« Education | Main | Liberal/National Merger »

17 May 2006

Budget 2006

These are the notes used for our interview this morning with Madonna King and the ABC Radio Brisbane Morning Program. I'll do the analysis up more formally later.

My read on the total sample is that many of our respondents feel personally squeezed by rising costs including petrol and interest rates (the last must be anticipatory) and don't think that the tax cuts allow them to do much more than catch-up, although most of them rate it as good for them personally and bad for the country. Explains why the government hasn’t gotten much of a bounce from the budget.

Our sample is also more concerned with Health and Education than they are with tax cuts. Interestingly, payments to stay-at-home and working mums are not a high priority, nor looking after the elderly. Will the older and middle to lower demographics stay bought?

BTW, Julia Gillard is the runaway winner for ALP leader, followed by Rudd, Keating and Beazley. Shorten on a bit less than 5% proves you need more than a walk-on part in a mining disaster to grab the public imagination.

On the other side of the ledger Malcolm Turnbull is the second runner after Howard, not Costello. Even amongst online Liberal voters Costello is only just ahead, but the Labor, Greens and Democrats overwhelm him in favour of Turnbull over the whole sample.

  1. Sample heavily left-leaning. 31% ALP, 27% Greens, 15% Liberal, 5% National. Older than average demographic, with highest proportion (31%) between 51 and 60 years of age. Males outnumbered females almost two-to one in the plus 51 age group, and by 60% to 40% overall.
  2. Most believe that the country is heading in the wrong direction. This aligns with voting intention. 21% think we’re heading in the right direction, compared to 70% who think the reverse.
  3. Only 25% approved of the budget, versus 58% who disapproved. However, 89% of Liberals and 88% of Nationals approved. A balanced sample would have shown a majority in support.
  4. However 37% said that they would be better off because of the budget. So 12% benefited but altruistically thought it was a bad budget.
  5. Only 24% thought it would be good for the economy. Again, Liberals 81% of Liberals thought it would be good, as well as 88% of Nationals. A balanced sample would therefore think it was good for the economy.
  6. When it came to alternatives, most favoured either tax cuts, or increased spending on health and education. Because of the bias in the sample, this was distorted. Making allowance for the bias, tax cuts and services were probably pretty evenly matched.
  7. Incentives to working or non-working spouses or to older Australians were not well-supported. Infrastructure also rated very well with a less intense feeling in favour of it than services.
  8. 71% disapproved of Howard’s performance, but 58% disapproved of Beazley’s as well. However, 91% of Coalition voters approve, so sample bias at play again.
  9. 35% want Julia Gillard as leader, compared to 20% for Kevin Rudd, 15% for Paul Keating and 10% for Kim Beazley. None of the above is only 12%
  10. 172% and 75% of Coalition voters want Howard as leader, but only 19% of the total sample. Malcolm Turnbull tops the total sample at 20%, followed by Howard, then Costello. Abbott and Downer both get 1% each.
  11. When it comes to household budgets there are a few obvious factors:
  12. Many households find themselves under price-pressure from petrol, interest rates and food prices (no-one much mentions rent). They find the tax deductions derisory.
  13. Some households are earning lots of money and traveling well - they thought that tax cuts were great.
  14. Because they can’t see that they can earn enough after tax to pay for their needs, they would prefer the government to pay them for them.
  15. Word counts and quotes on the household budget issue provide quantitative support for the issues being caused by higher petrol and money prices with petrol being by far the larger issue.
Petrol 116
Fuel 243
Oil 5
Inflation 41
Interest 122
Rates 99
Rent 42

Student 41
Pension 271
Retiree 66


"The tax cuts will help to ease the squeeze so to speak.  I have grandchildren so the extra child care will be good for us all and there are incentives for my daughter to go back to work when her son starts full time school. I am looking at the more longer term benefits of the budget rather than the what's in it for me right now view. there will still be a surplus for the next several yeras and I think that is responsible and the right way to go." Liberal, Male, 41-50

"I'm just not sure. As much as I am in a bracket that gets a 'saving' on how much tax I pay each fortnight, I don't see that as improving my financial position - in terms of short term - home mortgages have just increased (more so than the tax saving) - and in long term, I don't think that an improvement in my own financial position is a good thing in the big picture of the country's health, for eg. I would prefer the $9-10 per pay packet to go directly to medicare and the public hospital system." Greens, female, 31-40

