Australians are evenly split on whether Australian soldiers should be sent to fight against Islamic State in Iraq, this week’s Essential Report reveals, with a strongly partisan divide splitting Liberal voters from others.
Asked if Australian forces should be helping fight IS militants rather than merely training Iraqi forces, 41% of voters supported the idea, while 43% of voters opposed it. But Labor voters split 37%-48%, Greens voters 29%-53% and other voters 35%-52%, while Coalition voters split 51%-38%. The split is a strong one — 22% of Coalition voters “strongly support” ADF personnel fighting IS, while 25% of Labor voters, 31% of Greens voters and 34% of other voters “strongly oppose” it.
Voters dislike most of the options put forward for education funding in the government’s federation reform discussion paper last week. Removing the Commonwealth from funding responsibility altogether and leaving school funding purely the responsibility of states and territories was back 38%-35%, but other proposals met with less support. Adopting the Coalition’s preferred approach of leaving states and territories to look after public schools while the Commonwealth only funds private schools is opposed by 56% of voters, and supported by only 20%. Means-testing by charging high-income parents fees for using public schools is opposed 48%-37%. The only idea to find favour with voters is a full federal takeover of schools funding, which is backed 51%-23%, including support across all voting groups.
Essential also asked about best places to invest, and the results won’t enthuse economists or advocates of a “shareholder democracy”. The housing market is deemed the best place to invest, according to 29% of voters, with the sharemarket a long way back on 15% and “leave it in the bank” on 16%. Over-55s, however, are more diverse in their investment strategies — leave it in the bank is their most preferred investment (21%), but they split evenly on housing and the sharemarket (18%). Women are a lot more likely to say they’re not sure — 35% to 22%.
Women are — unsurprisingly given their lower workforce participation — also much more likely to say that their superannuation and other investments are unlikely to afford them a comfortable lifestyle in retirement. Fifty-five per cent of women say they “probably” or “definitely” will not have enough to retire on, with another 14% saying they don’t know, while 43% of men say they probably or definitely won’t have enough and 10% say they don’t know. Women were significantly more likely than men to say they believed they would be relying on the pension in retirement, 31% to 22%.
Essential also asked about occupation, enabling a breakdown by voting intention. Not surprisingly, tradies featured more heavily in the ranks of Labor voters, as did people working home duties. Few students were Coalition voters — they were much more likely to be Labor and Greens voters. Semi- or unskilled workers featured more heavily among Coalition voters, as did “admin or sales” and “managers”. Unemployed people and tradies were also more likely to feature among “other” voters. The notion of the Greens as the party of inner-city professionals, however, doesn’t stack up: “professionals” split exactly as per the overall population on voting intention. Greens voters were slightly more likely to be managers but were not otherwise notable except for the underrepresentation of tradies and home duties and a large proportion of students.
On voting intention, the Coalition’s recent momentum has come to a definite halt. Its primary vote remains on 41% and Labor’s remains on 39%, but the Greens are up a point to 11%, pushing the two-party preferred outcome to 53%-47% in Labor’s favour.
So the Green’s vote goes up 1% and suddenly they are responsible for Labor’s lead?
Get a life Bernard! What is the MOE in this poll, by the way?
My, don’t we all love to hate Labor at the moment. Limited News hasn’t taken over Crikey, have they????
You all just keep on, keeping on, and we will end up with another three years of the worst government in our history!
Actually that’s pretty much the case CML.
And its not that sudden.
Since the election Labor’s vote has gone up over all the polls by 3.4% and the Greens has gone up 4.5% which translates to a 3.7% gain for the ALP on 2 party preferred.
So, yeah, most of the lead Labor currently enjoys is courtesy of the Greens and without them they would be behind the COALition.
Essential actually generally downplays the support level for the Greens. All other pollsters have the Greens in the range of 12% at the lowest and up to 14% for some time.
This Essential poll has them at 11% and is the first time for yonks they have had them above 9% or 10%.
So I do tend to agree with your theme, at least a little bit, but in this detail it is correct to say “the Greens widen Labor’s lead’.
That doesn’t mean anything, shea. If the margin of error is around 3%, then we have the same situation as occurred before and at the last election.
The Greens were supposed to get around 15% according to the polls then, and they ended up with under 10%.
The Greens are just taking votes from the Labor party anyway, so they are just a waste of space.
Unless you are one of those fantasists who think the Greens can form government? Heaven help us!!
You don’t understand how the 3% MOE operates do you?
Hey, CML, the Greens did form government. They supported the last minority government. And it was more effective than the current mob. Get used to more State and Federal minority governments.
You are essentially putting forward the Campbell Newman (former Queensland Premier) argument for a two-party system – and that argument didn’t work for him.
To declare someone else’s vote a wasted vote is just arrogant and disrespectful.