Galaxy: Gillard versus Rudd in Queensland

A question of dubious value on how respondents would vote if Kevin Rudd were leader will hog all the headlines, but a Galaxy poll of federal voting intention in Queensland gives Labor one of their better results of recent times.

The Courier-Mail reveals a Galaxy poll of 800 Queensland respondents conducted on Wednesday and Thursday evenings shows a result for federal Labor which is better than their recent form, with Labor holding its ground from 2010 (not that that’s saying much) with 33% of the primary vote and a two-party preferred deficit of 55-45. This is the first time in a while that Labor has been able to enjoy a poll pointing to a status quo result. However, the headline-grabber is a supplementary question on how people would vote if Kevin Rudd was leader, which suggests Labor would be at 47% on the primary vote and lead 53-47. I have all sorts of problems with this kind of exercise, but you can nonetheless expect to hear a great deal of these results in the coming days. The full figures will be published in the Courier-Mail tomorrow.

UPDATE: Full results courtesy of GhostWhoVotes here. The primary vote figures are remarkably similar to the last such Galaxy poll in late November, back when Labor were thought to be on the upswing: 33% for Labor (steady), 46% for the Coalition (steady), 9% for the Greens (up one).

UPDATE 2 (25/2/13): A dire result for Labor in the latest Essential Research poll, which has the Coalition up two points to a epic 49%, Labor down one to 34% and the Greens steady on 9%, with the Coalition two-party lead blowing out from 54-46 to 56-44. Despite that, extensive questions on expectations of a Coalition government are not all that rosy, despite a net positive 10% rating for the economy: workers rights, job security, public services, and even interest rates, the cost of living and personal financial situation are all solidly in the negative. The kicker is that 57% say the government does not deserve to be re-elected, against only 26% who say it does. Thirty-six per cent said the Liberal Party was ready to govern against 45% who thought otherwise. Further questions gauge responses to policies on flexible work hours, industry and supplying mining projects, which party best represents blue-collar workers, and trust in various types of information sources.

Seat of the week: Port Adelaide

Since we already have a new thread going courtesy of Galaxy, Seat of the Week will attend to an electorate of marginal importance for which I was never planning on going to the effort of making a map.

The electorate of Port Adelaide includes Port Adelaide itself and the adjacent Le Fevre Peninsula, including the suburbs around Sempahore and Largs Bay, along with Woodville and its surrounds to the north of the city and, some distance to the north-east, a stretch of suburbs from Parfield Gardens north to Salisbury North, which are separated from the rest of the electorate by the Dry Creek industrial area. Over-quota enrolment required that the seat be pared back with the redistribution to take effect at the coming election, which has added 8000 voters around Salisbury North while removing 700 in the badlands west of Princes Highway. A little further south again, a projected 7,200 voters in a rapidly growing area from the University of South Australia campus at Mawson Lakes north to Salisbury Park have been transferred to Makin. At the southern end of the electorate, 3,300 voters around Seaton have been transferred to Hindmarsh. The changes have boosted the already handsome Labor margin from 20.0% to 21.4%.

Port Adelaide was created with the expansion of parliament in 1949 from an area that had previously made Hindmarsh a safe seat for Labor. Labor’s strength was such that the Liberals did not field candidates in 1954 and 1955, when it was opposed only by the Communist Party. Rod Sawford assumed the seat at a by-election in 1988 upon the resignation of the rather more high-profile Mick Young, member since 1974, and held it until his retirement in 2007. His successor has been Mark Butler, previously state secretary of the Left faction Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union and a descendant of two conservative state premiers: his great- and great-great-grandfathers, both of whom were called Sir Richard Butler.

Butler has quietly established himself as a rising star over his two terms in parliament, winning promotion to parliamentary secretary in June 2009 and then in the junior ministry portfolios of mental health and ageing after the 2010 election, despite his hesitancy in jumping aboard the Julia Gillard bandwagon for the June 2010 leadership coup. He was elevated to cabinet in December 2011 when social inclusion was added to his existing responsibilities, and was solidly behind Gillard when Kevin Rudd challenged her leadership two months later. Housing and homelessness were further added to his workload in the reshuffle which followed Nicola Roxon and Chris Evans’s departure in February 2013.

The Liberal candidate for the second successive election will be Nigel McKenna, a self-employed painter and decorator.

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.

3,311 comments on “Galaxy: Gillard versus Rudd in Queensland”

  1. 55:45 blah blah blah. All that huff and puff, doom and gloom for the ALP from the MSM and barely a move. Chins up genuine ALP supporters. The only people unhappy with this poll are the Tories and Ruddites. Night all.

  2. Psephos@3287


    We did work with them at the time of the Vietnam Moratorium and Anti-Apartheid Campaign.


    The Victorian Vietnam Moratorium executive consisted of Albert Langer (Maoist), Jean McLean (ALP extreme left), Harry van Moorst (independent Trot), Sam Goldbloom (ALP, but a secret communist) and Bernie Taft (CPA). Taft, a lifelong communist, trained in Beijing, was always the most sensible and moderate of the group. Note that three of the five were Jewish – this was before the left managed to drive the Jewish community into the arms of the Liberals through its support for the PLO.

    I thought Van Moorst was more of an anarchist.
    What is your source about Sam Goldbloom?

  3. Copied from last thread
    [I actually saw someone on twitter who got it right, a right winger who then deleted the tweet earlier tonight. Will keep an eye on that next time and see if its a fluke.

    Possum also said earlier trend would indicate 55-45 +/-3%. He was spot on.]

  4. Amazing – months ago when the Gillard lead was substantial over Abbott – not a peep. It was all the TPP preferred from the Murdoch minions.

    Now, TPP has not moved but Abbott now “preferred” and all the attention on Abbott’s supposed preferred position.

    At the first point we had the sages telling us that the lead in the leadership polls don’t really win elections. That is, discount any lead.

    Now, while the Labor 45 is not too flash – but has not moved despite the absolute media saturation of “She’s gone!” stuff, the TPP kind of put to one side as we not look at how “popular” Tony Abbott has become.

    So, where are all those sages down playing the leadership figures with the Gillard lead, but not now with with the Abbott lead?

  5. I know at least a little something about most of those people — only by reputation in a number of them because I was a mere child in 1970 — but who was Jean McLean? That name doesn’t ring a bell at all. What positions cast her as ‘extreme left’?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *