The government is not about to face any respite from those bad poll headlines: News Limited papers are today carrying a Galaxy poll which shows the Prime Minister heading for defeat in Bennelong, where he trails Labor’s Maxine McKew 53-47 on two-candidate preferred (a similar poll three months ago had it at 52-48). The Labor primary vote is at 47 per cent, compared with 28 per cent at the previous election (when much of the anti-Howard vote was harvested by Greens candidate Andrew Wilkie), while the Liberal vote is down from 50 per cent to 44 per cent. No quibbling with the sample size this time, either – there were 800 respondents, double the amount Westpoll used to gauge an entire state.
And, Gary, you noted that 27% of those cajoled into answering Galaxy’s questions said that honesty of the candidates was the most important issue for them in the election. Give me a break! Some earnest souls might indeed agree that “honesty” is a vital electoral consideration when a meddling pollster nominates it as an issue, but rest assured the actual election outcome will be determined on pragmatic grounds. I think you’ll find that when it comes time to vote the vast majority of that 27% will suddenly move into the “economic management” camp.
Steven Kaye, what could possibly be the problem about going back to a more fairer IR policy that was in place for a decade, and was in place when the Australian economy was growing at faster levels than what it is now? Oh that’s right – nothing. Rather, now we get to embrace a policy where every worker can be stripped of their awards and where every employee is happy to have greater power! Who needs equality in the workforce?
On the ABC this morning, a man made an interesting point that in the IR ads (made by business groups, the angels of the world), they claim that the Australian standard of living will decrease when the countries topping these lists are all the Scandinavian countries which have much more socialist policies in place than us.
Steven says: “During the election campaign – when people actually start to switch on to politics – it will be made very clear that Labor’s IR policy will wreck the economy..”
Like Tony Abbott, he tends to the view that people are asleep and only wake-up to cast their vote.
On this theory, all pre-election polling is unreliable beacuse it merely reflects some sort of somnambulistic response. It is composed of statements of intention offered by poll respondents, while in an unconscious, semi-cosncious or completely distracted and unfocussed state.
Hmmm. We’ll see how accurate this theory is in about 3 months, now won’t we?
For my part, I reckon people woke-up to the Howard Government some time ago and have decided that it’s way past time for a change.
I reckon they’re pretty focussed. Pretty hard not to be when the rates on the mortgage have just gone up for the fifth time since Howard promised he’d keep them at record lows, and you and the missus are struggling to hold onto the McMansion.
Boll, if John Howard were to lose his seat and the Coalition were to win government, the Liberal Party would choose a new leader well before the House sits for the first time in perhaps February. It’s not an impossible scenario. I would doubt if the result will become clear on the first night. There’ll be an awful lot of preferences to count.
Richard Jones, is Howard really likely to leave after the election?
Howard loves power and he’d just have to stay on to match the Menzies record (I think).
If the Libs and Labor win almost a similar amount of seats and 1 or 2 could mean the difference, then by stepping down and with Bennelong most likely falling to Maxine, that wouldn’t be good news for the government.
But if he wins and the government lose, then a bi-election is almost a given I suppose.
It would be interesting to know how many of those 27% are considering voting for John Howard. How is honesty not a pragmatic issue Steven, particularly if the dishonesty relates to economic issues?
Cajoled? Like the 41% were cajoled Steve?
#How about an election night or mid-week aceptance speech though Richard? Mark Vaile as stand-in PM?
Re Bennelong
I do not think John Howard will lose despite this opinion poll
but the seat is very different to what he won in 1974. a lot of area…..
North Sydney suburbs, Hunters hill , part lane cove has been shifted to
North Sydney over the years . Only one PM ever lost his seat that was Mr
Bruce in 1929 and his seat was much more rural than Flinders is now.
the interest lies in What will Mr Howard do if libs lose the federal election
but he retains his seat a much more likely prospect
PS: Mr Bruce lost over I.R issues
As Boll said #37, there are moral issues at stake here too. What we have had introduced is essentially the American system. The concept of fair go and egalitarianism has been jettisoned with these unfair laws.
They are far too extreme for most Australians. The balance has been skewed far too far towards big business.
