Carbon Tax, Election, Essential Media, Essential Report, federal politics, Greens, Labor, Liberal, Nationals, Polling, polls, tax
Q. Do you think the Government should call an early election over the carbon tax?
| 28 March | 31 May | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | |
| Yes | 40% | 42% | 15% | 71% | 18% |
| No | 44% | 42% | 68% | 19% | 66% |
| Don’t know | 17% | 16% | 17% | 11% | 16% |
42% think the Government should call an early election over the carbon tax and 42% disagree. This is similar to the views recorded in the previous poll in March and is strongly associated with voting intention.
Essential Media, Essential Report, federal politics, Greens, Labor, Liberal, Nationals, Polling, polls, two party preferred, voting, Voting intention
Q. If a Federal Election was held today to which party will you probably give your first preference vote? If not sure, which party are you currently leaning toward?
Q. If don’t know -Well which party are you currently leaning to?
sample size = 1,881
| First preference/leaning to | Election
21 Aug 10 |
4 weeks ago | 2 weeks ago | Last week | This week |
| Liberal | 43% | 44% | 43% | 44% | |
| National | 4% | 3% | 3% | 3% | |
| Total Lib/Nat | 43.6 | 47% | 47% | 46% | 46% |
| Labor | 38.0 | 35% | 35% | 36% | 34% |
| Greens | 11.8 | 10% | 10% | 11% | 12% |
| Other/Independent | 6.6 | 8% | 8% | 7% | 8% |
| 2PP | Election
21 Aug 10 |
4 weeks ago | 2 weeks ago | Last week | This week |
| Total Lib/Nat | 49.9% | 54% | 54% | 52% | 53% |
| Labor | 50.1% | 46% | 46% | 48% | 47% |
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. The two-party preferred estimate is calculated by distributing the votes of the other parties according to their preferences at the 2010 election.
Essential Media, Essential Report, family payments, Greens, Labor, Liberal, Nationals, welfare
Q. The Federal Budget has frozen the income levels above which parents become ineligible for family payments. Do you approve or disapprove of this decision?
| Total | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | |
| Total approve | 52% | 65% | 47% | 56% |
| Total disapprove | 28% | 18% | 38% | 22% |
| Strongly approve | 17% | 25% | 12% | 24% |
| Approve | 35% | 40% | 35% | 32% |
| Disapprove | 20% | 13% | 25% | 19% |
| Strongly disapprove | 8% | 5% | 13% | 3% |
| Don’t know | 20% | 17% | 14% | 22% |
52% of respondents approve of freezing the income levels above which parents become ineligible for family payments and 28% oppose.
65% Labor and 56% of Greens voters approve – and Liberal/National voters are more likely to approve than disapprove (47%/38%).
Respondents with dependent children approve 47%/37% and households earning over $150,000 approve 48%/37%.
Essential Media, Essential Report, Greens, household earnings, Labor, Liberal, Nationals, perceptions, Polling, polls, spending and income, tax, welfare
Q. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
| Total agree | Total disagree | Strongly agree | Agree | Disagree | Strongly disagree | Don’t know | |
| Households earning more than $150,000 a year don’t need help through family payments | 67% | 27% | 29% | 38% | 20% | 7% | 6% |
| Households on high incomes pay high taxes so should get family payments for bringing up children | 33% | 61% | 7% | 26% | 41% | 20% | 7% |
| Welfare payments should only go to those on low incomes | 66% | 29% | 23% | 43% | 23% | 6% | 5% |
| All taxpayers, regardless of their income, should be eligible for some form of Government payment | 35% | 57% | 8% | 27% | 36% | 21% | 8% |
| Family payments aren’t really welfare – they just provide assistance for families raising children. | 60% | 32% | 14% | 46% | 23% | 9% | 7% |
| Welfare payments should be reduced for those who have been on them long term. | 41% | 48% | 15% | 26% | 33% | 15% | 12% |
| Welfare and family payments should be lower to encourage people to be more self-reliant and not rely so much on the Government | 40% | 50% | 12% | 28% | 35% | 15% | 9% |
| People on low incomes receiving welfare should have to justify how they spend it | 47% | 46% | 13% | 34% | 31% | 15% | 6% |
| Welfare for low-income families is different from family payments to middle-income families | 61% | 22% | 14% | 47% | 18% | 4% | 17% |
| The purpose of welfare payments is to reduce the difference in income between people with higher incomes and those with lower incomes | 40% | 49% | 8% | 32% | 36% | 13% | 11% |
About two-thirds of respondents agreed that “Households earning more than $150,000 a year don’t need help through family payments” (67%) and “Welfare payments should only go to those on low incomes” (66%). Although these statements were more strongly supported by Labor and Greens voters, 61% of Liberal/National voters agree that “Households earning more than $150,000 a year don’t need help through family payments”.
For households earning under $100K, 77% agree “Households earning more than $150,000 a year don’t need help through family payments” and 73% agree “Welfare payments should only go to those on low incomes”.
