Essential Research: 53-47 to Labor

The latest Essential records no change on voting intention, be it for a federal election or a same-sex marriage survey.

The Guardian reports the latest Essential Research poll has Labor’s lead steady at 53-47, but provides only incomplete detail of the primary vote. The poll also records 59% in favour of same-sex marriage with 31% opposed, compared with 57% and 32% a fortnight ago, with 62% (down one) saying they will definitely “vote” in the survey if it survives the High Court challenge, and another 16% (down two) saying they will probably do so. Again, this skews towards the yes camp, with 74% of supporters rating themselves as definite compared with 58% of opponents.

On power prices, the poll finds 49% holding energy companies principally responsible, compared with 22% for the Turnbull government and 9% for “environmentalists pushing action on climate change”. It also finds 54% opposed to changing the date of Australia, with 26% in support, and 70% believing “believe everyone can celebrate on that day”, versus 18% against. Forty-two per cent disagree with changing inscriptions on public statues. The full report should be with us later today.

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.

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

  1. Tricot

    The Press ‘demanding to see the bit of paper’

    Samantha Maidens’ outrage at Abbott not showing her his ‘document’ was amusing to say the least.

    If somebody from the ‘Press’ want to make an allegation they could simply ask and if rebuffed write their ‘story’.

  2. Windhover

    Whatever the qualifiers are that are put upon the Appropriation, it is a function of Executive Government, NOT the HC, to determine whether the conditions of the qualifier are met. Such determinations have POLITICAL consequences, not CONSTITUTIONAL consequences.

    Obviously there are limits to this line of reasoning. An appropriation for a railway presumably could not be spent on a completely unrelated road for which there was no parliamentary appropriation. But “unforeseen circumstances” and the necessity to provide “urgent funding” are matters that in the first place are essentially determinations (good or bad) of the Executive arm of ‘Government.

    Had Parliament wanted to constrain the Executive arm of Government it was open to it to specify the subject matter of the appropriation by say defining “unforeseen circumstance” or “urgent funding”. Undefined these vague terms are a matter for the Executive arm of Government and NOT for the HC to redraft sloppy appropriations.

    ______________________________________

    No matter how vague the words ‘urgent’ and ‘unforeseen’ are, the fact that they have been included in the Appropriation Act means that there has to be some meaning attached to them. This is an issue of statutory interpretation in administrative law, rather than Commonwealth Constitutional law. If Parliament had intended the Minister to be able to spend the advance on anything (within power) that he saw fit, it would not have included those restrictions.

    I think there is every likelihood that the High Court, as it did in the Malaysian people swap case, look to see whether the Minister met the threshold requirements in the enabling legislation. This is not political second-guessing the Minister but a quite proper investigation into whether his action was within the powers conferred by the legislation.

  3. Windhover
    briefly @ #103 Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 – 10:25 am

    Hmmm…interesting. The Executive is going to have to argue that the legislature provided an appropriation so that the Executive could spend money on purposes that the Parliament itself had declined to authorise.

  4. Boerwar
    briefly
    You tried to enlighten me. You really did. But you failed. I blame the teacher. Infinite density?

    Infinite density…Malcolm Roberts, gentleman from Dishergarh.

  5. In the Big Bang Theory, the Universe started in a state of extremely high density a finite time ago (best estimate about 13.8 billion years) and expanded according to the laws of physics into what we see today and which continues to expand and evolve. All existence (time, space, energy) was contained in that initial state. It’s not like everything was stuffed into a corner somewhere and expanded into a pre-existing void. In that sense, the Big Bang happened ‘everywhere’.

    Physicists are divided over what, if anything, there was ‘before’ the Big Bang. Time and the laws of physics may have started at that instant, with ‘nothing’ before, ‘before’ being no more meaningful that ‘South of the South Pole’. Or the Big Bang ‘bubble’ may be part of some larger reality. All mind-blowing stuff.

  6. Ron Merkel QC is a rare example of a longstanding judge coming back to the bar as an advocate.

    The trick is to try and one find of his judgments to use against whatever argument he is bowling up.

  7. By licensing a hate campaign the Government has allowed all the Crazy-Nasty voices to affiliate themselves with the Lib-right. Tony Abbott and Lyle Shelton are making common cause with the Nazis.

  8. Steve777
    In the Big Bang Theory, the Universe started in a state of extremely high density a finite time ago (best estimate about 13.8 billion years)…

    There is a problem though…..the big bang itself, measured from within (there was no other place from which anything could have been measured), must have taken an “almost” infinitely long “time” to develop, to reach the point of unstoppable expansion.

  9. Theoretically, any space/time theory is possible as there is no certainty that we’re are anything but a single mind exploring itself. Time itself, doesn’t really exist in one theory, i.e. We cannot perceive everything at once therefore we do so in a linear manner. Theoretically, there is so much empty space between atomic level nuclei and their attendant electrons, that all matter can coexist in the same space, despite our perceptions of solidity.

    All this stuff is wonderful fodder for an inquiring mind!

