ABC, Australian Broadcasting Corporation, funding, less funding for the ABC, more funding for the ABC
Q. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) currently receives about $950 million a year from government, including money for transmission. In terms of future funding, do you think the ABC should receive:
|
% |
Vote Labor |
Vote Lib/Nat |
Vote Greens |
|
| Total – More funding |
34% |
42% |
27% |
67% |
| Total – Less funding |
17% |
13% |
23% |
6% |
| A lot more funding |
11% |
15% |
6% |
24% |
| Some more funding |
23% |
27% |
21% |
43% |
| About the same funding as current levels |
32% |
31% |
37% |
21% |
| A little less funding |
8% |
8% |
10% |
4% |
| A lot less funding less funding |
9% |
5% |
13% |
2% |
| Don’t know |
17% |
14% |
13% |
5% |
The largest portion of respondents believe that the ABC should receiving more funding (34%) followed very closely by those that believe funding at current levels should remain (32%).
Seventeen per cent (17%) believe that the ABC should receive less funding.
Looking at the results by voting intention, Greens voters are the most in favour of more funding for the ABC (67%), whilst Coalition voters are the most likely to take the view that the ABC should receive less funding (23%).
Looking at the results by gender, male respondents are far more likely to support more funding for the ABC (44%) compared to female respondents (25%).
06 August 2012, 060812, 2012 olympics, Australian olympic team, funding, London olympics
Q. Direct Federal funding of Australia’s Olympic team over the past four years has been at least $589 million – which equates to about $39 million for each gold medal. Do you think this investment is too much, not enough or about right?
|
Total |
Vote Labor |
Vote Lib/Nat |
Vote Greens |
Very/quite important |
Not so/not at all important |
|
| Too much |
58% |
60% |
55% |
71% |
47% |
68% |
| Not enough |
9% |
8% |
11% |
6% |
14% |
5% |
| About right |
19% |
21% |
20% |
14% |
25% |
14% |
| Don’t know |
14% |
11% |
13% |
9% |
14% |
13% |
58% think that funding invested in the Australian Olympic team over the last 4 years has been too much, 9% think it is not enough and 19% think it is about right.
Of those who think winning gold medals is very/quite important, 47% think that funding has been too much, 14% think it is not enough and 25% think it is about right.
Early Childhood Australia, funding, Samantha Page
Family values. It’s something everyone wants to embrace. But, beyond making broad statements, the bottom line is…well, the bottom line. If you love families, you probably love children…but what happens when it gets to supporting early childhood education and care reforms?
We noticed this concern raised this past Friday by Early Childhood Australia:
Peak children’s body Early Childhood Australia (ECA) have expressed concern today about statements from Shadow Minister for Childcare and Early Childhood Learning, Sussan Ley that suggest the opposition is considering winding back early childhood education and care reforms.
ECA today urged Shadow Minister Ley to consult more broadly on the reforms and hear from children’s advocates, experts and the many service operators already successfully implementing the reforms, about the long-term benefits of quality early education and care.
“We need to see bipartisan support for improving the quality of early childhood education and care for the sake of the 1.5 million Australian children in these services,” said ECA chief executive Samantha Page.
Seems like it should be a no-brainer for early childhood education to be a bi-partisan effort, enjoying broad support no matter who’s running the show.
Australian football, ER, Essential Report, FC, Football clubs, funding, income
Q. Football clubs in Australia get their income in a variety of ways. For each of the following, please indicate if you think it is good or bad source of income for football clubs?
| Total Good | Total Bad | Very Good | Good | Bad | Very Bad | Don’t know | ||
| Merchandise sales | 91% | 4% | 45% | 46% | 3% | 1% | 6% | |
| Corporate sponsorship | 90% | 3% | 45% | 45% | 2% | 1% | 6% | |
| Raffles, auctions, competitions | 89% | 4% | 38% | 51% | 3% | 1% | 6% | |
| TV broadcasting revenue | 87% | 5% | 37% | 50% | 4% | 1% | 8% | |
| Philanthropic donations | 76% | 8% | 29% | 47% | 6% | 2% | 16% | |
| Property investment | 76% | 11% | 24% | 52% | 9% | 2% | 13% | |
| Poker machines in clubs | 33% | 57% | 7% | 26% | 28% | 29% | 10% |
Merchandise sales (91%), corporate sponsorship (90%), raffles etc (89%) and TV broadcasting revenue (87%) are regarded to be the better sources of income for football clubs in Australia.
By a difference of 11 points, philanthropic donations and property investment are also regarded as good sources of income by the vast majority of respondents (76%).
Forty three (43) points behind those sources of income are poker machines in clubs, making them the least well regarded source of income for football clubs by a large margin. Whilst only 33% of respondents regard them as a good source of income, 57% see them as a bad source of income.