Essential Research: 53-47 to Labor

Essential Research goes the other way from Newspoll on voting intention, while both pollsters suggest the same-sex marriage plebiscite will record a high participation rate and a resounding yes vote.

Essential Research moves a point in favour of the Coalition this week as a particularly strong result for Labor a fortnight ago washes out of the two-week rolling average, leaving Labor’s lead at 53-47. Primary votes are only provided for the minor parties, so we’ll have to wait on that for the release of the full report later today (UPDATE: here it is: Coalition steady on 37%, Labor down two to 37%, Greens steady on 9%, One Nation steady on 8%). The poll also finds 33% in favour of committing military support to the United States in the event of conflict with North Korea, with 38% opposed and 26% uncommitted. Sixty-one per cent believed parliament should have a say on the matter, with only 22% favouring the prime ministerial prerogative. On the question of the biggest threats to global security, The Guardian relates the results the most favoured responses were, in descending order, terrorism, North Korean aggression, climate change, US aggression, Chinese aggression and Russian aggression.

Essential also provides one of two sets of new numbers on the same-sex marriage plebiscite/survey, the other being a second tranche of results from the weekend’s Newspoll. Both record similarly strong majorities saying they will participate: 63% for definite and 18% for probably from Essential, compared with 67% and 15% from Newspoll. They also both find supporters more likely to vote than opponents, although in both cases this is based on very small samples of prospective non-voters. The two pollsters get different outcomes on the question of whether the postal plebiscite should be held: Newspoll records 49% “in favour” and 43% “opposed”, while Essential has 39% approval and 49% disapproval. Newspoll also finds 62% in favour of “guarantees in law for freedom of conscience, belief and religion if (parliament) legislates for same-sex marriage”.

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.

574 comments on “Essential Research: 53-47 to Labor”

Comments Page 9 of 12
1 8 9 10 12
  1. **A third of India Pakistan and Bangladesh will too hot sustain human life by 2100**

    That graph Billie linked (GDP per capita) is interesting. Sri Lanka WAY out in front.

  2. I was just handed a (small A6), leaflet by “rainbowlabor” , no authorization.
    The front says
    “Want to vote YES?
    aec.gov.au/enrol
    aec.gov.au/check”
    The back
    “Three reasons to vote yes:
    1. Tony Abbott doesn’t want you to.
    2. Our weddings will be bloody fab.
    3. All love is equal.”

  3. There were 1625 candidates at the 2016 Federal Election. Obviously, a large number of those had little to no prospect of being elected.
    To ask the AEC to screen every candidate’s eligibility prior to the election will result in a lot of pointless work, which doesn’t happen without a cost.

  4. [zoomster
    I’m not sure that shifting the onus onto the AEC to check is workable. The time between close of nominations and the ballot drawer atm is a matter of hours – no real opportunity to check anything other than that the paperwork has been completed. And, in the end, it all boils down to the nominee being truthful about their circumstances.

    I don’t think the present bar is too high. Maybe we should regard it as a competency test – if you can’t get this right, you’re not up to being a legislator.]

    If something like this included it wouldn’t necessarily require the AEC to check it.

    It could be part of the candidate declaration saying they had investigated their ancestry back to their grandparents and this is what they discovered and what actions, if any, they took and when.

    It could then be placed on the public record for anyone to peruse and also incorporate a process for the reporting and dealing with any discrepancies.

    This would be more transparent and basically imitate what the Labor members queried have done in just stating the facts of the situation.

  5. There is no difference, Bemused. An issue has been raised for these public representatives concerning their sole citizenship. Both required renunciation of another citizenship, place of birth is not an issue as they should, and do, know. Both men should respond to this question transparently.

    IMO there is a distinct whiff about Abbott’s very late registration of birth as an Australian, maybe strings pulled, and there had been criminal charges etc, but we are not to know. And also the date he obtained a document in support shows the Libs lax procedures.

    But this does not change the fact. Why does Shorten simply not lay his cards on the table?

  6. Barney
    I agree. The AEC needn’t check every piece of paper; I’m pretty sure the hospitals don’t. But if the MP puts it all in writing, they can’t later complain they weren’t aware of the issue and run for the hills like most are doing now.

  7. peter love,

    Shorten has laid his cards on the table saying he dealt with the matter in 2006 before he entered Parliament.

    If you have evidence that contradicts this then you should bring it forth and let the HC deal with the matter.

    Otherwise you are calling Shorten a liar without any basis.

  8. [Diogenes
    Barney
    I agree. The AEC needn’t check every piece of paper; I’m pretty sure the hospitals don’t. But if the MP puts it all in writing, they can’t later complain they weren’t aware of the issue and run for the hills like most are doing now.
    ]

    I’d suggest the AEC wouldn’t need to check any of them.

    I’m pretty sure that their opponents would be more than happy to investigate any discrepancies.

  9. Diog

    I’ve been on the other end of the accreditation process for doctors, and it takes considerable time. An election period of three weeks wouldn’t, in many cases, even have the most cursory overseas enquiry answered.

  10. Seriously, who trawls through the National Archives to look for a 1966 passenger card for some obscure MP?

    “An incoming passenger card from 25 July 1966 – found in the National Archives – shows Sudmalis listed her nationality as “British” when she returned to Australia as a 10-year-old after travelling overseas.”

  11. Every doctor and nurse etc has to send in loads of supporting documentation of their degrees, specialist qualifications, working with children certificate etc when they apply to a hospital and get all the boxes ticked.
    The same could happen with applying for parliament and the AEC.

    Do those hospitals have only a matter of a couple of days after applications close to process and approve said documentation, and would need to contact one of nearly 200 different administrative systems in that short window to verify any claim in doubt?

  12. z
    “…so we get back to relying on the MPs to fill out the paperwork correctly – just as we do at present.”
    Not really. This way they have no comeback if they have dual citizenship. None of this “the dog ate my homework” crap.

  13. [zoomster
    …so we get back to relying on the MPs to fill out the paperwork correctly – just as we do at present.
    ]

    Well, that’s ultimately the issue at hand, with maybe a few tweaks to facilitate those who don’t have a major Party machine behind them.

  14. Diogenes @ #413 Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 – 6:30 pm

    Seriously, who trawls through the National Archives to look for a 1966 passenger card for some obscure MP?

    “An incoming passenger card from 25 July 1966 – found in the National Archives – shows Sudmalis listed her nationality as “British” when she returned to Australia as a 10-year-old after travelling overseas.”

    A journo can request the parliamentary library to do the search for them, afaik.

  15. Brandy’s submission, in part…

    “Senator Brandis proposes that Laurie Fransman QC, of the United Kingdom Bar, provide the relevant advice in relation to Senator Roberts while David Goddard QC, of the New Zealand Bar, provide the advice in relation to Mr Ludlam. It also proposes a “suitable expert in Canadian law” provide an opinion in relation to Ms Waters.

    It appears these arrangements are aimed at ensuring the matter can be resolved as quickly as possible so the validity of the election of all parliamentarians who have fallen foul of section 44(i) of the constitution to be determined together.

    Under section 44(i) of the constitution a person is incapable of being elected to the parliament if they are a “citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power.”

    However, if Mr Ludlam, Ms Waters or Senator Roberts contest the findings of the legal opinions being offered by the government, Senator Brandis advises their case be heard separately by the court.

    “In the event that any person who is the subject of a reference disputes the conclusion reached in any of the expert opinions anticipated above, the Attorney-General submits that that reference may need to be determined separately from the other references.”

    To assist in the “expeditious hearing of the references,” Senator Brandis also proposes to submit to an order to pay the costs of each of those who have been referred to the High Courts but “reserves his position on costs in relation to any other party to the proceedings.”

    The submission notes that the judgment of the court may have direct implications for two more Senators including Nationals Deputy Leader Fiona Nash and South Australian crossbencher Nick Xenophon, both of whom are “likely to be referred by the Senate to the Court of Disputed Returns when Parliament next sits.”

    Another factor that could complicate and possibly delay the process is the need for the Attorney-General to “serve a notice under section 78B of the Judiciary Act” by 4pm on Friday. This will require Senator Brandis to inform the states and territories that they can intervene in the High Court proceeding because it touches on a constitutional issue affecting the states.

  16. And the first part…..

    “In the government submission filed ahead of Thursday’s directions hearing, Mr Donaghue conveys the view of the Attorney General George Brandis that the matter be resolved as quickly as possible and proposes arrangements to help expedite the case.

    “The Attorney-General submits that there is a compelling public interest in the references being determined as quickly as possible, given that they involve the qualifications of several sitting senators and a member of the House of Representatives,” the submission says.

    READ MORE
    Voter split over MP expulsionsDAVID CROWE
    Queries over Lib MP citizenshipGREG BROWN
    The new arrangements proposed by the government include the provision of opinions from legal experts in Italy and the UK in relation to the citizenship of both Senator Canavan and Mr Joyce to help provide a “sufficient account of the applicable foreign law” to help inform the court.

    “The experts conclude that, for the purposes of the domestic law of each country, Senator Canavan and the Hon Barnaby Joyce MP are, or were, citizens of Italy and New Zealand respectively. The Attorney-General understands that this conclusion will not be disputed in either reference.”

