There’s a three-week gap between Newspolls as the new management takes effect, with Galaxy to assume the reins with a survey this weekend. That means the fortnightly release schedules of Morgan and Newspoll are now out of line, and will hopefully remain so. This week’s Morgan result, from 3282 face-to-face and SMS responses over the past two weekends, records a slight shift to the Coalition, but does off a particularly weak result last time. On the primary vote, the Coalition is up 1.5% to 39%, Labor is down by the same amount to 36%, and the Greens are up half a point to 14%. Labor’s lead on the headline respondent-allocated measure of two-party preferred is down from 54.5-45.5 to 53.5-46.5, while on previous election preferences the shift is from 54.5-45.5 to 53-47.
Also out this evening is a last hurrah from Newspoll in the shape of its quarterly aggregates of federal voting intention broken by state. GhostWhoVotes relates that these show a 50-50 split in New South Wales, compared with a 54-46 lead to Labor last time and consistent with the story being told of late by BludgerTrack; a Labor lead of 57-43 in Victoria, down from 59-41; a Labor lead of 52-48 in Queensland, compared with 50-50 last time; a 50-50 result in Western Australia, compared with an improbable Labor lead of 54-46 last time; and a 52-48 Labor lead in South Australia, down from 53-47 last time. Hopefully there will be a link to full tables from The Australian reasonably soon, as well as gender breakdowns. (UPDATE: All of that here, with a tip of the hat to Leroy Lynch).
Stay tuned for Essential Research, which as always will be with us later today.
UPDATE (Essential Research): For the first time in two months, Essential Research has budged from its 52-48 perch, with Labor’s lead in the fortnightly rolling aggregate increasing to 53-47. However, the primary votes are all but unchanged with the Coalition on 41%, Labor on 39%, the Greens on 11% and Palmer United on 1%, the only movement being a one-point increase for the Greens.
There is also a question on trust in particular media outlets, which as ever finds the Fairfax papers on top, The Australian slightly below, and News Corp tabloids further down still (responses were limited to those living in the papers’ relevant states). There appears to be a general downward trend here over results going back to 2011, most explicitly in the case of the Courier-Mail, which has adopted a highly partisan tone since that time, although The Age is well down over that time for reasons that are less clear to me. Even more entertainingly, the poll inquires on recognition and trust in various journalists, and finds Laurie Oakes, Andrew Bolt and Alan Jones leading on name recognition, but with the former topping the table on trust while the latter two occupy the bottom slots. Jon Faine of ABC Radio in Victoria also performed rather weakly among those who recognised him, for some reason.
There is also a question on funding of schools, for which the clear leader out of four options is having the federal government be “the main funder of all schools”. A question on whether Australian troops should fight Islamic State in Iraq records an even balance of support, with 41% in favour and 43% opposed, which is perhaps a little more hawkish than I would have guessed, and probably tells you something about reaction to the words “Islamic State”.
[One final thought. I reckon that what ACA did to the Paxtons was ten times as awful as the decision to allow Zaki Mallah on Q&A.]
Yeah totally.
GG
[The spongers all moved to Greece, apparently]
Spongers come in all shapes and sizes. You could have your wife own a house in Canberra, and use taxpayer’s money to rent it.
Matthew Yglesias at Vox makes excellent points about the destructive nature of the Eurozone.
http://www.vox.com/2015/6/30/8868363/greece-crisis-default-austerity
MB
So you are saying Labor in Australia is like Alan Bond financing.
Well done thats a new low
When is the ALP going to say something about the government’s prosecution of Witness K and his lawyer Bernard Collaery over the revelation that the government illegally bugged East Timorese Cabinet meetings in order to gain a commercial advantage in negotiations over oil and gas deposits?
953
Nicholas
This covers most things.
jules@950: I think his precise words were “brought up Aboriginal”. I think he was thinking of the concept in the same way that someone who grew up in a house of non-believers/non-synagogue attenders who didn’t Because eat pork or celebrate Christmas would consider themselves to have been “brought up Jewish”.
