Essential Research: 52-48 to Labor

Both parties up on the primary vote in the latest Essential poll, which concurs with Newspoll in finding Malcolm Turnbull’s personal ratings edging upwards and Bill Shorten’s edging down.

The latest fortnightly Essential Research poll has Labor’s two-party lead unchanged at 52-48, and The Guardian report provides full primary votes for a change: both major parties are up two, the Coalition to 40% and Labor to 37%, with the Greens steady on 11% and One Nation down one to 6%, with the “others” vote presumably well down. Also featured are Essential’s monthly leadership ratings, which tell a remarkably similar story to Newspoll: Malcolm Turnbull’s approval is up one to 43%, his best result since March 2016, and his disapproval is down two to 40%, his best since the eve of the July 2016 election; while Bill Shorten is respectively down two to 31% and up one to 47%. Turnbull’s lead as preferred prime minister is out to 42-25, compared with 41-27 last time.

The Essential poll also finds only 15% of respondents expect the government’s national energy guarantee will reduce power prices, compared with 22% for increasing them (down nine since the same question was asked last October) and 38% for making no difference (up seven). The government’s proposed tax cuts for big companies have 41% support, up four on a month or so ago, with 36% opposed, down one. Further on company tax cuts, The Australian has a comprehensive set of further results from the weekend’s Newspoll, which find respondents tending to be persuaded that the cuts will be good for employment (50% responded cuts would create more jobs versus 36% who said they would not, and 43% believed repealing them would put jobs at risk versus 37% saying they would not), yet 52% supported Bill Shorten saying cuts for businesses with $10 million to $50 million turnover would be repeated if won office, versus only 37% opposed.

UPDATE: Full report from Essential Research here.

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.

2,074 comments on “Essential Research: 52-48 to Labor”

Comments Page 5 of 42
1 … 4 5 6 … 42

  3. AE: “In sum, Labor can say to both its base and the swinging voters in the middle that Labor’s tax policy is as good or better than the LNP’s in terms of their own Household Budgets AND can win those voters over with the massive rollouts in Government services and programs that those voters love and expect a Labor Government to provide.”

    Thanks for the interesting response to my post. But, if the strategy is as you’ve put it, then why couldn’t that be the message too, rather than the forthright rhetoric we’ve heard lately from Shorten and co which, if not exactly talk of a “class war”, has a fair tinge of “us against them” in it.

    Unless things have changed dramatically, swinging voters haven’t traditionally thought of themselves as “workers” battling “the big end of town.” Some of them are currently doing it a bit tough due to high house prices. And I suspect that a somewhat larger group feels that they are doing it tough because they haven’t had much in the way of pay rises recently. But my suspicion is that most of these swinging voters, especially my second category, still have the “aspirational” mindset.

    It wouldn’t be too hard to deliver a message about trying to improve the budgets of the households of middle Australia which doesn’t have any sense of class war about it. But Labor seems to have consciously turned up the rhetorical heat. So, I can only conclude, as I have suggested before, that this has something largely to do with wanting to drag MT’s personal wealth into the debate and draw a connection between him and the wicked banks, etc, etc.

    To me, that looks like a rather risky strategy to run against a government that was already struggling. Anyway, we’ll soon find out whether or not it works.

  4. Peg – rubbish

    Any politician other than the ‘libertarian publicity seekers’ would call it out and have – public pressure had nothing to do with it.

    FMD the way people try to spin stuff is, at times, completely absurd

  6. Meher – you likely didn’t hear Shorten’s speech on Sunday but he was at pains to stress that ALPs policies were aimed at lifting ALL Aussies, not just a particular group.

    He said it several times.

    Unfortunately, as usual, our media neglected to show anyone that bit.

