Yet another 53-47 result from Newspoll, from primary votes of Coalition 36% (unchanged), Labor 36% (down one), Greens 11% (up two) and One Nation 8% (down one). Both leaders recorded better personal ratings, with Malcolm Turnbull up four on approval to 38% and down four on disapproval to 50%, and Bill Shorten up three on approval to 36% and down two on disapproval to 51%. Turnbull’s lead on preferred prime minister has widened from 43-32 to 46-31. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1639.
Stay tuned for federal voting intention results from the Queensland-only poll conducted for the Courier-Mail, from which state results were published yesterday.
UPDATE: The numbers from the Courier-Mail’s Galaxy poll from Queensland, conducted Wednesday and Thursday from a sample of 902, are Coalition 37% (up two since April), Labor 32% (down one), One Nation 12% (down three) and Greens 7%, with Australian Conservatives recording a fairly impressive 6%. On two-party preferred, the Coalition records a lead of 51-49, which compares with 50-50 in April and 54.1-45.9 at last year’s election.
Bob’s Uncle @ #450 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 5:05 pm
The Labor caucus has finished its meeting.
Shadow attorney-general, Mark Dreyfus, told the meeting Liberal senator Dean Smith’s same-sex marriage private member’s bill was “an acceptable compromise”.
℃
Kewl
GG – is it realistic that Dean Smith’s private member’s bill will get up though? Surely a lot of pressure on him to delay that (particularly if there is a “path” to SSM via the Coalition’s own policy) in order to save face?
Given that it was scrounged up in order to circumvent Parliament, only the High Court can kill the postal plebiscite.
Bob’s Uncle @ #454 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 5:10 pm
Probably not with the later developments.
But, it does show Labor is onside with what Smith was putting up. However, Labor could probably just as easily sink it in the eyes of many conservative LNPers by offering support.
So, there’s a lot of politics to play out.
How would Abbott, Abetz etc likely react to this notion of a free Parly vote by year end if both versions of plebiscite fail to materialise? It seems like a compromise but not one they’re likely to buy. This could really prove to be a means of flushing Abbott out as the true wrecker he is.
It depresses me that the most effective way to convince the Coalition to oppose something is to get Labor to support it. Housing affordability is another obvious a victim of this cynical brand of wedge politics, together with resettlement of refugees “it’s not a people swap because Labor once suggested this policy”.
alias
I think you might be right on the money with that!
Physical or verbal punches?
What is Labor’s position on a postal vote?
Diog
Shorten described it as an expensive way to achieve nothing.
Labor says postal pleb is a joke, not representative, disenfranchises young etc
[Diogenes
What is Labor’s position on a postal vote?]
No, even more stupid than the plebiscite.
………”Diogenes
What is Labor’s position on a postal vote?…………..”
I don’t think they will give it the stamp of approval.
Seems like a tight timeframe to have the Senate (1) reject a Plebiscite, (2)reject a postal Plebiscite and then (3)pass ME in 4 fortnights?
If they know they aren’t going to get past 1st base with 1 and 2, why not just go straight to 3? They know they are going to end up there anyway!
I’m not sure that I would regard John Setka as the most reliable of sources but what he says is tantalising nevertheless.
Nick Cater
It’s Labor’s fault.
This meeting is going on for a long time, suggesting complete chaos in the Libs. Nothing new of course.
[“John Setka @CFMEUJohnSetka · 7m7 minutes ago ”
“My contact in Lib mtg saying]
Lol. Does John flick something back in return?
The Drum has a failed Lib candidate, Nick Cater and Annabel. Not a very balanced panel!
shellbell @ #469 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 5:38 pm
Peace on the developers’ worksites?
