The latest Nielsen opinion poll shows federal Labor’s support hitting a 15-year low as it tries to head off a business revolt over the carbon tax.
Today’s poll in the Fairfax press shows Labor’s primary support slumping two points to 31 per cent, its lowest point since the aftermath of the Keating government’s defeat in May 1996.
The poll also says almost two-thirds of Australian voters are opposed to the Government’s proposed carbon tax.
It says opposition to the tax has risen three points to 59 per cent, whereas support remains unchanged at 34 per cent.
Meanwhile the Food and Grocery Council has joined the steel industry and other manufacturers speaking out against the tax.
The council is one of 45 business groups to sign a letter to Prime Minister Julia Gillard asking for assurances they will not be disadvantaged under the tax.
Council CEO Kate Carnell says there is no doubt that goods manufactured in Australia will cost more under a carbon price.
“If imports are cheaper than the Australian manufactured goods, our experience is that Australians will buy imports and that’s why giving Australian taxpayers some money to compensate them for the carbon tax doesn’t help us at all,’ she told AM.
“It just means they’ve got more money potentially to buy cheaper imported goods. It doesn’t mean that they’ll pay the extra for Australian-manufactured goods.”
Today’s poll shows Coalition’s primary vote increasing, rising two points to 47 per cent.
The Coalition now leads Labor 56 points to 44 on a two-party preferred basis.
In more bad news for Ms Gillard, the poll shows a majority of voters want her predecessor Kevin Rudd back in The Lodge.
Mr Rudd, who was ousted by Ms Gillard after climbing down over his emissions trading scheme, leads her by 55 points to 38 in the preferred prime minister standings.
Malcolm Turnbull leads Tony Abbott by 41 per cent to 28 per cent as preferred Opposition leader.
mike seabrook
April 17, 2011 at 15:15
there is something wrong here in turnbull outpolling abbott
has mr turnbull fully recanted yet from his me-too with the lab-greens in sticking australian voters with greenhouse/ carbon taxes & hits to their spending power yet.
Karl Stevens
April 17, 2011 at 20:05
To Bob Brown and the Australian Greens. Lets get real about a carbon tax shall we? It can only work with a world government using a world currency. Why? Because atmospheric CO2 is a global pollutant and taxing it locally is just plain stupid. Nobody has had the courage to call for a world government that can tackling global environmental problems. Isn’t global nuclear proliferation from Australian uranium an even bigger threat? Somehow I don’t think the people who can solve these problems will be the locally-minded Australian Greens.
phill Parsons
April 17, 2011 at 23:57
The answer is easy. Put the Carbon price on imports not priced in their country of origin. Adjust it according the the UNFCC Levels as would happen had an agreement been reached in Copenhagen. As a corollary you would have to allow Carbon credits to be purchased overseas but that would have to be restricted to verifiable investments. If Australia sticks to a 5% reduction on 2000 levels of emissions by 2020 then the cost of this scheme qill have to be offset against achieving very few changes in Australia’s emissions trajectory. If the lesson of this summer is not enough and Austrlaia fails to introduce an effective mechanism to price Carbon it will leave the economy vulnerable to climate events and changes in other economies.
Already we see coal mines in QLD still closed because of flooding from Cyclone Yasi and vegetable crop yields in Tasmania reduced. To claim the economic impacts will be restricted to the price on Carbon is to ignore the changes in climate stability that follow doing nothing. Our physical contribution may be small but its example will join many other in showing the necissity of change.
Dr Kevin Bonham
April 18, 2011 at 04:35
Turnbull is outpolling Abbott mainly because he is more popular among Labor supporters and far more popular than Greens supporters. Among Coalition supporters Abbott is preferred by 41%, Turnbull 31%, Hockey 23%. Similarly Coalition supporters prefer Rudd to Gillard, albeit not as strongly as Labor supporters prefer Turnbull and Hockey to Abbott. What is really getting interesting is that Labor supporters (those still calling themselves such) now prefer Rudd and Gillard equally.
Barnaby Drake
April 18, 2011 at 06:38
The problem will ultimately solve itself.
As money rules the world and has the most influence, carbon emissions will continue to increase unabated. As the only solution to the problem is to lower human expectations of a high standard of living and make sacrifices, this is unlikely to happen. Which group of humans do you know that is likely to opt for less, not more, apart from a few hippies, and they are unlikely to have a great deal of influence on worlf behaviour?
No, I believe the solution is to concentrate on personal survival should the worst happen. Selfish, no doubt, but practical. If the worst comes to the worst, the majority of us will not survive the consequences, but the demand for a greater polluting future will also diminish, or prove to be impossible.
If the human race continues to survive for the next ten to a hundred thousand years or so, then the problem may disappear by itself. After all past great extinctions, the world has proved itself to be pretty resilient and self-rinsing. We are the current problem and without our help, the Earth will find its own solution.
Dr Kevin Bonham
April 18, 2011 at 22:06
Part of #5 should read “far more popular [b]among[/b] Greens supporters”.
Barnaby Drake
April 22, 2011 at 21:41
#8.#3 Since the carbon tax in the form proposed does not actually reduce emissions (since they are simply relocated offshore), the points you mention are unaffected by the introduction of such a tax…… Shaun.
The answer is both very simple and terribly difficult at the same time.
As all carbon emissions originate from burning fossil fuels, the simple solution is to mine less coal and produce less oil. The difficulty is that no-one will ever agree to do it. Australia’s economy is based on exporting its mineral wealth and currently the large mining companies seem to control the government thinking and the purse. However, if a world reduction of emissions is to take place, this is basically the only solution. Carbon capture technology can never be inplemented on any scale that would reduce the overall effect, and the technology itself demands a high quantity of energy and comes without any guarantee that the captured carbon will stay captured.
The best solution on offer is to tax carbon at source, meaning the coal and oil and wood, where it is burnt. And this should apply to all exports as well, and in that way, there is at least a chance of keeping the playing fields somewhat level. Despite all the semantics, there is actually no other way, and a system of taxing users and then offering compensation will have little or no effect on the atmosphere. Al that will happen is that the distributed price will rise somewhat, which will affect some users more than others and this will then be absorbed by the rising cost of living and the devaluation of the the currency. Again, a thing that will see an increase in the gap between rich and poor.
But the government will be happy, as it will have an additional cash flow and an army of administrators and will give the appearance of doing something. However, it will not ameliorate the weather patterns, but might generate enough for a compensation fund.