Morgan has released what it describes as the “first major public opinion poll of 2014”, though it could just as easily have dropped the “major”. It provides no indication of festive cheer softening attitudes towards the new government, showing the Coalition down 1.5% on the primary vote to 39% with Labor also down half a point to 38%, the Greens up half a point to 10.5% and the Palmer United Party steady on 3.5%. That translates to a 53-47 lead to Labor on 2013 preference flows and 52.5-47.5 on the headline respondent-allocated figure. As has been Morgan’s form for a while now, this poll combines its regular weekend face-to-face polling with SMS component, in this case encompassing 2527 respondents from the two weekends past. The first Essential Research result for the year should be with us tomorrow.
UPDATE: Little change also from Essential Research, which opens it account for the year with a result from the polling period of Friday to Monday only, rather than its two-week rolling average. This has the Coalition leading 51-49, with the Coalition, Labor and the Greens each up a point on the primary vote to 45%, 38% and 8% respectively, with the Palmer United Party steady on 4% and others down two to 6%. Also featured are the monthly personal ratings, showing a slight improvement for Tony Abbott – up two on approval to 47% and down three on disapproval to 43% – and a softening for Bill Shorten, down four to 35% and up one to 32%. Preferred prime minister is little changed, Abbott’s lead shifting from 43-33 to 42-31. The poll also finds strong opposition to fees for GP visits, with 28% approving and 64% disapproving, and 47% support for Australia becoming a republic at the end of the Queen’s reign against 32% opposed.
Fulvio Sammut@1550
While the Abbott gang might order worse, I am not sure the Navy would implement the order.
prettyone
[There are a lot of people around on lowish incomes like me who vote conservative and admire Tony Abbott.]
Admire him all you like, i doubt he gives a shit about you. If you earn what you say and live like you claim then its against your own best interests to vote for him, no matter how much you admire him.
Also if you’re up for it why do you admire him (I promise I won;t laugh if you answer, tho others might.)
I know full well how hard it is, I did it for forty years of my life.
It didn’t turn my brain into such mush that I admired a shallow charlatan like Abbott or voted conservative.
And there are some people who take smack, even though it’s detrimental to their health.
1546
Admiration,I’m not so sure. The main reason people voted for lib was continuous inability of labor to manage a budget. If you don’t manage your budget when self employed your gone.
Briefly 1505 & 1517
Agree with these posts, fertile ground everywhere for Labor outside of the boats issue, so why is labor still continuing down this line. Do they still maintain the AS policy they took to the election, or are they looking at a more humane approach. Did not Bob Carr warn of the dangers of another backflip just before he stood down.
If the govt want to crow about stopping the boats, the opposition after making such a hash of it during its term of Govt have just got to suck it up. Labor lost this debate years ago.
Opposition focus for the long term should be on budget cuts (especially to the low income), NDIS, NBN and direct action, as they will not make any inroads on the boats issue. Any short term issues with Govt AS policy, let the Greens or UNHCR make all the noise.
[ The allegation was that shots had been fired in the air.
A stupid and totally unnecessary action if it happened, but certainly not in the league of firing on boats. ]
Presumably shots in the air are warning that non compliance will result in shots being fired at a target..
“Also if you’re up for it why do you admire him (I promise I won;t laugh if you answer, tho others might.”
Thank you Jules for asking me but I don’t invite ridicule. My comments will only inflame people here. I was just wanting to say there are many ordinary people like myself who vote conservative.
I operated on a substantial overdraft and carried significant mortgages all my business life.
It didn’t prevent me from accumulating assets or setting myself up for a relatively comfortable retirement.
There is nothing wrong with judicious debt, and only an idiot would abjure borrowing as a matter of ideology, particularly when the borrowing protects his assets, advances his business and enhances his standard of living.
paaptsef@1557
It would certainly raise that apprehension.
Yep, bugger saving the nation from the GFC, much better to follow the US, Brittan, and the rest of the OECD into the Great Recession, eh Buddy ?
Goodnight all.
Off to try to get some sleep.
[ It would certainly raise that apprehension. ]
So if our Navy is firing warning shots and the criminal captain of a boat full of asylum seekers decides to ignore that warning, what does our navy do next..
That will be an on water operational issue for which there will be no answer forthcoming.
[The professional fishermen who will patrol West Australian waters as “shark sheriffs” are still to be contracted, despite a State Government deadline passing last week.]
This has been a balls-up from the get go. Contracting issues, tendering issues, budgetary issues, now recruitment issues.
If it looks like, smells like and sounds like policy on the run, then it’s most likely policy on the run.
You call Barnett’s brain fart “policy”? 🙂
1558
Borrowing is fine as long as the revenue for repaying is constant and what you’ve borrowed the money for is going to continue long enough to pay the debt.
1561
You obviously know where the GFC came from USA , Britain and Europe. You are probably aware how they got there. If we continue as they did b4 the GFC then I guess well all get the chance to see what it feels like.
FS:
Touche.
Whatever it is, it’s totally unacceptable.