To be fair Lizzie.. with regard to SSM issue, the panel comprises: one pro free Parly vote; one pro plebiscite; one neutral.
alias
I stand corrected. 🙂
C@tmomma @ #259 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:39 am
If Abbott et al are so convinced that a plebiscite is the way to go on issues that involve social change and/or where there is a significant difference between the majority opinion of the general community and then I propose that at the same time as the compulsory plebiscite on SSM that we have one on abortion, euthanasia, prostitution and a bill of rights.
At risk of being called cynical, I can’t see Abbott et al being in favour of such referendums.
Good point Grimace
The 3-step path to law reform is an open invitation to the Senate to reject steps 1 & 2. Is this the Lib idea of an orderly retreat? I wonder what the Nationals will make of it….
Grimace,
The Mad Monk is very selective in how much power he lets the people have! ; )
I don’t remember he was so keen when it came to RU486.
briefly @ #478 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 5:46 pm
Exactly, Briefly. Why even bother with the Shadow Play?
Had to laugh at GG invoking Australian history and saying marriage has always been between a man and a woman.
It is hardly surprising considering for a majority of Australia’s existence as a country homosexual acts were illegal.
In that light you would not even consider marriage between two people who in all likelihood would perform criminal acts together.
Interesting to see who Turnbull turned to as his go-between. And it wasn’t Madam Asbestos!
Labor has some brains at last, voting against drug tests on welfare recipients.
22/29 who have spoken so far in the Liberal Party Room are in favour of the status quo. 7 in favour of going to a free vote.
I wonder who the extra 2 are that we didn’t know about before?
C@tmomma
briefly @ #478 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 5:46 pm
The 3-step path to law reform is an open invitation to the Senate to reject steps 1 & 2. Is this the Lib idea of an orderly retreat? I wonder what the Nationals will make of it….
Exactly, Briefly. Why even bother with the Shadow Play?
Saving face among the die-hard Crazies. Time was, they could be described as holier-than-thou. These days they’re crazier-than-the-last.
C@tmomma
22/29 who have spoken so far in the Liberal Party Room are in favour of the status quo. 7 in favour of going to a free vote.
I wonder who the extra 2 are that we didn’t know about before?
7/29…almost 25%…a significant reformist minority…more than enough to bring about passage of reform when combined with Labor and the x-benches.
So Abbott won?
Overwhelming vote in the Liberal Party room in favour of the status quo, according to Chris Uhlmann.
briefly @ #486 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 5:55 pm
Nope. Everyone else apparently went with the status quo when it was finally put to the vote after all speakers had had their say.
And the status quo is?
My educated guess is that Marise Payne was one of the others who spoke in favour of a free vote in parliament.
lizzie @ #490 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 5:59 pm
Stick with the present policy, ‘A Plebiscite before the matter goes to parliament’.
Good afternoon all,
Re the liberal party room meeting.
Interesting if true re proposal for free vote by the end of the year if option A and option B fail.
Many within the coalition will not support a free vote. At least one national has already said he will move to the cross bench if a free vote is allowed by Turnbull. A postal plebiscite will be challenged in the courts. Abbott will not accept anything proposed by Turnbull !
Turnbull and his supporters are clutching at straws with no real chance of any solution being acceptable. One group will opposes one option, another group will oppose a alternative etc etc.
The merry go round will roll on.
Cheers.
It will be interesting what the numbers were in the vote.
Postal? Not clever.
John Alexander was another who spoke in favour of changing the Liberal Party policy to a Free Vote in parliament. According to Uhlmann.
Nothing changed:
Bevan Shields @BevanShields
·
9h
Parliamentary officials doing their usual best to block transparency…
#auspol
C@tmomma
Nope. Everyone else apparently went with the status quo when it was finally put to the vote after all speakers had had their say.
They are a recalcitrant bunch. No doubt at all. What happens next?
Losing faith with their Liberal base seems to have been the overriding concern if they went to a Free Vote.
Barney in Go Dau @ #481 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 5:49 pm
I actually said in “Australia”. kakurra seemed to think Australia existed as a law making entity back in the 18 th century. But, if you want to lie about my post, carry on!