This week’s reading of the Essential Research fortnight rolling average has Labor’s two-party lead at 54-46, out from 53-47 last week, with primary vote numbers not available at this stage. Also featured are Essential’s monthly leadership ratings, which have Malcolm Turnbull up three on approval to 38% and steady on disapproval at 46%; Bill Shorten up one to 36% and up five to 47%; and Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister at 43-29, compared with 41-27 last time. Respondents were also asked if they favoured a series of measures on energy policy, which found strong support for regulating power prices, increasing investment in renewable energy and storage, reserving gas for domestic use, and a “clean-up of existing coal-fired power stations”, while lesser but still majority support for forcing energy companies to help their customers use less power and bringing privatised coal generators back into public ownership. Twenty-eight per cent rated Labor most likely to deliver lower power prices compared with 19% for the Coalition, with 35% for no difference and 18% for don’t know.
UPDATE: Full report here. Primary votes are Coalition steady on 36%, Labor steady on 37%, Greens steady on 10% and One Nation up a point to 9%.
1,898 comments on “Essential Research: 54-46 to Labor”
Briefly my preference is the French model. Marriage registered by the state and if you want some other religious or secular service – go for it, but this also implies that the religion has the right about who they will offer a service to, according to the religion’s definition of a valid marriage. I get the impression that you feel religions are obliged to offer a marriage service to all comers but once again l apologise if that is not your belief.
I’m in favour of the French model too.
I reckon the deists should not be able to impose purity tests. If they want to perform the civil functions of marriage – the execution and witnessing of documents and creation of records for entry in a register – then this should be offered to everyone with no exceptions. This should be the case for all celebrants, not merely for the deistic. They are in all cases exercising a civil power. They should not be permitted to discriminate in the exercise of that power.
However, if they want to play sacramental dress-ups on an exclusive or discriminatory basis, that is up to them. That is, if people want to play ceremonial games that have no legal effect with their co-deluded, then why would anyone want to stop them.
Okay, off to put 2 Yes votes in the local mailbox.
I just realised, this government is so stingy they couldn’t even spring for self-sealing envelopes. We had to lick them! My #2 son, who has never done it before, nearly up-chucked!
I stayed in a castle in Bavaria, which offered a wedding reception service /photo opportunity. Wedding receptions bring out the Bogan in all cultures and Germany is no exception.
DN absolutely agree
Briefly, XML-T6 LED Torch 6 bucks on eBay
cheers, p. LED…amazing
PeeBee it took a while to click. 600 or so comments don’t seem to be a problem but up around the 1,000 it slows massively. I’m guessing it’s the phone memory.
I’m yet to receive my ballot paper. Friends in Perth have received theirs, so I’m assuming mine isn’t far away.
And why religions would care one whit about state recognised marriages is beyond me when they claim to believe their ceremonies are recognised by a greater authority anyway.
The point is….none of the objections of the deists are to be taken seriously. They want the same thing they’ve always wanted – to exercise control over the lives of the population. Their purposes are political and financial. They have a privileged position and seek to perpetuate it by creating some (utterly spurious) sense of legitimacy. They use their god-bothering to bother the rest of us.
I agree 100% about Labor going hard next time. No more mister nice guy Rudd-style. Ruthlessly clear out Coalition political appointees from boards, senior Government and statutory authority positions. That includes Murdoch minions. Cut the strings of the golden parachutes of retiring Coalition Ministers. Cease and abolish any investigations or star chambers targeting Labor or its friends. Command the heights of power. After all, that’s what the Coalition (or successor right wing parties) will do on their inevitable return, hopefully a decade or more after they lose power.
And if there is any credible evidence of dodgy dealings by the defeated Govenment, investigate. Set broad terms of reference. What is it with the Coalition and Big Coal? There’s got to be something there. What promises have been made to whom?
