Three new results on federal voting intention:
• The Guardian reports Labor’s lead in this week’s Essential Research fortnightly rolling average is 54-46, up from 53-47 last time. Primary vote numbers to follow later today. (UPDATE: The full results reveal the Coalition is down a point to 36%, Labor up one to 38%, the Greens steady on 10% and One Nation steady on 7%)
• A ReachTEL poll for Sky News, conducted on Thursday from an unusually big sample of 4888, has Labor’s two-party lead at 53-47, out from 52-48 at the previous poll on August 23. The primary votes are all but unchanged, with the Coalition steady on 34.5%, Labor down 0.3% to 36.4%, the Greens down 0.1% to 10.2% and One Nation up 0.6% to 11.0%. On 2016 election flows, the result would have come in at 54-46. The poll has Malcolm Turnbull leading Bill Shorten 51.7-48.3 on preferred prime minister; Turnbull’s performance rated as very good or good by 26%, average by 34% and poor or very poor by 39%; Bill Shorten’s respective numbers coming in at 31%, 31% and 37%.
• The YouGov poll for FiftyAcres maintains its idiosyncratic form in having the Coalition with a 51-49 lead on respondent-allocated preferences, compared with 50-50 a fortnight ago. After producing somewhat more conventional primary vote numbers last time, it’s back to having both major parties deep in the doldrums, with Labor down two points to 33% and the Coalition steady on 34%. The Greens and One Nation are also steady on 11% and 9%, with minor players soaking up the difference. Labor is credited with a fairly conventional 73% of Greens preferences, with the Coalition getting 68% from One Nation and 60% from the rest. A two-party result based on 2016 election flows would have come in at around 53-47. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1054.
Same-sex marriage survey latest:
• The Australian Bureau of Statistics’ yesterday released the first of what will be weekly estimates on the response rate for the same-sex marriage survey. It estimates that 9.2 million survey forms have been received, amounting to a turnout of 57.5% of eligible voters. The result will be announced on November 15.
• The ABS figure is at odds with two polls that have emerged in the last few days, which can only partly be explained by postal lag effects. A ReachTEL poll for Sky News, conducted from a sample of “nearly five thousand people”, found 79.5% identifying as having voted. This included 64.3% who said they had voted yes compared with only 15.5% for no, with another 6.0% saying they still intended to vote yes and 5.7% for no. The other poll is a survey for the Marriage Equality campaign finding 77% of those eligible had voted, including 69% of the 18-to-24 cohort and more than 80% of those aged over 65. However, the Essential poll comes in a good deal lower, with 47% saying they had already voted, up from 36% a week ago, and another 33% saying they will definitely do so.
• Essential Research now has support for same-sex marriage at 61%, up from 58% last week and 55% the week before, with opposition tracking from 34% to 33% to 32%. Of those who voted, 64% said they voted yes compared with 30% for no.
• Without providing further detail, Sky News relates that a ReachTEL poll “separate” to the one it commissioned itself had a 72-28 forced response split in favour of yes, reducing to 61-39 among those who said they had already voted.
“ The Sky News ReachTEL poll has 47.2% very concerned or somewhat concerned about “what might be taught in schools if same sex marriage is legalised”, compared with 42.8% for somewhat or not at all concerned.
• The YouGov poll found 64% of respondents saying they had discussed the survey with family, 54% with friends, 21% with work colleagues and 14% with others, with only 17% saying they had not discussed it with anyone.
Other recent attitudinal findings:
• The ReachTEL poll found a 53-47 split in favour of Labor on who was best to manage the energy crisis and rising power prices. It also found 41% would support more coal seam gas mining if it meant reduced gas prices, with 36% opposed.
• Absent qualifications about lower prices, a Research Now survey of 1421 respondents for the Australia Institute found 49% would support a moratorium on fracking in their own state, with 24% opposed. Seventy-four per cent said they would support higher renewable energy targets in their own states.
• The YouGov poll finds 42% saying Tony Abbott should “play a quieter role and not be so critical of Malcolm Turnbull”, compared with 31% for “he should continue to speak up in the media, even if it involves being critical of Malcolm Turnbull”. Results were fairly similar across different voting intentions, with the exception of One Nation, whose supporters were notably harder on Turnbull. It was also found that 40% thought it wrong of Tony Abbott to relate the headbutt incident to the same-sex marriage campaign, compared with 34% who thought it was right, with clear distinctions emerging in this case betweeen Labor/Greens and Coalition/One Nation supporters.
• Also from the YouGov poll, 59% were in favour of a royal commission into the banking industry, with 19% opposed.
• Essential Research has results from its occasional questions on trust in institutions and media organisations, but all we have from The Guardian is that the the federal police performed best on the former, with religious organisations, trade unions and political parties bringing up the rear, with the ABC as always taking the mantle of most trusted news organisation.
Joyce reply submissions
http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/cases/03-Canberra/c11-2017/Joyce_Reply.pdf
C@tmomma
Don’t give them ideas.
zoidlord @ #1451 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:12 pm
Senator Conroy’s staffer wasn’t a terrorist suspect who had been identified by the Intelligence Agencies, last time I looked.
guytaur @ #1454 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:15 pm
So vote Labor in at the next election! Problem solved! : )
Cat
No Labor are waving the surveillance laws through. Labor wants votes it needs to stand up for citizens
guytaur @ #1452 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:13 pm
Whistleblowers is an issue that can be solved with a secure digital drop box.
Other than that, as I have been making the point up until now, I don’t expect the system will be 100% successful in interdicting attempts at terrorist attacks in Australia, however, if it helps the Intelligence Agencies to pick up a person of interest that they have been following and thus prevents even one attempted terrorism attack, then I am for it.
As I said this morning, this is a Human Rights issue for me. The right of humans to live free from harm.
And when too many High Court submissions are never enough, here are submissions of Counsel contradicting Nash, Canavana (Freudian slip) and the aspiring SA politician
http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/cases/03-Canberra/c11-2017/Canavan_KennettSubs.pdf
guytaur @ #1455 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 2:19 pm
The average Aussie doesn’t care GT. In fact Labor jumping up and down about it would probably be a negative.
How do you know that they are just waving it through anyway, there is no legislation yet, at this stage it’s just a Turnbull brainfart.
Fight the fights you can win.
Cat
This is a human rights issue. To keep individual humans from harm for government. Give away freedoms and that stops.
We have seen too often around the world. This is who dictatorships become reality.
You have tracking of unionist and busting them for conspiring to have a strike.
It doesn’t matter that its about workplace safety or damage to the environment. It matters what embarrasses the government
guytaur @ #1459 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:19 pm
And if you vote Labor into power at the next election you prevent Dutton and Turnbull directing Public Servants and others in the implementation of the laws.
For example, I fully expect that Labor would not be at all keen to see 10 year olds rounded up for terrorism interrogation. I’d personally like to see the age that children could be taken in and interrogated without charge set at 16. The Age of Consent.
shellbell @ #1452 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 2:16 pm
Ah, so the Greens and others pulled the trigger too early, then? Should have waited until closer to the deadline to cut off such a reply.
Although according to my amateurish reading of that submission, it seems rather weak? Assertions that the word “is” should be ignored, or that citizenship by descent is not a notorious thing do not seem like persuasive arguments.
VP
See Jeremy Corbyn and May.
Corbyn jumped up and down about it. In an election campaign with actual terror attacks.
One of the major reasons for his gains was standing up for human rights when May said human rights are luxuries we have to ditch for safety.
Here where there have been no bombings at pop concerts or attacks on parliament standing up for rights will win more votes.
Guytaur,
You have tracking of unionist and busting them for conspiring to have a strike.
That’s a very slippery slope you’ve put yourself on there. And I don’t think you can validly infer that these intended laws will enable that, or any of the other shock and awe scenarios you have elaborated.
Of course, if it ever came to that, I would be out the front manning the barricades to fight it.