As has been observed a far greater proportion of the cake is going into company profits than employees’ remuneration. If redressing this balance causes the lowest paid to be better remunerated then so be it.
They are not the ones spending huge amounts on imported goods and blowing out our deficit to record levels. They are into survival and getting the worst impacts of the internal inflation from rising food prices and rents.
“The lowest paid should be marginally better off ”
Wage rises with no productivity gains only causes inflation you dropkick. The only way a Labor Government will control inflation is by causing higher unemployment, and the last time they were in government, they were the geniuses who gave us both higher unemployment AND high inflation/interest rates!
You have to be a very delusional left-winger to believe Labor’s IR policy is really an economically sound one. Watch the unions rort construction workers out of their jobs, watch small businesses stop expanding and stop hiring – Labor are the party that stand for more joblessness. Why? Because at heart they’re still socialists who want a welfare state for everybody.
just a few thoughts about my home state qld. while it is true some people are upset about the local council amalgamations are lot of people realise that something had to be done with a lot of poorly run councils.its just the ones complaing about it (mainly councillors worried about losing there cushy jobs) are getting all the publicity.In my electorate of fairfax which our member alex somaly holds with a respectable margin and will retain unless it is absolute bloodbath for the libs/nats most people i have talked to believe the govt.is finished.the most popular reason for this is workchoices,not iraq,economics,lies,wmds,etc,workchoices! mr. sinodinos probably realised this as well as many others. you cant just take away peoples rights and securites without first informing them of your plans to do so.the introduction of workchoices was the death knell for this govt.
ps. before steven starts carrying on about left wing loonies the people that i have spoken to were mainly at the golf & bowls clubs not a hotbed of rabid lefties i would assume.
Headline on ABC radio just now. (Just who writes this stuff? Masters of the non sequitur…)
” The Labor Opposition says the Prime Minister’s seat of Bennelong will be very tight DESPITE a new poll showing Labor can win.”
Well, Boll remember Black Jack McEwan (or “Le Noir” as Pig Iron called him) took over temporarily as PM from 19th December 1967 to 10th January 1968, so yes I suppose Mark Vaile could take over temporarily.
Any advice from Liberals here?
There are a couple of big local issues in Bennelong: the Ryde psychiatric centre sell-off and the Epping to Pennant Hills North West Rail tunnel.
I know nothing about the former, but as the proposed rail tunnel runs straight under my house (next door in the Berowra electorate), I know a LOT about the latter.
Howard is up to something on this tunnel. I haven’t heard exactly what, but it’s most likely along the lines of funding a diversion that allows the tunnel engineers to miss the strata title precinct immediately near Epping station (and hopefully under my place, too). At the moment the State government says they can only afford a straight line track, no curves. Does anyone hear a federal cash register ringing?
A lot of land-owners in Epping are from the Chinese communities of Epping (naturally) and Eastwood… the heart of the electorate. The Chinese are hopping mad, close to running amok on this issue. And their aunties and their cousins and the rest of their families are as well.
McKew refuses to get involved, saying it’s a state matter. I’ve contacted her personally a couple of times and pleaded with her (and Bob Hogg) to reconsider some kind of support for the anti-tunnel residents… all to no avail. I’ve pointed out that this kind of issue is tailor-made for Howard, given recent form:
1. Bloody-minded state Labor government.
2. Big-time, multi-billion $$$ infrastructure project.
3. High anxiety in among affected residents.
3. Needs a lot of money to fix it.
4. Hurried planning and public information campaign foisted on the voters by state government.
5. Heritage bushland to be destroyed for above-ground facilities (up to one hectare of concrete).
6. Many vow they’ll give their vote to the candidate who helps them get rid of this abomination (including some Labor voters). They mean it.
All I’ve got back is a patronising pat on the head.
This is the kind of issue that Labor ignores at its peril. The railway as designed (not in principle, but its idiotic, lazy design) is not only a stupid, unpopular idea, but federal intervention and state-bashing is straight out of the John Howard Election-07 playbook.
There could easily be 1500-2000 votes in it, yet McKew ignores the issue and publicly lunches with Sartor (planning minister). Meanwhile, Howard already has 2 full-time minders working behind the scenes with the locals to figure something out.
