Essential Research: leadership ratings, foreign and industrial relations

Some gloss comes off Scott Morrison’s still impressive personal ratings, and respondents prove broadly favourable to the government’s handling of disputes with China.

The latest fortnightly Essential Research poll, which is presumably the last of the year, features the pollster’s monthly-or-so leadership ratings: Scott Morrison is down four on approval to 62%, his weakest result since April, and up three on disapproval to 28%; Anthony Albanese is up three on approval to 43% and down four on disapproval to 29%; and Morrison’s lead as preferred prime minister is at 50-24, narrowing from 53-24.

As it does at the end of every year, the pollster asked respondents if they felt it had been a good or a bad year for various actors, which produces appropriately extraordinary results, particularly so for the Australian economy (a net rating of minus 47%), small business (minus 43%) and “the average Australian” (minus 32%). However, the minus 7% result for “Australian politics in general” was quite a lot better than any recorded over the previous seven years.

Respondents were also asked if Australia’s relationships with various foreign players should become more or less closer, or remain the same. This produces a notably negative result for China, with 49% wanting a less close relationship, 15% more close and 20% the same. Closer relationships are generally desired with, in descending order, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the European Union. Sixty-two per cent considered Australia “the innocent victim of Chinese assertion in restricting trade on certain products, but a non-trivial 38% felt Australia had “made itself a target by publicly criticising the Chinese government”. Fifty-six per cent felt Scott Morrison was right to demand an apology from the Chinese government over the recent Twitter spat, leaving 44% of respondents (the smart ones) favouring the alternative that he “should have let the issue be handled
through diplomatic channels”.

A question on the federal government’s proposed workplace relations reforms finds 52% expecting they will favour employers and businesses, 17% that they will favour employees, and 31% that they will strike a balance between the two. The poll was conducted Wednesday to Monday from a sample of 1071.

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.

844 comments on “Essential Research: leadership ratings, foreign and industrial relations”

Comments Page 2 of 17
1 2 3 … 17

  1. lizzie @ #46 Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 9:20 am

    rhwombat

    Heard last week about an old lady who lost her husband and her pet dog in the same week at the beginning of our lockdown. She was sinking into deep depression until she found an older dog to rehome, but now is bright and happy and looking forward to Christmas. Dogs are magical companions sometimes.

    Cats on the other hand…. esp when they are female and in the mood and there is a good looking stray hanging around nearby.

    boerwar @ #48 Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 9:21 am

    SK

    ‘Now watch as the governing party of small government and free markets intervene to correct this egregious market failure.’

    In relation to Ag Visa ScrewForce, spot on.

    C^^ts. You may have missed my tirade about blueberry pickers in NSW.

    I know many on here dislike the Guardian yet on the issue of casualised labour and unfair working conditions they, almost alone in the media environment, consistently report (and in the UK do deep investigative journalism) on these issues.

  2. I have found as the owner of two dogs (47 kgs and puppy adding 750 grams per week) and two rescue cats, that the laundry has a persistent and unpleasant odour

  3. If they argue that political donations bring no benefit to their company, how are they then justified in making them?

    Put yourself in the shoes of a greedy, two faced arrogant pig who is used to getting their way over employees, politicians and regulators. There is nothing noble in big business anymore.

    How about this – we are just trying to improve the overall economy and wellbeing of all australians and as such our company will benefit indirectly.

    Or – simply – we lie when we say our donations will not result in direct benefit. As a regulator you know that. Dont tell the mugs tho.

  4. I wonder if Pompeo will be “resigning” very soon –

    https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/530249-pompeo-to-meet-with-biden-nominee-antony-blinken-reports

    Whee, Captain Spaulding’s Roller Coaster of Crazy is getting a workout –

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/chase-trump-martial-law/2020/12/15/95ca99a4-3ee5-11eb-9453-fc36ba051781_story.html

    Gosh, what a great big non-surprise. Just think all you little people who are struggling if you gave big donations to the LNP your applications would be given approval in no time at all.

    https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/dec/16/anthony-pratts-visy-wins-10m-from-australias-bushfire-recovery-fund

  5. A different take on China’s coal ban.

    Australia sells the vast majority of its coal to Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. And if China buys more Russian, South African and Indonesian coal to replace Australian coal, then we can, by and large, simply swap customers, maybe with a month’s disruption. Total demand doesn’t change, nor does supply – at least not in the near term.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/15/chinas-ban-is-less-of-a-threat-to-australias-coal-industry-than-international-climate-ambition

    The writer is Tim Buckley, director of energy finance studies at IEEFA.

