The first ReachTEL poll of the year for Sky News is one of the Coalition’s better results of recent times, with Labor’s two-party lead down from 53-47 to 52-48 from the previous poll on November 28. On the primary vote, the Coalition is up a point to 34%; Labor is steady on 36%; the Greens are steady on 10%; and One Nation is down one to 8%.
Malcolm Turnbull also records a strong improvement on his personal ratings, being rated good by 30% (up six), average by 37% (up two) and poor by 32% (down eight). Bill Shorten is on 31% good (up one), 32% average (down four) and 36% poor (up three-and-a-half). Turnbull has increased his lead on ReachTEL’s all-or-nothing preferred prime minister measure, which typically produces closer results than other pollsters: last time it was 52-48, this time it’s 54-46.
The poll also finds 32% support for a cut in the company tax rate for businesses with a turnover of more than $50 million, with 44% opposed. Thirty-nine per cent of respondents rated that trade deals were good for employment, compared with 20% for poor; but 49% said Labor should vote against the Trans Pacific Partnership if it “doesn’t protect jobs”, with 20% taking the contrary view.
I’m not exactly sure what the field date was for the poll, but ReachTEL uses robopolling with samples of typically around 2300.
In other news, Tasmanian Premier Will Hodgman today called an election for March 3, which means there will be no clash with South Australia this time, as there was in 2010 and 2014. I hope to have a full election guide posted later today, so stay tuned.
Boerwar @ #242 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 9:41 pm
Cilic just broke back. 🙁
“Happy to have a referendum. You would lose.”
Probably. I don’t see it as a priority, but we should be able to tidy up our Constitution as the nation and the wider world evolve. S44 would be a prime candidate after the leftover racial privisions.
Unfortunately, the last time this was tried (1988), it was sunk by an opportunistic Opposition. The same would have happened had the local Government referendum gone ahead in 2013. The IPA were very concerned about Federal involvement in garbage collection (well, they gave no other reason) and leaned on the Opposition to undermine the planned referendum after they had voted for it.
Pegasus @ #250 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 9:50 pm
There are ugly totalitarian elements on both extremes.
Just on Assange, there was a Guardian article published the other day about how he’s been ‘treated’ by UK doctors who have concluded he is being “denied” appropriate medical care befitting his confinement.
They were your typical representatives of the Specialty: Bleeding Hearts. 🙂
There are ugly totalitarian elements on both extremes.
Agreed. The horseshoe theory has validity to the extent that extreme right and extreme left regimes are both highly authoritarian.
In fact, maybe North Korea is a supreme example, effectively a Communist monarchy with pseudo religious mythology surrounding the “Dear Leader”. And a kleptocracy like any fascist regime.
Steve777 @ #255 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 9:58 pm
A choice between Hitler and Stalin would not be one I would wish to have to have made.
Peg
Why are you surprised?
Both a desperate Hanson and and an equally desperate Di Natale are prepared to bastardize minorities for political gain = classic horseshoe.
Sooner or later the minors figure out that 90% of the voters will never support them.
And they jump the shark.
Same little fringe parties.
doyley @ #162 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 5:11 pm
The most important question of s44 is whether or not a candidate is too stupid and/or lazy to make sure they comply with the constitution as it stands.
If they can’t be bothered checking, or if they think they can get away with it, they are unfit to be a member of parliament.
Strictly, it starts on the 1st of March.
True, but seasons are just conventions. The weather will do what it wants. I was referring to a lengthy cool spell predicted to start on the 31st. I also predict that one of the usual suspects in the Daily Telecrap will be writing a column in early February declaring that climate change has been disproved because of the cool Summer weather.
Boerwar,
Surprised? I understand your need to project your emotional states onto me.
Looks like it’s all over Red Rover for Australia.
#cricketonPB
Boewar,
According to you then….Classic horseshoe – Coalition and Labor’s bastardisation of refugees and asylum seekers for political gain.
DTT and Guytaur are still vehement Assange defenders. But everyone else that I’ve noticed sees him for the shallow charlatan that he is.
Make of that what you will.
Confessions @ #263 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 10:14 pm
But most cannot be bothered wasting time and energy obsessing about him. That is confined to a few such as you.
Confessions
DTT And Guytaur?
As they say, with friends like that who needs enemies.
Well played England. Deserved winners.
#cricketonPB
rossmcg
The Ecuadorian Govt recently applied for the UK to accept Assange as a member of the embassies ‘Diplomatic staff’ in an attempt to get Assange on a plane without being arrested.
It was declined based on this below which the Ecuadorians were hoping the UK would ignore –
http://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/conventions/9_1_1961.pdf
Assange had no official function at the time of his offence.
The UK authorities still want to see him in court over his ‘bail jumping.
This coming week will mark the 50th anniversary of the Tet Offensive.
A lot of regs, nashos and reos fought hard.
And some uplifting news, Truffles wants Australia to be a leading merchant of death.
.
“Australia unveils plan to become one of world’s top 10 arms exporters”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/28/australia-unveils-plan-to-become-one-of-worlds-top-10-arms-exporters
Interesting program on ABC TV: “the Super Rich and Us”. One of its propositions is that policies adopted by Britain in the 1980s were deliberately geared to get people in debt. People with big debts don’t agitate, don’t go on strike.
I have often thought the same thing. Take housing prices. They enrich the few and crush everyone else. Someone working 2 jobs to pay a mortgage doesn’t make waves. Ditto transferring health and education costs onto families by running down public provision and encouraging private rent seekers to pounce. Ditto pokies, machines that virtually funnel cash out of workers’ pockets into those of billionaires.
I completely disagree with anyone who wants to cut our politicians any slack over s.44.
I’m happy to give our politicians the same slack that they give Centrelink clients: NONE. The requirements imposed on Centrelink clients are several orders of magnitude more onerous than that applied to our politicians, and very few Centrelink customers have the resources available to them that candidates for an election do.
IIRC there is a proposal in the works to force any recipient of Centrelink to have someone they know verify their relationship status as part of receiving their Centrelink payment. Given our politicians see fit to impose this requirement on the weakest in our society before receiving benefits, among many others, I have no problem whatsoever with the requirements of s.44 being imposed on them.
There is nobody in our society who can decide a given law does not apply to them, whatever the merits of their reasoning. A Centrelink recipient who had incorrectly received a benefit as a result of making a misleading statement to Centrelink would be at high risk of facing serious criminal charges, and a defence along the lines that the law in question was ridiculous, or that they felt they complied with the law, or that the law needed to be changed and should not apply to them would rightly be laughed out of court.
Almost all people know who their parents and grandparents are, and the country they were born in, and for those people, given the gravitas of being an elected representative, it is not unreasonable for them to check their potential dual citizenship status every three years. Let’s keep in mind, that for most, the information on dual citizenship is readily available and the countries concerned provide an online checklist.
We need to stop making excuses for laziness based on partisan interest. Anyone, Labor, Liberal, Green or otherwise who signs their nomination form without having first undertaken even the most basic check of their potential dual citizenship status should be forced to repay any benefit they’ve incorrectly received and be referred to the DPP for charges related to their false declaration.
If our politicians feel that s.44, or any other clause of the constitution is wrong and should be changed, then it is up to them to build the case for change and take it to a referendum, not to disregard it on the basis of their personal opinion of the clause.
Steve777
Of course it was. A compliant workforce has always been the goal of the masters
Steve777:
Where do those burdened by crippling student debts fall into those categories?
An expensive day out. One of our ‘Growler’ aircraft has suffered an engine failure and fire in the US.
A General Electric F414-GE-400 engine cost $3.71 million (in 2015) as a ‘spare part’. I’d think the actual cost to us will double as the work to install will have to be done in the US and there will be other incidental parts needed to get it home –
http://australianaviation.com.au/2018/01/raaf-growler-catches-fire-after-nellis-afb-takeoff-incident/
This stance presupposes that there is naturally or automatically a binary stance on the issue.
For me it isn’t ‘cutting lazy MPs slack’ over S44, but refining the clause and reforming it so that it is consistent with contemporary practices and understanding of citizenship.
It’s ridiculous to assume that an MP who was born and raised here, always understanding themselves to be Australian first and foremost and who has been an MP for years can suddenly have questions about their legitimacy to hold office under a technicality they may not have even been aware of but has suddenly flown onto their radar.
Grimace
Good post, and the advice to nominees only makes reference to exemptions for those where renunciation has proven impossible. Nothing about put in a valid application, no need to wait for result.
Where do those burdened by crippling student debts fall into those categories?
They’re copping it from all sides. Jobs that used to require a high school certificate now demand degrees. So a young person studies for 3 or 4 years, graduates with tens of thousands of dollars in debt, can’t get a job in their chosen field unless they go for a Master’s or do other courses, face abominations like unpaid internships and zero hour contracts, can’t get any job without contacts, any job that they do get had no security.
I don’t know why they’re not coming after us with pitchforks.
And finding a workable, practical solution to the minority of MPs who may find themselves falling foul of the clause once they contest and win election to parliament. Even if they’ve served for some years.
Steve777:
Yes I agree with all that.
I’m so glad I was a young person when I was, and not now.
“We need to stop making excuses for laziness based on partisan interest. Anyone, Labor, Liberal, Green or otherwise who signs their nomination form without having first undertaken even the most basic check of their potential dual citizenship status should be forced to repay any benefit they’ve incorrectly received and be referred to the DPP for charges related to their false declaration.”
Exactly.
As someone who has dealt with Centrelink over this robo-debt fiasco/scandal/malevolent attack on the defenceless, any talk of defending pollies who can’t manage to provide basic information gets short shrift from me.
It’s a good look for the Australian Open to bring out past Australian World Champions like Ashley Cooper to be the actual presenter of the trophies to the winner and runner-up.
Cooper won 4 tournaments that later became ‘Grand Slams’ in 1957-58 and was rated world number one in both those years.
