Newspoll: 50-50 in NSW

Newspoll has released its first New South Wales state poll since the March 2007 election. The poll was half conducted before the Wollongong City Council scandal broke, and half after. It shows the two parties locked together at 50-50 on two-party preferred, with the Coalition on 39 per cent of the primary vote and Labor on a dismal 34 per cent. The two-party figure might be subject to the Labor bias which Peter Brent at Mumble noted in respect to last week’s ACNielsen poll. Newspoll has Morris Iemma’s approval rating down to 32 per cent from 47 per cent at the time of the election, which is very close to ACNielsen’s 52 per cent to 34 per cent. The Australian’s article hints intriguingly at a five-point turnaround on preferred premier after the Wollongong story broke, but says nothing about voting intention. The Australian’s graphic possibly has more, but my browser crashes when I try to open it (UPDATE: No, I wasn’t really missing anything).

Also from Newspoll today are comprehensive figures on perceptions of the two party leaders, which show Kevin Rudd wiping the floor with Brendan Nelson on every measure.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

121 comments on “Newspoll: 50-50 in NSW”

Comments Page 2 of 3
1 2 3
  1. So the Libs have reached 50%. I wonder if they’d have managed that with the Member for Vaucluse (if you don’t mind) as leader.

    As Craig at #14 said, and I’d agree, it’s hard to see how things could get much worse for Labor.

  2. GP, it is too simplistic to say that Qld/WA are booming because of minerals/energy exports and the rest are not because they do not have those exports. Newcastle is the worlds biggest coal port. All the coal that is shipped from there is from NSW. NSW has approximately as much coal as Qld. The problem is (as usual) infrastructure. The queues of ships off Newcastle are now a cliche for ignored infrastructure /skills requirements over the last 20 odd years, since Nick Greiner made public debt political poison, and Costello added fuel to the fire (proving that Costello never had any original thoughts, even bad ones). Port Kembla is almost as bad, and due to worsen as freight from Port Botany is increasingly diverted there to alleviate political problems in Sydney. NSW is also a very big exporter of minerals including gold.
    Other states, especially SA are the same.

    One of the biggest problems in NSW is the curse of nimbyism. That has caused the delay in developing even more mining projects, and is the major cause of port and rail development delays after the voodoo economic arguement that debt is bad(thanks Costello).

  3. I think that with those primary vote figures and the OPV that we have in NSW that would translate to the Coalition ahead on 2PP.

  4. Regarding the figures on Rudd V Nelson, that’s a very good result for Nelson. He polled double figures in all issues, except the Environment (where his 9% still beat his Preferred PM rating).

  5. 50 [Oh dear Gary. What did you expect? That the Coalition magically discover rich deposits of resources in the South East?]

    Unlikely, GP, the coalition couldn’t even find any resources in the budget to fix teenagers teeth, let alone the dental care for seniors.

  6. Mike Cusack – I agree one of the most reasonable posts I’ve read in a long time. I tried to raise this issue with Joe Hockey once, but he responded with personal abuse.

    The inflation rate is indeed closer to 4%. There was a very low print of +0.1% in Q1-07, which means the annual rate is artificially depressed. So the 3.0% annual rate is actually 2.9% over the last three quarters. The RBA knows this, hence the rate hikes…

    One final point, as a comparative insider I can tell you that Swan’s public statements have kept the mortgage rates lower than I thought they would be. The banks’ responses (particularly the 30bp followed by 29bp) shows just how sensitive the banks are and are trying to outdo each other and stay on the right side of public opinion. And someone needs to keep the pressure up.

    When you realise the rise in costs has been in the order of 50bp for the banks, the paltry 20bp they’ve passed on (so far) seems restrained.

  7. 16 Steve – While the issue of “not having to work Friday mornings” is very close to my heart personally, I of course meant “an issue that someone other than the parliamentary Liberal Party cares about.”

  8. Any one notice the flood of law suits happening against the federal government since “Sorry Day”? Even the one highlighted in the papers virtually the following day was against the Victorian government and was in the pipeline before Rudd’s “sorry” took place.

