The Baillieu government’s second Newspoll shows a slight narrowing of its two-party preferred lead from 57-43 to 55-45, with Labor up two on the primary vote to 30 per cent, the Coalition down one to 47 per cent and the Greens steady on 15 per cent. Baillieu’s personal ratings are unchanged, with 52 per cent approval and 29 per cent disapproval. Daniel Andrews is up two on approval to 29 per cent and down one on disapproval to 33 per cent, and he has made up a small amount of ground on preferred premier, up three to 19 per cent with Baillieu down one to 56 per cent.
UPDATE: Stephen Luntz in comments with a point I was too lazy to make myself:
I never place much reliance on a single poll, but if I was to take this one as gospel I’d say it’s bad for the Liberals. It’s not just that they are way behind where Bracks was in 2000, it’s also that this poll was taken over two months, and the bad news for them was at the end of that period. It’s easy to imagine they sailed on at the level of the last poll (57% 2pp) until the Weston/Tilley/Overland stuff hit the media, at which point they dropped down to something like 52% to give this overall outcome.
Curious result,,,,
________________
Living in Melb I have had a feeling for some weeks now that Bailleau was on the skids and the tide had turned against him on a number if issues…and the nurses dispute was a further taste of this
How wrong I was.!!
..for to my surprise he seems to be going gangbusters…I can’t think why because he has been unimpressive in many regards
Perhaps the voters are tired and want a rest from politics…or perhaps the ALP is really on the nose and that’s that for the moment
Perhaps Victorians are thinking even a Liberal government is better than none at all, which is now essentially the state of play in Greece, Italy and Belgium. Meanwhile, the ECB has been the only buyer today of Italian bonds, effectively acting completely contrary to its charter and against its publicly-declared intentions.
Whilst of course I’d like figures showing Labor trashing the pants off them, not really a surprise at this stage of the cycle. Still a honeymoon period, where problems are dismissed as part of the learning curve, or difficulties created by the previous government.
The people he’s peed off so far – teachers, nurses, environmentalists – didn’t vote for him anyway.
As with the federal sphere, a slow creep back to Labor is better than a headlong rush, because one is based on decisions made due to a series of cumulative events and is less easy to undo.
I must say I am only half surprised at this, from an inside point of view the Government is doing pretty much the minimum and concentrating on election commitments so that is to be expected. I think the previous comment is right, the ones pissed off so far are public sector workers, greens and the comments from electorate land that I have heard are quite supportive of the Government and not at all sympathetic for the unions.
However, i thnk the Govt has a short life span, the big items they spruked, e.g. transport will not be fixed quickly and when those suburban voters think they have failed then it is good bye. Another worry is apparent interventionist role of the Ministers in some key areas, e.g. police and planning.
Big Ted is already being referred to as Kennet-Lite, if the response to the occupy movement was a taste of thing to come, and the way thing are going, by the second term we might have a full on Kennet revival – if rumors about public secor IR are true.
For a first term Government that is still evolving and hasn’t really done anything to upset the public this is about what you would expect to see.
The only issue that may upset the apple cart at this stage as been the handling of the Overland & Jones Police matter but again that is the sort of a event that a first term new Government usually makes.
I think the public’s attention is currently focused on bigger issues dominated by Spring, the economy and carbon taxing
I agree with a large part of Sir Humphrey’s comments except I couldn’t call this Government Kennett lite, it may be true that it has appointed to certain positions former Kennett staffers but I am not sure if that is necessarily a bad thing
This Government has maintained many former staffers appointed by the former ALP Government
@mexicanbeemer
I agree, they have been treading carefully to not fell in to the Kennet mould, i think alot of that is down to big Ted himself, but there also some that gives a sence of how it could be heading, almost an undercurrent from the more reactionary members of the party. For instance DTF is running a general review of Government expendiature – a real razor gang style of production looking into all elements of government finances.
My sence is they are still being overcautious at the moment, and if there is no percieved action by the public this could be run as a successful Do Nothing Ted campaign, of course you need a good opposition for that.
The Victorian government is still at the stage where people are willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. The next election isn’t until 2014 afterall.
The Victorian Government has done nothing in its first 12 months to convince those who didn’t vote for it last time to change their vote, and the opposition has done nothing in the first 12 months to convince those who voted for it at the last election to chnage there vote. This is a pretty poor result for the Government especially as the trend is all down for them. They were hopeless responding to the Victorian floods this year, they would have lost votes over the cattle grazing in the Alpine National Park and the undermining of Overland and the subsequent pay deal for the police have a whiff of corruption about it. The nursing dispute has all the indications of either blowing up or the Government backing down completely and giving in, while the blow out in their expenditure and squeezes on their revenues due to a declining property market will have a negative effect on the perception of their credentilals as economic managers. This poll reinforces last years election result but if i was the government I would be worried.