Cat
Nope not me. LNP and Labor with the surveillance laws
Cat
The inference comes from the raid on Stephen Conroy’s office. If the LNP can do it they will. Only defined legislation that stops them changes that.
This surveillance legislation is open ended. There are no safeguards. Nil.
guytaur @ #1466 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:27 pm
May’s attacks WERE censorious and should have been resisted. They went too far.
And, my goodness, using the fact that there have been no attacks here at pop concerts or on parliament as a justification to do nothing!?! Words fail me.
NickMcKim: Your licence photo will soon be handed to Peter Dutton so you can be spied on as you walk down the street. We need a Charter of Rights. pic.twitter.com/VszNZG5ouK
https://twitter.com/nickmckim/status/916159135497863168
C@tmomma @ #1466 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 2:28 pm
No, they’ll definitely enable that. Being able to identify and track every citizen in any public space enables a lot of things, as a necessary and sufficient technological precedent.
What you can’t infer is that everything so enabled will be implemented in practice. But it’s bad enough that it could be, and for basically no gain.
Although wait, I have a solution. Let’s put the question to a voluntary postal survey! Let the people have their say. There’s precedent for that now, after all.
guytaur @ #1469 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:31 pm
As Bemused correctly said, you are whistling in the wind about the legislation because none, nil, bupkis, has been put into parliament yet, nor been debated or amended.
Cat
No using attacks overseas to attack civil rights is despicable. Its up there with the NRA using mass shootings to dilute gun laws
guytaur @ #1471 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:33 pm
Typical conflation of a bogey man with a topic du jour.
Cat
Labor has stated its position. Its going to wave the legislation through after “carefully examining:” it. The exact same thing it said about metadata laws. We still have no safeguards around them either.
We are becoming a mass surveillance state.
Cat
Dutton is in charge of Border Force including the AFP
C@tmomma
Bemused is just as pathetic and stupid about non-existent laws, but when it comes from people about critising them, from Transparency and Human Rights angles.
Both you, C@tmomma and Bemused seem to defend the non-existent legislation to hell.
A R,
What you can’t infer is that everything so enabled will be implemented in practice. But it’s bad enough that it could be, and for basically no gain.
So you’re happy for terrorist networks to have access and to use the latest technology but our INtelligence and other agencies to be working with technological stone age tools?
I also fail to see how you can confidently state that the implementation will necessarily be deficient and that there will be ‘basically no gain’.
I’m interested to know how you came to those conclusions, other than by supposition.
The only reason the people from PB are defending these mass weapons of survivalence, is because Labor will use them, when they are in power.
Thank you, zoidlord! Ima gonna use that:
Mass Weapons of Survivalence
That’s what I’m talking about! : )
guytaur @ #1476 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:36 pm
I’d like us to become a Mass Survivalence State. : )
Cat
FaceID on all citizens is mass surveillance. A database the Stasi would be proud of.
Gun Debate in USA = No body wants to do the hard work.
Surveillance, Security, etc = easy shit to do.
Thats why they leave it to private sector.
zoidlord @ #1478 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:37 pm
I have as much right to use Human Rights as a defence as you or anyone else does.
Cat
Say good bye to your freedom. We know mass surveillance lead to dictatorship. The history is clear.
C@tmomma
You cannot not use my slogan for any support other than to attack on Surveillance, Transparency, Human Rights, etc
guytaur @ #1483 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:42 pm
guytaur, what a facile argument. It’s how the tools are used. They aren’t all used for malevolent purposes.
Take a knife, for example. You can use it to kill someone, or you can use it to slice a tomato. Same knife, different uses.
zoidlord @ #1487 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:43 pm
Yes I can. You believe in Free Speech, don’t you? Or are you into Stasi-like censorship now? : )
Cat
Not a facile argument. No rights. End of story. Means governments can and will use the data how it sees fit.
We already have seen the present lot go after a Labor Senator in a campaign.
That may have been enough to lose a seat. Why? LNP does not believe in rights just their self interest.
