Morgan: 54.5-45.5 to Labor

Roy Morgan has published a poll encompassing its face-to-face surveys from the past two weekends, hence not accounting for reaction to Labor’s formation of a minority government. It shows Labor opening a 54.5-45.5 lead on two-party preferred, compared with 52.5-47.5 in the last published poll of this kind conducted on the weekend before the election. On the primary vote, Labor is up half a point to 40.5 per cent, the Coalition down 3.5 per cent to 39.5 per cent and the Greens up 1.5 per cent to 15 per cent. The poll has a sample of 1632 and a margin of error of 2.5 per cent – beyond that, the recent election result provides yet more evidence that Morgan’s face-to-face polling has a substantial house bias to Labor.

UPDATE: Further from Gary Morgan:

Analysis of ‘past vote’ — how respondents claimed they voted at the recent Federal election shows, ALP (42.5%, 4.5% higher than actual ALP vote recorded at the 2010 Federal election) cf. L-NP (39%, 4.5% lower than the L-NP vote recorded at the 2010 Federal election). “The difference between the reported ‘past vote’ and the actual election result can be due to either — a Labor biased sample, or by an unwillingness of the part of respondents to admit to voting L-NP. This latter problem has been noted in previous polls over many years. Regardless of the reason for the difference, if the Morgan Poll is weighted correctly for ‘past vote,’ the estimate would be 50:50, exactly the same as the special SMS Morgan Poll conducted on Wednesday/Thursday this week.”

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.

2,197 comments on “Morgan: 54.5-45.5 to Labor”

Comments Page 43 of 44
1 42 43 44
  1. I’d like to have been a fly on the wall too –

    [The soft carpet throughout the ministerial wing in Parliament House has its benefits, especially if you are a Labor minister walking behind two Liberal frontbenchers who do not realise you are there as they discuss the various shortcomings of their colleagues.

    On Wednesday, the Liberal Party was abuzz as Andrew Robb sounded out the numbers for a tilt at the deputy leadership. If successful, Robb could then choose his own portfolio, which would involve knocking off Joe Hockey for the shadow treasury. Robb’s push had the support of the two shadow ministers walking along the corridor outside Julia Gillard’s office, reported the minister. ”Don’t get me wrong, I’m a friend of Joe’s but we’ve got to think what’s best for Joe and the party,” one said to the other.

    As events transpired, Robb’s push was aborted when Tony Abbott and other heavy hitters stepped in and stressed the need for stability.]

  2. Turnbull getting Defence would actually be a good move for Abbott. He’d get little attention as policy is mostly bipartisan. I’d stick him there.

  3. So strange to me that suddenly Shanahan sounds sensible and Tingle scathing.

    Shanahan went through a “sensible” phase last year, too, to the extent that his fanboys and girls started telling him he was a closet Lefty.

    The headline about forming a “suitably credible cabinet” gives the game away. It’s the usual condescending Shanahan claptrap that (amazingly) sets him up as the arbiter of good taste and judgement when it comes to forming governments. It half-heartedly give Gillard a tick for trying to do play the best poker game she can, having been inevitably – it’s Labor after all – dealt a bad hand.

    Then there’s the “good cop/bad cop” angle. Shanahan likes to be both. He assumes the role of senior advisor to Labor governments, trying to give them helpful advice (but only when they deserve it, in his eyes) and then turns on them when they don’t take it, ro when they muck it up. Thsi is how he earned the title “Shamaham”… it’s all so he can go in harder, later on. No point wasting ammunition at this early stage. He’s just pretending to look helpful.

    Don’t be fooled.

    I’d rather ten critical Tingle articles than one slightly softer Shanahan tome. You get the feeling with Tingle that she says what she believes, and can back it up. She’s no hack like Dennis, or a has-been like La Stupenda down at the Age, or Pretty Boy Hartcher at the SMH.

    Fancy Grattan complaining they didn’t have access to the inner workings of Treasury! That the costings were an attempted scam was as obvious as Abbott’s ears. There was not one word of criticism from any of the “majors” about the Coalition’s hypocracy in complaining about a leak to Lenore Taylor, but suddenly forgetting that they had had Godwin Grech who was not only prepared to leak for them from Treasury, but also to lie, forge, corrupt internal processes and give false evidence to a Senate committee on their behalf. This nearly led to the bringing down of a government. It took up days and days of Parliamentary time in questions, speeches and committee hearings. A leak to Taylor about a conflict over which was the correct interest rate to charge on a hypothetical loan was small beer compared to that. If the tidbit of information Taylor printed was a “leak” then Godwin Grech was the full Dambusters.

