Q. Tony Abbott says that by removing unfair dismissal laws and re-instituting AWA Individual contracts he is not bringing back Workchoices but making sure our IR system promotes workplace flexibility. The unions say that taking away unfair dismissal rights and re-instituting AWA Individual contracts IS bringing back two of the main pillars of WorkChoices and shows the Liberals are determined to make the laws favour companies at the expense of ordinary workers. Whose view is closest to your own?
24% agreed more with Tony Abbott’s position on removing unfair dismissal laws and re-instituting AWA Individual contracts and 43% agreed more with the unions’ position that the Liberals are determined to make the laws favour companies at the expense of ordinary workers.
69% of Labor voters support the unions’ position and 56% of Liberal/National voters support Tony Abbott’s position.
51% of those aged 35-54 support the unions’ position and 21% support Tony Abbott’s position. Comments »
Q. If it turned out the Coalition was planning to reintroduce some of the Howard Government’s IR laws, like ending unfair dismissal protections and restoring individual contracts, would that make you more likely or less likely to vote for them in the upcoming federal election?
|Total more likely||14%|
|Total less likely||46%|
|Much more likely||6%|
|Somewhat more likely||8%|
|Somewhat less likely||14%|
|Much less likely||32%|
|Make no difference||25%|
46% said that they would be less likely to vote for the Coalition if they were planning to reintroduce some of the Howard Government’s IR laws – 14% said they would be more likely.
Among Labor voters, 69% said they would be less likely to vote for the Coalition, 7% more likely and 16% make no difference.
Among Coalition voters, 20% said they would be less likely to vote for the Coalition, 30% more likely and 42% make no difference.
51% of those aged 35-54 said they would be less likely to vote for the Coalition, 11% more likely and 26% make no difference. Comments »
Q. There have been some recent situations where a politician has resigned from their position or their party after some aspects of their sexual behaviour were made public by the media. Is it appropriate for the media to reveal details of a political figure’s private life?
|Yes, in all circumstances||12%|
|Yes, in some circumstances||42%|
|No, not at all||38%|
A majority (54%) believe it is appropriate for the media to reveal details of a political figure’s personal life in some or all circumstances. 12% think details should be revealed in all circumstances and 42% in some circumstances. 38% say details of a political figure’s personal life should not be revealed at all. 64% of Liberal/National voters and 50% of Labor voters approved revealing details of political figure’s personal life in some or all circumstances. Greens voters were split 50% some/all, 50% not at all. There were no substantial demographic differences. Comments »
If answered “in some circumstances” –
Q. Is it appropriate for the media to reveal details of a political figure’s private life in any of the following circumstances?
|Where there is a public interest due to impact on the politician’s work or taxpayers’ resources||92%||5%||3%|
|Where the politician has acted in a way clearly at odds with their publicly expressed views||88%||8%||4%|
|Where a politician’s personal choices are unusual or not considered mainstream||20%||67%||14%|
Sample = 457
The majority of those who approved revealing details in some circumstances agreed that details could be revealed where there is a public interest due to impact on the politician’s work or taxpayers’ resources (92%) or where the politician has acted in a way clearly at odds with their publicly expressed views (88%). However, revealing details where a politician’s personal choices are unusual or not considered mainstream was only acceptable to 20%. Comments »
The Tasmanian election in March created history. For the first time the Greens polled over 20% of the vote in a state wide lower house election and as a result Australia has its first Greens Minister in the new ALP/Greens government.
While the media wallowed in superficial explanations – the Greens had an ‘articulate and electable leader’ and appealed to the mythical ‘middle ground’ they completely ignored the impact of the third party ‘Our Common Ground’ campaign run by Environment Tasmania and The Wilderness Society (ET/TWS) and other community organisations.
In doing so they failed to understand the strategy behind the first environment campaign since the WA Election in 2001 that has influenced the outcome of an election. Before that you have to go back to the 1990 Federal Election. In between times environmental election campaigns have generally failed to gain traction or worse backfired harming the party supporting the environment. Comments »
Q. If there was a Federal election held today, to which party would you probably give your first preference?
Q. If you ‘don’t know’ on the above question, which party are you currently leaning to?
1,911 sample size
|First preference/leaning to||6 months ago||4 weeks ago||Last week||This week
|2PP||6 months ago||4 weeks ago||Last week||This week
NB. The data in the above tables comprise 2-week averages derived the first preference/leaning to voting questions. Respondents who select ‘don’t know’ are not included in the results.
* Sample is the aggregation of two weeks’ polling data. Comments »
Opinion of Kevin Rudd an the Labor Party
Q. Would you say that your view of Kevin Rudd and the Labor Government has become more or less favourable in recent weeks?
|Total more favourable||11%|
|Total less favourable||58%|
|Much more favourable||3%|
|A little more favourable||8%|
|A little less favourable||25%|
|Much less favourable||33%|
58% of respondents said their view of Kevin Rudd and the Labor Government had become less favourable over recent weeks and 11% said they had become more favourable.
22% of Labor voters said they had become more favourable and 31% less favourable. Coalition voters split 4% more favourable/81% less favourable and Greens voters 23% more favourable/58% less favourable.
47% of those aged under 35 were less favourable compared to 66% of those aged 45+. Comments »
If a little less or much less favourable –
Q. And which of the following would you say has been the main reason for your view of Kevin Rudd and the Labor Government becoming less favourable in recent weeks?
|Not honouring their election commitments||24%|
|Too much spending||15%|
|Too soft on asylum seekers||15%|
|Problems with insulation and school building programs||13%|
|The 40% tax on mining companies||12%|
|Postponing introduction of ETS to address climate change||7%|
|Too tough on asylum seekers||4%|
|Some other reason||7%|
|No particular reason||6%|
Sample size = 642
Of those who had a less favourable view of Kevin Rudd and the Labor Government, 24% said their main reason was not honouring their election commitments, 15% too much spending and 15% thought the Government was too soft on asylum seekers.
Among Labor voters the main reasons were not honouring election commitments (30%) and problems with the insulation and school building programs (14%).
For Coalition voters the main reasons were not honouring election commitments (27%), the 40% tax on mining companies (18%) and too much spending (17%).
For Greens voters the main reasons were postponing the introduction of the ETS (34%) and problems with then insulation and school building programs (16%). Comments »
Read Essential's ongoing research on the public response to Covid-19.Download this week's Report
Two Party Preferred:
In this week's report:
- Performance of Scott Morrison
- Performance of Anthony Albanese
- Preferred Prime Minister
- Federal government response to Covid-19
- State government response to Covid-19
- Confidence in Labor government handling of Covid-19 pandemic
- Satisfaction with speed of Covid-19 vaccine rollout
- Party most responsible for slow vaccine rollout