Confessions @ #275 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 9:48 pm
And perhaps that should happen. But if it does, it should happen the proper way, by amending the Constitution to specify the new rules. Not by having the High Court reinterpret it in a way that makes words mean the exact opposite of what they actually say.
Confessions @ #275 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 7:48 pm
My stance presupposes nothing. The candidate nomination form specifically draws attention to s.44, and for most candidates, the information on whether they are dual citizens, or are potentially dual citizens is readily available. If a candidate chooses to disregard the advice on the nomination form to check their potential dual citizenship status, then they deserve everything they get when it is subsequently revealed that they are a dual citizen.
For every politician so far who has lost their seat due to s.44, and those currently before the High Court (or about to be), the most basic of enquiries using Google (or similar) would have revealed they were either definitely or potentially dual citizens. None have come unstuck as result of an obscure technicality or recent change to the law of a foreign country.
It is completely irrelevant what nationality understands themselves to be. No other person gets to disregard a law that is applicable to them on the basis that their personal opinion is that the law should not apply to them.
a r:
A referendum would ultimately deal with the matter.
grimace:
I’m not necessarily thinking about the current crop of MPs who are before the courts, but those that come later.
Reform is the sensible option, not the radical option.
Apply Centrelink standards to politicians’ travel and other entitlements by all means. The sooner the better. While we’re at it, apply preservation age entitlements to their pensions. But S44 is a loose end left over from a bygone era that needs to be tidied up.
Confessions @ #278 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 7:50 pm
The workable, practical solution to people who have made false declarations on important government paperwork resulting in them getting substantial financial benefits to which they are not entitled is repayment of the ill-gotten gains, bankruptcy and a lengthy stint in gaol for fraud. Just like what would happen to a Centrelink recipient.
Confessions @ #285 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 11:19 pm
And as has been pointed out on more than one occasion, the only mechanism is by referendum and such a proposition would be highly likely to lose.
Confessions @ #285 Sunday, January 28th, 2018 – 8:19 pm
I agree that the part of s.44 dealing with dual citizenship needs to be modernised. I very much doubt such a proposal would get up at a referendum.
grimace – The requirements are not that onerous that politicians should be “up’ed” the priority list.
Holding a referundum an expensive exercise so they should just comply with the law until it can be reviewed and proposed along with some other more important change.
But that they should only be Australian Citizens (or can show they’ve done their best to be so) sounds sensible to the average voter so I think it would not pass.
grimace:
Prosecution is fine for people who knowingly duped the system and lied on their applications for candidacy.
But that’s not fair for those who genuinely had no idea their candidacy was not in accordance with S44 requirements.
The broad parameters for s 44 have been known since Sykes v Clearly, DECIDED 25 YEARS AGO.
There is no excuse.
“who has been an MP for years can suddenly have questions about their legitimacy to hold office under a technicality they may not have even been aware of but has suddenly flown onto their radar.”
this is where Trumble, Brandis and a willing and foolish press gallery conned many who might think they are smart, the Constitution has been around a week or two it hasn’t suddenly flown onto anyone’s radar – would be embarrassing to fall for a Brandis lie
“But that’s not fair for those who genuinely had no idea their candidacy was not in accordance with S44 requirements.”
the old ignorance is a full excuse theory, difficult to understand why courts the world over haven’t gone for that, “I didn’t know i was supposed to pay taxes on that fair cop gov, and that tax act, well as you know it is two acts, neither of them make any sense to me at all, so complex, and have you read that anti-hybrid legislation FMD that is convoluted …”
“oh ok you are fine, carry on”
My wife is decidedly unhappy with 7 Perth. They failed to show the post match interview with Federer. They did say it would be on the 7 Tennis app, but no it isn’t.
I tend to agree with grimace’s core point above. The often bungled indignities politicians have inflicted on Centrelink recipients since the mid-90s are worthy of a Royal Commission at the minimum, and new ways of humiliating recipients continue to be found at every turn. Yet a very large number of politicians – dozens, at least – have made such poor efforts at proving themselves to be eligible during the Section 44 disclosure process that it is hard to avoid the conclusion that if they themselves were on Centrelink many would be breached within a month.
However, it is a serious problem that there are some ancestral backgrounds (like all these lazy dual-citizen Brits) for which checking and correctly one’s s.44 status is pretty easy, and some for which it is fiendishly difficult. That’s the part which at the least needs reform, otherwise parties will become reluctant to take punts on people with complex ethnic backgrounds in case they turn out to be ineligible.
KB
I’d certainly agree with that. For some it’s easy. For some all they can is try and make sure they can accurately document what they’ve done in case challenged.
The ‘easies’ should be whacked if they are too lazy in sorting out UK and NZ citizenship problems.
It’s an error to classify the Gs as a party of the “radical left”. They are a centre/bourgeois party.
Brexit. Trump with Piers Morgan. You’d think he’d learn not to make comment on things he doesn’t need to and avoid being involved.
But the lure of getting his ‘head’ on TV as many times a day is impossible for him to pass up.
http://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-42850362/trump-i-would-have-taken-a-tougher-stand-in-getting-out