To put this in perspective, Victorian Labor was leading the Coalition 60-40 at this point in the last electoral cycle (November-December 2007).
Victorian elections tend to be decided in the last year of a term. Polling in Brumby’s time as premier was very erratic, ranging from 60-40 to 51-49 and not going below 50 until the last week of the election campaign. This might be the case here. Labor can still win with an effective campaign in 2014, but shouldn’t be complacent. Victorians tend to surprise those parties that think they’ve got an election in the bag (1999 and 2010 as recent examples).
I am not at all surprised that the Baillieu government is so far in front. Whenever there is a change of government, there is a group of voters dissatisfied with the previous government but unable to trust the Opposition. When a new government is elected, those voters see that life goes on as normal, lose their fear and switch to the new government.
The fact that the Baillieu government hasn’t done much is neither here nor there. Look at yesterday’s Herald Sun, in which the Baillieu government gets banner headlines for basically re-announcing the previous Labor government’s plans for Melbourne (City lifestyle out in the suburbs, John Masanauskas, 9/11/2011). Of course, if Labor had done a better job with Melbourne, it would still be in power.
Then there is the blogosphere, in which all sorts of completely untrue claims can be made. I spent a lot of time correcting false claims when Labor was in government; e.g., that it had increased state taxation, that debt was unsustainable, that it would run deficits, that it was overly generous to the public sector, that it had done nothing about schools, that it had built nothing. The list goes on. Again and again, I would correct false claims regarding federal Labor’s promises re computers; e.g., that they were laptops, that every child or every student would be given one, that the ratio of 1:1 had been backed away from, that there was no money for replacements. Most letters to the editor to correct false claims are refused publication, so the false claim stands in the public mind. Most blog comments are published, but that does not stop the false claims being repeated.
It is a full time job just ensuring the facts are known, and that job has become harder. Below are my most recent efforts:
(Not published.)
(Not published.)
(Not published.)
(Not published.)
(Not published.)
Now, there is a reason for this:
However, maybe the rule has now ended or a moderator was not paying attention:
(Published.)
We will see via future attempts to post.
This is just an illustration of how many people believe total rubbish and how hard it is to get them to look at basic facts. I’m not even dealing with opinions here.
I am certain that Ted Baillieu will not “fix the problems”. However, his failure to do so will not automatically result in a return of voters to Labor.
@9
If the government is as hopeless as you claim above, then 55-45 is a good result, not a bad one, isn’t it?
Really it’s three years till the next election so who gives a fig?
But even so, I to am surprised. I thought that Bailleau was more popular than his party.
I never place much reliance on a single poll, but if I was to take this one as gospel I’d say it’s bad for the Liberals. It’s not just that they are way behind where Bracks was in 2000, it’s also that this poll was taken over two months, and the bad news for them was at the end of that period. It’s easy to imagine they sailed on at the level of the last poll (57% 2pp) until the Weston/Tilley/Overland stuff hit the media, at which point they dropped down to something like 52% to give this overall outcome.
Alternatively it should be noted that the shift from last time is within the margin of error, and they might really be on 57% if you had a larger sample size.
The Baillieu government seemed to mark time and do the minimum until after the NSW election so that O’Farrell could get elected. But Baillieu, or is that National leader Peter Ryan, have annoyed the urban electorates big time with
– grazing cattle in Alpine National Park
– stopping wind farm development
– cutting community spending to libraries, legal aid
– installing more transport thugs to check tickets
– threatening to put nurses on split shifts, replace nurses with untrained assistants
– reorganising train timetables to penalise voters in Altona and on Frankston line
– cutting spending on vocational education
The Coalition has a 1 seat majority in Parliament and I heard that there is serious dirt on a member of Parliament. If there is a by-election there is a potential change of government.
There is also a redistribution due before the next election.
I read somewhere that one of the main things happening is the loss of 1 rural seat and a new seat in the Northern/Western Suburbs. This is bad for the Coalition.
The redistribution would have been due before the 2010 election if the Electoral Commission`s had not decided that the Bracks Legislative Council Reforms definition of “general election” applied retrospectively to the 2002 election and thus made the 2002 election not a general election. Considering the close result this could have changed the outcome of the 2010 election.
The ALP should run a “The Liberals neglect the North and West” campaign in Northern and Western Metro to take back a seat in each from the Liberals and thus the Legislative Council majority from the Coalition (putting the Greens in the balance).
Will the Baillieu Government be the first one term government in Australia since the Borbidge Government?
The damage to the Baillieu Government from the Simon Overland affair is if Peter Ryan is forced to resign at some stage – resignation (voluntary or forded being taken as guilt) and a scalp for the opposition – also Peter Ryan is by far the best media performer of the Baillieu ministers so it would be a double whammy.