C@tmomma
I have copyright on it.
guytaur @ #1486 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:43 pm
Your hyperbowl is overflowing, guytaur. There’s a long way to go before THAT’S a reality in Australia. Besides, as any smart person will tell you, it is virtually impossible for even Police States like Thailand, China or Burma to monitor every individual, all the time. There’s not enough people in a country to do it and the cost would be exorbitant. North Korea is the only one that comes close.
zoidlord @ #1491 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 3:48 pm
I doubt you could prove it.
Really into censorship and human rights abuses when you want to be, aren’t you, zoidlord? Scratch the surface of someone who loudly brays for human rights and free speech and you will find someone who wants to control their enemies’ rights to practice that.
Sad.
Cat
Not hyperbole. Stasi collected a information on every citizen and then used that against their citizens.
They told people to trust them.
Without legislation at the least that happens. Even with legislation it can be ignored but at least legislation is a bulwark that has stood us in good stead with our systems of having targeted surveillance not mass surveillance.
Basically its because we are meant to believe in innocent until proven guilty not the other way around.
guytaur,
Last time I looked we were still a democracy in Australia and able to vote a government out. UNLIKE in East Germany.
Cat
For how long?
As we saw with the LNP raid on Senator Conroy if they get powers they are not backwards in using it
zoidlord,
Have you trademarked the phrase? I just looked and you have to trademark it before you own the copyright to it.
Not much sympathy for the gold miners in the West Australian today. Alston editorial page cartoon has a gold mining couple at home wailing about the gold tax and now only being able to afford 9kt instead of 18kt gold taps in the bathroom, having to get a smaller chandelier and a lower class of seats to the Maldives this year.
InsidersABC: On #Insiders, @barriecassidy interviews @DanielAndrewsMP. On the panel: @latingle, David Marr & @PhillipCoorey. Sunday 9AM. @abcnews @ABCTV
guytaur,
You are jumping the gun somewhat.
Anyway, that’s the last I am going to say on the subject. I want to go for a walk. I’m sure Daniel Andrews will be asked about the subject extensively on Insiders on Sunday. : )
C@tmomma @ #1478 Friday, October 6th, 2017 – 2:39 pm
I’m happy to accept that wherever I go and whatever I do there’s a very, very, incredibly small chance that I might meet some sort of violent end. And I’m happy to enjoy the full spectrum of civil liberties, including privacy, free speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom from search, seizure, or surveillance without a warrant having been obtained first.
I’m also happy to deal with terrorists in precisely the same way I deal with sharks; if and when I see one, which I almost certainly never will, I’ll either come up with something or die. I would much rather be maybe killed by a terrorist someday than surrender my civil liberties to the state and still be maybe or maybe not killed by a terrorist someday.
I’m just looking at the historical data. There can be basically no gain because historically there’s basically nothing to gain. As noted, a 100% perfect system would have saved no more than 5 lives over the past 20 years. That’s 0.000025% of the population, or 0.00000125% per annum.
And no system is 100% perfect. Hell, if I’m a terrorist and I know facial recognition scanners are everywhere, the first thing I do is add “Halloween mask” or “make-up kit” or “balaclava” or perhaps even “dark sunglasses and wig” to my bag of terrorist things and I’ve completely defeated the facial recognition system.
I don’t see how anyone can claim any level of confidence that the proposed changes will be effective at thwarting a deliberate and planned attack. If someone is planning an attack and they know there’s surveillance, they’ll plan a way around the surveillance. To stop them you’d have to do it the traditional way, with warrants and intercepts/wiretaps and preemptive action.
jacksongs: Communications Minister Mitch Fifield. Cufflinks. From Foxtel. A week after media reform. Really? pic.twitter.com/TytEUMCOuS
‘The exact same thing it said about metadata laws. We still have no safeguards around them either.’
Nonsense. If anything, people’s privacy is more protected now than it was before the metadata laws came into place. Beforehand, there were basically no restrictions on how metadata could be used.
Zoomster
Before then a warrant was needed.
Otherwise it was breach of the recording devices and surveillance Act.