  10. jenauthor @ #168 Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 – 11:53 am

    Theoretically, any space/time theory is possible as there is no certainty that were are anything but a single mind exploring itself. Time itself, doesn’t really exist in one theory, i.e. We cannot perceive everything at once therefore we do so in a linear manner. Theoretically, there is so much empty space between atomic level nuclei and their attendant electrons, that all matter can coexist in the same space, despite our perceptions of solidity.

    All this stuff is wonderful fodder for an inquiring mind!

    And jen, the next question then is ‘who’ makes the choices about ‘what’ we see ‘when’? –

  11. Eccentrica Gallumbits is the far-famed triple-breasted whore of Eroticon Six. Some people say her erogenous zones start some four miles from her actual body. Ford Prefect disagrees, saying five. It is possible that the Big Bang was actually one of her orgasms. 

    – Douglas Adams.

  12. cud chewer @ #171 Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 – 11:58 am

    Eccentrica Gallumbits is the far-famed triple-breasted whore of Eroticon Six. Some people say her erogenous zones start some four miles from her actual body. Ford Prefect disagrees, saying five. It is possible that the Big Bang was actually one of her orgasms. 

    – Douglas Adams.

    Love it. Now, all we need is a tiny drop of acid in the drinking water and we’re there.

  13. lanesainty: Merkel: There’s no reason this was so urgent it couldn’t be put to parli to approve which we say gives meaningful effect to the word urgent.

  14. michaelkoziol: Ron Merkel arguing the govt’s position in this case, if upheld, would give the minister “unbridled discretion” over expenditure #auspol
    MathiasCormann: Plainly not true. Firstly, amount of Advance limited by Parliament. Secondly expenditure has to be constitutional (check s.51(xi)) and 1/2 twitter.com/michaelkoziol/…
    MathiasCormann: and authorised by relevant legislation (check Census and Statistics Act 1905 in particular and ABS Act 1975) 2/2 twitter.com/michaelkoziol/…

  15. “There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

    There is another theory which states that this has already happened.”

    ― Douglas Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

  16. guytaur

    michaelkoziol: Ron Merkel arguing the govt’s position in this case, if upheld, would give the minister “unbridled discretion” over expenditure #auspol
    MathiasCormann: Plainly not true. Firstly, amount of Advance limited by Parliament. Secondly expenditure has to be constitutional (check s.51(xi)) and 1/2 twitter.com/michaelkoziol/…
    MathiasCormann: and authorised by relevant legislation (check Census and Statistics Act 1905 in particular and ABS Act 1975) 2/2 twitter.com/michaelkoziol/…
    __________________________________-

    Cormann is right, of course. But the High Court is not concerned about whether the discretion was bridled or not, but rather whether the bridle is sufficiently constitutionally tight.

  17. Gratton:

    By tabling his documentation, Mr Shorten in theory may have made it harder for others to resist demands for paperwork.

    But one suspects the Government has lost the will for this chase.

    Recently the position of Labor’s ACT senator Katy Gallagher, whose mother was born in Ecuador of British citizens who were in that country temporarily, has come under some question.

    In a statement to the Senate on Monday, Senator Gallagher quoted two legal opinions supporting her eligibility. That looks to be that.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-09-05/bill-shorten-citizenship-labor-continues-after-barnaby-joyce/8873568

  18. Sorry this explains better than I did.

    lanesainty: Now we’re onto whether personal opinions count as statistical information & can therefore be collected by the ABS.

  19. jeremy_gans: @rightsagenda @MathiasCormann @AMEquality (It’s VERY tricky to read HCA judges. But, at this point, they don’t seem grabbed by any of the @rightsagenda arguments.)

  20. Guardian seems to have tossed in the live coverage not that it was of any use.

    From lanesainty’s reproduction of comments from the bench, it sounds like the case is going shittily.

  21. The universe could be like a gigantic hologram. The physical world is made of information, with energy and matter as incidentals. There is a maximum to the amount of information that can potentially be stored in a given finite region of space which has a finite amount of energy.

    Thermodynamic entropy and Shannon entropy are conceptually equivalent: the number of arrangements that are counted by Boltzmann entropy reflects the amount of Shannon information one would need to implement any particular arrangement of matter and energy. The only salient difference between the thermodynamic entropy of physics and Shannon’s entropy of information is in the units of measure; the former is expressed in units of energy divided by temperature, the latter in essentially dimensionless “bits” of information.

    The holographic principle states that the entropy of mass is also proportional to surface area and not volume; that volume itself is illusory and the universe is really a hologram which is isomorphic to the information “inscribed” on the surface of its boundary.

    (Me paraphrasing wiki paraphrasing the late, great, Bekenstein.)

  22. shellbell

    Guardian seems to have tossed in the live coverage not that it was of any use.

    From lanesainty’s reproduction of comments from the bench, it sounds like the case is going shittily.
    _____________________________________________-

    The Constitutional power to enact s.10 and the ABS power were always the weakest lines of attack. I keep coming back to the question of the unforeseen and urgent need for this expenditure. Scanning Lane Sainty’s tweets does not indicate any problems with these so far, although they have not been fully argued yet.

  23. broomstick33: @lanesainty @kemal_atlay beware reading judicial demeanor as positive/negative…the interrogatory process involves beating down arguments (but might finally agree)

Comments are closed.