BludgerTrack: 54.1-45.9 to Coalition

A modest post-budget improvement for Labor is now visible to the naked eye on the aggregated polling charts.

Only the two weekly pollsters have reported national results this week, which have done nothing to interfere with what appears to be a post-budget uptick for Labor. This results in a 0.3% two-party gain to add to the 0.5% shift last week, translating into a gain of two on the seat projection (one from New South Wales and one from Western Australia). The Queensland Galaxy poll has translated into a relative 0.5% shift away from Labor in that state, which was mostly cancelled out by the change in the national result. Full details on the sidebar.

Preselection news:

• The Queensland LNP has chosen party treasurer Barry O’Sullivan to fill the Senate vacancy created by Barnaby Joyce’s bid for Tony Windsor’s lower house seat of New England. Barry O’Sullivan was chosen ahead of 11 other candidates, including Larry Anthony, Howard government minister and former member for Richmond; tourism executive Mary Carroll; Western Downs mayor Ray Brown; and Toowoomba doctor and social conservative David van Gend. O’Sullivan made the news in 2011 when a recording emerged of him using forthright language in dealing with a disendorsed state election candidate.

NineMSN reports the long-delayed local preselection ballot for the Illawarra seat of Throsby, where Labor incumbent Stephen Jones faces a challenge from local Right faction operative John Rumble, will be held on June 15.

AAP reports Emma McBride, Wyong Hospital executive and daughter of former local state MP Grant McBride, has withdrawn from the Labor preselection to choose a successor to Craig Thomson in Dobell. The report says contenders “could” include Wyong Shire councillor Lisa Matthews and David Mehan, a local union official who challenged Thomson for preselection at the 2010 election.

Other news:

• New campaign finance legislation to be introduced by the government shortly is proving a source of contention on two fronts. A plan for parties to receive “administrative funding” set according to their share of the vote, at an overall cost of around $13 million a year, has met a predictably hostile response in the media and is unlikely to be going down well with the public (a similar measure was axed in Queensland last year as part of the Newman government’s savings drive). There has also reportedly been furious opposition in caucus, notably from Senator John Faulkner, to a watering down of long-delayed plans to revise the threshold for disclosure of political donations. This was hiked from $1500 to an indexed $10,000 (now over $12,000) by the Howard government in 2005. Legislation introduced by the Rudd government in 2008, and reaffirmed as part of the minority government agreements with independents and Greens after the 2010 election, sought to bring it back down to $1000. Now the government proposes the threshold be set at $5000, a total presumably reached in negotiation with the Liberals. A government source quoted by Tom Dusevic of The Australian says a $5000 threshold will capture 60% of donations, whereas a $1000 threshold would have captured 80%. Bernard Keane of Crikey the new bill will also leave open the loophole that allows undisclosed donations below the threshold to be made to each state and territory party branch, which was to have been dealt with under earlier versions of the bill.

• Financial consultants Pottinger have produced a Bayesian model for predicting the election result which incorporates historical results and betting markets as well as polling over the current term. It projects “a central 2PP outcome for the ALP of 47.2%, with a 95% confidence interval of about 43.8% to 50.2%”, and gives the Coalition a 93.6% chance of winning the election against 1.9% for Labor, with a 4.5% chance of a hung parliament.

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.

2,946 comments on “BludgerTrack: 54.1-45.9 to Coalition”

Comments Page 59 of 59
1 58 59
  1. Player One

    [Abbott doesn’t give a fuck what happens after the elections … as long as he’s in the Lodge.]

    I’m sure that is completely true.

  2. Abbott After the Election

    GST – After the election we will a Commission of Audit and they will make recommendation

    Direct Action – After the election we will consult with appropriate people to decide what we actually do.

    SSM – After the election we will ???????? wait for Pell to tell me?????

  3. Buzz Lightyear aka Kelly O’Dwyer on Lateline soon trying to defend the coalition’s indefensible stop the boats nonsense.

  4. [He has a nanny, Peta Credlin, look after him.]

    Gawd BB, that conjures up an image of Peta as Mary Poppins!

    Where is George Bludger when you need him??

  5. [If you don tlike it just wait 30 mins and it will change]

    Let’s no gild the lily AA. Give Tony 4 days at least to change his mind!