  7. Van Badham
    ‏
    @vanbadham

    Why, HELLO, Mr My-Wife’s-Small-Business from #qanda. Do you think maybe you should’ve declared you were a Liberal Party activist before fauxing up your concern-o-meter to attack Labor’s @CatherineKingMP last night? You just look SO PLEASED WITH YOURSELF in these snaps! #auspol

    (Sorry, I seem to have lost the knack of posting from Twitter. The 3 pcs show him with James Patterson, Julie Bishop and Jim Moylan. )

  8. Winning elections is now a Right-Wing Majoritarian (whatever the F that means) bad thing?

    Someone let Bill Shorten know that he’s not allowed to win because it’s Right Wing Majoritarian – and he doesn’t want to be that.

  9. Lizzie

    The Qanda audience from time to time has people that are clearly plants if anyone does a litle bit of digging. Its not exclusive to Liberals, there has been a few Greens and Labor one about over the years.

  10. IoM
    I assume that the producers would have a list of current issues that they would like covered, ask for questions, vet them and feed them to Jones to call for as and when required by the flow of the discussion. I also assume that the parties would try to game the show by getting people in to put up the ‘right’ questions.

  12. Lizzie

    Just another example of why I decided years ago QandA was not worth my time.

    And the guy is lucky he is a liberal plant. A labor supporter who did that would have had the media on his doorstep and going through his bins at dawn this morning.

  13. Ides of March

    I suppose there’s a fair chance that “enthusiasts” will turn up with a question, but that guy was very obviously not there for a discussion. His face said nothing would persuade him and now we know why. I mean, once you’re a ‘friend’ of Molan and Bishop…

  16. Jen:-

    “Meher – you likely didn’t hear Shorten’s speech on Sunday but he was at pains to stress that ALPs policies were aimed at lifting ALL Aussies, not just a particular group.

    He said it several times.

    Unfortunately, as usual, our media neglected to show anyone that bit.”

    I was going to post along those lines as well, but you beat me to it. The ‘problem’ is that the outrageousness of the Governemnt’s policy to give $50 odd billion in tax cuts to genuinely big business (including $7 billion to banks) is something that cannot be ignored. Of course the CPG and MSM editorised a 35 minute speech to only reflect those points, because ‘it fits’ with their own narrative and relentless LNP campaigning. That doesn’t mean that Bill and Labor can or should stay mute as the LNP trucks out billions in lost revenue to big business.

    In my view, once the actual GE campaign is on, Labor will get more airtime and the ability to editorise Labor down to a simplistic ‘class warfare’ narrative will largely dissipate. At that point Bill stops being simply the ‘leader of the opposition’ and becomes the ‘alternative PM’ with an equal platform and standing during the campaign. I think that switch will have a profound impact as Labor ramps up the roll out of its war-chest.

  17. Shellbell @ #124 Tuesday, July 3rd, 2018 – 10:31 am

    [#1 has the potential to become an absolute circus, if things end up in court. The onus would be on Leyonhjelm to demonstrate that his imputations about SHY are accurate. Who knows what he’ll try?]

    He will probably have to pony up a few hundred grand to lawyers to act for him first. Maybe he can get some crowd funding going

    Shell bell

    Growing up I was told by my journo father that to impute a woman’s honour was a libel suite about to happen and be easily won.. Therefore it was avoided like the plague.

    Is that still the case?

  20. Lizzie

    There is a few people in a similar boat on other sides of the fence. A couple of weeks ago there was clearly a person in the young Greens, previously I saw a questioner from Young Labor.

  21. Bean it is, to the eternal shame of the AEC.

    By Sally Whyte

    The Australian Electoral Commission has confirmed that the ACT’s new federal electorate will be named Bean, after war historian Charles Bean.

    The commission had received dozens of objections to the electorate bearing the name, due to anti-semitic comments Bean made about General John Monash during World War I. In its determination, the commission said the decision was made “following extensive deliberations”.

    “The augmented Electoral Commission voted 4-2 in favour of adopting the Redistribution Committee’s proposal to name the southern electoral division ‘Bean’, to recognise Charles Edwin Woodrow Bean,” the statement said.

  22. Rick Wilson sitting on something

    Rick Wilson‏Verified account @TheRickWilson

    If this other thing I’m hearing about Cohen and RUS folks is true, Trump is going to shoot blood from his…wherever…very soon now.

