The three-weekly YouGov federal poll records little change on last time, with two-party preferred steady at 50-50 from primary votes of Labor 30% (steady), Coalition 38% (steady), Greens 14% (up one) and One Nation 8% (steady). Anthony Albanese’s personal ratings are also unchanged at 41% approval and 53% disapproval, but Peter Dutton is down four on approval to 38% and up three on disapproval to 51%. Albanese’s lead as preferred prime minister is at 47-36, out from 44-37. The poll also finds an 84-16 split in favour of the proposition that workers have a right to strike for better wages and job security. It was conducted Friday to Tuesday from a sample of 1500.
There are also two state voting intention results from RedBridge Group, both combining two waves of polling in February and May:
• As reported in the Herald Sun, a poll for Victoria credits Labor with lead of 55-45, out from 54-46 in the last such poll in March, contrasting with the recent bi-monthly Resolve Strategic result which suggested the Coalition had moved into the lead. The primary votes are Labor 35% (down one), Coalition 38% (steady) and Greens 14% (up four). Kevin Bonham on Twitter notes that these primary votes suggest a 53-47 result based on a crude application of flows from the last election, but pollster Kos Samaras says the cumulative “others” pool has moved leftwards because “most of the right-wing minor party votes have shifted to the Coalition”. A full accounting of the results from the pollster should be along shortly. (UPDATE: The pollster has published the full result together with a full account of its “others” pool).
• The second poll such poll is for Queensland, and it maintains Labor’s run of diabolical polling there ahead of an election in October. The Liberal National Party is credited with a two-party lead of 57-43 from primary votes of Labor 28%, LNP 47% and Greens 12%. The poll has a sample of 880, and is somewhat at odds with a union-commissioned uComms polling provided last week to The Australian’s Feeding the Chooks column, conducted on May 14 from a sample of 2400, which found Labor had gone from 26.9% to 30.0% from an earlier poll April, while the LNP had gone from 35.1% to 33.7%, the Greens from 13.0% to 10.9% and One Nation from 10.0% to 5.2%, with undecided down from 16% to 10%.
Latest news related to the various federal redistributions in progress, following last week’s publication of draft boundaries for Victoria and Western Australia:
• The Australian Electoral Commission has announced the proposed new federal boundaries for New South Wales, which will involve the abolition of one of the state’s 47 seats, will be published “around lunchtime” on Friday.
• Suggestions the redistribution proposal for Victoria may have strengthened the Liberals in Kooyong prompted a flurry of speculation concerning a comeback by Josh Frydenberg, with Josh Butler of The Guardian reporting on divided opinions within the party. Seemingly the only one to go on the record was soon-to-retire Queensland member Karen Andrews, who spoke approvingly of the idea, which would potentially have been helpful to a Frydenberg comeback given one of the chief obstacles is the optics involved in deposing an already preselected female candidate, Amelia Hamer. Antony Green was initially invoked as having calculated the seat had been strengthened for the Liberals, which many had taken as read given blue-ribbon Toorak was part of the area to be gained from abolished Higgins, but he shortly clarified it was not possible to infer independent member Monique Ryan’s level of support in areas where she was not on the ballot paper in 2022. The matter was shortly resolved in any case when Frydenberg declared his support for Hamer. Aaron Patrick of the Financial Review reported Frydenberg had commissioned Freshwater Strategy to poll the seat “several times”, with party sources saying the results “didn’t indicate he’d win”.
• The proposed abolition of Higgins has prompted suggestions defeated former Liberal member Katie Allen, who had again been preselected for the seat, will instead contest Chisholm, despite the party already having a candidate for that seat in Monash councillor Theo Zographos. Josh Ferguson of The Australian reports the party will challenge the abolition of Higgins in its submission in response to the proposed new boundaries. The report further says a political foundation established by the seat’s former member, Peter Costello, to help fund campaigning in the seat “is being eyed by Liberal bean counters to help stave off a feared collapse in fundraising capacity for the party”. A Liberal source is quoted saying the fund was established to ensure the money “was not ultimately seized by a factional rival”.
Well said Entropy.
Been There at 9:08 pm
Nothing partisan about comparing a poor victim of Robodebt to a politician declared corrupt by a very legal body by the name of the ICAC.
I don’t need to tread cautiously, and keep your ” bodies of extreme investigative powers” whinging to your IPA boardroom.
————————
What are you talking about a “victim of Robodebt”? The point of the example of the Centrelink staffer was that they were an official under investigation, not a bystander / victim.
Also, lol at the IPA Boardroom comment. You’re so partisan that somebody suggesting caution in the public hearing of investigations that hold extreme inquisitorial powers apparently means that person must be an arch right-winger. Your tinfoil hat is showing, mate.
talk about corruption but shouldn’t manslaughter be the charge to come out of robodebt.
Entropy at 9:15 pm
Certainly if you take into account the witnesses as well. There is probably no case in which an open hearing would be justified. As nearly all political malfeasance doesn’t occur in a vacuum. There is likely to be some who had minor roles in the committing of others crimes. Even if that just mean’t not imposing ethical standards to the level they possibly should have been applied. While these people probably need a reprimand. Their level of culpability is probably not to the criminal nor open hearing standard.
———————-
Yes, spot on. I’d go even slightly further, and note that smears can stick to those who have no culpability at all, but who are caught up in an investigation simply by being proximate to whatever has occurred. A full exoneration in a report ultimately published months (or potentially even years) after intense daily media reporting during the hearing itself may end up being a pyrrhic victory.
”
shellbellsays:
Sunday, June 9, 2024 at 7:18 pm
Sprocket
Questions will have to be answered if Heeney, Gulden and Warner are not joint winners of the Brownlow
”
Actually Geelong did not play bad against Sydney. They played quite well. Probably that game would have won them the match against most other teams. Some of the Sydney goals were excellent.
Sydney did not score a single goal in 1st quarter and then win by 30 points in the end was something.
Boerwar @ #742 Sunday, June 9th, 2024 – 8:52 pm
First of all he’s got to be elected as Prime Minister. And that’s not going to happen before 2040. 🙂
Mexicanbeemer at 9:22 pm
talk about corruption but shouldn’t manslaughter be the charge to come out of robodebt.
———————
Not sure if you’re being facetious here, but obviously not.
Badthinker @ #696 Sunday, June 9th, 2024 – 6:44 pm
Completely upside down.
The suicide note would be to the planet. Something Badthinker has thought poorly about. Australia’s diplomacy would be for nothing if we abandoned the Paris Accords. We would have lost our voice.
Stinker
Not sure if you’re being facetious here, but obviously not.
————
Thanks for the dick response but looking at the evidence it could point more to manslaughter than corruption since they knew their actions were causing deaths.
Dutton has given up on Teal voters as hopelessly woke. He’s consolidating his main base, the 2GB/Sky News crowd. Money still votes Liberal as always. He’s hoping to win more votes through culture-warring, dog-whistling plus fear and loathing. Finally, maybe he can persuade some teal voters to switch to voting with their wallets via targeted tax cuts and the like.
davidwhsays:
Sunday, June 9, 2024 at 9:18 pm
Well said Entropy.
================================================
Though i’m not totally sold on that argument either. Unfortunately there are good points on both the open and closed hearing arguments.
It’s a bit like the Glady case. Certainly Daryl was up to his eyeballs in dodgy deals. Glady obviously knew some of his deals were very suspect. Exactly how much she knew was never exactly determined. Also her other problem was as a Premier of a state. Did she have a higher duty to not turn a blind eye to something she suspected was possibly illegal than an average civilian?.
Tinfoil hat reflecting right off of yours Stinker!
Cheers!
laughtong @ #734 Sunday, June 9th, 2024 – 8:14 pm
When I was in the US and inspecting the Naval Museum, the gentleman who kindly showed us around and gave us a guided tour, explained that, when the US Navy is put in a position where they either have to dry dock a boat and wait for the new part so it can be fixed up, or not, they are increasingly using a 3D printer to print up the part they require and they fit that in until such time as the regulation part arrives.
Did she have a higher duty to not turn a blind eye to something she suspected was possibly illegal than an average civilian?
You would think so. Probity in Office is supposed to be a thing.
Entropy I was referring to the very valid point that basically innocent people can be hurt in open inquiries.
C@t,
Not sure if you’ve seen Game of Thrones, but the way the right sneers at climate change reminds me of characters like Queen Cersei scoffing about silly little creatures of folklore, namely “grumkins” and “snarks” beyond The Wall at the start of the series, and by the end of the series they get invaded by an undead army.
Steve777 @ #760 Sunday, June 9th, 2024 – 9:32 pm
Teal voters had the opportunity to keep voting with their wallets at the last election and they chose not to. The Liberal Party will always be the party for those who vote wallet first.
Kirsdarke,
I’m more a Blade Runner metaphor person. It’s more literal. 😀
The Liberals and the Elites can think they will be able to fortify themselves against the exigencies of Climate Change, but eventually their luck will run out because the Climate can’t be bought off and the peasants suffering below them will eventually revolt. And there’s more of us than there is of them.
Mexicanbeemersays:
Sunday, June 9, 2024 at 9:22 pm
talk about corruption but shouldn’t manslaughter be the charge to come out of robodebt.
================================================
It would fit with Industrial manslaughter type chargers. I think certainly some states recognise bullying at work that results in someone being suicidal, Victoria certainly does.
“Negligent bosses could face up to 20 years in jail and $16 million in fines over the suicide deaths of their workers under workplace manslaughter laws to be introduced by the Victorian state government on Tuesday.
The proposed laws will cover deaths caused by mental injuries, including trauma from bullying or other forms of abuse, sustained on the job as well as accidents and illnesses caused by unsafe workplaces.
Brodie’s Law was introduced in 2011 to prevent employees bullying one another following the death of waitress Brodie Panlock, who died by suicide after ongoing harassment at work.”
https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/bosses-face-manslaughter-charges-for-suicides-under-new-workplace-laws-20191029-p5359m.html
”
Confessionssays:
Sunday, June 9, 2024 at 8:35 pm
BK @ #734 Sunday, June 9th, 2024 – 8:00 pm
What a bizarre analogy.
_____________
Seminary experience?
It’s truly bizarre.
What has happened to certain press gallery journalists? PVO is now writing for a shitrag, and Uhlmann is doing…whatever it is that he’s doing.
”
It shows the quality of Australian “journalists” with the exception of few.
Newspoll: 50-50 (-2 ALP/+2 LNP)
L/NP: 39 (+2)
ALP: 33 (-1)
GRN: 11 (-2)
PHON: 7 (0)
IND/OTH: 10 (+1)
New thread.
Mexicanbeemer at 9:32 pm
Thanks for the dick response but looking at the evidence it could point more to manslaughter than corruption since they knew their actions were causing deaths.
——————
I am sorry if you thought the response was dickish, but the question is an absurd one. It would be impossible to prove that any one person (or combination of persons) involved in the development of the policy caused the death of another, where the deceased took their own life.
Frankly, on the suggestion you’ve made, there’d have been a much better likelihood of Rudd or Garrett ending up in the docks for the pink batts scheme than for any politician or public servant doing so for Robodebt. And that is an absurd proposition.
davidwhsays:
Sunday, June 9, 2024 at 9:37 pm
Entropy I was referring to the very valid point that basically innocent people can be hurt in open inquiries.
===================================================
Which is the strongest of the arguments for a closed inquiry. Yet we still have open criminal cases in law courts. In which the same can happen to innocent people at times. Basically it comes down to whether the protection of all potentially innocent people is the number one priority or making sure the process of justice is fully transparent. Unfortunately you compromise one for the other, depending which you prioritise.