It’s a concept which makes a lot of sense to me re Jewish people but very less so Aboriginal people. But then, I do not claim to be an aboriginal (even though I suspect I could have some Aboriginal ancestry), so perhaps it’s not for me to comment.
But it’s a tricky issue, especially down here in Tassie (where, correct me if I’m wrong, I think you might have once said you hail from), where the TAC wishes to reserve the right to determine who is/is not an Aborigine, which is very different to the inclusive approach adopted by mainland communities such as the Gamilaaray (to whom Ray Martin claims to belong), who would be reluctant to disown anyone who claims to have Gamilaaray ancestry, even if they think it’s a little doubtful.
Anyway it’s a complex issue, and please don’t assume my views are as simplistic as those of Bolt. But I’m Leo not convinced that the questions Bolt asked should have been ruled out of court as they were.
Nicholas
Dont know what has happened since. Although I thought i read somewhere that the matter was close to resolution
documents and data seized by ASIO to the East Timorese government.
[It is the latest twist in a row over espionage and a treaty dividing $40 billion in oil and gas revenues in the Timor Sea.
ASIO – under the direction of former boss David Irvine and with the approval of attorney general George Brandis – raided the Canberra office of East Timor’s lawyer Bernard Collaery and home of a former member of Australia’s foreign espionage service in December 2013.]
http://www.smh.com.au/world/george-brandis-hands-over-to-east-timor-docs-seized-by-asio-20150503-1myyps.html
Jason Murphy is right on the money:
http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/07/01/default-schmefault-the-greeks-bear-no-gifts-and-that%E2%80%99s-just-fine/
[957
meher baba
I’m … not convinced that the questions Bolt asked should have been ruled out of court as they were.]
Bolt did not ask questions. He made false assertions in bad faith.
guytaur@954: the only conclusion I can draw from your comment is either a) you willfully misinterpret what I write or b) you’re not very bright. I suspect a) because I’ve seen you do it to other posters. But b) can’t be ruled out. Either way, I’ve done trying to explain my views to you.
Nicholas @ 955: If East Timor wins in the Permanent Court of Arbitration and succeeds in having the CMATS treaty set aside, there would be a strong case for a Royal Commission to investigate the blundering within the intelligence services which led to that outcome.
Nicholas.
Your 953 gets the austerity wrong. It treats the political as if it was economic.
Austerity was the wrong economic policy. No matter whom the politicians were implementing it.
The social impacts of austerity are what enabled Syriza to form a government.
A lot of defence against the facts.
briefly@960. I think he mainly asked questions: I’ve got the court case saved on my computer somewhere so I’ll check if you like.
I can’t really dispute the bad faith rap. That’s the whole problem: it’s an interesting nuanced issue, but people like Bolt can’t resist point-scoring and don’t care for nuance.
pedant
Do you know if things have progressed since report i linked above?
MB
That is because you are of the right and do not want to say austerity is a bad thing that in the case of Greece made things worse.
Presumably an official reprimand gives McEvoy and opportunity to appeal and clear his name entirely.
When are Greens going to express outrage about Libs putting up a SSM Bill – or is it only Labor that aren’t allowed to do that?
[964
meher baba
briefly@960. I think he mainly asked questions: I’ve got the court case saved on my computer somewhere so I’ll check if you like.]
The less time given to Bolt the better.
Ray Martin? Are you sure you didn’t get that from the Onion? Appointing Ray Martin would be a sad joke if true.
paaptsef
It was interesting to see every Green at The Doors (all women, from memory) saying that it didn’t matter who sponsored the bill, as long as Love Won…and then a day later adopting the line that the proposed amendments weren’t acceptable because the Parliament didn’t own them.