I know this for a fact. I get the private emails from the group clandestinely working with them.
This bad poll today could well be enough to tip the scales, to get Howard moving on intervention. Labor are stupid to wish it away. Johnnie will grasp at anything to get just a few extra votes.
It’s all very depressing for a Labor voter. I’m really torn two ways on this.
Swordfish does that mean that if wages drop, as they have per hour on AWAs, and productivity and profits increase this is sound economics?
It’s OK to screw the employees as far as you can, but don’t you dare touch profits!
Howard would still be Prime Minister provided he could win a seat within 3 months. Black Jack McEwan was prime minister in that period as caretaker but then Gorton took over and served as PM even when he was not in parliament (he resigned from the Senate to run for Holt’s seat in the lower house… meanwhile Holt was enjoying himself in Red China). So Howard could PM even if he loses his seat.
#31 Sean
“Qld A conservative state; Australia’s Texas; known for being politically immature enough to vote conservative figures like Joh Bjelke in the past ”
Is that correct?
I thought that very few people voted for Joh and his winning of elections was mainly due to gerrymandered electorates.
???
Will a bad result in Nielsen tomorrow tip the PM over the edge? Surely he must now be despairing.
He has said he will stay while his party wants him and while it’s in their best interests. His party might still want him but is it in their best interests?
The ultimate humiliation is to concede defeat on election night to both Mr Rudd and Ms McKew. His achievements over 11 years will be forgotten and he will be remembered as the loser who lost his own seat and who allowed the ALP to govern everwhere. Some legacy.
Could he still chuck it in before the election? Costello would certainly create the X factor, but the ALP would only need to win 15 seats with Bennelong a certain gimme.
I’m not sure anymore.
“Boll Says:
August 12th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
No worries Noocat, just borrow Aristotle`s homework!?”
That’s fine, I pinch mine off Pythagoras anyway.
Gaynor,
If the PM resigned I’ve compiled a list of certain ALP gains. These aren’t possibles, but certainties.
1. Bonner
2. Moreton
3. Bass
4. Braddon
5. Bennelong
6. Macquarie
7. Makin
8. Wakefield
9. Kingston
10. Lindsay
11. Hasluck
Now some may argue against Lindsay and Hasluck but they really are certain gains. Let’s be honest about that.
So, assuming I’m correct, the ALP need to only win 5 more seats, while retaining all their own seats, to win government. These seats include.
1. Solomon
2. Eden-Monaro
3. Wentworth
4. Page
5. Paterson
6. Robertson
7. Deakin
8. McMillan
9. La Trobe
10. McEwen
11. Blair
12. Herbert
13. Hinkler
14. Flynn
15. Stirling
16. Canning
17. Kalgoorlie
18. Boothby
19. Sturt
Does anybody really think they can’t win at least 5 of these seats?
It’s difficult to construct an argument that has the coalition being re-elected.
Neil, I think Eden-Monaro should be on your “certain” list.
I’m just trying to be conservative Adam.
I also respect Gary Nairn. He’s an entrenched sitting member.
Not for long, Neil. Col Mike Kelly will defeat him.
RE Neil’s analysis
a slight error there on 2004 figures Macquarie is marginal ALP
and Parramatta marginal lib. Just swap Parramatta for Macquarie
doesn’t change sums
Thanks B.S.Fairman for the information. I think it would be highly unlikely that John Howard would want to continue if the situation were that bad.
I doubt if he would stand again.
That phrase “as long as my party wants me….and best interests”needs examination now.
His party may want him but may not be able to afford to have him still there.
It’s looks doubtful that it is in the best interests of the party that he stay on.
It’s hard to gauge.
Handing over to Peter Costello right now, which presumably would now be the option so close to the election, rather than throwing it open to all-comers, may be the circuit-breaker the Libs need.
Often leaders in opposition, or in waiting, don’t poll as well as when they take over.
It might just work for them. It might be an even worse disaster.
Mick #75
You are absolutely correct. But I was considering my sums based on how current sitting members vote in the chamber.
Although Macquarie is now notionally an ALP seat it is currently held by a Liberal. The reverse applies to Parramatta.
I reckon the ALP will hold Parramatta- ie. no change. But they are a certainty to gain Macquarie. – a net gain.
I don’t think Howard will despair. Despite all the talk of staying as long as his party wants him, he will stay as long as he can. He will fight to the end. It would be admirable in another situation, but with John Winston Howard, it’s really all about John Winston Howard.
If the bad polls continue, he will make even more desperate attempts to wedge the opposition. There will be more dirt and muck and more fear and doubt. This will work in Rudd’s favour, as people are seeing an increasingly desperate politician. Not a good look.
Expect promises on Iraq and Workchoices, both will of course be worthless. He will fight and fight and fight until the election or until it all becomes just too embarassing and he’s finally given the bum’s rush. I hope it’s the latter.
Costello would be a disaster.
The problem with Howard is that he owns both the good and bad of the govt – he gathers it all to himself. If he goes then any accumulated credits go too.
Rudd would be campaigning against a newbie who has no credits except some part of the economy – but thats been underminded quite a lot as well. Costello would appear as a policy vaccumn to the electorate, they know nothing about him.
Rudd is already preferred PM to the ‘master’ even though Howard still has good approval ratings. People see Rudd as superior material to Howard how much more will he appear superior to Costello or Turnbull?
Costello’s public presence is a bit off as well, his presentation is lacking and his manner of speech is off puting a lot of the time. He has no idea how to sell himself or the govt.
We have to also remember some voters are holding back because of fear of change. If Howard goes then the next govt will be change anyway. So the fear/uncertainty starts to dissipate.
Stanely Bruce was also PM for 11 days after losing his seat in 1929 because the overall result of the election was still up in the air, despite his seat not being there.
And Howard as treasurer in 1983 had to devalue the Aussie dollar two days after the election as he was still caretaker treasurer. (This was his last act). I wonder what he will devalue this time if he loses?
#no 68 Fred
the electorates werent gerrymandered, they were malapportioned so that country seats had a significantly smaller number of electors than city seats.
and joh was great he did a lot of good things
abolished death duty
gold coast highway
riverside expressway
south bank cultural precinct
off the top of my head
Mmmm you may be right Kina. It’s a horrible dilemma for the Libs. They’re stuck with a dead duck of a leader and any replacement may do worse on polling day. I wouldn’t want to be a Liberal member with a margin of less than 8%.
Regards Joh, DLP + Lib + Nat always held a majority of votes. Under a preferential system, he would have won–but the amount of seats would be much different.
It’s a lie to say that he was in power by “gerrymandered” electorates. It is not a lie to say that the number of seats he gained was exacerbated by gerrymandering.
Joh did also have some gerrymandering as well. There is the infamous doughnut electorate, where an aboriginal community was excised and placed in the electorate next to it. This is gerrymandering, where the boundaries themselves are manipulated. Mostly Qld had weighting. Though the ALP never actually won the 2PP until Goss.
Oh, and for the simple answer why Howard’s margin is tiny?–demographic change.
Bennelong (and this part of the North Shore) is playing host to increasing amounts of Asian migrants. And Asian migrants do not vote Liberal.
The main differential between Liberal and Labor, other than income, is whether or not the voters are from a non-English-speaking background. Going on the 2004 boundaries and 2001 census stats, of the divisions where 20%+ of the population is of NESB, only 4 out of 32 are Liberal seats.
Bennelong is the Liberal seat with the second highest proportion of NESB’s (28.9%) after Parramatta (30.1%). Both are marginals and likely to fall.
It is almost a certainty that Howard will loose Bennelong.
Malapportionment did allow the Queensland Nationals to govern in their own right after the 1983 and 1986 elections, minus the Liberals. Their respective vote was 38.9 per cent and 39.6 per cent.
” rel=”nofollow”>This chart might be of interest.
If Labor wins the election, they will win Bennelong.
