with other countries” causes Australia to lose more jobs than it gains, with only 28% providing the correct and obvious answer.

    The number and quality of jobs lost due to removal of tariffs, removal of import controls, removal of industry assistance, federal government fiscal retrenchment and so on has been greater than the number of good quality jobs created. A small number of people have benefited immensely from the creation of highly paid, stimulating jobs in more globally integrated supply chains. But far more people have been downgraded to precarious crappy jobs or no jobs at all. It’s true that consumers benefit from lower prices but it’s more valuable for a household to have stable and secure jobs with slightly higher consumer good prices than to have no job or precarious employment with cheap imported goods available.

  11. On last night’s Four Corners Abbott emerged from whatever dark cave he hides in when he isn’t being bitter on TV in order to… be bitter on TV. He attacked a group of lobbyists aligned to the moderate wing of the NSW Liberal Party, describing them as “factional warlords” and accusing them of creating “a potential for corruption”.

    How ironic, given the attacks he was always making on Labor’s factions, as if they were the only party that had them. Now he is making bullets for Shorten to fire back regarding the Liberal party’s factions. The next couple of years are going to be a very fun time for Labor supporters.

  12. bemused @ #3074 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 12:55 pm

    mtbw @ #3058 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    I just completed the Census and have no idea why so many are whingeing about it.

    Agree 100%.
    Some here are as nutty as Senator Malcolm Roberts.
    I will follow the advice of Andrew Leigh on AM this morning.
    http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2016/s4515040.htm

    I responded on wrong thread so here goes again. Although you might feel ok regarding the census, the majority of persons out there do not share your level of trust. There has plenty of polling done before revealing people’s mistrust of government institutions and the government itself. Aside from privacy concerns, there is a greater concern and that is that due to increased distrust, the data received from this census will be a lot less reliable than prior to these changes. That is my primary concern. I just think it is a stupid idea, impulsive and not considered carefully enough. They have not thought this through.

  13. player one @ #3080 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 1:08 pm

    gorkay king @ #3075 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 12:59 pm

    Also completed census, 10 minute job, no dramas. All that whinging, first world problems.

    For you, it probably isn’t a problem.
    However, the picture may be slightly different if you are from Syria, declare Islam as your religion, don’t speak English at home, have had a mental illness or a criminal conviction you did not declare to your employer, are in hiding from an abusive partner, or perhaps have not declared you are gay but use HIV anti-retroviral drugs you obtained via the PBS.
    If any of these or many other situations apply to you, then your problems may just be beginning.

    Exactly! There are plenty of people out there who are either not “squeaky clean” or are concerned at being discriminated against should things about them be “on the record”. Things they would consider none of anyone’s business and only admit to when they think they can answer anonymously.

    Also, consider this. Look what happened to Duncan Storrer after he had the guts to ask a question on Q&A, the way the media dug up his past and the Libs would have just loved that. We hear all the time about leaks, corruption, ICAC, yadda, yadda. We see the way people manage to drag out criminal histories of aspiring politicians that should be inaccessible due to a statute of limitations. In fact I recall something years ago about a corrupt person in the ABS that was releasing data to a politician I think who was benefiting somehow, maybe financially from the information. I cannot recall the details and should probably start googling but maybe this rings some bells with one of you reading this? Just saying there are plenty of reasons for people to balk at this latest change. Be they paranoid or not, there are some grounds for their distrust were the information to get into the wrong hands.

  14. Rod H:

    Thanks so much for those links. I will listen to the radio interview later.

    I do take issue with the blog link, in particular this:

    Indigenous people on dialysis and with other co-morbidity diagnoses were counted in the last Census. Are they better off? Has anyone asked them? What is the link between data matching and their well-being, whether as individuals or a population?

    It isn’t necessarily the way in which new knowledge is elucidated, but how that new knowledge is applied, either in policy or service provision, or whatever.

    The WA Aboriginal Child Health Survey was the first study of its kind involving indigenous child health, and contributed greatly to our understanding of the complex causal factors contributing to poor health and inequality. The problem is that governments, fed and state have failed to fully implement the recommendations of the research team. Look at RCIADIC, coming onto how many decades now since its findings were released, and we’re still seeing abuses of incarcerated indigenous people, essentially because the recommendations don’t get implemented.

