An unprecedented triple whammy of opinion polls is disastrous enough for the Coalition to lend force to Dennis Shanahan‘s assertion that “Malcolm Turnbull’s political career has been smashed in just one week”. In turn:
• Arriving a day earlier than usual, Newspoll shows that the Coalition recovery detected a fortnight ago has come to a sudden end, with Labor’s lead back out from 53-47 to 56-44. The parties have also exchanged three points on the primary vote, Labor up to 44 per cent and the Coalition down to 37 per cent. However, the real shock is that Turnbull’s personal ratings have suffered what Shanahan calls “the single biggest fall in the survey’s 25-year history”: his approval rating has plunged from 44 per cent to 25 per cent, while his disapproval is up from 37 per cent to 58 per cent. Fifty-two per cent do not believe that John Grant received preferential treatment from the Prime Minister against only 24 per cent who do. Kevin Rudd’s lead as preferred prime minister is up from 57-25 to 65-18.
• ACNielsen, which is hopefully back to monthly polling as we enter the second half of the term, has Labor’s two-party lead up from 53-47 to 58-42. Labor’s primary vote is up two points to 46 per cent while the Coalition’s is down six to 37 per cent. Fifty-three per cent say the OzCar affair has left them with a less favourable impression of Malcolm Turnbull, whose approval is down 11 points to 32 per cent with his disapproval has shot up 13 points to 60 per cent. Turnbull comes third as preferred Liberal leader with 18 per cent, behind Peter Costello on 37 per cent and Joe Hockey on 21 per cent. Rudd’s lead as preferred prime minister is up from 64-28 to 66-25, and his approval rating is up three points to 67 per cent.
• Galaxy has Labor’s primary vote up a point to 44 per cent and the Coalition’s down two to 30 per cent. Sixty-one per cent believe Kevin Rudd has been open and honest about the OzCar affair, while 51 per cent “believed Mr Turnbull had been dishonest or somewhat deceitful”.
Once again, Victoria dominates the latest round of electoral news:
• The Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters has tabled two major reports which I haven’t got round to sinking my teeth into: the regular conduct of the federal election report, and that into the Commwealth Electoral (Above-the-Line Voting) Amendment Bill 2008.
• Rick Wallace of The Australian reports that complicated quarreling in the Victorian ALP has thrown up “rogue challengers” against at least ten state MPs. Keilor MP George Seitz, who faces enforced retirement in the wake of the Victorian Ombudsman’s report into Brimbank City Council, is said to be largely reponsible: Andrew Landeryou at VexNews identifies his state nominees as Tomislav Tomic (against Bundoora MP Colin Brooks), Seeralan Arumugam Gunaratnam (Carrum MP Jenny Lindell), Raymond Congreve (Lara MP John Eren), Rosa Mitrevski (Mill Park MP Lily D’Ambrosio), Philip Cassar (Mordialloc MP Janice Munt), Teodoro Tuason (Narre Warren North MP Luke Donnellan), Teresa Kiselis and Mate Barun (both taking on Northcote MP Fiona Richardson), Josefina Agustin (Prahran MP Tony Lupton), and Blagoja Bozinovski (Thomastown MP Peter Batchelor). For good measure, Seitz candidate Manfred Kriechbaum is taking on federal MP Maria Vamvakinou in Calwell. Other challengers are explained by Wallace in terms the “stability pact” forged between the Left and the Right forces associated with Bill Shorten and Steven Conroy, and counter-moves by rival Right unions seeking to forge ties with some of the more militant unions of the Left. This presumably accounts for Australian Manufacturing Workers Union candidate Andrew Richards joining the aforementioned Kriechbaum in a three-horse race against Vamvakinou in Calwell, Lisa Zanatta of the Construction Mining Forestry and Energy Union challenging Lynne Kosky in Altona, and Kathleen Matthews-Ward of the Shop Distributive and Allied Employees Association joining the Seitz challengers to Fiona Richardson in Northcote. The option of referring preselections to the party’s national executive remains available to John Brumby, who must be sorely tempted.
• Other challenges appear more obscure. A third Labor Unity candidate, Rick Garotti, is listed as a nominee against incumbent Craig Langdon in Ivanoe, in addition to the previously discussed Anthony Carbines. In Preston, Labor Unity MP Robin Scott is being challenged by Moreland councillor Anthony Helou (once of the Socialist Left, but more recently of Labor Unity) and Tamer Kairouz, said by Landeryou to be backed by upper house MP Nazih Elasmar, a principal of a Right sub-faction also linked with Theo Theophanous (not sure if any relation to Kororoit MP Marlene Kairouz). Two Socialist Left members are under challenge from factional colleagues, which Andrew Landeryou suggests can be put down to dealings between the Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union and unions on the Right: Yuroke MP Liz Beattie faces a challenge from Colleen Gibbs, an official with the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, while Darebin councillor Timothy Laurence has nominated against Steve Herbert in Eltham. Andrew Lappos, who in the past has been associated with the Left, is listed as a challenger to the Right’s Telmo Languiller in Derrimut, but it was reported last week that Languiller’s preselection had been secured by the national executive.
• The preselection contest for Brunswick has taken on new significance with the news that Phil Cleary will contest the seat as an independent. Cleary defeated the Labor candidate in the federal seat of Wills in the 1992 by-election that followed Bob Hawke’s retirement and was narrowly re-elected in 1993, before losing to Labor’s Kelvin Thomson in 1996. He has more recently worked for the Electrical Trades Union, which under the leadership of Dean Mighell has disaffiliated with the ALP and given support to the Greens. Three candidates are listed for Labor preselection, each a colleague of outgoing member Carlo Carli in the Socialist Left: Jane Garrett, Slater and Gordon lawyer and former adviser to Steve Bracks; Enver Erdogan, 23-year-old Moreland councillor and staffer to House of Represenatatives Speaker Harry Jenkins, said to be aligned with the Kim Carr sub-faction; and Alice Pryor, also a Moreland councillor, aligned with the rival Left sub-faction associated with federal Bruce MP Alan Griffin. Former party state secretary Eric Locke has proved a non-starter; Andrew Landeryou reports he has withdrawn in favour of Garrett, who would appear to be the front-runner. According to David Rood of The Age, Garrett also has the backing of John Brumby.
• Andrew Landeryou further reports that National Union of Workers state secretary Antony Thow has been “elected unopposed” for the third position on Labor’s Victorian Senate ticket. If that means what it appears to, it’s a significant story the mainstream media appears to have ignored, as Labor would seem very likely on current form to repeat its 2007 election feat of winning a third seat.
• The Moonee Valley Community News reports it is “not expected” that Victorian Planning Minister Justin Madden will be opposed in the Labor preselection for Essendon, to which the party has assigned him so sitting member South Eastern Metropolitan MLC Bob Smith can be given a safer seat in Western Metropolitan. Mark Kennedy, a former mayor of Moonee Valley, was earlier reported to have ambitions to replace the retiring Judy Maddigan.
• Federal Liberal MP Chris Pearce has announced he will not seek re-election in his Melbourne seat of Aston. Pearce gave his party a morale-boosting by-election win in the seat in July 2001, limiting the Labor swing to 3.7 per cent – which has since stood as exhibit A in the case that the Howard government’s re-election the following November could not entirely be put down to the subsequent Tampa episode and September 11. He was closely associated throughout his time in politics with Peter Costello, and the fact and timing of his departure have inevitably been linked to Costello’s shock announcement early last week. No discussion yet that I’m aware of as to who might replace him. Dennis Shanahan of The Australian reports that “another swathe of resignations” from federal Liberals is expected when New South Wales and Queensland redistributions are finalised early next year, although no names are named.
• The ABC reports that three Western Australian state Labor MPs, headed by the factionally unaligned Alannah MacTiernan, have moved at state conference for preselection reforms allowing “compulsory secret ballots for preselections, with delegates completing their own papers”.
What’s the difference between Wayne Swan and Malcolm Turnbull?
Wayne doesn’t check his fax
Malcolm doesn’t check his facts ROFL
Bruised Turnbull plans frontbench shake-up
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/29/2610832.htm
[Those more seasoned operators mentioned – Andrew Robb, Tony Abbott and Tony Smith – have all served in backroom roles before they entered Parliament.]
No, NO and who?
I surely can’t be the only person who can’t see the fuss in Andrew Robb at all. I still haven’t forgotten his dodgy list of Labor candidates who ‘may’ have not been eligible to stand for Parliament that he waved around during the last campaign.
44 – Bob you’re one for talking about MoE and it’s importance. How does a SLIGHT drop in Rudd’s high satisfaction rating have any real meaning whatsoever given MoE?