    But not a word from our denizens of free speech in the major dailies, or on TV. Their profound skill lies in thinking up something over their cornflakes and writing it up before they forget the inspiration. What an easy way to earn a couple of hunded thou! Mark Latham, Kevin Rudd, listening pat to “We will always keep interest rates lower” (whilst maintaining a straight face), and pretending something ineffably stupid had not been said at all was their raison d’etre. Not only did they not have Treasury access, they didn’t even bloody try to get it, or to probe the scammers themselves on the subject. Didn’t ask one question about the costings. They just said, “Oh well, I guess we don’t get the costings then”. Only Gittins and Colebatch said anything about it. Did any of our brave political gurus amble down to their economics colleagues’ offices and ask what they were talking about? No. So much more pleasurable for them to just tell us they werwe “bored” with the whole thing because it was a circus… a circus of their own making because they elevated the unimportant to national significance and ignored the seismic, plate-shifting stories that should have been written.

    And when the Three Amigos brought the costings heist all out into the light of day what happened? They ignored it still. If we’d had a Coalition win we would now be in a position of having a minority government that was $11 billion dollars out on their own treasury Department’s calculation, trying to execute a legislative and executive program built on shifting sands and vague, uncosted expressions of interest masquerading as “policy”.

    That’s the point. And that would have been a story.

    Thank God we were spared the need for it.

  4. Dr Good, all the ministry lists that have been floated around since Saturday don’t have the word “Research” in his title. I think that was just a typo though.

  5. Thanks Itep.

    But now I look at it, maybe I’m wrong.

    Maybe “Research” does comes under
    “Innovation” from now on. If that is a problem for Universities then
    I suggest that they think carefully about what kind of research
    they are doing.

  6. Bravo, Bushfire B. You are one of the reasons I’m so glad I dicovered this Blog.

    Anyone closer to the action know what was the “technical hitch” that delayed the ministry announcement? I’m thinking it might have had an effect on the accuracy of the lists.

  7. [Anyone closer to the action know what was the “technical hitch” that delayed the ministry announcement?]

    Perhaps problems with Arbib, Farrell and Feeney’s fax machines when they were sending back their corrections? 😉

  8. Itep 🙂 🙂

    Further explanation of the education triumvirate – second time it’s appeared somewhere. Obviously the message not getting through.

    [“Innovation” from now on. If that is a problem for Universities then
    I suggest that they think carefully about what kind of research
    they are doing.]
    I think scientists would all agree with you, Dr Good.
    Who would now have “control” over CSIRO????

  9. steve, thanks for the link. Not being from SA, I’d never heard this one. Classic

    Lewis had also been on the receiving end of a firearm. He was shot in the arse by a duck hunter on his farm in the Mallee. And speaking of ducks, Lewis opposed a bill to decriminalise prostitution on the grounds that he did not want South Australia to descend to the moral depravity of the Orient, claiming it was possible in the former Portuguese colony of Macau to pay to have sex with a duck that had been inserted in a log. The claim inspired one of the greatest ever parliamentary interjections when Labor MP Pat Conlon described the then Liberal Premier John Olsen, beset by an IT outsourcing scandal, as being in “more trouble than a duck in a log in Macau”.

  10. Dr Good
    [You have been misinformed about ministry names to some extent.

    Kim Carr is Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research]
    I don’t see how that changes my point. Somebody has to explain who will be responsible for the university sector. Labor’s promises to the tertiary education sector in the 2007 election campaign were one of its worst areas of non-delivery. They are falling apart.

  11. As per BH at 2071 Conroy left Fran Kelly utterly frustrated this morning – and I suspect messed up an ABC strategy.

    The ABC news agenda was fairly clear today.

    The instruction for Fran Kelly was to get a grab from Conroy were he stated a speculative price for individual homes to connect to the NBN.

    That was to then be extrapolated into the ABC’s new modus operandi, where they take two or three words from an answer (not even sentences anymore) and completely invent a story – “NBN slug for families” is my guess at the headline they hoped for.

    Conroy destroyed Kelly’s attempts methodically. Kelly’s voice actually rose an octave when she thought he had fallen into the trap and committed to $100 and dropped away in disappointment when she realised Conroy was much too smart for her and it was nearer $50 or $55.

    Kelly had given the game away that her questions were very deliberately planned. She failed to listen to the answer, so when Conroy said that the copper network would be removed completely, Kelly didn’t pick that up and continued to ask her pre-planned gotcha question about people wanting to stay with copper.

    Then as BH mentioned, she tried to trap him on Telstra shareholders but that too was stymied, prompting the sarcastic comment.

