Personal Happiness

Jun 14, 2017

Q. Thinking about your own personal situation, do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

 

 

Total agree Total disagree   Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
I am happy in my personal/family life 79% 7% 29% 50% 14% 5% 2%
I am happy in my life overall 74% 9% 22% 52% 17% 6% 3%
I am happy in my social life 71% 10% 22% 49% 19% 8% 2%
I am happy in my spiritual life 62% 7% 17% 45% 31% 4% 3%
I am happy in my work life 52% 15% 14% 38% 32% 11% 4%

Each statement received majority agreement.

The area in which happiness was the highest was personal/family life, in which 79% were happy. Those most likely to be happy in this area were those aged 65+ (89%), Queenslanders (85%), Liberal/National voters (84%) and those who work full-time (84%). Happiness was by far the lowest in this area amongst those earning less than $31k per year (65%).

The area in which happiness was lowest overall was work life, in which 52% were happy. Those most likely to be happy with their work life were those who are employed (69% of full-time workers, and 67% of part-time workers), as well as those aged 25-34 (58%) and Liberal/National voters (57%).

 

Additional table

This table provides a cross-tabulation of the proportion who “very strongly” agreed with each statement across a number of demographics.

 

 

Total Vote Labor Vote Lib/Nat Vote Green Vote Other Male Female Earn <$78k Earn >78k 18-34 35-54 55+
I am happy in my personal/family life 29% 22% 36% 27% 36% 27% 31% 27% 31% 27% 25% 38%
I am happy in my social life 22% 17% 26% 17% 27% 20% 23% 19% 23% 20% 18% 28%
I am happy in my work life 14% 16% 15% 9% 17% 14% 14% 11% 17% 16% 13% 15%
I am happy in my spiritual life 17% 15% 18% 12% 25% 17% 17% 17% 16% 13% 15% 24%
I am happy in my life overall 22% 20% 24% 18% 26% 20% 23% 17% 26% 21% 17% 30%

Emissions Intensity Scheme or Low Emissions Target

Jun 14, 2017

Q. An “emissions intensity scheme” and a “low emissions target” are two policy options which aim to reduce Australia’s carbon emissions.=

An emissions intensity scheme is designed to increase the cost of electricity production from high-emitting sources (like coal and gas) while decreasing the cost of less polluting sources (like renewables).

A low emissions target would expand the current Renewable Energy Target to include non-renewable electricity sources with emissions intensities below a certain limit. Depending on the emissions limit, this could include certain types of coal and gas technologies.

Which of the proposals would you prefer?

  Total   Vote Labor Vote Lib/Nat Vote Greens Vote Other
Emissions intensity scheme (EIS) 20%   24% 14% 46% 12%
Low emissions target (LET) 45%   46% 51% 31% 48%
Don’t know 36%   29% 35% 23% 40%

 

45% preferred an LET, 20% preferred an EIS, and 36% did not know which proposal they preferred.

Those most likely to prefer an LET were those aged 65+ (51%), Liberal/National voters (51%) and those earning over $104k per year (50%).

Greens voters were the only demographic group which preferred an EIS to a LET, with 46% preferring an EIS.

Carbon Capture and Storage

Jun 14, 2017

Q. Do you think that coal generation with 100% “capture and storage”, where carbon emissions from burning coal are captured and stored underground, should be considered a “low emission” energy source under a low emissions target?

  Total   Vote Labor Vote Lib/Nat Vote Greens Vote Other
Yes 27%   25% 36% 16% 28%
No 29%   35% 19% 55% 28%
Don’t know 44%   39% 45% 29% 44%

 

27% thought carbon capture and storage technology (CCS) should be considered as a “low emission” energy source under a low emissions target, and 29% did not.

Those most likely to think CCS should be considered a low emission energy source were Liberal/National voters (36%), men (33%) and those aged 65+ (33%).

Those most likely to think CCS should not be considered a low emission energy source were Greens voters (55%), 18-24 year olds (37%), and South Australians (35%).

The largest proportion (44%) did not know if CCS should be considered a low emission source.

Federal voting intention

Jun 6, 2017

Q. If a Federal Election was held today to which party will you probably give your first preference vote? If not sure, which party are you currently leaning toward? If don’t know – Well which party are you currently leaning to?

