Labor’s 10-point lead on a two-party-preferred basis at the start of the election campaign has been reduced to a knife-edge 52 per cent to 48 per cent over the weekend, while the Coalition’s primary vote jumped four points to 42 per cent, compared with Labor’s 40 per cent, down from 42 per cent.

The two-party-preferred vote, based on preference flows at the 2007 election, is now the same as it was the weekend before Labor dumped Kevin Rudd as prime minister and put Ms Gillard into the job – only three weeks before she called the election.

Primary support for the Greens is unchanged on 12 per cent, while support for other candidates and minor parties dropped from 8 per cent to 6 per cent.

Satisfaction with the new Prime Minister has also dropped dramatically, from 48 per cent to 41 per cent; dissatisfaction with the job she is doing leapt from 29 per cent to 37 per cent last weekend.

Last Monday, Newspoll showed Labor ahead 55 per cent to 45 per cent on a two-party-preferred vote and four points ahead on a primary vote, 42 per cent to 38 per cent – initially vindicating the removal of Mr Rudd as leader to improve Labor’s polling.

According to a breakdown of Newspoll figures, much of the Labor boost came from female voters, with Labor’s primary vote of 42 per cent coming from male voter support of 39 per cent and female voter support of 44 per cent.

Last weekend, the Labor primary vote of 40 per cent came from an unchanged male vote and a female vote of 40 per cent, down four points in the first week of the election campaign.

Approval of the way the Opposition Leader is doing his job has improved markedly in the first week of the campaign, with satisfaction up four points to 40 per cent and dissatisfaction down from 51 per cent to 46 per cent.

Mr Abbott has also halved Ms Gillard’s 30-percentage-point lead as preferred prime minister at the start of the campaign after her support fell seven points to 50 per cent and his rose seven points to 34 per cent. At the last Newspoll survey when Mr Rudd was prime minister, he led Mr Abbott 46 per cent to 37 per cent.

But voters at the end of the first week of the election campaign believe overwhelmingly that Labor will win the election 65 per cent to 17 per cent for the Coalition. Even 47 per cent of Coalition supporters believe Labor will win, with only 34 per cent expecting a Liberal victory.

In terms of voter commitment, only 54 per cent said they would definitely vote the way suggested, with 43 per cent suggesting they may change their mind. The 54 per cent level of commitment to one party is about the same as it was at the beginning of the past two elections – 55 per cent in 2004 and 60 per cent in 2007.

Labor is behind on primary vote for the first time in the three Newspoll surveys since Ms Gillard became Prime Minister.

The two-party-preferred vote is the same as it was the weekend before Mr Rudd was removed, Mr Abbott is the closest to Ms Gillard as preferred prime minister since she took over. The Liberal leader’s satisfaction levels have improved while the Labor leader’s have fallen. The Newspoll is the first major survey taken since Ms Gillard announced a proposal for a 150-member citizens assembly to develop “consensus” on climate change policy while remaining committed to a carbon trading system by 2013.

Other national polls, taken before the climate change policy announcement on Friday morning, showed little change from Labor’s dominant 10-point lead on second preferences, but public reaction and online polling suggests the climate change decision has been unpopular.

Greenpeace’s ceasefire with the logging companies was not a deal with the devil

Richard Brooks

21st July, 2010

It took many environmentalists by surprise – that fiercely campaigning NGOs could not just make peace with their corporate enemies but enter into an agreement with them. This is a crucial step forward, says Richard Brooks

On May 18, 2010, Greenpeace along with eight other environmental organisations, the Forest Products Association of Canada (FPAC) and its twenty one member companies unveiled the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement (CBFA), one of the largest and most ambitious conservation planning and forest solutions agreements ever.

The Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement is a game-changer in the movement to responsibly manage and conserve large areas of intact forests while supporting the peoples, communities, and jobs that depend upon them. The Agreement is a truce between long-time foes in the battle for the Boreal Forest, and a move towards a collaborative solutions approach in an area of the Boreal Forest that is twice the size of Germany at 72 million hectares. It includes the suspension of logging and other forestry activity in an area larger than Italy (at 28.6 million hectares), virtually all the habitat of woodland caribou – an iconic and endangered species in Canada – that is under management of FPAC companies, for three years.

The agreement creates the space to do the work and planning in a massive area that is needed to create protection of vast areas of Boreal forest, implement world-leading forest practices, revitalise the forest industry and renew the communities which depend on it.

What we stood to lose

The Canadian Boreal Forest ranks with the Amazon and the rainforests of Indonesia and the Congo Basin as one of the most important forests on the planet. It is the largest storehouse of carbon on the planet – banking more than 200 billion tonnes in its soils and trees. It is home to more than 600 First Nations and Aboriginal communities. It is the source of billions of dollars in forest products sold globally. It is home to one billion migratory birds and is the source of fresh water for half of Canada. It is one of the last, truly vast wilderness spaces left on the planet.

Greenpeace and other environmental organisations have been waging campaigns for years to protect this forest. These have included boycott and divestment campaigns, public education and mobilisation projects, government lobbying and peaceful civil disobedience. We have had victories along the way, now culminating with the CBFA.

Nearly two decades ago, Greenpeace made the strategic decision to engage the global marketplace as a means to advance conservation of forests. We recognised at the time that those companies and governments that manage forests paid the most attention to what shareholders and pulp, paper and lumber customers of logging companies wanted – for obvious reasons. We also recognised that changing the logging companies’ approach to forestry could be facilitated by having these customers educated and engaged in asking and demanding change.

In the case of the Boreal Forest, the Canadian, U.S. and European markets have been very important in driving change and supporting the coming together of the disparate parties.  The UK is the largest European market for forest products, totalling $354 million (CDN) in 2009. Companies such as Office Depot, Pearson Publishing, Kimberly-Clark and others mobilised by our organisation and the likes of Canopy and ForestEthics, have been instrumental in supporting forest conservation in Canada through their contracts with signatories to the Agreement. Through the shifting of their purchases, through the release of environmental procurement policies and through sheer moral suasion they have helped create the openness to find a different way of doing things.

No Faustian pact

In our opinion, the simple truth of the matter is that the companies who signed on to the Agreement have done so because they recognise that the global marketplace is shifting and if they are to survive and compete, for example, against companies with weak environmental records and fast-growing  Brazilian plantations, FPAC member companies need to differentiate themselves. Being green and not greenwashed is one way to do it. The Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement will provide the signatory companies with a competitive edge.

“There are two parts: you either say that we throw up our hands and we can’t get to that point so we need to slow down our population growth, but then we wear the second round and third round negative effects of that on the economy… or we have to do something even more fundamental in terms of trying to enable housing supply,” he said.

He says the pressure on Australia’s housing supply is only increasing as the positive effects of government stimulus programs fade.

The report by BIS Shrapnel says building starts will be flat between now and 2012.

Mr Anderson says that is going to compound the current problem of housing shortages, and drive rental costs and house prices even higher.

“Even though we’ve had for most of the last 18 months, very favourable interest rates, a very successful scheme in terms of first home buyer demand, we haven’t really pushed up towards the level of supply that we need to match it in terms of population growth,” he explained.

The company’s Building in Australia report says Federal Government stimulus programs were largely responsible for the 15 per cent rebound in the value of national building starts throughout the last financial year.

Mr Anderson says that means private sector investment in construction is desperately needed to replace the publicly funded boost.

“The first home buyers boost scheme, social housing and education programs have proven to be very effective and they’ve basically clawed back all the losses,” he explained.

“We will have definitely a lower rate of public spend coming through even in the next 12 months, and even in the year beyond that.”

Tags: business-economics-and-finance, economic-trends, building-and-construction, housing, international-financial-crisis, australia

First posted 1 hour 34 minutes ago