Essential Research: leader ratings and protest laws

Discouragement for Newspoll’s notion of an Anthony Albanese approval surge, plus a mixed bag of findings on the right to protest.

The latest fortnightly Essential Research poll still offers nothing on voting intention, though it’s relative interesting in that it features the pollster’s monthly leadership ratings. Contrary to Newspoll, these record a weakening in Anthony Albanese’s ratings, with approval down three to 37% and disapproval up five to 34%. Scott Morrison also worsens slightly, down two on approval to 45% and up three on disapproval to 41%, and his preferred prime minister read is essentially steady at 44-28 (43-28 last month).

Further questions relate to the right to protest, including the finding that 33% would support laws flagged by Scott Morrison that “could make consumer or environment boycotts illegal”, while 39% were opposed. Fifty-eight per cent agreed the government had “the right to limit citizen protests when it disrupts business”, with 31% for disagree; but that 53% agreed that “protestors should have the right to pressure banks not to invest in companies that are building coal mines”, with 33% disagreeing.

The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1075 respondents chosen from an online panel.

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.

1,832 comments on “Essential Research: leader ratings and protest laws”

Comments Page 6 of 37
1 … 5 6 7 … 37

  1. GG

    Yeah the Gillard government failed in passing its climate policy suite because of the Greens..

    ………………… Oh Wait.

  2. Does anyone else wonder if it was a deliberate, pre-arranged strategy by the Coalition to send the Nationals out to bay at the moon over the fires / climate change link this week while the crazier Liberals were kept muzzled somewhere in the Parliament House carpark?

  3. Of course bandying around “anti-commie hysteria” is another way of demonising any legitimate concerns there might be about the influence of Communist China in Australia.

    Political donations, anyone.

  5. What are the side effects of elderberry?

    You forgot to mention what it is good for. A great remedy for ulcers. Also increases immunity from nasty bugs.

  8. The most pissant of PB pissants still garbling along about the Greens

    Holding tightly to the say nothing, do nothing, be nothing party line

    Why bother trying to hold the LNP in contempt for their pig-headed ignorance and inability to even discuss climate change and ecological breakdown. When it is so much easier to keep being puerile keyboard warriors.

    Gospers Mt fire back up to emergency.

    Should PB enforce the LNP and ALP politically correct line that no words on the cause and reality of climate change should be uttered until there are no fires anywhere on the Australian continent…? Which given how rare that would actually be, could see a lot of support from the pissant brigade on PB.

  9. I don’t personally see the problem with taking the Chinese money in this sort of instance. It’s not like there’s some kind of dire national security concerns with giving Red China a toehold in our strategic infant formula business.

  10. GG

    It’s pretty dumb to argue CPRS after succes in passing legislation.

    Stop blaming the Greens because Labor lost the election.

    Labor winning would have ensured the time.

  13. Greensborough Growler @ #186 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 12:12 pm

    a r @ #202 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 11:57 am

    Greensborough Growler @ #78 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 8:31 am

    Did you actually look at what he had to say or did you find it too hard to find a spot to park your prejudices?

    The people still defending Pell are the ones with the prejudice. The rest of us are just accepting the determination made by others who actually assessed both the evidence against Pell and the strongest arguments Pell’s defense could raise against them.

    Those people found him guilty. The only basis for ignoring their conclusions and deciding that you personally know better without having access to any of the facts and evidence is hubris, bias, and prejudice.

    So, you didn’t watch the video either. That’s OK.

    Perhaps we should ask the sky fairy. Scott has a direct line. GG thinks Andrew does too, but then GG told us all that the Royal Commission was ‘a populist witch-hunt’, so perhaps his judgement is a bit suspect. Just a teensy-weensy little bit. Its also, just maybe, possible that he is prejudiced, and incapable of rational thought regarding anything to do with the Roman Paedophile Protection Society money gathering racket.

    Me, I have a completely open mind.

  15. yabba @ #274 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 2:10 pm

    Greensborough Growler @ #186 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 12:12 pm

    a r @ #202 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 11:57 am

    Greensborough Growler @ #78 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 8:31 am

    Did you actually look at what he had to say or did you find it too hard to find a spot to park your prejudices?

    The people still defending Pell are the ones with the prejudice. The rest of us are just accepting the determination made by others who actually assessed both the evidence against Pell and the strongest arguments Pell’s defense could raise against them.