    Think about that letter.

    It was a formal communication, a final notice of agreement to terms and conditions thrashed out and compromised over after years of negotiation.

    A man’s signature is supposed to mean something.

    Yet he lied about it. He lied about not seeing the legislation. He lied about a sudden “Budget Emergency”. He lied about internal party room pressure.

    Benson criticised Gillard for STILL defending the policy. But this was EXACTLY what Abbott did too.

    It was exicse from every news report, and all mention in any newspaper article.

    You don’t get this kind of friendly coverage – or should that be “cover”? Or perhaps “camouflage”? – from the media unless you’ve promised them something really, REALLY big.

    To me it’s indisputable that Murdoch is promoting Abbott as a figurehead for his own nefarious purposes. I don’t know why they bother to deny it after tripe like Benson’s piece this afternoon.

    Murdoch’s own tweet and his admissions to the documentary makers make it pretty clear that he sees himself as the one in charge, not the puppet Prime Ministers who kow-tow to him.

    If the wingnuts here want to argu realpolitik, then fair enough. He who has the press barons on side is guaranteed a head start.

    But they should steer clear of trying to polish the turdlike Abbott into anything else but Murdoch’s droppings.

    Because that’s all he is: a protected species who is everyting to everyone… the voters and his masters.

  6. BB @ 2885 – a good assessment of Tony Abbott. I can hardly believe that this man is about to become PM but he will. He will be the ‘accidental’ PM – a DLP man when his party’s backers and paymasters want a Thatcherite. But we’ll be stuck with him for a couple of years until they can replace him with one.

  7. I am also sure Abbott is right about one thing, if he doesn’t win he will be political road kill.

    I am also prety dam sure Abbott is the Liberals Lathum.

  8. One good thing can come out of this election. And every Australian should seriously think about this as they vote.

    Abbott has stated he will have to leave Australia if he loses the election.

    When he goes we will owe the country he goes to a carton or two of beer

  9. The opposition have decided to reject marriage equality as a policy because they are either ideologically opposed to it, or because they think it isn’t a vote decider.

    Not because they took a position to the last election and feel they need to honour that position.

  10. 2847

    Good comment.

    [Costello, world’s laziest treasurer, wasn’t much better. He managed to gain those damn surpluses by refusing to spend on infrastructure and by flogging off anything that wasn’t nailed down.]

    And increasing tax take to record levels.

  11. AussieAchmed
    Posted Friday, May 31, 2013 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

    [One good thing can come out of this election. And every Australian should seriously think about this as they vote.

    Abbott has stated he will have to leave Australia if he loses the election.

    When he goes we will owe the country he goes to a carton or two of beer]

    Did you get that in writing?

  12. 2847 Leone

    Not quite everything he missed Medibank, but Abbott will fix that

    Telstra: $50.24 billion
    Australian airports: $8.5 billion
    Commonwealth Bank: $5.15 billion received
    Reserve Bank gold assets: 167 tonnes sold for $2.4 billion,

    National Rail Corporation and Freightcorp: $1.05 bn received,
    Broadcast Australia: $650 million received,
    DASFLEET: $407 million in 1997,
    Telecommunications spectrum: about $1.3 billion received,

    Radio licence spectrum: about $1 billion received,
    Property portfolio 59 sites: for $1 billion,

    Total value from sales: $71.7 billion

  13. frednk 2916 – bugger yes it is in writing….so it is meaningless…..

    Oh Well. I had already bought 2 cartons to send to the country…guess I’ll drink them myself or donate them to some charity…I dont like XXXX gold

  14. BB @ 2885

    All appallingly true.

    [He’s never accomplished anything or won any contest that wasn’t rigged in his favour.]

    An apt epitaph.

  15. confessions 2919

    JB is taking a page out of Melbournes play book???

    We can win…we can win…we can win

    Oh sh-t…no we can’t

  16. Reserve Bank gold assets: 167 tonnes sold for $2.4 billion,

    gold was around $300 an ounce be worth nearly 5 times as much today

    $12 billion roughly

  17. Could these reasons be why the Coalition are bullying the Independents into triggering an early election?

  18. [Could these reasons be why the Coalition are bullying the Independents into triggering an early election? ]

    “Ongoing dramas with LNP members being investigated with Obeid case”! Nice one.