    The government also proposes that, if this approach is accepted by the court, that further legal opinions be sought concerning the position of former Greens Senators Scott Ludlam, Larissa Waters as well as Senator Roberts.

  17. Shorten explains his thinking.
    .

    On Tuesday, Shorten challenged the government to “put up or shut up”. “I’ve renounced my citizenship, I did what I was supposed to do, but now they’re saying with no evidence at all: ‘Oh, there’s a cloud over Mr Shorten,’” the Labor leader said in Mackay.

    “Well, let’s been straight here. I’m not going to go down the American crazy conspiracy path where you reverse the onus of proof, and by that I mean, you make an allegation with no evidence about your political rival, and then you start demanding the rival, the political opponent, has to jump through all sorts of hoops when in fact there’s no evidence to back up the allegation whatsoever.

    “I say to Mr Turnbull, if you have evidence that I’m still a British citizen, put up or shut up. And in the meantime, if you haven’t got the evidence, stop wasting the time of the nation and get back to your day job.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/22/coalition-urges-high-court–fast-track–citizenship-cases

    Reply

  18. So it would appear that, insofar as Baarnyard and Canavan are concerned, they are conceding that they were ineligible to stand. So the arguments will be indolence and ineptitude leading to feigned ignorance of the facts.

    Open and shut.

  19. Clearly, for those caught in the dual citizenship caper, there appears to be an inverse relationship between the numbers being caught up and the cries that the rule was a silly one in the first place.

    When the Greens Senators were – at first blush – the first fish caught and to their credit, did the honourable thing and stood down, we had the likes of Joyce and Turnbull taking the high moral ground and crying for blood with lots of “tut-tuts”.

    Now, of course, with some bigger fish being caught, and with tons of egg splattered across a lot of LNP faces, we get this shift to claims the rule, after all, was/is a “silly” one.

    I have always maintained that while all political parties do hypocrisy, the conservatives do it best.

  20. Rational Leftist
    The hospital has about three weeks to do the relevant checks (as that’s the usual time between applying for and getting a job) which is much the same time as an election campaign.

  21. William, are we sure that the strong result to labor has “washed out” of Essential polling or Essential is doing its usual little bump back to the libs before showing strong polling to labor again. I suspect the latter.

  22. The hospital has about three weeks to do the relevant checks (as that’s the usual time between applying for and getting a job) which is much the same time as an election campaign.

    The length of an election campaign is irrelevant. It’s only a matter of days between the close of nominations and the first early ballots.

  23. RL
    “It’s only a matter of days between the close of nominations and the first early ballots.”
    So you get chucked off the ballot before election day because you stuffed up.

  24. http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/2017/08/22/essential-research-53-47-labor-14/#comment-2633447

    Actually Abbott, not far into the current dual citizenship affair, published the proof or renunciation on Twitter, after not publishing it in the face of previous calls for its publication.

    The debate around Abbott and other ex-UK citizens born before 1983 and also naturalised before 1983 has not come around to the Right of Abode they may well have (almost certainly inadvertently) retained by being Commonwealth Citizens before and continuously since 1983 and thus be entitled to the Rights and Privileges of a Citizen of the UK. Constitutional fun times if that happens.

  25. [So the arguments will be indolence and ineptitude leading to feigned ignorance of the facts.]

    The argument will be that no citizen born and raised in this country by at least one Australian parent has reason to believe he or she may be a citizen of another country and that “reason to believe” is an anterior requirement to the making of reasonable enquires set out in Sykes.

    If that is arguable, one would think there might be a need for evidence about the degree of notoriety attached to the fact that citizens born in this country, by dint of heritage, are capable, without anything else being done on their part, dual citizens.

  26. Dio
    That makes a lot of sense on candidate declaration. It puts the onus of proof on the candidate. And works well on public sector job applications. I am not saying no frauds get through. But when there is one the paperwork is there to allow swift action.

  27. Dio’s suggestion might also reduce the number of frivolous candidates in the Senate. Why make it easier than applying for a graduate job? They get double the average wage.

  28. peter love @ #407 Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 – 6:18 pm

    There is no difference, Bemused. An issue has been raised for these public representatives concerning their sole citizenship. Both required renunciation of another citizenship, place of birth is not an issue as they should, and do, know. Both men should respond to this question transparently.

    IMO there is a distinct whiff about Abbott’s very late registration of birth as an Australian, maybe strings pulled, and there had been criminal charges etc, but we are not to know. And also the date he obtained a document in support shows the Libs lax procedures.

    But this does not change the fact. Why does Shorten simply not lay his cards on the table?