However, of households earning $150K+, 62% disagree that “Households earning more than $150,000 a year don’t need help through family payments” and 50% disagree that “Welfare payments should only go to those on low incomes”.
Although most respondents (60%) think that family payments are different from welfare benefits, only 33% agree that “Households on high incomes pay high taxes so should get family payments for bringing up children”.
Opinions are divided over issues regarding the obligations of people receiving welfare. 47% agree that “People on low incomes receiving welfare should have to justify how they spend it” and 46% disagree – 58% of Liberal/National voters agree but 55% of Labor voters disagree.
Carbon Pricing, carbon pricing scheme, Essential Media, Essential Report, Greens, Labor, Liberal, Nationals, Polling, polls
Q. Do you support or oppose the Government’s recent announcement to introduce a carbon pricing scheme from 1 July 2012, which will require industries to pay a tax based on the amount of carbon pollution they emit?
| 7 March | 14 March | 28 March | 18 April | Total | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | |
| Total support | 35% | 38% | 34% | 39% | 41% | 63% | 20% | 86% |
| Total oppose | 48% | 49% | 51% | 49% | 44% | 19% | 75% | 9% |
| Strongly support | 9% | 12% | 12% | 13% | 14% | 22% | 4% | 47% |
| Support | 26% | 26% | 22% | 26% | 27% | 41% | 16% | 39% |
| Oppose | 19% | 17% | 19% | 15% | 15% | 10% | 23% | 4% |
| Strongly oppose | 29% | 32% | 32% | 34% | 29% | 9% | 52% | 5% |
| Don’t know | 18% | 13% | 15% | 12% | 15% | 19% | 5% | 5% |
41% (+2%) support the introduction of a carbon pricing scheme and 44% (-5%) oppose. This represents a 7% shift in opinion in favour of a carbon pricing scheme since last month and is the highest level of support and lowest level of opposition since the scheme was announced.
Women support the scheme 44%/39%, while men oppose 51%/38%. Younger people tend to support the scheme (aged under 35 – 47% support/35% oppose) while older respondents strongly oppose (aged 55+ – 35% support/55% oppose)
EMC, Essential Media, Essential Report, federal politics, Greens, Labor, Liberal, Nationals, Polling, polls, superannuation
Q. The Federal Government is proposing to increase superannuation payments from nine per cent to 12 per cent by 2019-20. How much have you heard about this proposal?
| Total | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | |
| A lot | 4% | 4% | 4% | 2% |
| Something | 13% | 15% | 13% | 17% |
| A little | 27% | 25% | 32% | 28% |
| Nothing | 53% | 54% | 50% | 53% |
| Don’t know | 3% | 2% | 1% | – |
There was low awareness of the Government’s proposal to increase superannuation payments from nine per cent to 12 per cent by 2019-20 – only 17% say they have heard a lot or something about it.
22% of full-time workers and 16% of part-time workers have heard a lot/something about it.
Essential Media, Essential Report, federal politics, Greens, Labor, Liberal, Nationals, Polling, polls, superannuation
Q. Based on what you know, do you support or oppose the proposal to increase superannuation payments from nine per cent to 12 per cent by 2019-20?
| Total | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | |
| Total support | 69% | 77% | 67% | 78% |
| Total oppose | 13% | 8% | 20% | 4% |
| Strongly support | 21% | 27% | 17% | 30% |
| Support | 48% | 50% | 50% | 48% |
| Oppose | 10% | 7% | 15% | 4% |
| Strongly oppose | 3% | 1% | 5% | – |
| Don’t know | 18% | 14% | 13% | 18% |
69% support the proposal to increase superannuation payments from nine per cent to 12 per cent by 2019-20 and 13% oppose.
75% of full-time workers and 69% of part-time workers support the proposal.
2PP, Election, EMC, ER, Essential Media, Essential Report, federal politics, Greens, Labor, Liberal, Nationals, Polling, polls, two party preferred, voting, Voting intention
Q. If a Federal Election was held today to which party will you probably give your first preference vote? If not sure, which party are you currently leaning toward?
Q. If don’t know -Well which party are you currently leaning to?
sample size =1,871
| First preference/leaning to | Election
21 Aug 10 |
4 weeks ago | 2 weeks ago | Last week | This week |
| Liberal | 43% | 44% | 44% | 43% | |
| National | 3% | 3% | 3% | 3% | |
| Total Lib/Nat | 43.6 | 47% | 47% | 47% | 46% |
| Labor | 38.0 | 35% | 35% | 35% | 36% |
| Greens | 11.8 | 11% | 9% | 10% | 11% |
| Other/Independent | 6.6 | 8% | 9% | 8% | 7% |
| 2PP | Election
21 Aug 10 |
4 weeks ago | 2 weeks ago | Last week | This week |
| Total Lib/Nat | 49.9% | 54% | 54% | 54% | 52% |
| Labor | 50.1% | 46% | 46% | 46% | 48% |
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. The two-party preferred estimate is calculated by distributing the votes of the other parties according to their preferences at the 2010 election.