Essential Research: leadership ratings, ICAC, emissions targets

An improvement in both leaders’ personal ratings from Essential Research, plus strong support for a federal ICAC and more ambitious emissions targets.

The Guardian reports the fortnightly Essential Research survey includes the pollster’s monthly leadership ratings, which find significant improvement in both leaders’ ratings. Scott Morrison is up four on approval to 54% and down three on disapproval to 37%, while Anthony Albanese is up four to 41% and down two to 34%. Morrison’s lead as preferred prime minister is 45-29, down from 47-26.

The poll also finds 78% would support a federal anti-corruption body, with only 11% opposed. Contrary to suggestions Gladys Berejiklian’s resignation would sap enthusiasm for the idea, 47% said it had made them more supportive, compared with 21% for less supportive.

Other questions focus on carbon emissions targets and climate change, including a finding that 68% support of a more ambitious target for 2030 and net zero by 2050, compared with 13% who did not favour targets and 19% who were unsure. Fifty-nine per cent agreed climate change was caused by human activity while 30% favoured the alternative of a normal fluctuation in the earth’s climate, which in both cases is up three since June (Essential asks this question on a semi-regular basis), presumably reflecting a drop in an uncommitted response. Forty-two per cent said Australia was not doing enough (down three) compared with 31% for enough (up one) and 15% for too much (up three).

The Guardian’s report relates further results on climate change, and the poll presumably included the regular questions on federal and state government COVID-19 management. All will be laid out neatly in Essential Research’s report later today.

UPDATE: Full release 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.

1,105 comments on “Essential Research: leadership ratings, ICAC, emissions targets”

Comments Page 21 of 23
1 … 20 21 22 23

  1. Labor’s plan is to win on other issues, and then presumably follow through on a real plan instead of the Coalition’s non-plan, all while arguing that they are simply aiming for the same targets the Coalition is aiming for and doing the same thing the Coalition was doing .

    In one sense, it’s a win for Labor *if* they get into power and *if* they can implement a real plan, and then *possibly* make use of the current Coalition and Newscorp bluff to blunt future attack lines.

  2. From Victoria it looked as if the WA Liberals finally started talking sense when it came to climate change. Didn’t help them much.

    The internal polls much be bad for the Liberals to pivot like this before an election.

  3. *pats GG*

    I’m simply pointing out that Labor have sacrificed the ability to call the Coalition’s bluff right now, in the hope that they can use that bluff, if they get into power, to blunt future attacks.

    It’s a tradeoff. It has some advantages, and it comes with its own risks. Don’t get your knickers in a twist when people point them out.

  4. DisplayName @ #1001 Wednesday, October 13th, 2021 – 8:01 pm

    Labor’s plan is to win on other issues, and then presumably follow through on a real plan instead of the Coalition’s non-plan, all while arguing that they are simply aiming for the same targets the Coalition is aiming for and doing the same thing the Coalition was doing .

    In one sense, it’s a win for Labor *if* they get into power and *if* they can implement a real plan, and then *possibly* make use of the current Coalition and Newscorp bluff to blunt future attack lines.

    Two ifs and a possibly.
    Feeling confident?

  7. mundo
    GG certainly isn’t confident, or he wouldn’t be so stressed over having the risks inherent in Labor’s plan identified :P.

  9. Yeah you do wonder about the killer instinct –

    the Jobkeeper rorts line was a good line / and then they blew it when they said they wouldn’t seek recovery of job keeper from those who rorted it.

    Seems like Labor is in such fear of a scare campaign that they cant contemplate taking any risks.

  10. DN
    The Green and the Liberals have one way or another prevented action on climate change for 10 years. The sudden change of heart by the Liberals validates Labors position. Leaves the Greens high and dry, what are they going to wedge Labor on now.

    Looks like they are going to give ICAC a red hot go. Hope they fail, we need a federal ICAC, the Greens and Liberals running interference for 10 years is not good enough.

  11. Late Riser @ #992 Wednesday, October 13th, 2021 – 7:36 pm

    I’m staying away from Morrison’s pivot to “Climate Change is real”, other than what I can’t avoid. But from comments here and headlines there, his strategy does have a feel to it that is similar to the Marriage Equality debate, for which Turnbull eventually took credit. It wouldn’t surprise me if Morrison is trying the same. He needs to fool the Nationals and pork might do that. He then needs to fool enough of the electorate that this time he means what he says. That might be more difficult. But Murdoch will help, no doubt.

    It seems to me that both these issues could only be resolved by the conservative side of politics because Labor is already on board. The conservatives and their backers and enables and voters could never support Labor policy.

    Scotty has it in the bag folks. If you can’t see it yet you’re in denial.

  13. Bennett has been announced as the coach of the Redcliffe Dolphins, the seventeeth club of the NRL. He’s far too old. He needs to pay off – I should know.

  15. mundo says:

    Scotty has it in the bag folks. If you can’t see it yet you’re in denial.
    ________________
    A 9 year old government with a thin majority?

    Labor free of it’s Shorten drag on the vote.

    Labor by 10 seats. For shizzle.

  17. There’s too many sins for Albo to eat Lurker!

    Plus – I worry he has been heeding c@t’s DM advice to him on twitter given some of his recent tactical choices.

  18. So it looks like, with regard to Global Heating, the Coalition are getting back to a similar place to where they were in 2007. We all know what happened then.

  22. ”
    Mavissays:
    Wednesday, October 13, 2021 at 4:00 pm
    Dodgy certifications?

    [‘An apartment tower housing hundreds of residents in Sydney’s south-west is at serious risk of collapse due to structural flaws, an engineer’s report has warned, sparking an emergency meeting to decide whether it will have to be evacuated.

    The Herald can reveal that a structural engineer hired by owners has warned that the 10-storey tower in Canterbury is a “risk to occupants”, and a collapse would also lead to “catastrophic damage” to two other apartment buildings which make up the Vicinity complex.

    An engineer has raised serious concerns about the structural soundness of the 10-storey building which forms part of the Vicinity complex at Canterbury.

    A group of engineers and other officials, including the state’s chief emergency engineer, are due to inspect the complex on the banks of the Cooks River on Wednesday afternoon. Some owners in the building have already packed their bags in case they are forced to evacuate.

    The complex on Charles Street has about 276 apartments, and was completed about six years ago by Toplace.

    A report by the structural engineer, completed on Sunday, warns that a range of serious concerns including the “magnitude of support deficiencies” and loss of structural robustness and absence of “fundamental structural members” puts the 10-storey building at severe risk of collapse in an earthquake.

    The 271-page report, obtained by the Herald, concludes that the 10-storey building, which has about 100 units, is “highly vulnerable” to a so-called weak storey collapse due to “high load irregularity”, irregularity of shear walls and deficiencies in the building atrium.’]

    https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/apartment-tower-under-threat-of-evacuation-after-warnings-of-collapse-20211013-p58zho.html
    ”

    Labor used to loose governments for such kind of things in past with screaming headlines from tabloids. Now it seems to become a common scene under the LNP government of last 10 years with no screaming headlines from Murdoch hacks.
    We are becoming like those developing nations we used to look down our nose in past.

  24. Regarding the “vibe” of the climate change pivot versus marriage equality, the difference is that there’s an election right around the corner, and even the most disinterested will allow some suspicion. I think Morrison has left this particular pivot too late, like so many before. Add to that Morrison’s failures to deliver (working backwards from vaccine procurement) and a steady whiff of corruption (I’ve lost track of the ‘rorts) and Labor is in with a pretty good chance against the “PM of NSW” who “can’t hold a hose”, delivers “too little too late”, and protects powerful men from consequences. There’s a lot to dislike in Morrison and his ministers. I’ve read that oppositions don’t win elections, governments lose them.

  25. My problem with Labor’s strategy is that I have been told all the same things before, for the past decade or more, on other issues. While it’s new for Labor to apply this strategy in the area of climate change, it’s a repetition of the same strategy that has handed other issues to the Coalition on a platter (none of which Labor is now competitive in).

    So far, none of that “neutralisation” has worked. They’ve lost despite all of it. They haven’t been in power to do things all those hypothetical things they could do better than the Coalition. In fact, the Coalition have only come out stronger in the long run, with the Overton window shifting in their favour, because their position and their arguments have been supported by Labor. Two major parties proposing the same thing will be significantly more convincing to voters than just one party proposing it.

    Labor gains:
    – a neutralisation of current Coalition attacks,
    – a potential blunting of future Coalition attacks if Labor get into power, and
    – hopefully an increased chance of getting into government.
    This is the so-called realpolitik “long game” we keep getting told about by the politically savvy on PB.

    Labor risks:
    – handing the Coalition a significantly strengthened position, and
    – swinging the Overton window further in the Coalition’s favour.
    That’s if the Coalition get into government. In which case, Labor also has to start over again building a new narrative, in competition with a (by now) long and strongly established Coalition narrative.

    The latter is what has actually eventuated from Labor’s “long game” over the last couple of elections, and not the hypothetical future advantage after an election win that Labor keeps hoping for. What I find slightly odd is that this failing strategy is never blamed. What’s always blamed is all those other issues Labor has yet to apply this strategy to :P.

    By the way, this strategy popularised by the politically savvy on PB stands in contradiction to that adage oft-quoted by the politically savvy on PB wtte “oppositions don’t win, governments lose”. Well if governments lose, then you may as well hold on to your ideals, policies and arguments until they do, and then claim vindication :P.

    (instead, Labor has held onto it’s strategy of neutralising one issue after another and will eventually claim vindication for that :P)

  27. I always think my objectives. I occasionally write them down, too. Sometimes I speak them, for example when I want to communicate them to other people.

  28. DN, Maybe all Labor needs is a truly popular leader?

    Easier said than done I guess.

    Objectively Morrison should be easy to knock over.

  29. ”
    Lars Von Triersays:
    Wednesday, October 13, 2021 at 8:10 pm
    Don’t you think Labor needs a positive agenda to win DN – or do you think Buggins turn will do the trick?
    ”
    They dis for LNP. But do you believe they won’t for ALP because they are held to higher probity?

  30. LVT: I’ve listed some of what I think are Morrison’s weaknesses going into an election. Do you disagree that these are weaknesses?

    (And sorry. I’ll be gone for a bit, but back later.)

  31. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31708/veteran-sonarman-explains-why-pump-jets-are-superior-to-props-on-modern-submarines

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/33018/modern-submarine-torpedo-attacks-are-nothing-like-what-you-see-in-the-movies

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42706/why-multi-billion-dollar-nuclear-submarines-still-run-into-things-underwater

    Hi all. Not exactly politics but found some interesting articles on Submarine stuff that may be of interest. Most seem pretty low on propaganda and hype content and are about how stuff works.

  32. Frednk
    Don’t underestimate the pressure coming from markets because the government has serious money managers telling them to get on board with tackling climate change or else.

  33. Here’s a question for you, Lars. Do you think a party that can’t make up their mind will be popularly considered a leader?

    Surprise! I’m referring to the Coalition, not Labor.

    What do you think the Coalition’s current frantic efforts at greenwashing are about? The Coalition’s thrashing around is to Labor’s advantage, whether or not they actively try to make something out of it :P.

  34. DisplayName @ #1034 Wednesday, October 13th, 2021 – 9:08 pm

    Here’s a question for you, Lars. Do you think a party that can’t make up their mind will be popularly considered a leader?

    Surprise! I’m referring to the Coalition, not Labor.

    What do you think the Coalition’s current frantic efforts at greenwashing are about? The Coalition’s thrashing around is to Labor’s advantage, whether or not they actively try to make something out of it :P.

    As Paul Bongiorno said the other day, all he can see is a government in chaos.

  35. DN – don’t know what your first sentence means?

    Third sentence – I think its about winning the election – presumably to keep the blue blood liberal vote on side in places like Kooyong/ North Sydney. Surely you don’t think its a “climate ephipany”?

  36. As far as WA is concerned, if Labor can’t win + 2 seats as a minimum this time around in the Federal election, they ain’t never going to get more than 5 Federal seats – ever……….
    Over the years, if a swing is generally on in the Eastern states, it is on here too.
    The pundits (largely the WA variety) always sing the song that “WA might make the difference” but over the years, if Labor win in the east, they will win here too. If it goes pear shape in the east, same here….
    I cannot remember, ever, when the results for a Federal election have hung on the outcome of the WA vote…..
    It will be against history if the local vote is the maker or breaker come the next election……First time for everything I suppose………..

  38. – swinging the Overton window further in the Coalition’s favour.

    Display Name, why can’t you see that Labor have been standing on solid ground all term and it’s the Coalition that have been scrambling?

    Some people, like you, seem to be blinded by a belief that the Coalition can win whatever the circumstances. I mean, even in 2019 when the Coalition won, it was only by a bee’s dick. Um, which sort of says to me that a hell of a lot of Australians, despite the Coalition’s crack election team, or whatever BS people lapped up about them, and despite the expensive character assassination launched directly at Bill Shorten’s body like a torpedo by the Coalition and the media, Labor still have a fair few MPs sitting on the Opposition benches. And are within striking distance of decapitating the Morrison government with the Overton Window that the Coalition are scrambling to get through to be on the right side of history where Labor are.

  39. Labor can rightly call out relying on carbon capture and storage, “blue” hydrogen, coal and gas subsidies, nuclear power, etc. as significant risks, and questionable technologies/practices around which to base a plan.

    Fine, so we’re going with “technological solutions”. There are plenty of problems with the Coalition’s captain’s grab bag of “winners”.

    What about coal and gas? They can just say they take the Coalition’s word that coal and gas will continue to be viable. Just ask the Coalition if you want to know more :P.

  40. Display Name,
    You’re making an awful lot of assumptions about Labor’s Climate Change policies going into the next election. Maybe instead of making smarmy assumptions you could do what I did today and listen to their spokesman for an hour or so tell you what Labor’s thinking is? 😐

  42. C@t

    Display Name, why can’t you see that Labor have been standing on solid ground all term and it’s the Coalition that have been scrambling?

    I haven’t said they aren’t.

    What you’ve quoted is (what I perceive to be) a risk. That is, it is qualified by “if Labor loses”. That doesn’t mean I am arguing that Labor will lose the next election.

    This whole discussion started because apparently some people don’t like it when people point out disadvantages. So I thought, to be fair, I’d go into a full and thorough explanation (sorry Mavis) of (what I perceive to be) the advantages and disadvantages of Labor’s strategy. Which didn’t help because here you are selectively quoting just one bit of it :P.

  45. Lurker
    We are all 20/20 in hindsight so now everyone is saying Shorten was unelectable. Heard didly squat during his time as leader. I thought ALP by 10 plus last election. I like everyone was wrong. The ALP is currently in front but I am feeling more confident than the last election of at least a chance of victory.
    Polls are turning as Covid and premiers becomes less of an issue. By March we should be hearing little of either. Then it becomes Morrison v Albanese and Morrison has him if there is no big issues hanging over the Liberals.

  46. Display Name,
    I freely admit I came to the conversation after The Block finished. However, I just had to challenge the Overton Window statement because I thought it was wrong and needed correcting. 🙂

  47. Steelydan says:
    Wednesday, October 13, 2021 at 9:35 pm
    Lurker
    We are all 20/20 in hindsight so now everyone is saying Shorten was unelectable. Heard didly squat during his time as leader. I thought ALP by 10 plus last election. I like everyone was wrong. The ALP is currently in front but I am feeling more confident than the last election of at least a chance of victory.
    Polls are turning as Covid and premiers becomes less of an issue. By March we should be hearing little of either. Then it becomes Morrison v Albanese and Morrison has him if there is no big issues hanging over the Liberals.
    ________________
    Albo’s gonna get defined real good by Crosby Textor.

  49. Lars Von Trier @ #749 Wednesday, October 13th, 2021 – 9:49 pm

    Steelydan says:
    Wednesday, October 13, 2021 at 9:35 pm
    Lurker
    We are all 20/20 in hindsight so now everyone is saying Shorten was unelectable. Heard didly squat during his time as leader. I thought ALP by 10 plus last election. I like everyone was wrong. The ALP is currently in front but I am feeling more confident than the last election of at least a chance of victory.
    Polls are turning as Covid and premiers becomes less of an issue. By March we should be hearing little of either. Then it becomes Morrison v Albanese and Morrison has him if there is no big issues hanging over the Liberals.
    ________________
    Albo’s gonna get defined real good by Crosby Textor.

    Jeez, imagine what Crosby Textor would do to Scotty if they worked for Labor.

Comments Page 21 of 23
1 … 20 21 22 23

Leave a Reply

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