"Rising prices at every level of living then a slight tax benefit!!!! You have to be joking. After the GST the goverment have been completely rolling in money yet they are tighter than ever & services are lacking more & more funding." Greens, Male, 18-30

"No tax on super is a bit late for me as a self funded retiree for the last 9 years and being taxed on my benefit. I also do not have access to a health card for pharmaceuticals as I am means tested out of elegibility" Greens, Male, 61+

"With the increase in fuel costs that have already happened up around 21 cents per litre and interest rates up .25% costing an extra $10 per week the tax cuts have already been spent." Greens, Male, 41-50

"I am a mature aged woman in the middle income range who works part-time to finance studies that will hopefully lend me enough credibillity to take on consultancy work.  I support my daughter and son-in-law one is a student and the other an adult apprentice, my husband is a TPI pensioner.  I can't live on what the governemtn would pay me to be a carer for my husband or to be a student we have manged in the past and I will continue to manage in the future.  The minute amount of money I may be entitled to in the buget will probably be eaten up in fuel costs." Greens, Female, 51-60

Those who say their personal position is significantly improved appear to live in high income households or be on the verge of retirement.

Posted by Graham at May 17, 2006 12:18 PM

Comments

I am a disabled person, runs a voluntary, psychosocial, rehab, recovery, group. set up by the mentally unwell people who are ( those with extremely difficult to treat illness), To give them the place to belong, and a place to learn new skills etc.
I sit on many committees, by request, for my expertise in life and the battling pensioners, who for no fault of their own, truly cannot work in the general paid work enviroment, the fast track etc.
I have 13 grandchildren, and 4 of my own children( all married).
I do my hard , but loved work to make a difference in some way, to enable a better future for my family.
Having a job to go to when they leave school. having braces on their teeth, having access to bulk billing doctors a good hospital, where they will have a bed when the need arises.
Dental work done etc.
I have waited 6 years for a dental visit, beurocracy and red tape says I have to stay with out teeth for another year or so, cos they have no time.
I facilitate meetings and workshops educating the community, get asked by the health service to sit on their committees etc, yet here I am , doing all this voluntary, and with no teeth.
Surely government, must allow all in Australia the same rights, to equally good health services and education.
Surely they must see that pushing aged and disabled to despair, re working, is going to also put young people and those already unemployed, in worse position.
We should have the right to work if we wish, as a disabled person, and or an aged or retired person, but not bullied and cohersed into doing something they cannot or don,t any longer wish to work.
Its putting so much pressure, I can assure you, suicide is and will continue to plague our families.
This Government, the wealthy, TAKE A LOOK , SEE Around you.SHARE your wealth, stop telling us all how much profit you made, each year, stop wanting to shout it out, its killing many people, pushing families over the edge, our people are living under the poverty line, homeless, cannot afford good health food at times, yet govt push to eat healthy , PEOPLE LOOK AROUND, open eyes, LISTEN.
People are crashing.
Depression, heart attacks, strokes, caused by STRESS.
Awareness raising, prevention, yes the TREND.
But ATTENTION TO, helping families in Australia to SURVIVE, let alone LIVE.
NOt even asking to live COMFORTABLY, JUST TO SURVIVE.and hopefully be able to smile without
bursting into tears, tears of despair, and opression.Frustration, at where our country and its academics are pushing us into.

Posted by: Sandra Taylor at May 20, 2006 12:04 PM

Once again they have fiddled at the margins with the tax scales in the budget. I cannot understand why this or any other govt just does not seem to have the BALLS to raise the tax free threshold from the current $6000 to say $20000 or 25000 and then link that to inflation and maintain its value.
I find it abseen that one CEO can supposedly earn enough money to get a tax cut of $8000 per week and have a weekly income of around 450 grand, when most struggle on around 30 to 40 grand per year.

Posted by: Richard Ward at May 19, 2006 09:20 PM

I find the waste of taxpayers' funds abysmal - the blunders in defence spending alone would have rescued the health system. When it comes to accountability, no one seems to be able to identify the culprits who made the 'crook' decisions. We seem to have developed a culture of no one to blame for anything!!