Tom is quite right that there will be a redistribution during this term – and because of the time elapsed it will need to be quite substantial. Northern Victoria will definitely lose a seat, there will need to be one or two in Northern/ Western Melbourne. Geelong and the Surf Coast are also about half a seat short. Besides Northern Victoria, there will be a seat lost in the Eastern Suburbs – one of Burwood, Box Hill, Mitcham, Forest Hill or Mount Waverley are likely to go as Kew and Hawthorn are under quota and need to grow eastwards.
The Baillieu Government have an advantage in such a redistribution as they will have a higher number of incumbent MPs who have not been in Parliament long – the ALP members elected in 1999 and 2002 are more likely to retire – especially if the polls don’t look crash hot closer to the election.
The next redistribution will be interesting
If northern Victoria does lose a seat that may make life harder for the regional ALP MP’s around Macedon, Ballarat and Bendigo
I think we may find a new seat in both north-west Melbourne and one in south-west Melbourne
Seats like Keilor (north-west metro) are over quota as are a few seats in south-east Melbourne and the inner city seat of Albert Park is also over quota
I think last time something like 15 seats were abolished or renamed. I expect a similar number this time around.
15
The Frankston line is not penalised under the new timetable (Nor is the Government likely to do that because the voters on that line were key to its election). Trains were through-routed with the Williamstown and Werribee lines for more efficient running and higher capacity through Flinders Street.
Williamstown trains were chosen over Altona trains to be through-routed with the Frankston line because of higher patronage. This is sensible.
The Werribee trains were taken out of the loop because their lines have to cross other lines to get to a loop portal and this reduces capacity and amplifies and spreads delays. This is sensible. Loop passengers can change at North Melbourne or Southern Cross.
There was a choice as to whether the Werribee line direct (not via Altona) or Werribee line via the Altona Loop. Was choosing the slight convenience of passengers of the Werribee line with major inconvenience for the Altona Loop the correct decision. I am not sure.
Just today my friends on the Frankston line said that Frankston trains terminate at Flinders St. Frankston line passengers who want to travel through the loop change to any loop train at Richmond
My apologies the Frankston trains do not run through the loop in evening peak hour, however they run through the loop in morning peak hour and given that the Frankston line voters switched their vote from Labor to Liberal they think the degradation in service is arrogant. there is also concern about Liberal backers trying again to develop land around Moorabbin airport.
We are all pretty non-plussed about the Baillieu promise to remove the railway gates at New St, can’t tunnel because the water table is too close, could build the rail line up, no room to build a road overpass. So we expect it will be too hard or the Sandringham line will terminate 2 stops earlier at Brighton Beach – also solving the problem.
The impact of the EBA bargaining and protected industrial action for nurses is just about to play out here. The Age has published leaked “advice” to health services about possible responses to same, including “Quantas” type responses, i.e., locking nurses out and other pretty extreme and invasive, intimidatory actions. The gov’t. has denied it and the peak negotiating body says it’s business as usual, just canvassing all the options, but this will not go down well.
I agree with other posters about the rather smelly removal of Overland and the questionable relationship between the gov’t and the police, not to mention they have no hope of fixing the trains.
The situation with the Trains is improving, the new authority will be up and running next year with the bill to set it up currently going though the Parliament
The Overland saga will hurt the Government in the short term, but will be a wake up call to Peter Ryan, and the rest of both parties.
Peter Ryan has been the stand out Minister in this Government, and has been virtually the De-facto Premier since the election.
This saga has been a huge wake up call to Ryan, who is a very polished and hard working operator.
Dont expect Ryan to make a similar mistake of handing over to much power to other close advisors again. Ryan will be a much tougher and more careful and discilpined Minister after this fiasco. This will become evident from now on.
This fiasco will result in a more disciplined party and in the longer term should be of benefit to the Government. If they dont learn from this mess then of course they dont deserve to be in Government
20
The Frankston trains do not generally terminate at Flinders St any more. They are through-routed with the Werribee and Williamstown lines (during the week) so they keep going (after a short layover at Flinders St) to Werribee or Williamstown (it alternates) or also Laverton via the Altona Loop during peak hour.
21
Chopping 2 stations of the Sandringham line would cost the Government far more votes than breaking a promise of abolishing a crossing that was comparatively little used for a Melbourne crossing before it was closed 2 years (and counting) ago.
23
The Liberals voted down amendments to make the PTDA more transparent.
http://twitter.com/#!/MartinPakulaMLC/status/133853366790000641
What’s the PTDA and what’s its relevance?
28
Public Transport Development Authority.
Looking at the PTDA, I think the Government has it right. The claim by the opposition that it is not right for the authority to be answerable to the Minister and to operate with the existing departmental seems a strange position to take from otherwise experienced political operators.