    If they are truly desperate the ABC may try a “Telstra shareholders kept in dark” angle. This will completely misrepresent the case but that’s par for the ABC course these days.

    Conroy was excellent.

  12. [Further explanation of the education triumvirate – second time it’s appeared somewhere. Obviously the message not getting through.]
    Obviously the message is not washing with those who know the reality.

  13. dave@2035 posted a piece about Hockey and the costings

    [JOE Hockey has revealed to colleagues he didn’t see disputed Coalition campaign costings until the last minute during the election campaign.

    As well as not seeing the costings, prepared by Andrew Robb, he has also conceded to colleagues that policies were being released during the campaign without him being aware of the “full box and dice”.

    Coalition insiders say there were two sides to the debate, with Hockey critics arguing he “went missing” during the process and Robb critics arguing it was his job in the Melbourne headquarters to sort out costings.]

    It struck me that the dirty work re ‘the leak from Treasury’ meant the costings wouldn ‘t be released was typical Andrew Robb. He’s the fella who always comes up with dirty tactics prior to an election and this one was a doozey to keep the costings from being seen.

    Joe was probably sent into the electorates and kept in the dark on purpose. Robb would have had no compunction in making up costings but Joe may have wanted a little more honesty in them. Very clever tactics by Robb and Abbott and I’m pleased they failed. Joe can now demand Treasury I reckon.

  14. Anyone who seriously thinks the ALP will do anything on carbon reductions should read this. Industry protectionism at its worst. I wonder if Asbestos was a major export would we be delayings its demise too?

    Still talking up the ridiculous CCS (that would cost ~$100 per tonne even if it worked)


    [“I’ve got a responsibility to support those people’s jobs. The coal industry is a very vibrant industry with a strong future. What you’ve got to do is look to how we can achieve in the longer term things like carbon capture and storage for coal-fired power stations.”]

  15. Socrates: What’s so hard to understand?

    Chris Evans
    (Minister for Jobs, Skills and Workplace Relations, Senator for Western Australia)
    -Minister responsible for undergraduate university.

    Kim Carr
    Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Senator for Victoria
    -Minister responsible for postgraduate university. He has ALWAYS been responsible for postgraduate university.

    Peter Garrett
    Minister for Schools, Early Childhood and Youth, Member for Kingsford Smith
    -Minister responsible for Schools and early childhood education.

  16. Gos – Pleased you saw the Conroy interview in the way that OH and I did this morning.

    Conroy refused to be talked over or allow FK to distort what he was saying. We both said well done, Conroy.

    BushfireB – How right you were about Shamaham when many of us thought he had changed and would be fairer to Labor. That’s a lesson learned.

  17. So Hockey is now trying to position himself away from Robb in the costings debacle …

    “The Great Unhinging” has well and truly begun!

  18. I am not sure that you need one minister for Universities
    (i.e. I am open to argument one way or another). Here
    are some reasons

    Coursework teaching is provided by Unis in cooperation
    and/or competition with TAFEs and private providers.

    Parts of Universities also undertake a very different
    activity in research and research training. That is done
    in cooperation and/or competition with CSIRO,
    state govt operations, and industry.

    The two different activities of teaching and research do not
    need to have the same federal government bureaucrats
    with oversight. Perhaps both will be done better
    when the separate goals are clear.

    Also, actually over the last few years there have been some
    bold new activities and plans for Universities, eg much
    increased funding for Australian postgraduate researchers
    and details of plans for expansion of University education
    for a wider group of students into the future.

  19. Scroll down the SMH website to “most read” of the WA Times. Top story: Shortens Future in Balance because of Marriage collapse rumours”. Click on: story posted in 2008 and refers to his first marriage. Wierd.

  20. [The two different activities of teaching and research do not
    need to have the same federal government bureaucrats
    with oversight. Perhaps both will be done better
    when the separate goals are clear.]

    And now Unis can double their bureucrats to match the commonwealth structure.

    And what about the uni infrastructure- perhaps we can now have PhD student toilets and undergrad toilets too.

  21. I am no expert but I thought the PM made the situation very clear on Insiders with regard to the education responsibilities. At least one stayed exactly were it was before.

  22. [Anyone want a good job at SBS?

    ValerioVeo Last week at SBS before I head over to Ten Digital next week – anyone interested in my job?? 11 minutes ago via TweetDeck]

    From above

    [You must also have more than five years experience in a digital environment and at least five years in a newsroom. An excellent understanding of news & international affairs is necessary.]

    Does pollbludger count?

  23. [ltep
    Posted Monday, September 13, 2010 at 10:53 am | Permalink
    Turnbull getting Defence would actually be a good move for Abbott. He’d get little attention as policy is mostly bipartisan. I’d stick him there.]

    That what I really want. It would elevate the Defence discussion in Australia and therefore improve the quality of our strategic decisions.

    I have been saying here for a while that we will probably need to spend up big soon on a Defence rejig. We need to have the public discussion before we start writing the big cheques.

  24. Blue Green

    You seem to be under the misapprehension that Unis are managed by the
    Federal Government.

    They are not. They can build their own buildings etc, just like a commercial
    enterprise or charity, or householder … without a minister looking
    over their shoulder.

    The Federal government has got a small bureaucracy which manages
    investment of tax payer funds in research, and an even smaller
    one which watches the quality of undergraduate teaching.

    If you want an increase in bureaucracy then your suggestion of having
    Unis managed from Canberra seems to be the way to go.

  25. Pls could someone explain for a political novice (me) why Julia is “one vote away from losing government”. Many journalists have written it but I though Labor had 2 votes up. Sorry to be so dumb.

  26. Dr Good

    Unis receive direct funding for research and research infrastructure. They also receives funding though HECS/international students etc.

    But they also recieve block infrastrucutre grants. If the funding pipeline for these things are further split it will make integrated uni palnning more difficult.

    Its like having a Fed minister for hospitals and one for health.

  27. [lizzie
    Posted Monday, September 13, 2010 at 12:06 pm | Permalink
    Pls could someone explain for a political novice (me) why Julia is “one vote away from losing government”. Many journalists have written it but I though Labor had 2 votes up. Sorry to be so dumb.]

    If one Indy jumped ship it would be difficult.

    I think that two would need to go for her to lose the confidence fo the house.

    JG would have to really stuff it to lose the confidence of the House. There will be policy fights with the Indies but I doubt a loss of confidence.

  28. Once again Blue-Green, the Federal government does not manage the
    Unis. They are independent organisations which are vaguely non-profit,
    although they do invest and manage their capital and income over the
    long term. They get money from fees, from grants for undergrad
    teaching, grants for research (from Federal govt, state govts, private
    companies, charities, etc etc).

    Eg you say that they receive funding for eg international students. Yes, they do.
    They do that by charging the students fees. There is no Ministry in Canberra
    that funds Unis for that.

    Your suggestion seems to be that you want some big Canberra department
    that manages all the money going into Unis and all their policies.

  29. [Interesting that Ruddock, Peter Garrett and Rod Oakeshot are all products of the same High School (albeit in different eras)!]

    Really? Which school was that. My local school is (in)famous for churning out Fred Nile. 🙁

    And Shows On, don’t forget that Iemma had fatally bad opinion polls toward the end and Costa, while a good Treasurer was equally disliked.

  30. My point is that there are two different tasks that should be managed from
    Canberra (teaching and research)

    Unis are indeed split across the two. So what?
    Under teaching unis are with tafes and private providers.
    Under research Unis are with CSIRO, commercial R&D, charity research orgs etc.

    By the way, Unis are also big players in Trade (4th largest export
    industry) and in Immigration (tens of thousands of overseas
    student visas per year) and in Health (teaching hospitals
    need special funding and facilities) and in the regions.
    Are you upset about that?

    Take another simple example of an eco-tourist company operating in a national
    park in the NT. They have to deal with the Minister of the Environment and the
    Minister of Tourism. Are you upset about that?

  31. Josh Frydenburg covering himself in glory in an interview with Helen Dally. Not. Kevin Rudd should be outside the tent. Why? Kevin Rudd is outside the tent. But you just said… Kevin Rudd should be outside the tent. Japan! China! East Timor!

    Where the hell did the Liberals find this bloke?

  32. Confessions

    the gist is well credentialled by arrogant.

    [Though he has lived in Canberra and overseas during his short but stellar career, Frydenberg owns an apartment in the electorate (but has never voted in the seat), was mostly schooled there (Bialik College then Mt Scopus) and is a Kooyong Tennis Club champion (although the club itself sits just outside the electorate in neighbouring Higgins, held by Costello). His CV reads like an executive search firm’s dream blueprint — a Monash law and economics honours graduate and academic prize winner, he spent time at Mallesons before taking up a scholarship to study a masters in international relations at Oxford, and is currently completing a Masters in Public Administration at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.

    Frydenberg offers Professor David Gergen, the political commentator and a White House adviser to four US presidents — Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton — as a referee. Via email this week, Gergen told The Age: “Joshua has impressed many of us at Harvard with his intelligence, his interpersonal skills and his strong leadership abilities. These qualities should serve him well in politics, and I view him as a young man with enormous promise.”]

    I prefer that to the ideological hacks.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 43 of 44
1 42 43 44