    Those people found him guilty. The only basis for ignoring their conclusions and deciding that you personally know better without having access to any of the facts and evidence is hubris, bias, and prejudice.

    So, you didn’t watch the video either. That’s OK.

    Perhaps we should ask the sky fairy. Scott has a direct line. GG thinks Andrew does too, but then GG told us all that the Royal Commission was ‘a populist witch-hunt’, so perhaps his judgement is a bit suspect. Just a teensy-weensy little bit. Its also, just maybe, possible that he is prejudiced, and incapable of rational thought regarding anything to do with the Roman Paedophile Protection Society money gathering racket.

    Me, I have a completely open mind.

    I found that song they wrote about you.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6CdpAhwpw8

  17. When an appeal is lodged against conviction, the grounds are often many, and many are quite often frivolous. As far a Pell’s appeal to the Court of Appeal is concerned, from memory one of the grounds was that he wasn’t arraigned in the jury’s presence, a legal requirement. Such failure is normally dealt with by invoking the “proviso” which enables a court to dismiss an appeal where there is no substantial miscarriage of justice.

    Pell’s appeal to the High Court is based on the unreasonableness of the verdict, in consideration thereof the following legal principles are considered:

    [‘First, and most importantly, there is a very high threshold for a court to overturn a jury’s guilty verdict for being unreasonable. This is because, in Australian law, the jury is the constitutional tribunal of fact responsible for deciding guilt or innocence. A verdict will only be overturned in exceptional circumstances showing a clear miscarriage of justice.

    Second, the test is whether, on the evidence, it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt the accused was guilty.

    To win the appeal, the appellant must show the guilty verdict was not open to the jury. It is not sufficient for the court to find a jury might have had reasonable doubt. The evidence must mean no reasonable jury could have returned a guilty verdict; it must have “obliged” them to reach a not guilty verdict.

    Third, the appeal court does not retry the case — again, because the jury is the tribunal of fact. The court must independently assess the evidence, but to determine whether the guilty verdict was open to the jury; not simply whether the court itself has a doubt.

    Fourth, if a complainant is credible and reliable and the account is detailed, consistent and plausible, it is difficult for an appeal to succeed. On plausibility, courts have accepted that sexual offending can be brazen, influenced by the abuser’s arrogance, power and belief the child will not make a complaint.’]

    These legal principles are indeed very high hurdles to surmount. If he fails, his counsel (Brett Walker) will no doubt inform his client that he can’t work miracles.

  18. Quoll

    Should PB enforce the LNP and ALP politically correct line that no words on the cause and reality of climate change should be uttered until there are no fires anywhere on the Australian continent…?

    The “don’t mention it” pricks need to hear this guy.

    This is climate changed. Pray for rain. Pray harder for leadership
    We had a bushfire two months ago that burned most of our property. It didn’t matter. It burned again

    ……………………………“Today is not the day to talk about climate change.”

    No, yesterday was the day, or the day before, or the month before, or the year before. But it didn’t get a mention.

    Now we have the reality, and the mention it gets is: “Don’t talk about it now.”

    While all the ignorant Shoutback radio etc peeps muttering about lack of “back burning” need to read

    Over the past three years, in cooperation with NSW forestry, national parks and the RFS, we have had very extensive controlled burning in the state forest and national park on our perimeter………………..The September fire burned to our perimeter. This was just two months ago. Everything that should be done was done, and lots more.

    The fire that came last Friday was of another order of magnitude altogether. A crown fire roaring in from the west on a hot afternoon with an 80km/h wind – it wasn’t on the ground. It was a firestorm in the air – raining fire.

    There was no fuel on the ground; it was already burned.

    The heat ahead of the fire front ignited nearly everything in its path. Before he saw any flame my neighbour’s car exploded. They just escaped with their lives

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/15/this-is-climate-changed-pray-for-rain-pray-harder-for-leadership

  20. Mavis says: Friday, November 15, 2019 at 2:23 pm

    These legal principles are indeed very high hurdles to surmount.

    ******************************************************

    THANKS Mavis for your posts breaking down what must be very complex laws into simple to understand layman terms !

  22. From Cabal/Pasini in the High Court as to the conditions for the granting of bail pending the hearing of an appeal to the High Court.