I believe we would find that all government agencies at some point are answerable to a department and a Minister and that Minister has a role to play in the appointment of senior people, maybe not directly but in a sounding sense the Minister would be in the loop.
The Department of Transport already has below it several agencies that are independence but fall under its umbrella for example VicRoads is separate with its own management structure and policy processes.
I would image that the PTDA will operate much the same as VicrOADS does and that is a good system to follow.
Considering this new authority will be the public face of Public Transport, I am surprised that the opposition would have any objection to PT entities being branded with the new authority name.
30
I believe you will find that the PTDA will actually have slightly less responsibility and autonomy than Vicroads.
Looks like the ‘common knowledge’ vibe that the Liberal governments of NSW and Victoria were completely hopeless not showing up in the polling.
Swings away from the ALP since election…
Behind the daily hurly burly of politics is an ideological battle for the provision of decent public services to the community. One side in this battle, the side of the IPA and its adherents, seeks to exaggerate the burden of the public sector by irrational claims and the illogical use of figures. Sometimes, the exaggeration is overt; at other times, it is no more than a word inserted in long piece of writing, a subtle method that most people would not notice. I have responded to recent examples of each technique.
(The letter was not published and thus the misleading claim has been allowed to seep into the public unconscious.)
(The letter was not published and thus the misleading claim has been allowed to seep into the public unconscious.)
Even though Labor put more than $3 billion into capital expenditure on schools and the Baillieue government has cancelled the program, Labor cops the blame on blogs for the schools not yet rebuilt.
Chris – The size of the public sector is already a hot issue although I think the issue should not be how many are there but what are they doing and that question rest with what is the Government of the day doing.
In business it is said that Labour cost should be about 50% of cost, keeping that number in mind earlier this year the Financial Review that showed that in
“Victoria the cost of the public sector was about 40% of cost”
To my surprise this is actually way lower than many of the major private sector companies, it is not uncommon for major companies to have 60% Labour cost.
The point being that the public sector is in many cases more productive then the private sector
already = always
mexicanbeemer,
The size of the public sector is an issue, partly because those on the right make it one and partly because it is good practice to keep an eye on it. What those in the public sector do is relevant, as are the numbers. I think labour costs as a percentage of total costs must vary a lot from business to business, being particularly low in mining, for example. The same applies to government. Some fields are labour-intensive; e.g, education, under which more than 80 per cent of school costs are teacher employment and around 90 per cent are total staff employment. The education sector is highly productive when you factor in the long working hours of teachers
My argument is with those who pretend that a 1.2 per cent increase can be described as “swelled”, with those who pick a start year for their comparisons that is immediately after previous big cuts, who ignore population growth, who ignore inflation, who ignore economic growth, the obvious relevance of that last being that pay in the public sector has to keep pace with pay in the private sector. I wish journalists would do a bit of thinking.
Bit late on the debate so apologies, @Chris and @mexicanbeemer, it also deopends on how you define ‘public sector’. I am sure such swelling would not be critisised if it was all nurses, techers and police – the problem is when public sector is misleading portrayed as ‘public service’.
It should be noted that VicPS numbers did well under Labor – for mostly good reasons too but there has been a significant decline since big Ted came in maily due to attitrition.
I agree with the sentiments on public transport, it will take a while for any improvements to resonate with the public, however two big examples are the Regional Rail Link and Sunbury Electrification. Sunbury is due in 2012 and RRL should be doing something by 2014 – there would no doubt be a political milage if these were mostly up before the election.
Re redistributions, while there is only a 1 seat majority amd the prospect of a new NW metro and loss of regional seats with a precarious position, we should consider the regional seats that remained Labor at the election. The liberals had an almost reverse 1999 result with metro swings but the regions staying put, my impression is some of the controversial policies that upset city voters (say Alpine nat park, wind turbines, NW pipeline) will resonate more in the regions and help the Liberals to pick up those regional seats that did not swing far enough and remain Labor (e.g. Macedon).
37
The Sunbury Electrification was started by the ALP. The RRL was started by the ALP and slowed down under Baillieu to be finished by 2016 instead of 2014.
It is likely that a seat that goes will be a rural seat held by the Coalition. The seat created will likely be in the Northern and Western suburbs where the ALP have all the seats. So unless the redistribution drags ALP voters out of both Eltham and Essendon tipping them over to the Liberals then the ALP will be the same (if only one is effected) or ahead (if neither is). The North South Pipeline will be a non-issue outside Seymour (possibly even in Seymour) at the election. Wind Turbines are a divisive issue and anger many voters who would otherwise vote Coalition but want wind turbines on their property. The Alpine National Park vandalism with cattle is being stopped by the Commonwealth.