Menu lock

Federal

Oct 17, 2011

Essential: we don't like carbon tax any more now it's passed

Opinion of the carbon tax has been little affected either by the government's political success in negotiating it through the House of Representatives nor by the perceived unseemliness of the triumphalism that followed.

We don’t like the carbon tax any more since legislation passed the House of Representatives. But we don’t like it any less after the perceived unseemliness of the triumphalism that followed its passage.

That’s the message in new polling from Essential Research, which shows little change in the level of support for Labor’s landmark legislative achievement.

Conducted between Wednesday and Sunday, the online survey of 1047 respondents shows 39% supporting the carbon tax against 53% opposed. This is slightly better for the government than the Galaxy poll in today’s News Limited tabloids (34% support and 57% oppose), but effectively unchanged on Essential’s survey of September 19. And it continues a pattern where Essential Research’s online panel methodology has consistently produced less unfavourable results on this issue than phone polls.

Essential also gave respondents three options for what should happen to the tax if Labor is defeated at the next election, in contrast to Galaxy’s approach of asking whether a victorious Tony Abbott would have a mandate for its repeal (to which 60% said yes).

Thirty-four per cent favoured a double dissolution to secure the repeal of the tax, with 33% prepared to allow that the tax should remain “if it proves to be effective in reducing carbon pollution”. More than 20% felt it should remain in any case “to provide certainty for individuals and business”. As always with questions related to the carbon tax, a strong polarity was recorded between Coalition and Labor/Greens voters.

Respondents were also asked to take their pick from 12 options to describe the positions taken by the leaders on asylum seekers, and the results provide consistently unflattering reading for Julia Gillard. The bitterest pill would be that she outscored Abbott on both “too soft” (21% to 7%) and “too hard” (10% to 6%).

Abbott even managed to record an effectively equal score to Gillard on his traditional negative of “just playing politics” (47% to Gillard’s 46%).

There is some relatively good news for the prime minister on the monthly measure of leaders’ personal ratings, in the shape of an 11-point improvement in her net approval rating after a disastrous showing in the September 12 poll. Gillard’s approval is up six points to 34% and her disapproval down five to 59%, and her deficit on better prime minister is down from four points (40% to 36%) to one (39% to 38%).

Abbott’s ratings have recorded no significant change: his approval and disapproval are both up one, to 40% and 51% respectively.

On voting intention, the major parties have recorded no change on last week’s result. The Coalition continues to lead 48% to 33% on the primary vote and 55% to 45% on two-party preferred, with the Greens up a point to 11%.

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

165 comments

Leave a comment

165 thoughts on “Essential: we don’t like carbon tax any more now it’s passed

  1. Suzanne Blake

    No we don’t like it Willaim. It will make Australia more uncompetitive and negatively impact our quality of life and do NOTHING for the global environment

  2. Jimmy

    SB – Please provide evidence for your statement or stop repeatedly making it! And the we you are referring to is what 55% of the poulation based on combinng 2 polls of 1000 people, I think you need a bigger majority than that to be convincing. And finally a majority does not make a point of view correct.

    As for this article, who really cares why do we have this constant poll driven analysis when we are 2 years away from an election. Does it really mean that much that the ALP has snuck up 1% in 2PP? Let’s have more policy analysis and more policy analysis!!

  3. dfgdgdf

    Yes we do like it William. It will make Australia more competitive in the area of renewable energy, it will positively impact our quality of life by giving extra payments or reduced taxes to the majority of the population, the effects on the global environment may or may not be minimal but it will be good for the local environment and it sure beats doing nothing.

  4. Jimmy

    SB – Please provide evidence for your statement or stop repeatedly making it! And the we you are referring to is what 55% of the poulation based on combining 2 polls of 1000 people, I think you need a bigger majority than that to be convincing. And finally a majority does not make a point of view correct.

  5. Jimmy

    who really cares why do we have this constant poll driven analysis when we are 2 years away from an election. Does it really mean that much that the ALP has snuck up 1% in 2PP? Let’s have more policy analysis and more policy analysis!!

  6. Suzanne Blake

    @ Jimmy

    The majority does make the point of view correct in Australia. Its doesn’t in a Community Country, I agree, but it does in Australia.

    Majority is how democracys run. Sorry to let you down.

    Gillard wants to increase costs for Australian businesses. So that make us uncompetitive.

    The compensation Gillard says will compensate, wow you get an extra $33 a year on their formula. But you cannot trust labor, they have wasted billions elsewhere and have demonstrated they cannot estimate anything.

  7. Mary Rose Liverani

    Suzanne, I’d find your assertions a lot more impressive if you could support them with data – or is that too much to ask in a ‘discussion’? Or at least show that you have made it your business to exam Gillard’s arguments closely and can rebut them with alternative data and sound reasoning.

    That way, we might all learn something.

    Shifting tack slightly, what is it about Crikey that makes me think it’s only affecting to be different from the other media? Why give space to polling results for instance? In the present climate their only role is to keep stoking the faggots being stacked up around the PM.

    MRL

  8. Jimmy

    “The majority does make the point of view correct in Australia” Sorry Suzanne but that is not the case, the majoirty of people thought Collingwood would win the AFL grand final, not correct. At one stage the majority thought the world was flat, not correct. And even if you were to say the majority was correct would that mean that a carbon price was the correct thing in 2007 but now it isn’t, and in 2015 when Abbott wants to call a double dissoultion if the polls then show a majority of people want to keep it does that make it incorrect?

    Also how do we measure this majority, in 1999 beazley won the majority vote but we still ended up with a howard govt and a GST that was unpopular in the polls.

    “Gillard wants to increase costs for Australian businesses. So that make us uncompetitive.” This isn’t evidence SB, where are the numbers, where is the qualified opinion? Who are we competing against, which businesses will be effected?

  9. Jimmy

    MAry – Shifting tack slightly, what is it about Crikey that makes me think it’s only affecting to be different from the other media? Why give space to polling results for instance?

    Completely agree!! I made a similar comment but it is stuck in moderation for who knows why.

  10. Suzanne Blake

    @ Mary Rose Liverani

    Mary, its quite simple. Australian companies produce goods and services and their is a cost base. If anything increases the cost base, we need to increase prices.

    We increase prices and then have to compete in local and overseas markets.

    We are competing against importers who dont have Carbon Tax in their cost base
    We are competing against other exporters and local in country companies to sell our goods and services, who dont have this added cost base.

    Failing that, we reduce our margins, pay less tax, perhaps employ less – regardless Australia is the loser.

    We already have a high cost base, we are making it worse.

    With the multiplier impacts throughout economy, its make it even worse.

    The compensation package, while inadequate, does not compensate beyond the initial price, when who knows what it will be.

Leave a comment