    [The history of decisions of this Court shows that ordinarily it will grant bail in criminal cases only if two conditions are satisfied. First, the applicant must demonstrate that there are strong grounds for concluding that the appeal will be allowed. The grant of special leave will often – perhaps usually – indicate that there are strong grounds for so concluding. Second, the applicant must show that the sentence, or at all events the custodial part of it, is likely to have been substantially served before the appeal is determined. Thus, in Marotta v The Queen[42], Callinan J granted bail after special leave had been granted. His Honour thought that substantial parts of the custodial sentences were likely to have been served and possibly completed in one case by the time the Court gave its decision on the appeal. Furthermore, the grant of special leave indicated that the applicants had at least reasonable prospects of succeeding in their appeals.]

    Pell fails on both, obviously.

  23. GG, a bit rough calling me prejudiced, just because I am not interested in checking out someone who has a proven track record of misrepresenting the truth.

    If you have a more credible source, please provide it, I am happy to have a look at it.

  26. A very interesting hit piece on Nikki Haley by writer Greg Olear ( even some ….. ummm …… ‘interaction’ with D J Trump )

    Greg Olear‏Verified account @gregolear

    Here’s another Nikki Haley theory: she is “Anonymous.”

    After publishing the controversial op-ed in the New York Times, she then writes an op-ed attacking “Anonymous” in the Washington Post two days later.

    Talk about hidden genius!

    Beware GOP Darling, Nikki Haley

    Ambitious as Lucifer, ruthless as Machiavelli, shady as fuck.

    ON OCTOBER 3, 2018, Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, tendered her resignation to President Trump—although it would take six more days until the media heard about her departure. The break-up was amicable, her relationship with the president apparently, and fantastically, intact: “She’s done a fantastic job, and we’ve done a fantastic job together,” Trump told reporters. “She’s a fantastic person, very importantly, but she also is somebody that gets it.” But the circumstances surrounding her resignation a year ago, as well as her sudden media re-emergence this past week, demand closer scrutiny.

    MORE : https://gregolear.substack.com/p/beware-gop-darling-nikki-haley

  27. PeeBee @ #284 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 2:46 pm

    GG, a bit rough calling me prejudiced, just because I am not interested in checking out someone who has a proven track record of misrepresenting the truth.

    If you have a more credible source, please provide it, I am happy to have a look at it.

    As I said, “It’s OK”. I understand and accept your right to pick and choose your sources of information.

  28. Section 80 of the Australian Constitution provides a right to be tried by jury in respect to indictable (ie, serious) offences. In states and territories that allow judge only trials, a defendant/accused may elect to be tried by a judge only. Also, there are some offences that although indictable, can, at the election of the defendant/accused, be dealt with summarily. There are also some summary offences where police can elect to have them dealt with via indictment, eg (in Queensland) serious assault of police. Due to trial by jury being a Constitutional right, courts of appeal are loathe to overturn jury verdicts, making Pell’s appeal all the more onerous – the metric being that there must be a substantial miscarriage of justice.

  33. @LordofWentworth tweets

    Comedy Gold. https://twitter.com/TimWilsonMP/status/1195185394414804993

    @TimWilsonMP tweets

    We’re building renewables 10 times faster than the world average per capita and we’ve now met the Renewable Energy Target early. This year alone, we’ll hit another record, with an extra 6.5GW projected to hit the grid by year’s end. We‘re leading the energy transition. More ⤵️ https://twitter.com/michaelroddan/status/1195147888721985537

    @MichaelRoddan tweets

    In Australia, renewable energy is growing at a per capita rate ten times faster than the world average. This is nearly three times faster than the next fastest country, Germany.

    https://theconversation.com/australia-is-the-runaway-global-leader-in-building-new-renewable-energy-123694?utm_medium=amptwitter&utm_source=twitter


  34. guytaur says:
    Friday, November 15, 2019 at 2:01 pm

    GG

    Yeah the Gillard government failed in passing its climate policy suite because of the Greens..

    ………………… Oh Wait.

    No they had the power to screw Labor over but Labor didn’t have to power to make it stick on their own and of cause the Greens being impotent were no help.

    The opportunity for by-partisan action was scuttled by the Greens. The Greens have totally screwed up Australia’s response to climate change. Instead of sanctimonious crap over a pissy little mine that will not go ahead, they and their supporters should hang their head in shame over what they have done.