    The Institute’s mission is to accelerate the transition to a diverse, sustainable and profitable energy economy.

  6. I nearly choked on my coffee when I got to –

    “Elsewhere, the game has come under fire for a litany of bugs and errors. One flaw sees player characters wandering around with a visible penis poking through the fabric of their clothing.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/games/2020/dec/14/cyberpunk-2077-developers-offer-refunds-after-bug-ridden-launch

    A case of, “Oh crap, Christmas is less than two weeks away, get the game out there asap or we’ll lose big money.”

  7. From the previous thread:

    For the sake of protecting democracy and healing a divided nation, Biden will be asked to waive all actions against Trump and his crooked crew. And he will probably do it.

    For the sake of protecting democracy and healing a divided nation is why he shouldn’t. And the flashes of anger from Biden (and Harris) at Trump’s behaviour is why I think he won’t. (Aggressive medical analogies spring to mind.)

  8. “Elsewhere, the game has come under fire for a litany of bugs and errors. One flaw sees player characters wandering around with a visible penis poking through the fabric of their clothing.”

    It wouldn’t surprise me if this version becomes a collectors item. I can see Easter Eggs too in future releases. (Are they still called that?)

  9. Late Riser @ #55 Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 9:57 am

    A different take on China’s coal ban.

    Australia sells the vast majority of its coal to Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. And if China buys more Russian, South African and Indonesian coal to replace Australian coal, then we can, by and large, simply swap customers, maybe with a month’s disruption. Total demand doesn’t change, nor does supply – at least not in the near term.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/15/chinas-ban-is-less-of-a-threat-to-australias-coal-industry-than-international-climate-ambition

    The writer is Tim Buckley, director of energy finance studies at IEEFA.

    The Institute’s mission is to accelerate the transition to a diverse, sustainable and profitable energy economy.

    I seem to remember that Russia has been increasing supply in recent times. It was a side story to the Galilee basin opening up – that perhaps, with the opening of these mines and the increase in renewables there will be a world wide coal glut.

    So, Russia may be able to supply exiting contracts and take on new ones.

  10. Kronomex @ #NaN Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 10:29 am

    I nearly choked on my coffee when I got to –

    “Elsewhere, the game has come under fire for a litany of bugs and errors. One flaw sees player characters wandering around with a visible penis poking through the fabric of their clothing.”

    https://www.theguardian.com/games/2020/dec/14/cyberpunk-2077-developers-offer-refunds-after-bug-ridden-launch

    A case of, “Oh crap, Christmas is less than two weeks away, get the game out there asap or we’ll lose big money.”

    Hungarian Catholic Devs, huh? Who’da thunk it? I would have thought they’d have gone with nothing between the legs. 😆

  11. Late Riser @ #55 Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 10:27 am

    A different take on China’s coal ban.

    Australia sells the vast majority of its coal to Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. And if China buys more Russian, South African and Indonesian coal to replace Australian coal, then we can, by and large, simply swap customers, maybe with a month’s disruption. Total demand doesn’t change, nor does supply – at least not in the near term.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/15/chinas-ban-is-less-of-a-threat-to-australias-coal-industry-than-international-climate-ambition

    The writer is Tim Buckley, director of energy finance studies at IEEFA.

    The Institute’s mission is to accelerate the transition to a diverse, sustainable and profitable energy economy.

    This is why disruptions in the supply of coal matters …

    So the Chinese domestic thermal coal price has jumped 35% to 740/t yuan in the last three months. Seaborne thermal coal prices have rallied from a low of US$46/t to over US$70/t in the same timeframe. Even as total volume of Australian coal exports have dropped in the December quarter, the value has surged, and more importantly, the profitability much more so (notwithstanding the 10% rally in the Aus$/US$, lifted by the unprecedented rally in iron ore prices). Hence the Whitehaven Coal and New Hope increase in share price.

    Australian coal is quite literally dirt cheap. Anything that disrupts the supply of Australian coal will tend to increase the price of coal globally, which in turn makes coal less attractive as a fuel.

    I know China is not doing what it is doing for altruistic reasons, but we should look at the positive side – Australia losing such a big market for its deadly export is unambiguously a good thing for the planet.

  12. shellbell

    Friends of mine confessed to having thrown away 3 rugs in their bedroom within a few years because one cat objected to a new man in the house and peed on them. Lately it’s changed to pooping and now they’re considering an outside cat run. Cats are very smelly. 🙁

  13. Cats on the other hand…. esp when they are female and in the mood and there is a good looking stray hanging around nearby.