  Total   Last week 30/5/17 2 weeks ago 23/5/17 4 weeks ago 9/5/17   Election 2 Jul 16
Liberal 36%   35% 34% 35%    
National 3%   3% 3% 2%    
Total Liberal/National 39%   38% 37% 37%   42.0%
Labor 37%   36% 37% 38%   34.7%
Greens 10%   11% 10% 10%   10.2%
Nick Xenophon Team 3%   3% 3% 3%    
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation 6%   5% 6% 6%    
Other/Independent 6%   7% 6% 6%   13.1%
2 party preferred              
Liberal National 48%   47% 46% 46%   50.4%
Labor 52%   53% 54% 54%   49.6%

 

  1. Sample = 1,774. The data in the above tables comprise 2-week averages derived from the first preference/leaning to voting questions. Respondents who select ‘don’t know’ are not included in the results. The two-party preferred estimate is calculated by distributing the votes of the other parties according to their preferences at the 2016 election.

Same sex marriage

Jun 6, 2017

Q. Do you think people of the same sex should or should not be allowed to marry?

  Total   Vote Labor Vote Lib/Nat Vote Greens Vote Other Oct 2013 Jun 2014 Oct 2015 Mar 2016 Jul 2016 Aug 2016
Should be allowed to marry l 60%   69% 51% 87% 50% 57% 60% 59% 64% 58% 62%
Should not be allowed to marry 26%   18% 36% 6% 38% 31% 28% 30% 26% 28% 27%
Don’t know 14%   13% 13% 7% 12% 12% 12% 11% 10% 14% 12%

60% thought that people of the same sex should be able to marry (down 2% since August 2016), and 26% thought that they should not (down 1%).

Women (67% support) were more likely than men (53%) to support same sex marriage.

72% of 18-24 year olds supported same sex marriage, compared to 42% of over 65 year olds.

Decision on same sex marriage

Jun 6, 2017

Q. Do you think the issue of same sex marriage should be decided by Parliament or should there be a national vote?

  Total   Vote Labor Vote Lib/Nat Vote Greens Vote other Sep 2015 Mar 2016 Jul 2016 Aug 2016 Vote “Yes” Vote “No”
Should be decided by Parliament 27%   33% 27% 36% 24% 21% 23% 25% 25% 31% 22%
Should have a national vote 61%   57% 67% 45% 67% 67% 66% 60% 59% 62% 68%
Don’t know 12%   10% 6% 19% 10% 12% 11% 15% 16% 7% 10%

 

61% thought that same sex marriage should be decided by a national vote, up 2% since August 2016, and 27% thought it should be decided by parliament, up 2% since August 2016.

62% of those who supported same sex marriage would prefer a national vote, as would 68% percent of those who did not support same sex marriage.

Men were more likely to prefer a vote in parliament (32% prefer) than women (21%).

Voting for same sex marriage

Jun 6, 2017

Q. If a political party or candidate supported same-sex marriage would you be more likely to vote for them, less likely to vote for them or does it make no difference to your vote?

  Total   Vote Labor Vote Lib/Nat Vote Greens Vote other Jun 2015
Total more likely 34%   43% 26% 62% 25% 34%
Total less likely 19%   13% 29% 10% 30% 22%
Much more likely 19%   25% 13% 36% 14% 17%
A little more likely 15%   18% 13% 26% 11% 17%
A little less likely 7%   5% 11% 8% 9% 7%
Much less likely 12%   8% 18% 2% 21% 15%
Makes no difference 40%   39% 43% 25% 42% 40%
Don’t know 6%   5% 3% 3% 4% 4%

34% said they would be more likely to vote for a party or candidate that supported same sex marriage (unchanged since June 2015), and 19% said they would be less likely (down 3%).
40% said a party or candidate’s support for same sex marriage would not make a difference to how likely they were to vote for them.

57% of 18-24 year olds said support for same sex marriage would make them more likely to vote for a party or candidate, and 35% of over 65s said it would make them less likely to vote for a candidate.

 

 

Foreign aid budget

Jun 6, 2017

Q. As far as you know, about how much of the Federal budget is spent on foreign aid?

  Total   Vote Labor Vote Lib/Nat Vote Greens Vote other Jun 2015 Jul 2011
Less than 1% 10%   10% 9% 20% 10% 13% 7%
About 1% 9%   8% 10% 12% 7% 11% 8%
About 2% 15%   15% 21% 13% 8% 14% 17%
About 5% 10%   10% 12% 5% 12% 10% 11%
More than 5% 12%   12% 11% 8% 26% 9% 16%
Don’t know 44%   44% 37% 41% 37% 43% 41%

 

Only 10% identified the correct amount of aid spending (less than 1% of the budget), a 3% decrease since June 2015. Those most likely to identify the correct amount were Greens voters (20%), those with a University degree (15%) and those earning over $104k per year (14%).

Overall, 82% of those who provided an answer other than ‘don’t know’ overestimated the amount spent on foreign aid.

Pages:«1234567...401»

Sign up for updates

Receive our weekly Essential Report in your inbox.
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.