  35. @denniallen tweets

    @AdamBandt @petergalvin1_l Amazing what $70m in anti Labor anti Greens ads will buy. In Palmers case…a whole Govt! A quid pro quo donation LNP dont have to declare. #auspol #MSM

  37. Agree on the social aspect of religions Yabba. Humans like tribalism. A club/religious group/political party – it is basically the same kind of belonging. The insidious part of religious adherence is that it is also a method of social control.

    Although we are supposed to have a separation of church and state – it is clear Morrison/Abbott and those of a similar ilk are aiming for dovetailing their belief system with government.

    The other interesting thing is that in medieval time the church leader had power over the government/king/despot (whoever) and like ancient Egyptian Pharaohs the leader of the church was seen as the ultimate conduit to their ‘god’ (or son of god). Such an inherent belief in the power structure topped by a religious ‘leader’ still persists – even if only at a subliminal social level.


  39. guytaur says:
    Friday, November 15, 2019 at 3:08 pm

    frednk

    You can’t have your own facts. The Greens passed the Carbon Price. It was Labor that lost the election.

    You seem to want to ignore that the Greens scuttled a bypartisan response, they are primarily responsible for this nonsense. Passing legislation that doesn’t stick is not a success.

  40. Interesting move

    Labour has promised to provide free “full-fibre” broadband for every home and business by part-nationalising BT.

    In a speech due to be delivered in Lancaster on Friday, Jeremy Corbyn will outline his proposals to create a new British broadband public service, saying it will “bring communities together in an inclusive and connected society”.

    The scheme would be a radical shift in provision of broadband services, which are currently provided by companies at an average cost per household of about £30 a month.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/14/labour-pledges-free-broadband-for-all-homes-and-businesses-in-uk

  42. FredNK

    You seem to want to ignore that there was no bipartisan option available.

    Turnbull tried his best several times. Greens attacking Labor would help Turnbull in negotiations so your whole premise is wrong if you want to argue persuadable.

    I argue the deniers were never going to let climate change be addressed.

    We are seeing that play out today. Neither Labor or the Greens are responsible for the actions of the LNP. No matter how much you try and rewrite history

  44. caf @ #683 Friday, November 15th, 2019 – 2:02 pm

    Does anyone else wonder if it was a deliberate, pre-arranged strategy by the Coalition to send the Nationals out to bay at the moon over the fires / climate change link this week while the crazier Liberals were kept muzzled somewhere in the Parliament House carpark?

    Yep. It’s an emerging technique of disinformation from the Merchants of Doubt (ie the Denialist Deadshits), filtered through Lynton Crosby’s Dead Cat Method and the Trump Trolls. If clash with reality can’t be spun, find some disposable Useful Idiot (like Mick Mac or the Beetrooter) to say something certifiably insane. It distracts from the real broken condoms – like Barilla(i)ro or Gladys. That’s why ScumMo’s gone into witless protection. As the fires progress and the Rural Peons get more restless, they’ll have to throw some new victims on the pyre. I recon it might be Elliott in NSW and Angus “The Well-Connected Fuckup” Taylor Federally. It used to be Downer, but he’s a bit limp and smelly at present.

  46. You seem to want to ignore that the Greens scuttled a bypartisan response…

    This is arrant nonsense – self-evidently if the response had been bipartisan then it would have passed no matter what the Greens did (which is exactly why Rudd choose to negotiate with the Coalition rather than the Greens at the time).

    The bipartisan agreement was scuttled by the Liberals’ partyroom.

  48. shellbell:

    I’m sure Walker could argue the first limb. As for the second, and as previously argued, Pell is an old and ill man. By the time of the hearing, he would’ve served 1 year of his 3 years and 8 months of his non-parol period. You’ve got to think outside the box sometimes, old dear. Let’s say he does succeed with his appeal, it would mean an innocent man has been incarcerated in fairly harsh conditions for a year. Precedent is precedent but they’re only precedents until such time they’re replaced with another, by dint of cogent argument, the type Walker’s renowned for.

  49. It was also the poison of choice of the murdering aunts in Arsenic and Old Lace.

    I believe the poison was arsenic. Otherwise the movie would be called Elderberry Wine and Old Lace.

Comments Page 6 of 37
1 … 5 6 7 … 37

Leave a Reply

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