Posted by: Shirley at May 19, 2006 05:27 PM

The average respondent is an old white leftie - ie a looser. The comments are mostly aligned with the ravings of that other profile looser - Philip 'Commie' Adams. Fancy anyone wanting to have Gillard (authoress of the Golden Medicare ****)at the Treasury gates - its taken over a decade to plug the $90b spending hole of the last cohort of bleeding hearts. And I still winch at 25% interest rates trying to buy a home under another past ALP economic genius - Whitlam. Never again, never again....

Posted by: Gaz at May 18, 2006 04:49 PM

The curent Fedral Government is rotten to the core. (AWB) It is in the pockets of big business, this is obvious from the IR Legislation recently enacted. Foreign Policy has been handed to Bush, I thought that we were an independant country. Howard's current visit to the US makes me cringe. In the past we were accused of tugging the forelock to the Royals, now we can be seen as a bunch of brown nosers with the Americans. Shame on us.

Posted by: Drew Jackson at May 18, 2006 04:40 PM

Hard to believe some people do not believe the earth's atmosphere & enviroment is in danger. Nearly all scientists believe it is. However as some peole still believe the earth is flat, guess there will always be ostriches !

Posted by: Gillian at May 18, 2006 03:52 PM

I would like to speak up for pensioners who were totally overlooked in this budget. How can this government give tax cuts - in some cases more than $13,000 when pensioners exist on less than that. There is absolutely no recognition of the long term financial and social input that past generations have provided.

Posted by: Margarett McPherson at May 18, 2006 03:41 PM

I retired 2.5 years ago, got taxed to the hilt on exiting one super fund to finance another so not much in this budget for me. I struggle to live on less than $22,000 per year and feel that the tax cuts (in some cases amounting to over $13,000) are a slap in the face to pensioners who exist on less than that, despite having worked and paid taxes all their lives. There is absolutely no recognition to the older generations who raised the kids who are now financing Howard's largesse.

Posted by: Margarett McPherson at May 18, 2006 03:38 PM

All the posted comments are certainly relevant to today's Australia in some shape or form but probably the one that strikes me the hardest was the lack of provision in the Budget to get our aboriginal peoples into the 21st century. In view of the latest outrages and although we have to agree that Clare Martin has a very hard job - we should all be ashamed of ourselves. Native law is not the answer nor is harsh Aussie law - re-education, caring, and stopping the unscrupulous liquor providers from operating is. Deep seated, ongoing improvement measures are urgently needed so that our friends and neighbours can hold up their heads - we are after all - ALL AUSTRALIANS!

Posted by: marie cimasko at May 18, 2006 11:18 AM

Why are so many people so woried about climate change ? The earth has been warming up ever since the ice age, and a very recent report said it had increased by .8% over the past 100 years.
Is it because it suits some people to be seen to be saying something no matter how stupid ?

On the question of lefties and righties, I believe we should forget about elections and, like the duck hunting season, just declare "open season" on the --------s. Now what does that make me ?

Posted by: Andrew McLellan at May 18, 2006 08:17 AM

Wow boy! In the 60s! Get with the present. In the 60s social problems still existed, just less obvious and in smaller numbers. Free trade agreements and modern technologies have taken us into a time when supporting others has become a social issue for many reasons. Living and thinking in the present with an open and creative mind is what will change our future, not bleeding all over the past.

Posted by: Martha at May 18, 2006 08:08 AM

Boy, don't the lefties hate, & don't they want it all on a platter from the tax payer.
I hanker for the 60s, when we paid very little tax, & got stuff all services. The bludger was not too well paid, but a single income, average income, family could buy a house & a car, pay their doctors & hospital bills, & still save a nest egg.
How could we do it? Well we did not pay millions of public servants to pay our bills for us, & we did not bleed all over every bludger in sight.

Posted by: Phil at May 18, 2006 12:39 AM

It is good for me to see that among Liberal voters Costello is only slightly preferred to Malcolm Turnbull. I would seriously consider preferencing a Turnbull led Liberal party over a Beazley led ALP, IR reforms or no IR reforms.

Having said that I am now going to go into damage control to avoid losing the few friends I will now have remaining.