    I just came home to the pair of ducks that have adopted us gettin’ it on! 😆

  14. SK

    I don’t follow coal markets. But mines start up all the time and I expect the coal businesses would be aware of Russian mines coming on line and have planned for that. What was interesting was the perspective of a financial analyst working for a renewables pushing organisation.

    notwithstanding coal luddite claims that Australia’s coal is slightly less carbon polluting than someone else’s seaborne coal, the minute difference is irrelevant – all coal is almost 100% more carbon intensive than wind, solar, hydro, nuclear or energy efficiency.

    Our coal exporters will however survive this near-term political fight, probably far better than our wine or lobster export industries, by comparison.

    The investment, employment and export opportunities for Australia are enormous, and exciting. To steal a very good line from Ross Garnaut and Mike Cannon-Brookes – better we focus on building Australia as a renewable energy superpower.

  15. P1

    Australian coal is quite literally dirt cheap. Anything that disrupts the supply of Australian coal will tend to increase the price of coal globally, which in turn makes coal less attractive as a fuel.

    If China is willing to pay more for non-Australian coal wouldn’t others be willing to switch to the cheaper Australian source, leaving the more expensive stuff to China? What Buckley seems to be saying is that there might be a month of adjustment, and that’s about it in the short term.

  17. Lizzie

    The boy rescue, 8 years old, got away last night, tapped on the shutters forcibly at 2.15am to be let in, was placed in the laundry, door shut, other doors shut etc.

    By 2.43am, three doors pried upon and at end of bed demanding attention.

  18. Late Riser @ #65 Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 10:52 am

    P1

    Australian coal is quite literally dirt cheap. Anything that disrupts the supply of Australian coal will tend to increase the price of coal globally, which in turn makes coal less attractive as a fuel.

    If China is willing to pay more for non-Australian coal wouldn’t others be willing to switch to the cheaper Australian source, leaving the more expensive stuff to China? What Buckley seems to be saying is that there might be a month of adjustment, and that’s about it in the short term.

    His argument is that there is still sufficient supply to meet demand, so things will adjust. He’s probably correct there – but the end price under the new regime will not be the same as the price under the old regime. Countries naturally will source their coal from wherever it is cheapest (for them), so disrupting the existing supply regime will tend to lead to a rise in price.
    Or, to put it another way, Australian coal probably cannot be shipped to (say) Brazil as cheaply as it can be shipped to China. So if our coal goes to Brazil instead of China the global price of coal will tend to rise.

  24. Political party and independent candidate donations
    In some circumstances, your gifts and donations to registered political parties or independent candidates may be claimed as a deduction. … $1,500 for contributions and gifts to political parties. $1,500 for contributions and gifts to independent candidates and members.Jun 5, 2020

    Gifts and donations | Australian Taxation Office

  25. Are political donations tax deductible Australia?
    Your political gifts or contributions need to be made in a personal capacity to be tax deductible. Businesses cannot claim deductions for contributions and gifts to political parties, members and candidates including payments incurred in deriving assessable income.Jul 25, 2017

    Claiming political contributions and gifts | Australian Taxation Office

  27. Even as total volume of Australian coal exports have dropped in the December quarter, the value has surged, and more importantly, the profitability much more so (notwithstanding the 10% rally in the Aus$/US$, lifted by the unprecedented rally in iron ore prices).
    …

    As the AUD rallies, profitability declines. That is, a given USD amount will buy fewer AUD. The rising AUD is a source of loss for exporters who sell products denominated in USD.

    A rising AUD is very good for importers and real wages.

  28. P1

    Individual contracts will determine prices and profits in the near term, but in the longer term it make sense that reducing efficiency (measured in money) will reduce competitiveness. But Buckley’s main point is that this is not the big deal for the coal companies that most are making out. For me the biggest impact of China’s decision is political*, it makes Australia’s coal workers nervous. It might have them looking for alternative employment opportunities (jobs), and asking questions like, “Where are they?”, “Why not?”, “Who’s fault?” “How do we get there, and how soon?”, and so on. It might be hypocritical, but why not use it to scare the workers a bit?

    *apart from the obvious international politics

  29. China’s Xi Ramps Up Control of Private Sector. ‘We Have No Choice but to Follow the Party.’

    Xi Jinping, long distrustful of the private sector, is moving assertively to bring it to heel.

    China’s most powerful leader in a generation wants even greater state control in the world’s second-largest economy, with private firms of all sizes expected to fall in line. The government is installing more Communist Party officials inside private firms, starving some of credit and demanding executives tailor their businesses to achieve state goals.

    In some cases, it is taking charge entirely of companies it regards as undisciplined, absorbing them into state-owned enterprises.

    The push is driven by a deepening conviction within the country’s leadership that markets and private entrepreneurs, while important to China’s rise, are unpredictable and not to be fully trusted. The view that state planners are better at running a complex economy has gained currency this year, with Beijing relying heavily on state directives to engineer a V-shaped recovery from the shock of Covid-19.

    Mr. Xi has made his priorities especially clear in recent months. In September, the party issued new guidelines for private companies, reminding them to serve the state and vowing to use education and other tools to “continuously enhance the political consensus of private business people under the leadership of the party.”

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-xi-clampdown-private-sector-communist-party-11607612531

  30. Or, to put it another way, Australian coal probably cannot be shipped to (say) Brazil as cheaply as it can be shipped to China. So if our coal goes to Brazil instead of China the global price of coal will tend to rise.

    This is just not the case. If shipping costs were to rise (because of the destination), the implicit price of the product would fall. Shipping costs would be similar in their effect to a tax on exports. Some of the cost would be met by importers and some by exporters, and volumes would be lower than otherwise would be the case.

  31. Non @ #75 Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 10:19 am

    Are political donations tax deductible Australia?
    Your political gifts or contributions need to be made in a personal capacity to be tax deductible. Businesses cannot claim deductions for contributions and gifts to political parties, members and candidates including payments incurred in deriving assessable income.Jul 25, 2017

    Claiming political contributions and gifts | Australian Taxation Office

    Hmm. That rings a bell. I have a vague memory reading of a company pressuring its employees to donate to a political party and then reimbursing them with bonuses. If the company knew the employee would not wear the full cost of the donation (by virtue of paying less tax) then they could reimburse a lesser amount, effectively channelling ATO money to their political party.

  34. China’s Xi Ramps Up Control of Private Sector. ‘We Have No Choice but to Follow the Party.’

    Is this a strategic error by Xi? A healthy ecosystem needs a bit of unpredictability. Though if it is an error I expect it will take a while to become evident.

  35. Julia Gillard should have just called it ‘a Friedmanesque Price Signal’ and the Coal Conservatives wouldn’t have had a leg to stand on:

    The Canadian government, led by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, has just introduced a new plan for a strengthened climate plan that has many interesting features, including billions in energy upgrades, subsidies for electric vehicles, and grid modernization.

    But the biggest and most controversial item is the dramatic increase in the carbon tax, ratcheting up every year until it is C$170 (US$132.72) per tonne of carbon by 2030, and would probably increase the price of gas by 25%.1 They call it a “price on pollution.”

    Carbon taxes are based on the amount of carbon released, so the tax on burning coal would be higher than that on gasoline, which is higher than natural gas. In the Canadian proposal, the funds collected are then rebated back to the taxpayers. The majority of people will actually get more money back than they pay in the tax.1

    The basic idea is an old economic principle: as things get more expensive, people look for alternatives that are cheaper, whether it is electric cars instead of gas-powered ones, or heat pumps instead of furnaces, or just driving less. As the Globe and Mail editorial board notes,

    “This tax is also like no other because its goal is to change behavior, not to raise revenues. The aim is for people to do such a good job of reducing emissions, and thereby avoiding the tax, that revenues eventually spiral to zero. The carbon tax’s goal is its own obsolescence.”

    Conservative politicians were immediately outraged, with the Ontario Premier calling it the worst thing you could ever see. This is odd, because carbon and pollution taxes are a very conservative idea. Writing in National Affairs, the very conservative magazine published by the very conservative American Enterprise Institute, Spencer Banzhaf describes The Conservative Roots of Carbon Pricing, noting that “various proposals to tax or price pollution have, from their beginnings, been championed by conservatives and their libertarian allies,” including such right-of-center folk heroes as William F. Buckley, Jr., and Milton Friedman, who wrote in his book “Free to Choose” that pricing pollution through “effluent charges” were the best way to deal with the problem.

    https://www.treehugger.com/canada-introducing-big-honking-carbon-tax-5092199

  37. Late Riser @ #78 Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 11:24 am

    P1

    Individual contracts will determine prices and profits in the near term, but in the longer term it make sense that reducing efficiency (measured in money) will reduce competitiveness. But Buckley’s main point is that this is not the big deal for the coal companies that most are making out. For me the biggest impact of China’s decision is political*, it makes Australia’s coal workers nervous. It might have them looking for alternative employment opportunities (jobs), and asking questions like, “Where are they?”, “Why not?”, “Who’s fault?” “How do we get there, and how soon?”, and so on. It might be hypocritical, but why not use it to scare the workers a bit?

    *apart from the obvious international politics

    You can’t just look at the near term – you have to look out a bit longer. In the near term, coal prices are rising, but this is partly just due to the market uncertainty. You can’t take that to indicate “Coal has a Future”. In fact, the higher the coal price goes, the less future coal has, since coal’s main selling point has always been that it is the cheapest option. It still remains so in some cases, but that is coming to an end – and the sooner this happens, the better.

    We will have to wait a bit longer to see where the coal market is really going. But assuming China continues to be willing to artificially inflate the global coal price by choosing to buy more expensive sources of coal over ours (which is effectively what is happening) then the longer they do that, the longer global coal prices will remain higher than they would otherwise, and the better off we all are.

    This is essentially a contest between China and Australia to see who has the deepest pockets. I know which side I would be betting on!

  39. P1

    I agree with your 1st two paragraphs.

    You can’t just look at the near term –…

    We will have to wait a bit longer …

    Coal is a long term problem. But I see your last point differently.

    This is essentially a contest between China and everyone else to see who has the deepest pockets.

  42. @timdunlop
    ·
    35m
    Despite everything in 2020, it is so gratifying to have the media constantly telling me that Scott Morrison had a good year. I mean, how else would we know?

  43. Bill Bowtell AO
    @billbowtell
    ·
    1h
    Yesterday Swedish ICU units at 99 percent capacity, 2406 Covid-19 cases in hospitals and 14 day cumulative average of 738.8 cases per 100,000 is 5th highest in Europe. This is what “living with COVID-19” delivered.

  45. Non @ #80 Wednesday, December 16th, 2020 – 11:29 am

    Or, to put it another way, Australian coal probably cannot be shipped to (say) Brazil as cheaply as it can be shipped to China. So if our coal goes to Brazil instead of China the global price of coal will tend to rise.

    This is just not the case. If shipping costs were to rise (because of the destination), the implicit price of the product would fall. Shipping costs would be similar in their effect to a tax on exports. Some of the cost would be met by importers and some by exporters, and volumes would be lower than otherwise would be the case.

    Huh? Of course shipping costs depend on the destination.

    For some coal examples, have a look at https://www.coalage.com/features/ocean-freight-rates-for-coal/

  47. President-elect Joe Biden nominated his former rival Pete Buttigieg as secretary of transportation on Tuesday and intends to choose former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm as his energy secretary….

    …Meanwhile, as energy secretary, Granholm will have a role in executing Biden’s promised $2 trillion climate plan, billed as the nation’s broadest and most ambitious effort to cut fossil fuel emissions that are dangerously warming Earth’s atmosphere.

    Biden’s plan includes overhauling the nation’s transportation and power sectors and buildings to eliminate fossil fuel emissions by 2050. Biden says he will return the United States to the Paris climate accord as a first step after Trump yanked the country out of the global climate effort.

    As governor, when Granholm faced an economic downturn before the Great Recession struck, she sought to diversify the state that is home to the Detroit Three automakers by emphasizing the growing “green economy.” The state pushed incentives to manufacture wind turbines, solar panels, advanced batteries and electric vehicles, and she signed a law requiring that more of Michigan’s energy come from renewable sources.

    After leaving office, she moved to California to teach at the University of California, Berkeley. She is a political contributor on CNN.

    Biden also plans to tap former Environmental Protection Agency chief Gina McCarthy to spearhead his ambitions for a massive, coordinated domestic campaign to slow climate change. Her counterpart in climate efforts will be former Secretary of State John Kerry, earlier named by Biden as his climate envoy for national security issues.

    The selection is in line with Biden’s pattern of picking tested, familiar figures from his time as vice president. McCarthy, 66, served as EPA administrator from 2013 to 2017 during President Barack Obama’s second term and was assistant administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation in Obama’s first term.

    She led initiatives that cut air and water pollution and signed the Clean Power Plan, Obama’s signature effort to address climate change by setting the first national standards for reducing carbon emissions from existing power plants. The plan was later discarded by President Donald Trump.

    https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-south-bend-transportation-coronavirus-pandemic-1b3e71a61ce48a5d1851e25ada26f12f

    Sounds promising without knowing too much about them.

Comments Page 2 of 17
1 2 3 … 17

Leave a Reply

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