Di Natale at work?
guytaur@966: it’s true that I don’t think that austerity is always a bad thing, and that it might be justified in Greece. But you have accused me several times of criticising Rudd’s GFC response when all I did was praise it.
If we are into finger-pointing, then I’ll say that your “problem” is that you believe that the success of Rudd’s GFC response somehow “proves” that austerity is wrong for Greece. I think you are more or less on your own there and I am certain that, if you wrote an essay with that conclusion and gave it to your beloved Professor Stiglitz to mark he’d give you a D.
I see lets beat up the Greens is at work again.
It was Abbott that said the parliament should own the legislation not the Greens not Labor.
Stop peddling LNP attacks on the Greens Labor people it does you no favours
So the first thing we hear from the changed Sophie is that she hasn’t changed….
http://wangarattachronicle.com.au/2015/07/01/same-sex-marriage-a-point-of-difference-in-indi/
mb
No you did not praise Labor’s response. Instead you cherry picked to avoid saying austerity is bad.
Austerity is contractionary. This made Greece has a recession for 5 years. Less income less money for government to pay back. More interest to be paid.
Austerity made it worse. Doing the opposite that is expansionary economic policy meant no recession for Australia.
No ifs or buts about that.
guytaur
[“Having individuals going it alone now, having the Opposition Leader going it alone, would be a mistake,” Mr di Natale said.
“I just hope that he recognises that here’s an opportunity to have a rare moment of unity.
Let’s put the competing bills behind us, let’s have one piece of legislation that we can all get behind.”
Mr di Natale said it was critical that politicians put politics to one side.
“That the parliament owns this bill, that the Greens, the Labor Party and the Liberal Party are all co-sponsoring a piece of legislation, a piece of legislation that the entire Parliament and indeed the community can own,” he said.]
http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/06/01/greens-tipped-reject-gay-marriage-bill/
Di Natale uses exactly the same language to criticise Labor’s bill that Abbott did.
Mike Kelly throws in the towel
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-01/defamation-case-over-former-mp-tweet-ends-with-apology/6587298
Next cab off the dank should be John Setka
SSM…
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/samesex-marriage-vote-should-be-owned-by-the-parliament-tony-abbott-20150527-ghaohc.html
[Any vote legalising same sex marriage shouldn’t be owned by any particular political party says the Prime Minister.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott has hinted that same-sex marriage should be brought before Parliament via a cross-party bill, in a major shift in his language on the reform.
As Mr Abbott also called on Labor leader Bill Shorten not to politicise the issue, estimates show Canberra is just one MP away from gathering enough support to a pass a same-sex marriage bill through both houses.
Ms Burke’s announcement comes as Mr Shorten announced he will introduce a bill to legalise same-sex marriage into the lower house next week, and in doing so, try and force the issue in the Liberal party room.
The move has angered some Liberal MPs who support same-sex marriage and do not think Labor pressure will help them secure a free vote for their side. It has also caused confusion in the Parliament, given Liberal Democrat senator David Leyonhjelm and the Greens also have same-sex marriage bills on the Senate’s books.]
zoomster
Well he was right. The LNP voted it down comprehensively. So it was a mistake.
That is very different from Abbott saying the parliament has to own it.
This is an issue where Labor and the Greens are on the same side and united at the moment along with cross bench people and LNP members.
zoomster
Oh and to say Di Natalie used the same language as Abbott is ridiculous. He was making the point that parliament owns all legislation. The opposite to what Abbott was saying
It’s quite obvious that di Natale and Abbott are on a unity ticket when it comes to Marriage Equality. They are opposed to Labor’s bill.
briefly
That makes you wrong then. The Greens have officially affirmed they will vote yes to Labor’s bill on marriage equality.
982
guytaur
The Greens frequently vote for things to which they also declare opposition…and vice versa.
There have been so many bills. It’s polyamory.
briefly
This cross party legislation is likely to fail too. Much as I do not want it to. The LNP has confirmed it is going to decide on its free vote position on August 18. The cross party bill is due to be voted on if things go well before that.