Posted by: Benno at May 17, 2006 10:27 PM

Well there was no mention of the environment in the budget and there was no mention of it again in the summary of voting in this survey. So it just means that there are not many people aware of the likely problem developing from the past and increasing use of fossil fuel. It does not mean that it is not real. It does not mean that the risk of the scientists predicting global warming being right is just too high to ignore. Money should be being alloated in increasing amounts to overcome the problem that is increasing in certainty.

A statistic in the summary of how many people mentioned the environment, would be enlightening and useful even if the number was small at this stage.

Posted by: Norm Morwood at May 17, 2006 08:06 PM

I am tired of those people who are worrying about the environment. When God created the earth, He set boundaries for the oceans and seas. Instead of being concerned whether we have enough to go around in 10 years, consider where YOU will be in 10 years!
As a people, we should be caring for each other instead of killing each other through abortion, war, murder, you get the idea!
Instead of blaming some else, have a good look at yourselves and then see if you can do anything to help those who are needy, sick, poor, etc., etc.
Next time you go to watch the new year eve fireworks, think of the cost and then think how that amount would help our failing hospital systems, cheap housing and so on.
I am a Vietnam Veteran, and as a part of the veteran community am appalled at thr way the government treats us, but I must accept there discision whether it is good or bad. Remember, you, as a voter, hold the key to who is in government.

Posted by: Kevin at May 17, 2006 06:45 PM

I am a "left-leaner". Howard has consistently reminded me of Nixon in his behavioural responses in Public. Consequently I enjoyed reading John W Dean's book "Worse than Watergate" which focuses primarily on secrecy within the Bush government - keeping the truth away from the constituency - lying through your teeth. Howard has demonstrated superior skills - to Nixon - in prevarication through the ten years of his "reign". So Dean's outlining of the innate evils of secrecy underlies our current government's relationship with the public, and readily recalls the cliche "Birds of a feather stick together":
> Secrecy is undemocratic
> Secrecy threatens liberty
> Secrecy precludes public accountability
> Secrecy alienates
> Secrecy negatively affects character
> Secrecy is dangerous, and
> Secrecy encourages incompetence.
I believe the long-term effects of the Howard Government - even with Keating giving him slight praise - will be truly negative to the social democracy of Australia.

Posted by: Doug McGufficke at May 17, 2006 06:13 PM

All those in favour of a new heart in politics remember Julia. Go girl go!

Posted by: Martha at May 17, 2006 06:00 PM

I'm interested to see if the ALP will take note of these results and maybe we will have a female Prime Minister. A lot of people seem to be looking for an alternative to Howard's never ending story. The Liberals seem in danger of believing themselves indestructable and having the ability to do anything they want outside of an election year of course. Look back at what happened to Kennet when he was Premier of Victoria. It's a very similar scenario that I can see happening on a federal level now. As soon as the ALP are seen to get their act together properly I can see a voter backlash looming.

I see this Budget aa simply candy for targeted swinging votes. There isn't really anything in it that will affect our family. Maybe in the next budget....... pre election time.

Posted by: Michelle at May 17, 2006 05:49 PM

What good is a budget that does little or nothing to overcome the crippling effects of an already out of control economic and social environment? I would think that a fair budgets aim would be to create less division between those who have and those who have not rather than streaching already streached limits. I believe more numbers of Australians will be joining the ranks of the have nots, many of these will be women and children. Our government needs to have a rethink about this growing group of people and how, when the numbers are to large and the scales of power begin to tip what that might do to this country.

Posted by: Martha at May 17, 2006 05:23 PM

It is interesting that a disproportionate range of this research tended to be ALP, Greens, or Democrat voters and I'm not sure it people have noticed an important point. Whether you call it left, right or centre, most of those that participate in such a study indicate that they still care about other Australians. It says more about the constructive attitude of the participants, than any biass in the study, which has no control.The attitudes of the voters were consistant with the parties that they prefer. The minority in this range: higher income Liberal voters who preferred more tax cuts over infrastructure, ironically only thought of their selfish endulgences, which they admit, they didn't really need. I'm not surprised that Greens and Democrats would prefer Malcolm Turmbull over Peter Costello. Pesonally, I would prefer David in the Big Brother household over all coalition leaders, if he lead the National Party. He might a member of the wrong party, but at least he seems to care for the underdog, doesn't shrug from a challenge, and has a love for the wilderness.