ABC radio headline this morning was weak, but typical. They’re reporting the Libs are angry over being smeared by Rudd.
[Re Pembroke election in Tasmania – Vanessa Goodwin is standing for the Liberals and has an excellent chance of getting in. This could be the end of the Bartlett Government.]
Isn’t the seat in the upper house? How would this be the end of the Bartlett Government?
[44 – Bob you’re one for talking about MoE and it’s importance. How does a SLIGHT drop in Rudd’s high satisfaction rating have any real meaning whatsoever given MoE?]
The fact that the 2PP goes up ~%3 but satisfaction drops, with the same pool of voters. MoE accounts for things like randomly getting more Liberal supporters on the phone than would be the case. But if the 2pp goes up and satisfaction goes down, it shows they are moving away from Turnbull, not moving toward Rudd. There is a difference.
Well I was going to make a comment about the ramifications these polls have for the ‘urgers’ in the media.
I was going to ask if maybe the repudiation by the public of the hysterical line the media and Mal ran a week ago has made the media sit up and take notice that the public doesn’t buy their negativity towards the ALP.
Perhaps there might be a more prudent and circumspect moderation in reporting and commenting in the future at least for a little while until the habit reasserts itself?
And then I saw Bill’s comment [#52] about ABC radio’s headline.
So it looks like business as usual.
Morning all and what a good morning it is. No wonder Kev was smiling yesterday morning – bet he had an inkling of the polls. He was so relaxed.
Grog and Crikey Whitey – your darn team gave me the miseries on Sat. arvo but all is forgiven. Today is a good day with Glenn Milne squirming. Fantastic.
Unusually High Support For Sotomayor:
62% Say She Should Be Confirmed
The Republicans have exactly the same problems as the Libs – no leadership, shackled to an unpopular far-right legacy, determined to fight “culture wars” they must lose.
Probably commented on earlier or in another thread, but the Nielson also shows 65% support for the CPRS and only 25% opposition. Interestingly for our Greens readers, 74% of Greens voters support the scheme.
Psephos – it sounds as though you will be right about the CPRS being passed by Libs.
65% in one of the polls say they will go with the Govt. line but I heard Robb on ABC this am saying that he’s not convinced. He say 95% of people don’t understand it so it is still rubbish and needs lots of amendments.
Of course he didn’t say what the amendments would be. He naturally doesn’t know.
54 bob1234 – What about the other two polls bob, do they backup this slight fall from grace for Rudd?
NASA has photographed Turnbull’s support base within the Liberal Party from space. You can see them all in this photo:
61 Socrates – LOL. Good one.
One of the problems modern day parties face (and perhaps olden day ones did, too, I’m not old enought to say) is that safe seats are ‘given’ to factional warriors who need to be rewarded for their party work but have the personal charm of warthogs and are thus unelectable in more marginal seats.
In the sunny days of romping big parliamentary margins, this makes for harmony within the ranks. Come the inevitable electoral wipe out, however, and the party is left trying to rebuild itself using charmless warthogs who have never really campaigned and thus have very little understanding of politics in the raw.
I’m being even handed here; it was one of the problems Labor faced in Opposition as well.
Anyway, the charmless warthogs are left in charge of the keys. They determine who the leader is. They have a big say in party preselections (and are attracted to the charmless warthog demographic – they can’t see anything wrong with it). They determine tactics in Parliament and often are in charge of ‘policy’ as well.
If the Liberals (as I confidently predict) lose more seats at the next election, it is likely that their parliamentary representatives will consist of people such as Mirabella, Bronnie Bishop and Abbott, whose ideology blinds them to the needs and concerns of real people.
Good post by Possum with more nifty graphs. Any Liberal reading it would need to have a Bex and a good lie-down after.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2009/06/29/malcolm-turnbull-a-ute-full-of-pain/comment-page-1/#comment-13655
[54 bob1234 – What about the other two polls bob, do they backup this slight fall from grace for Rudd?]
62 bob1234 – Now, Bob, you could have just answered “no”.
[54 bob1234 – What about the other two polls bob, do they backup this slight fall from grace for Rudd?]
Gary, if you’re not going to understand what i’m saying, which is that the swing is anti-Turnbull rather than pro-Rudd, then there’s no point continuing this discussion.
[Psephos – it sounds as though you will be right about the CPRS being passed by Libs.]
Naturellement.