[984
lizzie
There have been so many bills. It’s polyamory.]
So many bills, so little time…:)
guytaur..
You are blind & thoughtless. Di Natale did, in fact, use the same language as Abbott & other Liberals ..and he did, in fact criticise Bill Shorten ..as Abbott did. Zoomster has pointed this fact out and provided the quotes ..it is incontrovertible..
Now we wait for him to do the same with this Liberal Bill ..I won’t be holding my breath
http://www.samesame.com.au/news/12476/Cross-party-marriage-equality-
[Greens MP Adam Bandt is also supporting the bill, and as a persistent voice in favour of marriage equality, Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young welcomed the announcement today.]
Sarah Hanson-Young @sarahinthesen8 3h3 hours ago
MPs & Senators from all sides working together will make #MarriageEquaility finally happen. I’m looking forward to lots of Spring weddings!
guytaur #979
Don’t know why exactly the Liberal Party were binding opposed on that bill.
From what I recall, the Libs said that they would support a conscience vote on same-sex marriage if ‘it was above party politics’ i.e. co-signed by another member of political party, and Tanya Plibersek said that she would step down as a co-signor if a member of the Liberal party did.
Meher
Forget didactic economic theory and look at outcomes.
Austerity has resulted in 50% youth unemployment. Clearly austerity is a complete failure. No ifs no buts
markjs
I saw the press conference live. I know Di Natalie was talking about all legislation being owned by parliament. He only even used that terminology because of Abbott.
If you doubt me. Find quotes before and after about other legislation where Di Natalie has said any such thing
I reckon a unity SSM bill with LNP engagement is definitely the go…
If the proponents of SSM are prepared to accept that they’ll never see it in their lifetime.
I don’t care all that much about SSM (although I’d certainly vote for it in a referendum) but Greens’ position on this is risible. It’s clearly a sort of turf war: “LGBTs are our constituency so rak off Labor!”
I’m now waiting for Senator X to come out with his usual trick of saying “I’m all for SSM but I have major problems with some of the clauses so I’ll reluctantly have to vote against it. ”
Even the Greens look reasonable compared to Senator X.
Millenial
Yes indeed Plibersek did say that which of course just showed up Abbott for being the obstruction he is on this legislation
[I’m now waiting for Senator X to come out with his usual trick of saying “I’m all for SSM but I have major problems with some of the clauses so I’ll reluctantly have to vote against it. ”]
Well he voted for it in 2012 and hasn’t indicated that his vote would be any different this time around, so if that does happen, it’d be a bit of a shock turn-around and credit to you for calling it.
@meher baba and others
Greens have always said “Every vote, every MP, every time.” on marriage equality and that’s how they’ll always vote.
They can dispute the parliamentary tactics, but ultimately it won’t stop them voting yes every time.
dtt@990. Seeing as you are saying “no ifs no buts” you’ll presumably be instantly able to tell me the youth unemployment rate in Greece 5 years ago.
I’d be interested to know.
Carey@994: he’s done it on several other issues (twice on emissions trading as I recall) so he’s got form. So I’ll be pleasantly surprised if he sticks to his guns.
You’re not a fan are you? He’s not worthy.
If Howards, in his tight-trousered way, hadn’t redefined marriage as between a man and a woman, I wonder what the argument would be about now?
This will hurt Abbott politically
@CatherineKingMP: Doctors make sure patients know who is to blame for higher fees and falling bulk billing. Tony Abbott and his GP Tax. http://t.co/vfljytxDQL
guytaur #993
I know right? I don’t care about this dumb ‘parliament owns’ excuses or exactly who of who’s name is on the bill… I just the damn bill passed so we, as a country; can finally acknowledge that this is the 21st century, give the people the right they deserve, and then we can move on to create a better future than what we’re currently living in.