Posted by: Fletcher at May 17, 2006 05:14 PM

Well, the little weasel has done a good job on our first peoples hasn't he! Not even a mention in your survey, and no concerns expressed in the replies. The Australian Council of Social Service
estimated it would take only $4 billion of our loudly touted surplus to really make inroads in Indigenous affairs. Even with only $12 billion
then left, isn't it the height of economic and social irresponsibility not to be spending it now
when current and future needs are so great?

Posted by: kieran walsh at May 17, 2006 05:12 PM

Thank you Graham, we appreciate being able to read others comments.This government have done nothing in regard to really helping average Australians. As for the budget Mr costello will not jeopardise government money,the only real winners will be government.We listened to Mr Beazley's reply budget,if he were to abide by what he said his on the right track.

Posted by: Anne at May 17, 2006 04:52 PM

I have to agree with D.H...Howard is way past is retirement date..and personally I am tired of seeing him take Bushes advice and pander to his wishes, whenever the US needs some help.This latest trip to the U.S. is a waste of Taxpayers money. Howard if you want to remain PM, then look after the domestic side before you go running all over the World.
Anyone who wants to have more say, can visit our website also.Free Membership

Administrator
Australia Speaks and Global Topics
Copy and Paste link into your browser if unable to click on link here

http://www.vf11.com/australiaspeaks/australiaspeaks.html

Posted by: Helen Hirst at May 17, 2006 04:37 PM

John,

Thanks for your comments. I am aware of the political compass, and use it in some of the Uni lectures that I give, but I have to confess that I still fall back on "left" and "right", with all their limitations, when describing where people fall. If you can give me some better words, I'm all ears!

Posted by: Graham Young at May 17, 2006 03:49 PM

A key factor for people's view of the budget is whether they have a mortgage. If not, and if they are also investors (these are likely to be directly related) then upward interest rates might work in their favour and provide a more benign view of the budget.

Posted by: Geoff Coyne at May 17, 2006 03:46 PM

I suggest you find a term other than "left leaning" to describe the majority of the respondents. I am aware that this conveys a certain general meaning which is commonly accepted but it is too vague and has a pejorative whiff about it partly because it is much less common to refer to those who support the status quo, even vehemently so, as "rightleaning". If you consult the site: www.politicalcompass.org(I think rather than .com)you may find a better way to convey the shades of opinion in political and economic issues.

Posted by: John Ness at May 17, 2006 03:33 PM

Slowly but surely under the Bush/Howard regime the every day battler's in this country are slowly being squeezed of life.
I listened to Condaleza Rice's address to Parliament when she visited Australia and she refered to Australia as being a wonderful democratic state....last time I checked the atlis Australia was a Country or has Howard already sold us out to America?

Posted by: pauline edmunds at May 17, 2006 03:31 PM

Graham.

One would appreciate this forum where readers can comment and let others know what their thoughts are.

Whilst I haven't read all of the above, I do have concerns about our environment and world climate. However, noting that the Federal Government is leaning towards a nulcear industry, this is something that needs to be questioned. Personally, I oppose any such industry and re its waste.

Posted by: David at May 17, 2006 03:17 PM

A little hemarroid on George Bush's bum doesnt belong here. Maybe he should be sent to Narau for processing.

Posted by: Vivienne McNeil at May 17, 2006 03:15 PM

So. Once again, no mention of the environment.

Consider this quote: "The earth's climate is nearing, but has not passed, a tipping point beyond which it will be impossible to avoid climate change with far-ranging undesirable consequences. These include losses on a vast scale due to rising seas. The earth's history suggests that with a warming of 2 to 3 degrees, the new sea level will include not only ice from Greenland and West Antarctica, but a portion of East Antarctica, raising the sea level by 25 metres ... We have at most 10 years to make such drastic cuts in carbon emissions that will head off [such] climate convulsions".

I copied this from the current issue of Dissent magazine. It is attributed to James Hansen "director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and reagrded as America's top climate modeller.".

Posted by: Don Meharry at May 17, 2006 03:07 PM

Judging by your findings either Howard can become an American citizen and stay over therwe,or we have an election ASAP and get rid of the arrogant..........

Posted by: PETER w hERMAN at May 17, 2006 02:29 PM