  9. 60 Craig, looks like you are out of luck, all the coalition seem to care about at present is playing golf with journalists during question time, going on cruises to talk about wheat, abusing the speaker on Fridays or lobbying people in Dubai. Other than that the only issue seems to be when will the rash of by-elections start and in which order will they be held.

  10. The biggest loser!

    Little Johnny H has scamperd off to the states and is having a cry to his neocom mates about how is precious policies are being trashed by the Rudd government.

    Boo hoo, democracy sucks doesnt it.

    No guts to air your grievences in Australia you have to run off to the country you wanted us to become, pathetic!

    Please America keep Johnny, make him a citizen he will be well chuffed with that.

  11. Gary, if a seven percent preferred Prime Minister scatters the few Nelson supporters left and gets them crowing about the sucess of a Democratic candidate in the US. Imagine the support for the Democratic Party if Nelson gets to zero.

  12. Howards speech.

    “If the butter of common national values is spread too thinly it will disappear altogether.”

    Makes as much sense as Glenns bullbutter remarks.

  13. 67 “Mr Howard has given an address at a gala dinner for the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, where he received the Irving Kristol Award.”

    An award? for what? Services for spreading the notional value of inflation thickly most likely.

  14. Malcolm Turnbull on 7.30 report.
    The Howard gov’t had nothing to do with the increase in inflation.
    What a complete tosser.

  15. Turnbull and Swan have no idea. Turnbull should have admitted the failures of the previous government and then suggested what they should have done.
    His productivity answer was just sheer nonsense, productivity was not occurring because of the booming mining sector restricting it and doing so for five years, what next? The mind boggles.
    Turnbull was i must admit terrible, i thought he was better than this.
    Swan is the same both, both i admit have no solutions other than letting things roll on regardless, actually cutting spending is not a solution, and tax cuts are just stupid.

  16. Turnbull almost admitted the problem, oh gee we had all these unskilled long term unemployed joining the great low paid.

    Hey Wentworth Lawyer – that is exactly what the RB has been saying for yonks. Skills you wally.

    0% productivity gain – why?

  17. People seem to be great at telling us what Swan shouldn’t be doing but not particularly good at saying what he should be doing to solve our economic problem.

  18. JWH was still crapping on about “winning the war on terror”.
    I’d love for someone to tell us what the definition of winning is.
    Defining anyone as a terrorist because they refuse to fight by our rules is just patently silly. A fight to the death is a fight to the death.
    Anyone knows that if you don’t want to get hurt fighting that you just don’t get involved in the first place. Now granted, that might not always be possible when someone wants to bring the fight to you, but if you’re going to talk about “winning” then you’ve got to be prepared to annihilate your opponent.
    The 6 years since the invasion is just a drop in the bucket that represents conflict in the middle east. The idea that we can make anyone forget the bucket is just laughable.

  19. 77 Gary B
    on the money again
    marky marky – I think it’s great that you’ve got plenty of criticism to hand out; no one should go unscrutinised, but surely with that much energy invested you’ve got some solutions too?
    Yes we all know about the tax cuts, but be politically serious; the truth, promises and word of politicians is particularly sacred in Australian politics – especially when you promise to give.
    So, taking account of politics, and assuming the tax cuts stay, what should the ALP be doing differently?

  20. For one thing i would not be cutting cutting taxes, especially to the wealthy who are causing much of the housing crisis.
    Thus the continued buying of investment properties which are fueling a spiralling out of control asset price explosion on houses. This is especially the case in our inner suburban areas and coastal regions of this country. Thus the rich will use their taxcut to speculate further whilst the poor will use it to put a few scraps on the table. Their is this continued belief that the rich will reduce their savings and not their consumption and this has been over the last twenty years refuted). Instead the reverse has happened.
    In the end it will cause a massive housing bubble and a significant increase in the homeless. Why continue to pump prime an economy out of control. Hence cause further interest rate increases.

    Two- i would not be cutting spending, must what and see on this regarding the cutbacks but cuts to spending will hit the vulnerable more than the rich who will be able to ride out such cuts. It is possible the cuts to spending will hurt the economy even more. Why quarantine defence, it does not make sense.
    To me it is the governments fault regarding housing price speculation that is now evident. Negative gearing, cuts to capital gains taxes have caused the housing bubble.