The Progressives’ right wing opponents accuse Labor of class warfare and the politics of envy while being the supreme practitioners of both. They know their class enemies, their cultural enemies and economic enemies. These include unions, people on welfare and their supporters, the ABC and non-right media (even Fairfax), civil libertarians and anyone who doesn’t think neoliberalism isn’t the best thing ever. They attack savagely, with the help of powerful and deep-pocketed allies in the media and business. In principle, I have no problem with Labor doing the same. They’ll have to adjust their tactics since their friends don’t control large media organisations, but it’s doable.
Still no SSM postal survey arrived in inner Sydney.
Lot’s of Salvo’s mail-outs for donations. Can’t help wondering what their position is on SSM although there is no comment in their newsletter and from a quick view off their website they look like they’re keeping their nose out of it. I’m not sure if that should influence a donation anyway, what do you think.
this is a bit better than a waltz…
Salvos not in favour of SSM though I believe they arent as uptight about it.
I agree 100%
There is an old saying….In defeat, malice, in victory, revenge.
paaptsef @ #1799 Friday, September 15th, 2017 – 7:33 pm
Uses rechargeable lithium ion battery so you will need an appropriate charger.
I bought its big brother which takes 2 such batteries and it is fantastic. Think it was about $16 with charger.
Yes X 1000 for this! Fight fire with fire.
emused, mine uses 3x AAA batteries fwiw
Ides of March
Yep. I was wondering whether they’d not help out a SSM family. Consensus here is they wouldn’t discriminate.
paaptsef @ #1820 Friday, September 15th, 2017 – 7:55 pm
The model you referenced came up as using an 18650 battery. Li-ion – rechargeable.
Top listing was USD2.98 inc. delivery so cheap that I suspect it does not include battery or charger.
The 18650 battery seems to have a good life and mine are still running on their original charge after about 8 months light use.
Its the name of the type of LED not a torch model
My eyesight has always been pretty good until fairly recently, when i’ve begun to find it difficult to make things out in dull light. I guess I should invest in a torch…LED…good idea.
OK, I searched on “XML-T6 LED Torch” on ebay and came up with a product labelled “Zoomable 15000LM 3Modes XML T6 LED 18650 ZOOM Flashlight Torch Lamp Light”.
I also misquoted price. USD2.38.
It’s not directly within my power, which you can take as no. I would if I could.
I don’t believe Salvos would discriminate, but perhaps it would happen on a state by state, or city by city basis.
We’re about to declare war on Saturn and all people can talk about is a torch…
briefly @ #1824 Friday, September 15th, 2017 – 8:05 pm
Mine is so bright it is amazing.
I got my complete and utter waste of time, effort and taxpayer’s money form in the post yesterday (electorate of Perth).
I took it inside, ticked “YES”, and as I’m dog-sitting my parent’s pooch at the moment, decided to kill two birds with one stone. I took the dog for a walk and posted it back.
Time taken between receipt and dispatch, approximately 10 minutes.
actually it is a 14 led everlite torch from the reject shop that i used, cost $3 and came with batteries in it.
We’re about to declare war on Saturn
are Saturnians in favour of equality, is that why we invade?
Dan Gulberry @ #1770 Friday, September 15th, 2017 – 7:09 pm
Yarp. They only understand one thing – power. If you have it, use it. If you fail to use it they will take it from you and use it against you without a second’s thought. If you want to have the option of working constructively with the Libs you have to hurt them to the point they decide they’d like a break from hurtin’ for a bit.
You’re only fooling yourself if you think they can be reasoned with or have some point at which they would put the nation’s interest above their own.
Well done DanG. Yes it’s a total WOFTAM, but in reality takes next to no time at all to simply tick yes.
The sit out or chuck out mob really need to have a good long look at themselves.
Scapegoat or will this go further?
I did like the suggestion that, to help Barnaby out, we should invade NZ.
The promo video for the invasion is already made and set to go.
The plebithing is likely to turn out to be the worst of all worlds for the NO advocates. They will be seen to have imposed a shonky process on an unhappy electorate and then seen their case go down in flames. Their biggest names will be associated with an ignoble cause and coast-to-coast defeat. Moreover, their party will be as divided as ever and the Right will be left nursing an even deeper sense of grievance.