  19. Says Julie Bishop:

    [“We have a very good working relationship with Indonesian officials in Indonesia and in Australia

    “It is an inescapable fact that the majority of boats coming to our shores are Indonesian boats with Indonesian crew leaving from Indonesian ports.

    “Those boats can be returned to their home ports.”]

    The Indonesian ambassador made it perfectly plain: they don’t want the passengers.

    The boats may be Indonesian, but the passengers aren’t.

    Sure the boats can be returned if they aren’t holed first, which is the usual practice, or will become the usual practice if towings start),but the Indonesian have no obligation to take the passengers back.

    Indonesia is not a signatory to the Convention.

    They only let the asylum seekers in so they can get rid of them to Australia.

    The entire premise of Coalition policy is that Australia is too good to have to put up with wogs on boats. It’s so arrogant, but there’s the problem.

    We are hated for that attitude and probably rightly so.

    Indonesia is about to show them who’s boss, methinks.

  20. Could these reasons be why the Coalition are bullying the Independents into triggering an early election?

    second try..I’m not good at this posting stuff

  21. confessions
    Posted Friday, May 31, 2013 at 10:59 pm | Permalink

    I think she’s just useless.

    I agree – Asbestos Bishop – useless, heartless, and any other “less” you deem suitable

  22. Jackol@2857

    And it’s interesting that Kevin Bonham tries to tie it to the leader’s attitude. It’s a very small sample size of cases, and are you really trying to make the case that because Julia Gillard professes to not support SSM that 30% of ALP MPs vote against their conscience to kiss arse or something?

    I think a good leader has a lot of authority to take waverers within their party with them on social issues. But if the leader is saying no, it’s easy for the waverers to say no too. Maybe the percentage would still have been higher than NZ/UK anyway but I think it would have been nothing like 41% if Gillard had come out in favour. We’ve seen that support on this issue often cascades – one prominent figure crosses and another prominent figure follows them, one nation legalises and another leader comes out in support and so on. The PM switching would have made a big difference.

    I don’t buy that. I do buy that the ALP is split on this issue (hence why they couldn’t get past making it a conscience-vote issue).

    That was actually a very close vote on whether to mandate it and disallow a conscience vote, and it would have been mandated for sure but for the PM’s position, since mandating something the PM opposed would have been a major embarrassment to her with potential leadership implications. I do not get the impression from that that the party conference is all that conservative; rather that a lot of people were scared of the impact of a forced vote on either leadership or social stability.

    The other 2 examples in the NZ and the UK passed with conscience votes;

    They passed on conscience votes with both major party leaders supporting. I think that is the circumstance under which we will eventually get there – either that or a landslide ALP victory under a supportive leader – unless Labor decides to make support mandatory. I’ll be very surprised if it passes on a joint conscience vote at a time when the PM of the time opposes it.

    Also as my article points out in the UK Parliament, strongly pro-SSM parties hold a majority of seats.

  23. zoomster@2866

    …which means if you want ssm to get up, you should be hoping for a Labor victory. If Labor wins in September, it would be possible we’d have ssm legislated by the end of the year.

    No because if Labor wins then Gillard will still be PM, will still be opposed, and the numbers will not be there, not even if you win massively.

    If anyone wants me to believe that a Labor victory means SSM post-election then I will believe it if Labor either changes to a pro-SSM leader now or convinces the current leader to change her position.

    Otherwise it’s my suspicion that a win for Labor under Gillard could even cause this reform to occur later than if Abbott wins, by delaying the arrival of the first supportive Labor PM.

    (Quite amuses me as someone who frequently analyses how little effect SSM has on voting intention either way to find that it has a growing impact on mine. It’s just something I’m sick of opposition to because the arguments against are all so utterly laughable, and because it is so obvious that support carries no real political risks outside the partyroom.)

  24. I am one of the people who joined in jumping on the Latika is a waste of space and a Stenographer could do her job people.

    I have to say getting statement from the Indonesian Ambassador makes up for a lot and proves she is not just a stenographer.

    Well done Latika

  25. 2932

    If a vote were held now the ALP no vote would not be 41% as Rudd has changed sides. That, even if no other ALP vote has changed, cuts it down to just bellow 40%. I think a few other votes may have changed as well.

  26. If the asbestos business is pinned on the NBN, then Turnbull’s – and in fact – ANY upgrade of any Telstra pit will never happen. The copper in the ground will stay there until it rots and the entire system falls over.

    And then it will STILL need to be cleaned up.

    Those jokes about two tin cans and a piece of string will come true if the asbestos fetishists get their way.

    1,500 people are killed by cars every year. Hundreds are drowned in the surf and in backyard swimming pools. People die of oversodes of prescription drugs. They are killed through surgeons’ negligence.

    And shit happens.

    Care, of course, needs to be taken with asbestos, but as long as the lawyers are hovering, going on TV and issuing warnings, threatening lawsuits, not just the NBN’s but ALL telecommunications infrastructure development will grind to a halt.

    It needs to be explained that we have a chance to fix the problem in one go – just clean out the Telstra pits and build the bloody NBN, or else this will string out for decades and we’ll fall even further behind.

  27. Oh, is it? Well, blow me down.

    Oakes is out for blood in the Murdoch papers today.

    He’s another one of those dinosaurs going in the same direction his ancestors did.

    The shrillness of the shills is becoming a tad obvious, isn’t it?

    According to Oakes:

    [Abbott] broke his agreement with the Government, hoping that credit for killing off the unpopular measure would compensate for damage to his credibility. And it did.

    Oh it DID, did it?

    According to effing WHO?

    Laurie Oakes and his pals, that’s who. No-one else. No polls, no focus groups, just a media pack determined to see their analysis – hopelessly wrong for three years – finally come true, like a stopped clock – once in a blue moon.

    It won’t be long until the poor bastard run over by a truck yesterday is turned into Pink Batts #2.

    And I suppose they’ll blame Gillard for Telstra putting asbestos in their pits forty years ago, too.

    It all adds up to “a horror week”, the pundits say, with Abbott guilty only – in Oakes’ view – of an “error of judgement”.

    No he wasn’t, he broke his word, It’s like he’s broken his word on just about everything he’s ever given it on.

    And Oakes lets him off, just like that.

    If things were as rosy for the Opposition and their Murdoch mates as it’s claimed they are, they wouldn’t be so shrill and screamy.

    The Australian people would be getting close to having a gutful of the continual wailing and gnashing of teeth of a pack of hyenas on bloated salaries working for failed corporations, telling other people how to do theirjobs. The hatred and the anger have ground Australia down to the lowest common denominator: the Ray Hadley way of doing business. Rule by shock jocks (which Oakes gleefully mentions).

    I’ve said it many times. Everyone’s in the lifeboats. The oars are out prodding swimmers away. The media survivors think they have first class tickets that will get them back to dry land.

    The hysteria is reaching fever pitch as the boat starts to sink.

    It’s a race to see who freezes to death in the black waters of oblivion, and who gets saved… and there ARE no guaranteed winners or losers.

  28. [ Bushfire Bill
    Posted Saturday, June 1, 2013 at 12:27 am | Permalink


    It needs to be explained that we have a chance to fix the problem in one go – just clean out the Telstra pits and build the bloody NBN, or else this will string out for decades and we’ll fall even further behind.]

    And infrastructure has to be maintained and altered these pits are part of our infrastrucure, you will find them whereever you find pits, telco, traffic lights etc.

    People get in them and pull up these pits on a daily basis. It increases the cost of the project, but there are well established work practices to deal with the problem. The level of bullshit is unbelievable.

    This comes from the people that also want to turn a work place accident into a reason why we should not do the NBN. They have no decency. Part of the unhinging.

  29. […which means if you want ssm to get up, you should be hoping for a Labor victory. If Labor wins in September, it would be possible we’d have ssm legislated by the end of the year.]


    Plus Labor has had 6 years to do it, so if they were going to it would of already happened.

  30. Apart from Bill and a few other political tragics no one in punterland cares if Abbott is backflipping, lying or reneging on deals. They have their target and they’re intent on bringing her down, one sandwich at a time.

Comments Page 59 of 59
1 58 59

Leave a Reply

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