    Put simply i am not a supply side economist, i believe in growth and government spending with a measured approach to taxation policy to reduce demand in the economy, hence greater taxes on the wealthy. Why use interest rates as a lever for slowing the economy down when mainly it effects the vulnerable and those either buying a home or trying to pay for one. Tax increases would slow the economy down on a more equitable basis. Our prioriities are backward.
    Interest rate increases rarely hurt the wealthy as they own a home. They also hurt businesses who have borrowed money but again it is generally the smaller businesses trying to get a foothold in the economy, larger businesses have enough equity already and the ability to get through the tough times.

  21. Higher interest rates also allow the wealthy to stick their money in nice account or term deposit with a high rate to reap further benefits. The economic process is designed to help them and not the vulnerable in my view.

  22. Must say it is fascinating to see the amount of ex Labor people who become lobbyists for big companies. Seems to me that they just give up what they believe in and let the wealthy continue on playing their game.
    Lobbyists and donations, especially in New South Wales are causing significant probs, time reforms occurred in this area.
    Hopefully Iemma will end donations from developers.

  23. Marky I commend you for giving it a go but, as I understand it, the tax cuts are not directed towards the wealthy are they?

  24. “Thus the continued buying of investment properties which are fueling a spiralling out of control asset price explosion on houses.” Is this an assumption on your part or do you have the stats to prove it?

  25. As a proportion of income recieved the tax cuts go to people who recieve the greater share of income, Gary.
    Yes the very rich don’t get a tax cut this year. But will in the future.
    Nonetheless, money will be in the economy and yes it may not go towards speculation as i suggested but the poor tend to spend their money rather than save it and yes whilst i want the vulnerable to have more money in this time of need for them, maybe it should go into measures which would benefit them long term such as super, further consumption will in my mind cook their goose through increases in interest rates or rental price hikes.
    Why not scrap the capital gains tax concessions or limit the negative gearing changes to investors’ incomes from the property instead of a rebate on total income.
    Gary i would like you to tell you me if you work for the Labor Government because you never criticise it. Hate to criticise but i have a dislike for yes people. Nothing against you though.

  26. 87 marky marky – I’m not part of any party and never have been. I will criticise when I feel the need. I have voted Liberal. You?

  27. Gary i am actually a member believe it or not of the Labor Party. Amazing as it is, just care about people and society and want a better world.

  28. Marky, I’m just not convinced anyone really knows what they’re doing with the economy and I get a bit narky with people who criticise without providing solutions, solutions that are based on facts, figures proven remedies rather than ideology which, no offence, your suggestions seem to be based on ie “hit the rich”.

  29. I respect your motives and agree with your goals but I think you’re one of those people who overlooks the reality of politics. I remember years ago there were left wingers of the Labor Party who had the people’s wellbeing at heart but would sacrifice their own Labor government in order to achieve their goals. To me that useless. You can’t achieve your goals in opposition. Hence some sacrifices to ideology need to made.

  30. well done marky marky
    Now if we only had a treasury department to produce the reports to back your ideas up. That’s a major part of the problem. I don’t really know whether I can support your ideas or not. I’m not really sure it’s all the rich’s investment in property that’s the problem – I think there’s a lot of problems.
    Here’s one:
    When my parents were buying a house they bought a 2 bedder and extended it to match the kids as they came along – that’s all they needed.
    Now go out and try and find a new modest 2 bedroom house on a large block with real potential to be extended – they just don’t exist.
    We now borrow and buy based on the maximum loan we can service – what we NEED is secondary. It’s a cultural change.
    We’ve gone from aspiring to a Kingswood, to our company leasing a Lexus 4WD. Now that might make sense to the individual, but what it really means is that our overall taxation has increased to support a finance company to run a leasing company etc etc. Again – it’s a cultural change.
    As any parent will know- it’s very hard to take the brand new shiny red toy off the 2 year old and then try to explain that them having it is hurting the less rich child who lives across the street….

