The final Essential Research result for 2017 (actually released yesterday, but who’s keeping score at this time of year) has the Coalition gaining a point on two-party preferred for the second week in a row, reducing the Labor lead to 53-47. They’re also up two on the primary vote to 37%, with Labor steady on 38%, the Greens down one to 9% and One Nation steady on 7%.
Essential closes the year with a particularly interesting series of supplementary findings, one of which is that only 29% approve of tax cuts to medium and large businesses, with 54% opposed. On political donations, overwhelming support is recorded for immediate disclosure of donations (84% versus 6%) and politicians’ meetings with companies donors and unions (82% versus 5%), very strong support for a ban on foreign donations (67% to 16%), capping donations at $5000 (59% to 20%) and banning donations from companies and unions (58% to 22%), but opposition to banning donations altogether and replacing them with public funding (30% to 50%).
Another series of generalised questions on how things have been going over the past year suggest Australians are feeling a good deal more positive than they have at any time since this annual series began in 2013. In particular, there are greatly improved perceptions on the state of the economy; neutral but improved ones on respondents’ personal financial situations; greatly improved, but still somewhat negative ones on how “the average Australian” has fared; and a view on “Australian politics in general” that remains highly negative, but is still greatly improved. Included for the first time is a question on “the planet”, with 20% consider to have had a good year versus 42% for bad.
guytaur
You’re doing it again – what is the ‘job thing’ I want to argue?
Lizzie:
Ah, of course, it would have to be some self-entitled nobody with no stake in whether federal Labor is elected or not.
“I think the next federal election will be in August/ September 2019”
That would require a half Senate election for Senators whose terms expire 30/6/2019. To avoid that, the election would need to be held by mid May. Then you’ve got the Budget around that time.
Still, Malcolm had proved creative in determining the timing of Budgets and elections.
Jackol
…and that’s part of the message of the original article I posted – don’t use discussions about a UBI to distract from the real discussion, which is the future of welfare.
We’d be better off discussing the ways the present system can be improved.
Massola and integrity are inversely related.
zoomster
You said that someone would not want to leave their high paying job to be on UBI alone. Thats the job thing.
Muskiemp
😆
And see also Sharri Markson at 10.28.
@davidwh – not a double dissolution. A half senate only election.
Turnbulls last ‘brilliant scheme’ messed up the timing of the Senate elections.
Australia needs to hold:
A senate election by 18 May 2019 at the latest, and
A HoR election by 2 Nov 2019 at the latest.
Most people are assuming that these two elections will be held simultaneously (because that’s what almost always happens and apparently the few exceptions went poorly for the government).
Therefore, your statement that “I think the next federal election will be in August/ September 2019” can only be true under one of two circumstances:
1) Turnbull holds a half senate election (for the 36 Senators with 3 year terms, plus all 4 from the territories), some time before 18 May, or
2) Turnbull declares martial law, suspends democracy, ignores the courts, crushes the protests.
Are you predicting 1) or 2)?
zoomster
UBI is a form of welfare. Its not a distraction from discussion about welfare at all. Its a discussion on how to make welfare and society fairer. Including redefining what welfare is.
guytaur
‘You said that someone would not want to leave their high paying job to be on UBI alone’
Um, yeah.
So what did your reply have to do with that?
One thing we know for sure: you can always rely on Turnbull to create a mess out of an issue most people would handle with ease!
guytaur
And, as I pointed out, ‘fairer’ isn’t necessarily better.
It might be ‘fairer’ for someone on a disability or a single parent with three children to be on a UBI, but it isn’t necessarily ‘better’ – unless you tweak a UBI in precisely the way we tweak welfare, in which case there’s not much of an argument for a UBI, unless you simply want to redistribute money to give more to those who don’t need it.
If Turnbull left the House of Reps election until after the half-Senate election(s), it would be a sign of expecting to loose. It would also be poor for the Coalition in the Senate composition because the half-Senate election(s) would be giant by-elections passing verdict on the current government.
An early House of Reps election would however leave the half-Senate elections to be by-elections under the Shorten Government, which may be better electorally for the Coalition.
zoomster
You are arguing as if the very thing that makes UBI work is a down side. The whole point is not to punish people for looking for work. The idea is to remove the stigma that if no work is available you are on a “scrapheap” beccause you can’t work.
The idea is that companies pay tax and that some of that tax pays that basic income but does not bar people trying for more.
Its a system of sharing the wealth that works with capitalism not against it,
Lower Blue Mountains, west of Sydney. It was 37C at 9am this morning.
#WeatherOnPB
zoomster –
And my point is that at the moment there seems no prospect that there can be any such discussion.
The politics are just flowing in the wrong direction. Where is the pushback from the public to the constant attacks on welfare? There is very little. I don’t think having a less aggressively hostile welfare system comes anywhere in the top issues of concern to voters, and if the voters don’t care (or actively want the crackdowns and moral posturing, which it seems a large chunk of the population do) then of course the politicians are not going to move or even be part of any such discussion.
And that’s the structural aspect of the UBI which could work in its favour – it’s not about dividing people into ‘us’ and ‘them’ – everyone gets it, unconditionally. No checks to see whether a particular person ‘deserves’ it, no concept that someone is abusing the system by receiving it. The nature of the politics changes, necessarily, and defuses a lot of the negativity and potential political advantage.
That’s not reason enough by itself to justify a UBI, but to me it is a strong argument in its favour.
But sure, let me know when we’re having that discussion – I wouldn’t want to miss it.
zoomster
Your whole argument rests on the old idea of work. That people are there to work for the bosses and that work in and of itself is the goal.
If we have to tax companies at 90% to achieve UBI they can still be profitable and owners still have more wealth than a basic income.
Think different.
I wonder what “Grubby deals” Malcolm made with the National party and the hard right to get the reshuffle done.
Just walked to Ashfield station. Don’t know the temp but it was bloody uncomfortable. Serves me right for going in to the office late.
#weatheronpb
Ah! Shorten doing deals with the “gruby” CFMEU. Is that like someone doing deals with Gina or an Indian business man.
Jackol
Even in the shrunk down verison of the Finland trial of using only those on welfare it reduces a lot of the us and them aspect. To attack social security under UBI you have to attack age pensions.
It’s currently 37-39 across most of Sydney, even Observatory Hill is on 37.3. Those in Harbourside mansions get to suffer this time.
#weatheronpb
If the coalition hierarchy is convinced the next election is unwinnable, they could push for a HoR-only election early next year (say, March) to force the incoming Labor government into a short first term. The drawback for them would be that Labor could then call a half-senate election just a few months later (early August) while still in honeymoon mode.
Canberra – cool change is saying “I think I can I think I can”.
Cloudy and lots of wind but not really cooling down much.
Hopefully there’s more cool change to come.
#WeatheronPB
guytaur
‘Your whole argument rests on the old idea of work. ‘
No, you seem to have decided what I’m arguing and addressed that, rather than looking at what I’m actually saying, so I’ll let you continue to squabble with yourself.
Jackol
If we can’t get the present system reformed, we have bugger all chance of bringing in a whole new system. If the present power brokers are undermining the present system, there’s no way they’d introduce a whole new one unless it benefited them even more.
Unions grubby? Compared to who or what? Financial Planners who work in banks? The big miners? Big Coal? The real estate industry? Adani? The gaming industry?
Having a senate and house out of order is not a good option. It gives mid term kickings to the government. That goes for the coalition or labor governments.
Overcast, 16 degrees and zero wind.
#weatheronPB
VE,
The earliest half Senate election could be August 4, 2018. The Government are talking tax cuts in the next Budget. My guess is that a Reps election and half Senate election will be held around this time.
zoomster
Its you trying to shift goalposts. You are arguing a case that doesn’t exist as your replies regarding the article I posted show.
I have not posted the whole article to avoid copyright exemptions. The article does address all these things in a sensible way.
You don’t like it so say the author does not say the things it says it does.
Same with my replies to you. You don’t like my replies so therefore I am not addressing your arguments.
Turnbull’s majority:
Survived a by election with a 20% margin.
Survived a by election with a 10% margin.
Can it survive a reshuffle?
“The Australian Financial Review reported the move may have backfired, with (MP for Hinkler) Pitt reportedly telling colleagues he was considering his options and a possible move to the crossbench.”
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/dec/20/barnaby-joyce-damage-control-nationals-mp-keith-pitt-cabinet-reshuffle
I accept that mid-term polling is often harder on governments, and that Howard won a few elections after starting the election year badly, but let’s wait and see what the polls are saying at the next campaign before assuming their trajectory.