    Maybe it is a cunning plot to drive people like you nuts?

  29. I think the issue with Abbott is there was a question around his eligibility for a Rhodes Scholarship as he was a British citizen, so his parents arranged for his Australian citizenship “tout de suite”.

    However, the ‘Australian citizen’ bar is considerably lower for a Rhodes Scholar than it is for an MP.

    Also, bear in mind that Tones didn’t organise his own Australian citizenship – mumsy did it for him. If and when he renounced his British citizenship, I suspect mumsy did that for him as well (or maybe wifey did). The question – which was not out of the realms of possibility given who we’re dealing with – was whether it was done in time for his initial election.

    I have no doubt he has renounced now, but I find it interesting that his “proof” was to reference a letter previously written, rather than furnishing a copy of the original (which he would surely have in his personal records and therefore laid the issue to rest once and for all).

    Now, I’m not about to die in a birther ditch over it, but I do find the media treatment of Shorten compared with Abbott illuminating.

  30. Diogenes @ #414 Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 – 6:30 pm

    Seriously, who trawls through the National Archives to look for a 1966 passenger card for some obscure MP?

    “An incoming passenger card from 25 July 1966 – found in the National Archives – shows Sudmalis listed her nationality as “British” when she returned to Australia as a 10-year-old after travelling overseas.”

    So that’s where it came from!
    I was wondering just who would have retained such a seemingly insignificant piece of paper for so long.

  31. The High Court may need to broaden its scope of which MPs might not be 100% dinki-di Aussies:

    ‘ALIENS HERE ON EARTH’ Claims extraterrestrials that ‘look like humans’ are among us

    ALIENS are living among us and we may be oblivious to them, it has been sensationally claimed.

    By JON AUSTIN
    PUBLISHED: 14:27, Tue, Aug 8, 2017 | UPDATED: 15:32, Tue, Aug 8, 2017

    A conspiracy theorist said extraterrestrials that look just like humans are on Earth and you may not even know you are speaking to one.

    Marcus Allen is the publisher in the UK of alternative news magazine Nexus, which provides monthly updates for so-called ‘truthers’ on conspiracy theories and other alternative philosophies.

    http://www.express.co.uk/news/weird/838458/Aliens-news-here-on-earth-extraterrestrials-humans-Marcus-Allen-Glastonbury-Symposium

  32. bemused
    The poor minions in the National Archives have probably been swamped with requests to trawl through passenger cards for Bill Shorten, Plibersek etc etc.

  33. Barney in Go Dau @ #418 Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 – 6:36 pm

    [zoomster
    …so we get back to relying on the MPs to fill out the paperwork correctly – just as we do at present.
    ]

    Well, that’s ultimately the issue at hand, with maybe a few tweaks to facilitate those who don’t have a major Party machine behind them.

    Oh come on! It is not terribly arduous for any wanna be MP to check out their citizenship status.
    Checking a whole lot is a different matter.
    Barnyard was easy, even Xenopom really only had 3 options to check. 3 inquiries in writing is not all that arduous.
    And if he had got incorrect information back then he has done his best and should be off the hook anyway.

  34. Unworkable idealistic ideas and false equivalences aside, I think this drama will be a wake-up call to anybody in future to be more vigilant about their own circumstances because others who don’t like them will no doubt be vigilant for them. Other than changing the constitution (a completely different, really hard nut to crack), that extra vigilance from both sides of a fence is the only realistic and workable resolution to this saga that I can see.

    Shame it didn’t happen a year or so later when a regular House + Half Senate election could be called, so that an one is called and, at least, the HoR candidates can all make sure their shit is in order.

  35. The South Australian premier, Jay Weatherill, has renewed his warning that Labor-led state governments could go it alone on energy policy if the Turnbull government can’t resolve its internal battle over the clean energy target.

    If we are going to do it ourselves we might as well design the best system
    Jay Weatherill
    In an interview with Guardian Australia, Weatherill has also upped the ante by signalling the Labor states might look to collaborate on an alternative policy to the clean energy target recommended by the chief scientist if there is a better mechanism to provide certainty for investors and emissions reduction.

    Asked whether he was wedded to the chief scientist’s central recommendation in the event the states decided to break away and pursue their own policy, Weatherill said: “No, not really. If we are going to do it ourselves we might as well design the best system.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/22/jay-weatherill-renews-warning-labor-states-could-go-it-alone-on-energy-policy

  36. William – really? You’re the one who described the Labor lead as “washing out”, which I interpret to mean coming back to its natural or proper state. However, it could just as easily be a false bump to the libs. You drew the connection, not me.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 9 of 12
1 8 9 10 12