    New insights into problems is one thing, but changing the way we do things to embrace the new insights is another.

  15. William ‘the frankly idiotic view that “Australian trade with other countries” causes Australia to lose more jobs than it gains’. The mining boom caused Australia to lose way more jobs than it created. Pushing way up the value of the $A crashed out a fair bit of manufacturing, reduced tourism/tourism growth and made it harder for a whole lot of other exporters/import competers to do business.

  16. “It isn’t necessarily the way in which new knowledge is elucidated, but how that new knowledge is applied, either in policy or service provision, or whatever.”

    Yes Fess. I think Ingrid (and many others) would agree with you wholeheartedly. As she goes on to say herself :

    “Similarly, merely counting the number of people in prisons and detention centres does absolutely nothing for the conditions for people in those places; and does absolutely nothing to decrease the rate of incarceration and detention.”
    The current problem is not so much in the quality of the counting. We know things are dreadful. It is unfortunately in the quality of the policy responses even in areas where the facts are well known.

  17. rod hagen @ #22 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 4:11 pm

    “It isn’t necessarily the way in which new knowledge is elucidated, but how that new knowledge is applied, either in policy or service provision, or whatever.”
    Yes Fess. I think Ingrid (and many others) would agree with you wholeheartedly. As she goes on to say herself :
    “Similarly, merely counting the number of people in prisons and detention centres does absolutely nothing for the conditions for people in those places; and does absolutely nothing to decrease the rate of incarceration and detention.”
    The current problem is not so much in the quality of the counting. We know things are dreadful. It is unfortunately in the quality of the policy responses even in areas where the facts are well known.

    I shall definitely have to check out your links after dinner now when I get some free time again.

  18. Rod H:

    But she specifically questions the link between data linkage and improving indigenous health (dialysis was the eg she used). The link between linked data and health is to better understand the problems which is the point I made. What is done with the new understanding is another matter. But I wouldn’t use the failure of govts to respond to new insights through improved policy or service provision, gaps identified through linked data in the case of WAACHS, to argue against linked data, even census data.

    As I’ve argued before, currently the Census count is excellent. What I cannot understand, probably because no convincing case has been made for it, is why the ABS need to compulsorily collect our names and to retain this identifiable information for such lengthy periods instead of what they’ve done in the past.

  19. Nicole

    ‘…the majority of persons out there do not share your level of trust.’

    Oh, bollocks.

    The majority of people grabbed the census form out of my hands with cries of joy. Some had arranged to go around to friends’/relatives’ homes so they could use the computer. ONE person asked if it was compulsory and only two asked if they had to put down their names and addresses.

    Don’t dress up ‘feelpinions’ as statements of fact.

  20. I will be following this sound advice.

    Labor has called on Australians not to spoil the census, slapping down a growing revolt led by minor parties to withhold names when filling it out.

    But the shadow assistant treasurer, Andrew Leigh, criticised the federal government for failing to explain changes to hold name and address information for four years, up from 18 months, after two Greens senators joined the push to withhold their names.

    On Monday Nick Xenophon announced he would not include his name on his census form, risking prosecution and a fine, over privacy concerns.

    He said he would contest any notice or fine, and would bring an amendment so people who withhold their names cannot be prosecuted.

    On Monday Greens senators Scott Ludlam and Sarah Hanson-Young announced they too would withhold their names when completing the census, to be conducted on Tuesday night

    Senators Janet Rice and Lee Rhiannon said they would withhold their names ahead of Tuesday’s party room meeting in which the Greens will discuss their stance on the census, in addition to other business including reshuffling portfolios.

    Leigh told ABC’s AM: “Labor’s view is everybody should fill in the census.”

    He said the minor party push and the government’s failure to sell its changes “imperils the quality of census data”.

    Asked about the minor party push to withhold names, Leigh said: “I won’t be following that mode. I would encourage Australians not to spoil the census because when you do so you deny your community and neighbours the resources they’re entitled.”

    Leigh said the census was critical for allocating funding to schools, homelessness and employment programs. Business and the not-for-profit sector also relied on the information.

    Asked about the specific uses of collecting names, Leigh said this information could be matched to the death registry to calculate the life expectancy gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

    Duncan Young, the Australian Bureau of Statistics census project head, tried to reassure Australians on Tuesday that their data would remain private.

