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.
[lizzie
I wonder who advised Howard on the alteration to the definition of marriage?]
This is interesting but actually before Howard’s amendments there was no definition of marriage in the marriage act.
The Howard amendments were two fold;
1. To actually define marriage as between a man and a woman;
2. Not recognise same sex marriages performed legally overseas.
There were discussions at the time whether 1 was necessary as opinion was that the Act implied this was the case.
This was born out in the HC in their ruling against the ACT act legalising SSM.
They clearly stated that their decision would have been the same without the Howard amendment.
The most import feature of the ruling was they did not strike down the Howard amendments and in doing so confirmed that the Parliament has the right to define marriage.
In effect Howard smoothed the way for ME legally.
Without it we would still be asking the question, does Parliament have the right to define marriage?
So whoever advised him did ME a lot of favours as the waters would be a lot muddier if they had left the Act alone.
Chances are that any random dive into the LNP swamp that is AM will reveal a largely uncontested regurgitation of the latest LNP talking points.
Haha, as if Alan Jones would go into parliament. He knows where true power lies.
Steve777 @ #145 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 9:55 am
To be fair, it’s the only metric that changed from the last poll.
However, I’ll say again, the PPM and more popular ratings are beauty contests that mean sfa in the greater realm. They are included to generate talking points for the media that owns the polls. The important numbers are primary and TPP.
Citizen
Ethan Hawke was also one of the brokers of the preselection peace deal for NSW (sitting members and activity tests). Alan’s groups didnt like it.
VE
Hes tried and failed a couple of times.
Ides of March and GG
The Coalition ‘crisis’ over an issue that is not urgent for a high percentage of voters is a good example of the hopeless state of the government. Hurting people for no good reason, similar (but not the same) as the refugees.
Lizzie.
Your description is more eloquent than mine 🙂 (I agree with you)
[Ides of March
Isnt there a provision blocking another DD from occuring so soon?]
Not that I’m aware of.
The only provision blocking a DD is not having any proposed legislation that meets the requirements.
Telstra landline report.
Before ringing I isolated my landline to save time.
Outcome: there is a fault on the line, not my problem, so it will be fixed within two days. Meanwhile, calls will be diverted to mobile.
All very satisfactory in its own way, but I am utterly exhausted from trying to make out the accent of the polite and helpful technician.
Ides of March @ #139 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 9:39 am
Why would there be?
There are conditions that have to be fulfilled to go to a DD and they take some time to get through. So that alone causes delay.
lizzie @ #154 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:03 am
Not sure how any one is really being hurt by the current Marriage Laws. The recent Census showed there are 46,000 people in SS permanent relationships. That shows, that the whole debate affects only 0.38% of the population, that people are able to enter such relationships unfettered by laws and that the relationships are measured by the Commonwealth as a social statistic.
Where’s the fire?
@ GG – 0.38%, really?
Do those gay people have parents? Maybe they want to see their kid happy and getting married. Now we’re at 1.14%
What about brothers and sisters? So 1.52%
And cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents, friends? Now we’re up to 20%?
What about the $1 billion that would go to small business and the tourism industry. Now we’re up to about 30%?
And the politicians that benefit from the tax revenue generated by that $1 billion? 30.01%
And the general public that benefits from the schools, hospitals and public transport built with that tax revenue – 100%
http://www.news.com.au/news/anz-bank-calculates-marriage-equality-would-deliver-swift-hefty-boost-to-the-economy/news-story/2563cfa547700534fa57e5e0a172c237
Voice Endeavour @ #119 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 9:10 am
No. Since Bob Brown left the Greens are a disorganized rabble without an ideological compass.
Hahaha.
I see PhoenixRed is still banging on like the deranged lunatic they are.
Get help idiot. You are menschally unwell.
Haha. What a bloody whackjob.
VE,
Your made up extrapolations and dodgy logic do you no credit! It’s just emotional claptrap.
If you’ve got some real statistics post them.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/bill-shorten-has-peaked-sinodinos/news-story/bdc21fe2a825a2075845c720eeeea9d7
The smell of Coalition desperation in the morning is far better than napalm.
Oh yeah, and with their meeting this morning we get napalm as well………………
Sweet.
Equality is indivisible.
[Greensborough Growler
Not sure how any one is really being hurt by the current Marriage Laws. The recent Census showed there are 46,000 people in SS permanent relationships. That shows, that the whole debate affects only 0.38% of the population, that people are able to enter such relationships unfettered by laws and that the relationships are measured by the Commonwealth as a social statistic.