I must have missed the sovereign risk comment this week.
Stutchbury thinks this week was excellent
“Politically, it left Bill Shorten and Labor premier Daniel Andrews stranded with their airy fairy renewable energy targets, crying crocodile tears on power bills and lost jobs. With last year’s South Australian blackouts, the Finkel report in June and last week’s Australian Energy Market Operator report, Turnbull and energy minister Josh Frydenberg have turned the debate to energy security and household bills. They want AGL’s Vesey to keep Liddell open for another five years or so, or sell it to someone who will. “.
This is from his Friday email to subscribers.
It’s not lost me that the inspiration for the ME project came from Tanya Plibersek, who first prepared to move a private members bill in the last Parliament. This really catalysed Labor and, in turn, has loosened all the wagons for change. If the day does come when Bill Shorten may not lead Labor, thenTanya would have my support. She is one the first authors of Labor’s current call to renew and extend equality in this country.
Stutchbury in la la land.
Ides of March @ #1838 Friday, September 15th, 2017 – 8:37 pm
Tis was ever so.
Mad as a cut snake.
Turnbull and energy minister Josh Frydenberg have turned the debate to energy security and household bills.
This is losing territory for the LNP. They are seen as the cause of the problems in energy markets, investments and technologies whilst simultaneously under-reaching on climate change policies.
There are some policy areas that are just no-go for the LNP. Education, health, the environment, the NBN are among them…and energy policies can be added to the list. Labor will not mind them visiting this issue. The LNP have come to play on Labor’s home ground.
confessions @ #1843 Friday, September 15th, 2017 – 8:44 pm
Yep! We will just help AGW by reducing emissions by some magical means that entails no change to how we produce electricity.
I thought I read the Sovereign Risk reference in a piece by either Ross Gittins or Mark Kenny.
I didn’t say their ‘don’t mention AGW’ strategy was necessarily a winning one. But Stutchbury is right that it was the intention of the coalition all along to reframe the debate to one of electricity supply rather than reduction of GHGEs. They’ve achieved that, yet another fail in the coffin that is this govt.
Something I pegged long ago before msm latched onto it.
I thought I read the Sovereign Risk reference in a piece by either Ross Gittins or Mark Kenny.
Any chatter about sovereign risk in our context is totally over-blown. What on earth can they be talking of? Is default a possibility? Are we on the point of expropriation of foreign-held assets? Is the Federation at risk (in spite of the antics of the WA Liberals)?
For contrast, consider the UK, which has decided to commit repeated acts of economic self-mutilation. Yet there is no talk of elevated sovereign risk in their case.
Thanks William. If you don’t ask…
“They are seen as the cause of the problems in energy markets, investments and technologies whilst simultaneously under-reaching on climate change policies.”
Anyone paying attention sees that, but most voters get their info from either:
1. The Daily Rupert, which is actively boosting the Coalition line, or running interference for it, as required.
2. Commercial radio and TV, which just repeat unchallenged whatever the latest Government’s press release or the Daily Rupert says.
3. The ABC, which, all too often these days, is the same as ‘2.’
confessions…Stutchbury has failed to mention the real driver of LNP politicking on energy, and that is a desperate attempt to keep all the coalition geese in the same tumbrel. They are falling apart. The attempt to focus on prices – which is something they can hardly do anything about – is a pathetic diversion from their internal tensions and competing ambitions.
Stutchbury is a volunteer for the LNP. Actually, an unpaid sycophant.
Steve….I thought the surveys show voters have a higher degree of trust in Labor on these issues. And why not. They know they were lied to by Abbott and by various privatising State Liberal Governments in the past…
Voters apply very large discounts to the info presented to them in the media, and, in particular, by Ministers.
When it comes to power and gas bills, what they remember is the hit to their bank accounts. They will associate the pain with the incumbents. It’s not complicated.