  31. 92
    Gary Bruce

    And Gary that’s exactly what it’s about: Politics vs Values.

    If only the former government had promised 5 billion in tax cuts instead of 30 something billion. Then Rudd would have promised 4.6 billion or whatever. Rudd was compelled to ‘bid’ almost as much as the Liberals. Costello and Howard thought they’d completely trumped Labor with the tax cuts promise leaving labor no room to move on other savings/spending initiatives. Rudd brought the whole bidding process to a close when he unleashed his master stroke at the Labor launch where he said this “reckless spending must stop.’

    That’s all history now. Labor has made the tax cuts promise. Nelson & Co would love for the government to break that promise. No doubt Rudd would love to use the tax revenue for worthwhile national projects but a promise to the Nation is a promise that must be kept. The public will get the tax cuts and Rudd will have to find savings and revenue streams elsewhere to lift the country out of Howard’s mess.

    That’s what good government is all about: delivering on your spending promises whilst maintaining a sound economy. Rudd will work hard to achieve both which is something Howard/Costello had no intention of ever doing.

  32. Gary sorry but we beg to differ. You and i will continue to argue on this site and that i will enjoy.
    Economic rationalists are ruining this country and the world.
    On this negative gearing assumption made if you look at the bureau of statistics site for november regarding investment housing you in november 2007 you will notice that investment housing for new housing acconted for 30 percent of new starts a significant amount, i can recall in the late 80’s negative gearing fuelling speculation significantly when it was introduced housing prices. Put simply it is causing a bubble which will burst.
    And yes i may speculate and come up on occasion with little evidence but please explain to me what evidence our politicians and economists use as evidence for doing much of what they achieve- as today they tend to hide everything under the cloak of “commerical confidentiality”.
    And yes this hit the rich view is something i believe in,
    because it has got right out of proportion in this country and throughout the world. CEO’s get excessive payrises over the last ten years whilst working people get barely a trickle.
    I could go on but it is time i went to bed. But will love to continue debating with you on another occasion.

  33. Sorry was going to bed, but Steve you definately are a new modern Labor appartichik, who has come out uni and learnt how to spin and play with marketeers. Give me a break, this promises bulldust, so if the economy starts detoriating will Labor continue to honor its promises?
    So it is alright for John Howard and Jeff Kennett to do as they please and break promises and hence enact their ideological beliefs but it is not alright for the Labor Party.
    The problem for Labor is that it is to weak to do anything, simple.
    And full of people who continue to believe that the Whitlam Government was a failure which historically it was not, in terms of what it achieved.
    We need a new Labor Party.

  34. More chilling news on the real estate front from Bloomberg today:

    March 6 (Bloomberg) — U.S. mortgage foreclosures rose to an all-time high at the end of 2007 as borrowers with adjustable-rate loans walked away from properties before their payments increased, the Mortgage Bankers Association said today.

    New foreclosures jumped to 0.83 percent of all home loans in the fourth quarter from 0.54 percent a year earlier. Late payments rose to a 23-year high, the organization said in a report today.

    “We’re seeing people give up even before they get to the reset because they couldn’t afford the home in the first place,” said Jay Brinkmann, vice president of research and economics for the Washington-based trade group.

    The Bush administration is urging lenders to avert foreclosures by modifying mortgage terms amid the worst housing slump in a quarter century. The Federal Reserve has slashed its benchmark interest rate twice this year to try to avert the first recession since 2001. The central bank yesterday said the net worth of U.S. households decreased by $532.9 billion during the fourth quarter as home values fell.

  35. why Marky Mark-
    you sound like a Green!
    I totally agree that we are at a point in our history where there is a great divide between humanitarian values versus a culture of greed and instant gratification. Climate change is a direct result of this and we will all ultimately suffer as a result , but it will affect the poorest first of course.
    Idealism and vision may sound like ‘motherhood’ statements ( a great insult to mothers I might add), but they are in fact the only thing that we as a species have that differentiate us from less conscious animals. Time we used it. And the race in the US is pretty much about this, which is why it is amazing to see Obabma have such a good tilt at the old order. People want change, and we are looking to our leaders to guide us.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 2 of 3
1 2 3