    “You’ve been separated from the internet and the risks of the net and … the information is isolated so people who can access names can’t access the rest,” he told the Nine Network’s Today Show.

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/aug/09/census-2016-labor-urges-all-australians-to-include-their-names?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+AUS+v1+-+AUS+morning+mail+callout&utm_term=185217&subid=7122617&CMP=ema_632

  21. Zoomster:

    Are you enjoying your Census collection stint? I did it last time and had a ball. I still see some oldies in town who remember me as ‘the Census lady’ and say hello to me. 🙂

  22. Zoomster

    Don’t dress up ‘feelpinions’ as statements of fact.

    I hate to point out the obvious, but this is exactly what you are doing in your post.

  23. fess

    Very much so. I love meeting and talking to people and am also getting some satisfaction from the level of ‘name recognition’ still out there!

  24. ..and, as always, I love the inter connectedness of my community – I have rocked up to houses to be greeted with “Norma told me you’d run out of forms, so I knew you’d be here today. Good to see the car’s been fixed. Has your hay been delivered yet?”

  25. PlayerOne

    No, I’m not. I’m using evidence garnered from nearly one hundred interactions with people – which countered my own expectations.

    Nicole is simply going by what she thinks to be true, without any evidence at all that I can see to back it up.

  26. The census has always been a good thing. The data getting would be very helpful in generating statistics.

    However, I recalled the government at one point toyed with the idea of doing away with the census altogether. The recent changes would really help in putting a lot of doubt in the public perception of the census.

  27. zoomster @ #33 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 4:40 pm

    PlayerOne
    No, I’m not. I’m using evidence garnered from nearly one hundred interactions with people – which countered my own expectations.
    Nicole is simply going by what she thinks to be true, without any evidence at all that I can see to back it up.

    This sounds exactly like what Player One said. You’re basing it on your own evidence, as Nicole have with her own.

  28. zoomster @ #33 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 4:40 pm

    PlayerOne
    No, I’m not. I’m using evidence garnered from nearly one hundred interactions with people – which countered my own expectations.
    Nicole is simply going by what she thinks to be true, without any evidence at all that I can see to back it up.

    Perhaps her use of the word “majority” is a stretch, but Nicole has plenty of evidence on her side that the census is not trusted – even if you just go by what has been posted here today, that includes the opinions of the previous Chief Statistician, the NSW Privacy Commissioner, the deputy Privacy Commissioner, several lawyers, several Members of Parliament, Electronic Frontiers Australia, many journalists, not to mention the many PB posters here who have expressed the concern (which it seems to me could be a majority of posters). All verifiable from posts made here on PB today. Yours, on the other hand, is (at best) “anecdotal” evidence.

  29. I spent much of the day watching the CA Royal Commission. It is quite an experience to see the manner in which a witness, in this case solicitor Keith Martin, is chip by chip, brick by brick, taken apart.
    His Honour is an imposing, though outwardly gentle, figure.

  30. It is sensible to boycott the Census. If you don’t boycott it, or you fill in all of the demanded data, you are aiding and abetting an unjustified diminution of people’s privacy – not just your own, but that of others too. The ABS only needs de-identified data to inform policy development. ABS senior managers have displayed bad judgement by changing the protocols for data management. Instead of apologizing, fixing their mistakes, and safeguarding public trust in the census process, ABS senior managers are doubling down on their bad judgement and jeopardising public trust and therefore the quality of the data for several census cycles to come.

    If many thousands of people refuse to go along with the unjustified changes to the census process, this will put maximum pressure on the government to fire the senior managers responsible for the cock-up. If the census goes ahead smoothly because of sheep-like propensities in the population then the ABS will have learned that they can make arbitrary and poorly conceived changes and not suffer any adverse consequences. That would be a retrograde lesson for them to learn, so I very much hope that significant numbers of people withhold their cooperation.
    The census is the most comprehensive data instrument that the government uses. It isn’t like Medicare or the ATO which are silos for data about a particular aspect of your life. It isn’t like voluntarily relinquishing privacy to a private business such as Facebook or Google; it’s a case of the state using its coercive powers to make you do something. The ABS keeps a comprehensive dataset in one place; with that great power comes great responsibility to de-identify the data. The ABS should have backed down in response to the privacy concerns, but instead they’ve taken the path of obstinacy and pig-headedness. They deserve a campaign of civil disobedience. That’s the only way to stop them from eroding privacy and monkeying about with the census even further.
    I applaud Nick Xenophon’s advocacy on the problems with the census.