[65% in one of the polls say they will go with the Govt. line but I heard Robb on ABC this am saying that he’s not convinced. He say 95% of people don’t understand it so it is still rubbish and needs lots of amendments.]
It’s never a good look to tell the voters how ignorant and stupid they are. Andrew, democracy comes from two Greek words “demos” the people and “kratein” to rule. The people rule, get it?
[Of course he didn’t say what the amendments would be. He naturally doesn’t know.]
Rudd’s in such a strong position, he won’t have to give them much.
All jokes aside GB, IMO things will get better from here. There will be a few hickups from month to month as some bad economic news results come out. For example, in August / September a lot of companies will announce annual results that are losses. But by the end of the year employment will be starting to pick up. Sydney is a risk but Adelaide is already good, and the rest are doing not great but OK.
Bob – you claim there is a difference between and anti-malco swing and a pro-rudd one.
Ok, maybe there is. But does it have any practical application? It’s a two horse race…
The Liberals saying other peopel are ignorant about climate change is a bit like them giving us a lecture on document control.
[62 bob1234 – Now, Bob, you could have just answered “no”.]
2pp went up 3.
Rudd satisfaction went up 1, Turnbull satisfaction went down 19.
It’s obvious the reason for the 2pp drop is Turnbull and not Rudd.
It seems the newspaper line being quoted was due to the fact Rudd went down 3% for ‘likeable’ and up 4% for ‘arrogant’ (to 51%, a majority? wow……..)
[that the swing is anti-Turnbull rather than pro-Rudd]
No, Bob, that’s not the case. Rudd has increased personal approval ratings (67% in Nielsen). The voters actively like and approve of Rudd, not just accept him as the least worst alternative.
[Bob – you claim there is a difference between and anti-malco swing and a pro-rudd one.
Ok, maybe there is. But does it have any practical application? It’s a two horse race…]
It sure does. Howard led in the polls because of an anti-ALP leader vibe, not a pro-Howard vibe. So you get what happens when someone like Rudd comes along as opposition leader – you get a massive shift from voters who were unhappy with both leaders and wanted to swap their support but couldn’t face doing so.
[No, Bob, that’s not the case. Rudd has increased personal approval ratings (67% in Nielsen). The voters actively like and approve of Rudd, not just accept him as the least worst alternative.]
Is there a sheet for ACNielsen like there is Newspoll?
The fact that 51% say Rudd is arrogant is rather interesting…
Also, the Greens need to stop preening themselves on their own rectitude and listen to the voice of the people on the CPRS. Vox populi vox dei, Bob.
[Rudd satisfaction went up 1, Turnbull satisfaction went down 19.]
Rudd’s from an already high level. You are really splitting hairs here bob.
[The fact that 51% say Rudd is arrogant is rather interesting]
Not really. Politicians in general are not popular. Besides when you’re comparing that to 68% for Turnbull it doesn’t seem so bad.
All PMs are arrogant, it goes with the territory. What’s wrong with arrogant anyway?
[Gary, if you’re not going to understand what i’m saying,]
Bob, you made a typo in that one – you wrote ‘understand’ when you meant ‘agree with’.
[Not really. Politicians in general are not popular.]
Well done for admitting that, it’s more than most on here can say 🙂
[The fact that 51% say Rudd is arrogant is rather interesting…]
Interesting but not significant given that he is very popular.
I’m sure it will come as a surprise to people, but Piers Akerman has backed Turnbull’s call for a judicial inquiry into ‘ute-gate’ or ‘mate-gate’ as he calls it.
[Well done for admitting that, it’s more than most on here can say.]
Name names bob. Come on, you can do it.
[Also, the Greens need to stop preening themselves on their own rectitude and listen to the voice of the people on the CPRS. Vox populi vox dei, Bob.]
Brown or me?
I’m indifferent on Greens support for the CPRS. I reckon they’re doing what they think is noble and trying to extract maximum concessions on it, and right up till the last minute say they wont vote for it unless they get what they want, but in the end vote for it anyway – the Senate is often a game of poker.
Maybe Labor and the Greens both want a higher-targetted CPRS but know they can’t do it with Senate numbers so they’ll orchestrate two failed bills, get a DD, then a Labor-Green Senate majority, and redo the bill from scratch 😉
[Name names bob. Come on, you can do it.]
I try to stay away from personal attacks. Sometimes i slip, but I do generally try not to go personal.
[I try to stay away from personal attacks. Sometimes i slip, but I do generally try not to go personal.]
Me too bob, that’s why I object to these statements that contain the words “most people here ….” or “some people here ….” then finish with some derisive comment about them.
Bob – I think most people understand that a little arrogance is a good thing as a PM.
He has to cope with all types, local and international. If one was a bit short on the self confidence/arrogance aspect it would be difficult to cope with the job.
I reckon we cut him that bit of slack and also his angry bit so long as it is not over the top like Turnbulls.
Turnbull’s past is not all that glorious when you break it down and it is all due to his personality. Unfortunate for him but fortunate for Kev and his supporters.
Greetings all – I’ve not posted for some time (mainly because I could never remember my log-in details), and it’s good to see many of the old faces still at large on this site.
As regards to these polls, in actuality they are the same as pretty much every poll has been since December, 2006 – ie Labor miles ahead. The most interesting thing about these partcular polls is the collapse in MT’s personal support – last week may well have been the time when people made up their minds about MT, and once the voters have done that, they don’t often change.
It’s been commented by myself and others that the Libs have not yet accepted the 2007 election defeat – that it was all just an “over-correction”, and once they make the voters see what a mistake they made, then all will be well and the Libs will return to the Treasury benches. Trouble is, voters don’t like being told they are wrong. This was what Labor did in the first part of the Howard years, and it wasn’t until Rudd came along that the ALP accepted that, well, people didn’t hate Howard like they did.
It will take another election loss (or two) for reality to sink in, so I’d say we’ll see more of the same tactics-wise from the Libs over the next few years.
I meant Bob Brown, but if you’re a Green Bob, you can take it as well.
No, I don’t think the CPRS bill is a tactic to sucker Turnbull into a DD. I think Rudd wants this bill passed this year so he can go to Copenhagen with some credibility to argue for higher targets. And I think Turnbull, privately, agrees that it’s in the national interest for that to happen. His trouble is that he can’t carry his party with him, let alone the Nats. Nevertheless he will cave, telling his party that they can’t risk a DD at which they would be smashed.
[Vox populi vox dei, Bob]
And what if the people are wrong?
This won’t do the Labor Party much harm either. Promoted properly, it could see a further jump in Labor’s popularity in coming polls.
[TAXATION cuts of $3.4 billion will start to flow from Wednesday, as the Rudd government prepares to roll out massive changes to social security and superannuation.
The tax cuts from July 1 and next year will lift the 30 per cent threshold from $34,000 to $35,000, reduce the 40per cent rate to 38 per cent and raise the maximum low-income offset from $1200 to $1350. People earning up to $67,500 will be entitled to some offset.
People in a same-sex de facto relationship will be recognised as members of a couple for social security and family assistance purposes and will be required to advise Centrelink of their status. This change will mean some people may move from the single to the partner rate of payment. ]
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25704938-5013404,00.html
[And what if the people are wrong?]
As they quite often are. Parties should ignore it but do so at their own peril. If they can’t convince their voters of the benefits of opposing/supporting something they need to be willing to wear the consequences.
[And what if the people are wrong?]
Surely the Government wouldn’t be as stupid to implement policy based on opinion polls and focus groups.
What kind of wacky world would that be.
If the people are wrong they will wear the consequences of their wrongness. But in practice, they’re not wrong very often.
Psephos, everyone knows that getting legislation passed has nothing to do with getting a good outcome Copenhagen and if anything, it can be a negative to getting a strong global deal.
Leave the spin to Penny, she’s a bit better at it.
Mr Turnbull said he had met with the AFP as well as giving a statement but had “not been interviewed”. It is understood the police made contact late Friday afternoon and he met them on Saturday. The deputy Liberal leader in the Senate, Eric Abetz, spoke with police on Friday. This is Gratton in the Age link http://www.theage.com.au/national/turnbull-denies-link-to-creation-of-fake-email-20090628-d1aj.html . The police “made contact” with Turnbull late Friday afternoon and he met with the Police on saturday.He gave them a “full” statment.Turnbull later told Channel 10 that he was giving “full co-operation “.Gratton then writes, Mr Turnbull said he had met with the AFP as well as giving a statement but had “not been interviewed”. These are her inverted commas in the last sentence. I wonder did he refused to be interviewed .
Why have you become so obsessively nasty recently, Oz?