  23. Shellbell

    I think Andrew has answered my question

    So the public interest test still holds strong – thank bloody goodness.

    Abbott would HAVE to come out against leynhelm, given that he sued and WON against Bob Ellis for something similar.

  24. “Socrates

    Accuseds don’t choose the court they are prosecuted in”

    It’s a little bit more complicated than that when it comes to civil litigation. Cross vesting legislation generally permits a plaintiff to commence proceedings in any one of 8 state/territory jurisdictions but there is an ability for the Supreme Court in each to send the case to another jurisdiction if in the opinion of the court the other jurisdiction is more suitable.

    The last time I practiced in defo law (nearly a decade ago, so I’m by no means 100% current in my knowledge of the nitty grity of relevant procedures) the ACT Supreem Court was considered to advantageous to litigants, especially plaintiffs. In the current context, involving a SA Senator as plaintiff, a NSW Senator as defendent (and their connection being a work relationship centred in Canberra), potentially the Canberra bureaus of certain media outlets as co-defendants or at least providing relevant witnesses, the ACT Supreme Court would seem to be an appropriate forum to commence proceedings. Alternatively, the Federal Court of Australia would have jurisdiction given that the asserted demotions were broadcast.

  25. jenauthor @ #204 Tuesday, July 3rd, 2018 – 12:09 pm

    Peg – rubbish

    Any politician other than the ‘libertarian publicity seekers’ would call it out and have – public pressure had nothing to do with it.

    FMD the way people try to spin stuff is, at times, completely absurd

    Especially, Pegasus, for and on behalf of the grubby Greens.

  26. ALP preselections in Victoria for the next federal election could be referred en masse to Labor's National Executive. https://t.co/bhSOdgzo1s— James Campbell (@J_C_Campbell) July 2, 2018

    Anyone who supports this is fundamentally destroying the notion of a rank-and-file member party. The Libs give their members a vote irrespective of the political pressure. Labor must do the same or the party will only further hollow out. Sitting MPs are protected by POSC #auspol https://t.co/kfx2CIL2PW— Josh Gilligan (@Joshuagilligan) July 3, 2018

  27. It looks like the RW (except Bernardi) has abandoned Leyonjhelm. Hadley’s replacement this morning condemned him outright and Turnbull has belatedly done likewise.

    If Leyonjhelm were to resign from the Senate (unlikely I know), his replacement could be Sam Kennard, no.2 on the LDP ticket for NSW. Any information on this person?

  28. Compact Crank @ #208 Tuesday, July 3rd, 2018 – 12:14 pm

    Winning elections is now a Right-Wing Majoritarian (whatever the F that means) bad thing?

    Someone let Bill Shorten know that he’s not allowed to win because it’s Right Wing Majoritarian – and he doesn’t want to be that.

    Oh, look who’s back! Have you found another misleading issue to rant about today, Cranky? 🙂

  29. citizen @ #227 Tuesday, July 3rd, 2018 – 12:47 pm

    It looks like the RW (except Bernardi) has abandoned Leyonjhelm. Hadley’s replacement this morning condemned him outright and Turnbull has belatedly done likewise.

    If Leyonjhelm were to resign from the Senate (unlikely I know), his replacement could be Sam Kennard, no.2 on the LDP ticket for NSW. Any information on this person?

    Scion of Kennard’s Hire empire, I presume.

  31. Ides of March

    I confess I hardly ever watch QandA now. T Jones irritates me when he tries to take over as the Inquisitor. Trioli is better from that point of view. I only watched last night because I couldn’t sleep!!

  32. Edwina

    We have a number of high powered people on this site – more doctors than unionists and several barristers. We have a few transport engineers too. Never assume there are no experts.

  33. sprocket_ says:
    Tuesday, July 3, 2018 at 12:44 pm
    Bean it is, to the eternal shame of the AEC.

    Bean will become my electorate. I expect to see lots of Mr Bean signs around at election time!

  36. Andrew and meher

    I probably do not agree with either of you fully but i would like to congratulate you both on a rational, well mannered and informative debate. this is why i bother to come to a blog of this kind

    Thankyou.