[ It’s not easy and there’s ups and downs, no sick leave, no 4 week ARL, and Christmas time often brings dow time.
It’s harder than you might think.]
You don’t rock’n’roll for a living by any chance?
Barnett’s unilateral decree to destroy all 3 metre sharks has as much logic, benefit and substance as the biblical edict to kill each first born son.
Thirty years of ongoing tax-cuts to the top tier, combined with a total deregulation of the credit industry, actually.
That pretty much sums up Coalition policy over the past thirty years.
Must really irk you lot that Keynes was vindicated over the GFC, eh Buddy ?
and on that point, it’s time to go sweat
[asking me but I don’t invite ridicule.]
Oh come on, you can expect anyone to take that statement seriously.
Keynes is an unknown to me . Borrowing money that you can’t repay is pretty simple really. It’s a no no.
“You don’t rock’n’roll for a living by any chance?”
‘course not, but would you like to hear about some dirty deeds done dirt cheap?
silmaj
There is more to Keynes than just borrowing money, it is about supporting the Aggregate Demand side of the economy.
And your premise is that the Labor Government couldn’t service it’s piffling budget excess?
Sorry, you’ve been polite, and you deserve a civil response, so I’ll simply say that your premise is totally unacceptable by any objective economic analysis.
[1565
confessions
The professional fishermen who will patrol West Australian waters as “shark sheriffs” are still to be contracted, despite a State Government deadline passing last week.
This has been a balls-up from the get go. Contracting issues, tendering issues, budgetary issues, now recruitment issues.
If it looks like, smells like and sounds like policy on the run, then it’s most likely policy on the run.]
Hunting sharks is an idiotic idea as well as a barbaric one. It will only result in the pointless destruction of (endangered) Great Whites that will in any case be replaced by new individuals. The Whites are highly mobile but thinly distributed ocean-going travelers, attracted to the WA coast by increasing numbers seals, sea-lions and whales, and are most likely transiting WA on their way to or from the nursery off Kangaroo Island. Hunting and destroying them will not reduce the threat posed to humans and will only amount to State-sponsored trophy-killing. The other influence on the appearance of ocean-going species such as large hammerheads is the increase in inshore sea surface temperatures, a phenomenon resulting from climate change that obviously cannot be altered by killing anything.
Well said, Briefly.
I appears that we have been reduced to a small gaggle of West Australians here tonight.
Did you guys see or hear the little piggy from the Hotels Association squealing that the Liquor recommendations were unfair and the result of the efforts of self interest groups such as the medical lobby and the police, pushing their own agenda against the best interests of the community?
And he said it with a straight face, too.
OK, only one then.
Good night.
1576 and 1577
Labor decided to fiscally keep demand going which then put a restraint on the independent monetary tool being used to perhaps the extent it could have been. You must all recall our rates rising while others went to zero. The govt now has a large overdraft and supposed spending increase to come. The low overseas rates have allowed the once were weak business to restructure and are starting to thrive. Aus business never got that chance. We are know in a global economy and govt intervention against the globe is pointless.
[1565
confessions
The professional fishermen who will patrol West Australian waters as “shark sheriffs” are still to be contracted, despite a State Government deadline passing last week.]
It will most likely cost at least $4,000 per boat per fishing day to operate the drum-and-line fishing gear mentioned by the Fisheries Department. This would cover the hire of 35-40′ vessels suitable for WA coastal waters, engagement of crew, the supply of fishing gear and bait, and the fuel, lubricants, insurance, maintenance and other running costs. Such boats can set and pull 20 km of gear in a day in seas up to about 4 metres and winds up to about 25 knots, so on most but not all days from October to May along the SW coast.
So the State will have to provide around $20,000 per fishing day to set and work every 100 km of gear. If they are serious about catching sharks, the budget would need to be enough to run 200-250 km of gear each fishing day, focused only on the most populous areas from Lancelin to Augusta.
If they target only large White and Bull sharks – say, those over 3m – catch rates will necessarily be very low. This is because the numbers of these sharks is not great, and because they are distributed over great distances and in various parts of the water column all along the coast from beyond Kalbarri to Israelite Bay and The Bight in waters up to 15 km from the shoreline.
They may catch 1-2 such sharks per 30 fishing days per 100 km of gear, at the absolute most. So the State is going to have to expect to spend between $20,000 and $50,000 per day to engage between 5 and 12 boats at a cost of between $3 and $8 million per season, resulting in the taking of as few as 15-20 very large sharks. Obviously the fishing cost per shark may be very high – as much as $500,000 for each one taken.
As well, considering these boats will have to be paid even if they catch nothing, there will not be great incentives for the crew to maximise their catching. On the contrary, the incentive will be to operate with as little gear and as few hours as possible each fishing day or trip.
This is a completely idiotic sham of a policy.
[ You must all recall our rates rising while others went to zero. ]
Yes the incompetent Libs ignored 20+ warnings about spending
and we had about a dozen consecutive rate rises
New thread.
04:57:00 16/01/2014 ——- Nett_NEWS++™ http://bit.ly/1aQcqOy NB Pique of the Week