Where’s the fire?]
With your figures you seem to be saying equality should be democratic, only to be considered if some arbitrarily significant number of people are affected by it.
If you’re in a SS relationship and have a desire to have that relationship recognised as a marriage the same as any other legal relationship, not being able to do so will cause hurt.
The fire is maintaining and condoning inequality in our society.
briefly @ #164 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:27 am
How very George Orwell of you!
Greensborough Growler
briefly @ #164 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:27 am
Equality is indivisible.
How very George Orwell of you!
However, it does multiply.
[briefly
Equality is indivisible.]
I’d dispute this, you could take away a right from everyone and maintain equality. 🙂
Barney in Go Dau @ #165 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:28 am
Governments have more important tasks than re-defining the meaning of words to satisfy the moral outrage of zealots. And, most people would prefer they get on with other tasks.
This is why this SSM debate is just rhetorical flourishes with a large dose indignant self righteousness. There’s nothing of real consequence in the whole debate. Most people are bemused that it pre-occupies so much time effort and money when there are far more pressing issues to be dealt with like energy prices, jobs et al.
There is nothing in law preventing the creation of permanent SS relationships now.
@ GG – here are my sources/assumptions.
I used 4 parents per couple. I am assuming there is no incest involved, and no parents are deceased. It may be slightly lower if either assumption doesn’t hold.
I am assuming 1 brother or sister per person. This is conservative. I know Australia’s population is experiencing some organic growth. This requires greater than 2 children per couple.
I am assuming 49 attendees at a wedding, plus the aforementioned 4 parents and 2 siblings (and the couple being married). This well below the 100.4 average attendees at a wedding in Australia so it is a very conservative estimate.
https://www.easyweddings.com.au/pro-education/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2015/11/Easy-Weddings-Annual-Australian-wedding-survey-2015.pdf
For small businesses, this one is a bit of a guess. There are approx 5 million people in small businesses, extrapolating from here.
https://www.smallbusiness.wa.gov.au/about/small-business-sector/facts-and-statistics
Would half of them be employed in food, drink, tourism, hotels, clothing, floristry or any of the other industries necessary for a wedding? I don’t know. This one may not have been conservative enough.
Are 0.01% of Austalians politicians? I really don’t care, because:
Do all people not in the above categories gain benefit from government spending of tax revenue? Yes.
So it still adds up to 100%.
briefly @ #167 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:32 am
I think you’re using some sort of regression curve to make that statement!
There was a post last bight by Briefly denouncing those big bad Russians and all the evil things they are doing like seizing the Crimea Peninsula and backing rebels in Ukraine.
Turns out even right wing columnist Tom Switzer has a better appreciation of what has been going on when he writes:
An unexpectedly good and balanced article.
http://www.smh.com.au/comment/donald-trump-can-say-goodbye-to-american-exceptionalism-20170804-gxpe8q.html
Voice Endeavour @ #170 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:39 am
So, it’s all about the right to “frock up” seems to be your implication.
It’s not as if that can’t be done now. And, it requires no changes to legislation.
Has anyone explained to ScoMo that the “wedding pink dollar” would stimulate the economy?
lizzie @ #158 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:06 am
Mucho simpatico.
I have, because of hearing problems, often had to resort to the Telstra computer chat system to obtain assistance.
My fanciful post about the “have we got a bundle for you” was not much of an exaggeration and the variation in understanding between the “polite and helpful” accented from somewhere over the rainbow Telstra person and my “deaf but not dumb” bewilderment on the other created a further problem.
Good luck with your Telstra.
Hint. Don’t bother dying to get help. My understanding is that this will not work.
GG
It doesn’t matter what percentage of population is supposedly affected.
marriage is a social construct. If this construct is recognised for all couples, it changes everything. The continued stigma is totally minimised. How good will it then be for those grappling with their sexuality in their formative years.
actual lives will be saved. Open your eyes
Lizzie
And save mental health dollars too
500 Religious leaders to come out ; ) later today in support of Same Sex Marriage!
So good to see not all religious people are anti Marriage Equality bastards.
The Christians carry on about freedom of religion in the SSM debate but feel quite happy to bag all Muslims as being lesser human beings … ahh. The equity in arguments when religion rears its ugly head
There are no provisions blocking a DD occuring at any time there’s a valid trigger, that’s necessary or we could end up stuck in a 1975 case again where the executive lacks the money to operate.
There’s a provision that stops half-Senste elections being held too soon after a DD though, Senators must serve at least 2 years before a standard half-Senste election can be called , which is why mid next year is the earliest feasible date for the next election. The idea here is to stop a government fishing for a favourable Senate. I believe there’s a similar restriction normally on long terms but it’s not usually relevant because it’d only be relevant if a Government went to the polls within 12 months of being elected and that’s stupid.
@ GG – I’m really not going to engage with you over whether gay people deserve equal rights. It is something that I hold to be self evident, but I get that you do not. It’s unlikely that either of us could convince the other here, so lets just save ourselves some time.
The thing I was engaging you on was the objectively incorrect statement that only 0.38% of the population is effected.
There are people who care about gay people. That may be specific people they care about, or it may just be a general empathy for human kind. These people are effected by the current inequality, even though they do not intend to marry someone of the same sex.
Jenauthor
Hypocrisy is the name of the game
KayJay
I can cope with my Pakistani doctor, who is a sweet person, because we are communicating face to face. Over a mobile line, not very clear, I find it almost impossible. Obviously I have a slight hearing problem which does not matter in normal conversation.
victoria @ #184 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:54 am
You surely can’t make that statement wrt the 500 religious leaders who are going to go public later today with their support for ME?
We need to be positive and encouraging towards religious people who support Same Sex Marriage!
C@t
No. That is a welcome development!!
lizzie @ #176 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:45 am
So where is the “pink dollar” currently going?
Wouldn’t it be getting spent in other ways?
I always treat such arguments with caution.
Voice Endeavour @ #182 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:53 am
My point was that there are only 0.38% of the population is SS permanent relationships as measured by the the recent Census. So the notion that people cannot form such relationships or they are not recognised in the community is rubbish.
I also pointed out that in the greater scheme of things, the actual numbers are bugger all.
People can have parties to celebrate those ties now. So, the nett affect on economic activity is marginal.
I am watching an arsehole on SKY at the moment claiming anti-discrimination bias against religious people … he is some rep of a religious organisation. Should have specified this.
And while I respect GG’s right to an opinion, I think he is fundamentally wrong.
A lot of religious types tend to quote the biblical tradition when it suits them on homosexuality, but if you quote back the various passages promoting incest etc. they suddenly say the bible is only a guide and some parts are now anachronistic.
Sorry folks, you cannot have it both ways.
Greensborough Growler
briefly @ #167 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:32 am
Greensborough Growler
briefly @ #164 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 10:27 am
Equality is indivisible.
How very George Orwell of you!
However, it does multiply.
I think you’re using some sort of regression curve to make that statement!
Could be a standard deviation, GG
In the Coalition Govt.
Their inability to do anything other than to spend copious amounts of time deciding how to simply delay a vote in parliament for something that the majority of the voting public are in favour of shows what an unfocused rabble they are.
That leadership depends on this is a farce.
“It doesn’t matter what percentage of population is supposedly affected.
marriage is a social construct. If this construct is recognised for all couples, it changes everything. The continued stigma is totally minimised. How good will it then be for those grappling with their sexuality in their formative years.
actual lives will be saved. Open your eyes”
Speaking as someone who’s child is actually in their formative years, AND is going through working out just what their sexuality is……..i entirely agree. I see my obligation as a parent being to provide the most safe and supportive environment for her to work out what and who she is, and to as best i can (i own it that fwark up occasionally) to provide a good example of how to do respectful relationship stuff.
I do NOT want her to be subjected to the crap and bullshit bigoted campaigning that will happen around a waste of time plebiscite conducted for pure LNP party politics. It will hurt someone i love.
Barney in Go Dau
[briefly
Equality is indivisible.]
I’d dispute this, you could take away a right from everyone and maintain equality.
I think this is what happens during calculus.
It is also interesting that people quote that the insignificant number of committed that gays exist in the population is a reason they should suffer discrimation.
The whole essence of equity in society is that it is all-inclusive under the law.
As a society, we should be past the point of leaving a portion, even a small portion, not subject to the same legal status. In any form.
briefly @ #192 Monday, August 7th, 2017 – 11:03 am
Depends on the numbers that get rooted.
imacca
I have not personally gone through it, but know others who have. Their children’s lives were at real risk.
This whole ME debate in a first world country, is a joke. ME should have been legislated ages ago.
The ridiculous aspect of all this is that the whole society benefits on so many levels. It is a win win.
On a Personal note, your support of your child is what counts above all else!!