I don’t think that is entirely accurate Michael. It is not so much that the NESBers in Bennelong are Labor voters, but overall they support the Libs to a lesser extent than the WASPs they replaced. It still spells doom for Howard though…
Andrew 81
“and joh was great he did a lot of good things”
Including presided over arguably the most corrupt government in Australia’s history: politicised the police force and made it and other areas of government just another arm of the National party machine; persecuted those who opposed him; destroyed the career path of any public servant who opposed him; and imposed unlawful restrictions on civil liberties.
And, as pointed out, he used both gerrymandering and malaportionment to maintain his position.
Let’s hope we never see his kind of “greatness” again.
In the NSW Senate what is the best way that I can do my bit to help Labor and the Greens get four seats between them.
Would it be by my giving my 1 and 2 to Labor No. 3 the Greens No.1
I apologise for the tone of my last entry but it does p— me off when people skite about being academics who write publicly and all they seem to do is sit back and take pot shots at others thoughts and theories. It TICKS me off big time. Hell, Adam has a Phd, Ive got a few bits of paper too, and Im sure others here are well educated. There is no need to rub in people’s faces and deign on to act a correction monitor for other people’s contributions. Enough said. Come on Graeme, put your neck on the block for a change.
Swordfish #61
Your argument seems to be that you have to have these draconian IR Laws to have a healthy economy
I am afraid that the evidence does not support you argument
See
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/there-is-nothing-like-a-dane-for-an-economysavvy-lead/2007/08/10/1186530620059.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
One thing you have to remember is that the system should be here to support the individual not the other way around.
Neil I would add Blair to your certain list too mate.
23
Graeme Says:
August 12th, 2007 at 11:13 am
Don’t mean to quibble, William, but does it matter to a poll’s accuracy whether it is 800 voters for a whole state or a whole electorate? (I avoided stats like the plague in my maths degree, but I thought, once over a small population threshold, the accuracy of the sample size was invariant).
These may be heady days for Labor but I doubt 53-47 at the moment is enough to get McKew over the line, because this election race will tighten over the economic fundamentals.
Graeme how about giving us the benefit of your “academic” knowledge and “public” writing and offer us an explanation of what you mean by ‘economic fundamentals’ and how and why they will “tighten” the election race if I may “quibble” ?
87, William– off topic, but I’m assuming that some of those National seats were won on Liberal preferences, yes?
88, Dan– I’m not suggesting that the increase in NESB’s is the sole reason, there are doubtless other causes, but I’m going to broadly put “demographic change” and particularly the increase in NESB’s at the top. The Labor vote (through Greens preferences) is increasing in all the Liberals’ high-income seats.
The most interesting part of the last few polls is that the alleged drift back to the coalition since March seems to have come to a thuddering stop. And, if anything is starting to trend back to Labor.
Notwithstanding the various projections based on the charts provided by Bryan, everyone’s collective wisdom of previous electoral experiences and the possible appearance of the fabled “rabbit” issue, things look very grim for the Libs.
I believe the tipping point has been reached and the Libs are staring at a rout unless they can do something, eg change leader, start a small war with a Pacific country or completely repudiate their Work Choices Laws.
However, winning sixteen seats for Labor to govern in their own right is a daunting task that should not be under estimated. Time for the true believers to work harder than ever to make it happen.
Now Labor saying that the polling is a bit strong and it will be a tough race I understand. Humble underdog – most cunning [sub-text = evil] politician we have ever seen stuff. All very sensible.
I don’t get the broader Lib stuff seems too caught up in the man of steel rubbish.
65 – Aussie Bob could you explain the rail thing a bit more; why the line should be crooked how far down the process the State Govt is, how much money moving the tunnel will cost and whether or not that creates a new set of losers, just different ones?
Strop #93
Why Blair?
I’m not a local so I am unaware of what is happening up there.
Is it fair to say that Bennelong is now a notionally Labor electorate, that still has a Liberal member because he happens to be the prime minister?
Have the boundaries and demographics changed that much?
Eddie C – Your best bet to achieve that is make sure that the ALP preferences the Greens before FF. As to a voting pattern, either Grn 2, ALP 4, Grn 1, ALP 3, ALP 2, ALP 1 or ALP 4, ALP 3, Grn 2, Grn 1, ALP 2, ALP 1. However, this is unlikely to make an ounce of difference.