Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor

Essential Research records support for a postal survey on same-sex marriage dissolving on contact with reality, while voting intention remains unchanged.

The Guardian reports that Essential Research’s fortnight rolling average has Labor’s two-party preferred lead unchanged at 54-46, with the Coalition (37%), Labor (39%), the Greens (9%) and One Nation (8%) all unchanged on the primary vote. The poll also records 39% approval of the postal ballot on same-sex marriage with 47% opposed, just one week after the same question elicited respective results of 43% and 38%.

The survey also found that 33% considered the top marginal tax rate of 47% too high, compared with 12% for too low and 39% for about right. A suite of questions on the Turnbull government’s handling of various policy areas recorded negative results for “the implementation of the national broadband network, schools and universities funding, addressing climate change, funding health and hospitals, implementing a fair tax system and ensuring reliable and affordable energy”, with the only positive result apparently being for “protecting Australians from terrorism”. Only 15% reported satisfaction with the government’s policies and progress in implementing them, with a further 28% reckoning only that it hadn’t made enough progress, and 41% expressing disapproval for its policies and decisions.

Other questions related to respondents’ financial situations, with 53% reporting that their income had fallen behind the rising cost of living, 25% saying it had remained even, and only 15% saying it had improved.

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.

2,292 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor”

Comments Page 39 of 46
1 … 38 39 40 … 46

  4. Briefly,

    the entire effect of Sykes is to disqualify dual citizens from serving. It goes so far as to say that even the unwitting dual national may not serve. It is idiotic.

    This creates two classes of citizen…the qualified and the disqualified with respect to eligibility to serve in the Parliament. It is thoroughly objectionable.

    You are right that Sykes confirms the effect of s.44(1) of the Constitution which is to disqualify dual citizens from serving.

    You are wrong that it creates 2 classes of citizen. Dual citizens are able to qualify themselves at a time of their choosing PRIOR to nominating for election. Renouncing their other citizenship(s) to the satisfaction of Sykes is neither impossible nor irrelevant to the position to which they seek to be elected.

    You may be right that dual citizenship ought not be a disqualifying factor. That is another matter.

  9. [briefly
    …

    Dual citizens most certainly are not obliged to follow the laws of other countries. This is just wrong…It is an example of the misunderstandings about dual nationals. There are millions in Australia. Their standing should be the same as that of other “untainted” citizens.]

    There are laws that Australians must adhere to when travelling and living outside Australia, (paedophilia), so why can’t this be true for other countries?

  13. BevanShields: @mearesy George Brandis gave probably the speech of his career, and his own colleagues didn’t bother to stand and applaud #auspol

  16. Not to mention when Julia Gillard was attacking Tony Abbott over comments there was applause for him from LNP side.

    So why the fck Labor and Greens be happy with Brandis is sickening double standards.

  20. domknight: This is the Australian government’s chief law officer saying Islamophobia has no place in this country, and is dangerous as well. Well done. twitter.com/CalBD/status/8…

  21. Briefly
    Dual citizens most certainly are not obliged to follow the laws of other countries. This is just wrong…It is an example of the misunderstandings about dual nationals. There are millions in Australia. Their standing should be the same as that of other “untainted” citizens.

    __________
    And it is the same, and nobody thinks they are “tainted” except you.

    If they choose to be involved in making Australian laws they have to revoke their conflict of interest. Just like MP’s are also supposed to do on financial matters.

    It has nothing to do with ME and any conflation is as silly as ME and “freedom of speech”.

  22. [guytaur
    BevanShields: @mearesy George Brandis gave probably the speech of his career, and his own colleagues didn’t bother to stand and applaud #auspol    ]

    Says much about his colleagues.

  26. I’m sorry, dear bludgers, to see the position of dual nationals being compared to pedophiles and tax avoiders. This is very disheartening.

  28. [BK
    GG
    It’s actually the most appealing Pauline’s ever looked!    ]

    Appealing!

    I would say looking her least offensive, while at the same time probably being her most offensive.

  31. I’m sorry, dear bludgers, to see the position of dual nationals being compared to pedophiles and tax avoiders. This is very disheartening.

    How about teachers and police officers? They can’t get elected either.

    But I don’t think s44(iv) implies that public servants are second-class citizens, unworthy of being elected because they are obviously corrupt. Do you?

  32. Hmmm

    They are not pulling the gag. I wonder what their tactics are? On the basis of this week’s performance I would be surprised if it was not dumb.

  33. There are millions of dual citizens in Australia. The country is practically founded on the notion that this is not only possible but is, in fact, desirable. Dual citizenship is expressly permitted under the Act. It is very strange that dual citizenship should be facilitated in general yet excluded when it comes to political rights.

  34. Very short term thinking from Hanson. She’ll have the headline for today. Even the Libs won’t be able to involve her in a deal on anything for a good long while.

  35. High Court uphold Victorian law preventing Julian Knight (Hoddle Street) getting parole until he is dying or so incapacitated he cannot harm anyone

  36. The country is practically founded on the notion that this is not only possible but is, in fact, desirable.

    If that were true the Oath of Citizenship would not previously have included a clause renouncing all other allegiances.

  38. briefly @ #1930 Thursday, August 17th, 2017 – 2:54 pm

    I’m sorry, dear bludgers, to see the position of dual nationals being compared to pedophiles and tax avoiders.

    Come again? All I’m saying is that:

    1. I’m a dual national; and
    2. As a dual national, there are some overseas laws that apply to me even while I’m in Australia; and
    3. I follow them, because their application is legally valid; and
    4. I’d be very surprised if the same didn’t apply to most other dual nationals.

    And I think all Big-D said was that even Australia has laws that apply to its own citizens while they’re overseas. I think ‘foreign fighters’ is another instance in the same category. Which isn’t to say that dual nationals are terrorists.

  39. I want my dream job, but it means I have to spend time in Canberra away from my family.

    I want my dream job, but it means giving up my dual citizenship.

    ….It’s a rare occupation that doesn’t demand some kind of sacrifice. As I say to my son, when he whinges about something to do with work: That’s why they pay you money.

  41. [briefly
    I’m sorry, dear bludgers, to see the position of dual nationals being compared to pedophiles and tax avoiders. This is very disheartening.    ]

    Sorry, briefly you made a point that a dual Australian citizen in Australia was not beholden to the laws of that other country.

    a r and I have just provided examples that show this is not true.

  45. http://www.theage.com.au/comment/samesex-marriage-there-is-one-good-thing-about-the-postal-plebiscite-20170816-gxxcdj.html

    This is very interesting. The government has directed the ABS to compile a simple yes/no/didn’t participate count and to break this down into state and electorate numbers.

    The government hasn’t asked the ABS to also include breakdowns on age group and gender. But the ABS in its own explanation of the process, clearly is going to provide numbers broken down in terms of age group and gender.

    I wonder how the government is going to react to this? Having numbers broken into age group and gender could potentially show how biased the survey was and destroy its legitimacy. On the other hand I can’t see the government directing the ABS to not do this because it would blow up in their faces.

    Any thoughts on how this will play?

  47. Barney….there is a presumption in all this that dual nationals are dodgy. It is just plain offensive to the 15-18 million Australians who are themselves dual nationals or who’s family include dual nationals. The suggestion is their allegiance is dubious. I think this is nonsense. I agree with William Deane.

  50. Why the difference between the 2 Ministers then? Why is it that Canavan has stepped aside from Cabinet and as a Minister, approved by Turnbull, and Barnaby Joyce hasn’t and Turnbull won’t let him!?!

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 39 of 46
1 … 38 39 40 … 46