  31. I just listened to the law radio interview Rod H linked to.
    https://soundcloud.com/law-radio-671157417/whats-in-a-name-the-census-question

    It sounds like it’ll come down to the courts if the ABS decides to pursue people who refuse to give their name on their Census form. Very interesting though. Clearly providing a fake name would constitute an offence under the Act, so those thinking along those lines would be advised not to choose that door!

  32. Raaraa:

    Yes I agree our Census is invaluable and it is indeed a treasure trove of statistics about our demography. And I’d completely forgotten the govt plans to do away with it, so thanks for that reminder.

  33. I’ll probably just put something like “available on request”. You may be fined if you have been repeatedly asked to complete the form and refuse to do so.

  34. Meanwhile in Africa (where there are more mobile phones than adults in most countries) there is a social and economic communication revolution happening..

    “In Ghana, the Mobile Technology for Community Health initiative aims to improve healthcare for pregnant mothers by providing time-specific information about their pregnancies and childcare each week. A separate application enables nurses to collect patient data and upload records to a centralised database to track the progress of patents and identify those who are due for care.”

    and..

    “Similar schemes operate in Rwanda, Mozambique and South Africa, while a programme in Nigeria known as Smart has halved the turnaround time for test results for early diagnosis of HIV infection in infants. Using small battery-operated printers and SMS technology, health facilities can receive and print test results without having computers and internet access.”

    ..much more here..

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/08/africa-calling-mobile-phone-broadband-revolution-transform-democracies?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_b-gdnnews

  35. nicholas @ #38 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 4:51 pm

    It is sensible to boycott the Census. If you don’t boycott it, or you fill in all of the demanded data, you are aiding and abetting an unjustified diminution of people’s privacy – not just your own, but that of others too.

    Further solid evidence in support of completing the census and taking it seriously – the loons oppose it.

  36. zoomster @ #26 Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 4:26 pm

    Nicole
    ‘…the majority of persons out there do not share your level of trust.’
    Oh, bollocks.
    The majority of people grabbed the census form out of my hands with cries of joy. Some had arranged to go around to friends’/relatives’ homes so they could use the computer. ONE person asked if it was compulsory and only two asked if they had to put down their names and addresses.
    Don’t dress up ‘feelpinions’ as statements of fact.

    Well maybe polls are somewhat biased in that the question being asked triggers people to think more which is more likely to bring up any latent distrust. Essential polling does provide substance to my argument however. Also I did not say a majority have no trust. I said the majority do not have the same level of trust as Bemused and MTBW. You have it seems interpreted what I was saying incorrectly.

    The thing is though, just because a majority will (regardless of any opinions they might have regarding the changes) go ahead and fill out the census does not make insignificant that a rise in levels of distrust will lead to a decrease in the accuracy of data collected. Can you deny the increased display of concerns being raised regarding these changes expressed on social media for example?

    Just here in this blog I have seen people state they had never had an issue prior to these changes. I feel the same. Also, as much as you want to discount peoples “feelpinions”, trust is a “feelpinion” which is relevant to the topic. “Feelpinions are a part of life and something we should be taking into consideration, especially where public sentiment is concerned. To use an example: What percentage of people are swinging voters? They may not be a majority but they decide elections.

  37. ‘What is the reason we have to put our names on the census this time?’

    Something to do with keys.
    I’ve heard it explained, but nobody bothers to ask what it actually means, and why it is actually needed.

  38. ‘Further solid evidence in support of completing the census and taking it seriously – the loons oppose it.’

    ‘Loons’, ‘nutjobs’. Are your comprehensions skills that bad you twerp?

    Yes I’m resorting to insults because you’re so damn annoying sometimes!
    Are you like this in real life?

  39. They only need our names if they want to link census information with other information.

    <disclaimer>I put my name down</disclaimer>

Comments Page 1 of 72
1 2 72

Leave a Reply

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