Also if we are going to cite history, the more recent history is probably a more reliable pointer.
Recent history is that the polls have become far more stable. Here on PB someone mentioned that in the past Newspoll used to weight the more reactionary sections of it’s sample precisely because it gave the appearance of the poll following the mood of events. (Sorry I can’t give credit, I have forgotten who posted that).
Also, during the last campaign there was no ‘narrowing’ or ‘shy Tory’ effect. Using the final polls of the 2016 campaign, our respected pseph William Bowe estimated the L-NP would get 80 seats, and Kevin Bonham estimated 79. The L-NP did worse than the final polls were suggesting.
The other point is that Turnbull doesn’t govern the way Howard did. While Howard would generally save all his goodies for the election year, Turnbull has been campaigning hard for a ‘Newspoll win’ since the moment his government was sworn in. The budget was largely received as an ‘election year budget’.
OK. The ALP will have Feeney to start the year, and he will probably lose his seat to the Greens, and the MSM will have a field day. But in the grand scheme of things I can’t see how that will alter the result of the next election.
I agree it would be very unwise to write off the Lib’s, but let’s not panic either. Turnbull would swap his odds with the ALP in a flash.
Everyone talks about the weather on PB. But, no one ever does anything about it!
guytaur
You don’t even understand what I’ve been saying, as your replies make clear, so it’s pointless trying to have a discussion with you.
zoomster – but in the case of UBI there are a different set of political actors. The Zuckerbergs of the world should be treated with a great deal of suspicion in terms of their motivations, for sure, however it is also a potential opportunity.
The motives of the new big end of town for supporting a UBI may be self serving, but that doesn’t mean that that support can’t be leveraged to achieve an outcome that benefits everyone. Win win and all that.
GG
I knew my political activism was getting out of control when, after a spell of five 40 degree days in a row, I found myself wondering who I should write to about it…
Zoomster
There you go again. You don’t like my points of argument so intead try and say I don’t understand them.
Well you can try that with me but you can’t with the article you are trying to shift goal posts away from.
You don’t like the arguments so you say they are not what is being said.
Jackol
If the far right and corporate types have the power and influence to undermine the present system, then they have the power and influence to make sure that any other system which is introduced is similarly f*cked.
As people accept incremental changes more easily than wholesale ones, fixing what’s already in place is always easier than introducing a whole new something else.
zooomster
In your reply to Jackol you outline exactly Finland’s approach in its trial on UBI
Need some rain otherwise I can’t drive the stakes into the ground to keep the inflatable nativity scene stable.
Steve, I don’t think Maladept needed to make deals to do the reshuffle. It’s just a long-standing tradition that the leader of the Farmers and Miners’ Party nominates his own favourites for a somewhat disproportionate share of the Ministries. So all Mal had to do was the usual – stand back and let others make the decisions for him. He’s very good at that.
On the matter of the next election’s timing, I am expecting Turnbull to go for the most bizarre legal-loophole kind of option, just to show how cunning he is. This will especially be the case if it’s an option that everyone who knows what they’re talking about tries to warn him is a bad idea.
Separate elections for the HoR and Senate are a real possibility.
Possum Comitatus @Pollytics
3h3 hours ago
Why does every description of internal Victorian ALP party games sound like a rejected Star Wars script
zoomster –
And the current approach, as I outlined, has seen incremental change only towards bashing and victimizing all welfare recipients. There is no engaged discussion about walking this stuff back.
We are incrementally changing into a much worse system. “Fixing” is not even on the agenda.
In Adelaide it is cool with a nice breeze. We had some rain which my veges and roses appreciated.
#weatherandgardensonPB
*Tries to visualise an inflatable nativity scene*
Hot. Not too humid. Sunny.
#weatherinmackellar
#weatheronPB
Yes, Fess, I’m having the same problem!
Sydney is like a bloody sauna.
#weatheronPB
The point that Finland trial proves is not about cost. Thats irrelevant to what the point of the trial is about. The Fins do not have problems with taxing companies.
The point the Finland trial proves that you stop bashing those on welfare and give then a real opportunity to do even part time work and not be punished for it people will do so.
That trial proves that bashing welfare recipients and making them jump through hoops makes things worse for them and for society.