  38. Yeah, thought so. Kennards started out in Hire, moved into Self Storage.

    So, Sam Kennard is just another privileged old white guy who can afford to support a Libertarian agenda, ‘Free Speech’, and dismisses a social democratic agenda because he can afford to.

  40. Rexy and Peg seem obsessed with Shorten. You’d think a couple of ‘Greens’ might have an opinion on Malcolm and his government.. but no.

  41. George Megalogenis
    ‏
    George Megalogenis Retweeted Sky News Australia

    Has the PM thought this through? Imagine his next visit to Beijing or Moscow. “Sorry Mr. Prime Minister, your media say nasty things about our sovereign nation. But don’t worry, our journalists will cover your trip for the benefit of your wonderful people back home.”

  42. daretotread. @ #222 Tuesday, July 3rd, 2018 – 12:45 pm

    So the public interest test still holds strong – thank bloody goodness.

    A lot of people have made this assertion, however I can find nothing in the relevant legislation to back it up. What I could find, however, is this:

    Formerly in some states (such as NSW, Queensland, Tasmania and the ACT) truth was only a defence if you could prove that a ‘public interest’ was served by publishing the defamatory words. This requirement has been dropped from the Uniform Defamation Law and now there is a defence if the defendant can prove that the defamatory imputations are substantially true.

    https://www.thenewsmanual.net/Resources/medialaw_in_australia_02.html

    Perhaps you’re remembering an aspect of the previous defamation law, which was replaced ca. 2005?

    The bottom line, with current legislation, appears to be that it’s not defamation if it’s true (and you can prove it).

  46. lizzie

    Ditto for rice – Deniliquin almost shut down entirely during the long drought, as no rice was being grown. Shepparton, on the other hand, kept on canning tomatoes.

    One of the problems we have when talking about the M-D is that different states have different definitions and arrangements, which leads to all sorts of anomalies. As water is (under the Constitution) a state responsibility, it’s a very hard issue to tackle.

    Howard proposed ‘buying’ water infrastructure from the states in order to put a federal umbrella over the whole system.

    https://www.theage.com.au/news/national/rudd-backs-howards-water-plan/2007/01/25/1169594432300.html

    ….gives an idea of the stoushes which broke out at the very suggestion, and of course he tried to do it on the cheap, which was never going to work.

  47. I see KM in the Grauniad has deleted my polite request to know why the media hasn’t sought Malcolm’s opinion on Leyonhjelm’s attack on SHY, given that Bill condemned him yesterday.Katharine is a very sensitive soul.

  49. As I said yesterday, make no mistake, the energy wars are coming again-and I don’t mean on PB, but in the Coalition. Abbott’s piece in today’s Australian is the opening shot. He is trying to position Turnbull as repeating what he did in 2009 by doing a deal with Labor on emissions. We all know how that ended. I’m not suggesting this necisarily ends the same way, but what I am saying is don’t underestimate how ugly this might get, and how much pain the Nationals may also cause Turnbull and Frydenberg. This is just getting started and even the pro Coalition media won’t be able to resist it. The bottom line is, it doesn’t matter how many concessions are made to the rwnj climate change deniers, it will never be enough. Fun times are ahead!

  50. Rex Douglas @ #243 Tuesday, July 3rd, 2018 – 1:03 pm

    Andrew_Earlwood @ #235 Tuesday, July 3rd, 2018 – 12:54 pm

    “Trickle-down tax cuts don’t resonate with me.”

    Nor does reality. Clearly.

    Funding for public schools/hospitals, homelessness, Indigenous Affairs, etc., could be increased if these trickle down tax cuts were scrapped. That’s real.

    Been at a workshop this morning for the latest Greens’ talking points, Rex? 🙂

    Just as well for the rest of us that we aren’t so short-sighted as to see the 2 viable options coming into the next federal election are, vote for a Labor government and get increased resources for Public Schools and Hospitals; or, vote Liberal, National or Greens and get neither. 🙂

Comments Page 5 of 42
1 … 4 5 6 … 42

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *