BludgerTrack: 51.1-48.9 to Labor

A closer look at the parties’ polling fortunes this term state-by-state, in lieu of much to go on in the way of new polling over Easter.

Easter has meant that only the regular weekly pollsters have reported this week, which means Essential Research and Morgan. The latter polls weekly but reports fortnightly, which I deal with by dividing each fortnightly result into two data points, each with half the published sample size. Neither Essential nor Morgan is radically off beam, so this week’s movements involve a correction after last week’s Greens outlier from Nielsen. This is not to say that Nielsen’s Greens surge was measuring nothing at all, the 17% result perhaps having been partly a reflection of it being the poll most proximate to the WA Senate election. In fact, both of the new results this week find the Greens at their highest level since at least the last election, and probably a good while earlier. Their 11% rating in Essential may not appear too spectacular, but it comes from what is the worst polling series for them by some distance – indeed, the only one the BludgerTrack model does not deem to be biased in their favour. Nonetheless, their rating in BludgerTrack this week comes off 1.8% on last week’s Nielsen-driven peak.

The dividend from the Greens’ loss has been divided between other parties in such a way as to produce essentially no change on two-party preferred. However, state relativities have changed in such a way as to cost Labor three seats and its projected majority, illustrating once again the sensitivity of Queensland, where a 0.8% shift has made two seats’ worth of difference. The New South Wales result has also shifted 0.6% to the Coalition, moving a third seat back into their column. Another change worth noting is a 2.4% move to Labor in Tasmania, which is down to a methodological change – namely the inclusion, for Tasmania only, of the state-level two-party preferred results that Morgan has taken to publishing. I had not been putting this data to use thus far, as the BludgerTrack model runs off primary votes and the figures in question are presumably respondent-allocated preferences besides. However, the paucity of data for Tasmania is such that I’ve decided it’s worth my while to extract modelled primary votes from Morgan’s figures, imperfect though they may be. The change has not made any difference to the seat projection, this week at least.

Finally, I’ve amused myself by producing primary vote and two-party preferred trendlines for each of the five mainland states, which you can see below. These suggest that not too much has separated New South Wales and Victoria in the changes recorded over the current term, leaving aside their very different starting points. However, whereas the Coalition has had a very gentle upward trend this year in Victoria and perhaps also New South Wales, their decline looks to have resumed lately in Queensland. Last week I noted that six successive data points I was aware of had Labor ahead on two-party preferred in Queensland, including five which are in the model and a Morgan result which is not. That’s now extended to eight with the availability of two further data points this week. The other eye-catching result in the charts below is of course from Western Australia, which clearly shows the effects of the Senate election with respect to both the Greens and Palmer United. The current gap between Labor and the Greens is such that the latter could well win lower house seats at Labor’s expense on these numbers – not that I recommend holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

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.

1,662 comments on “BludgerTrack: 51.1-48.9 to Labor”

Comments Page 4 of 34
1 … 3 4 5 … 34

  2. As I said earlier Hockey’s mantra of “we rather than me” means absolutely nothing until he refuses his large pension or refuses to take the money he is being payed.

  4. You notice about how they left the Entire Newstart alone? If it were really about the jobs, they would have started on Newstart, not those on Age Pension or on Disabled Pension.

    This shows they are dodging up the budget.

  5. Seem to remember Rudd, Gillard and all going on about ‘cuts to Health, Education, Pensions and Welfare’ for long periods of time while in office – warning the electorate of what could be expected from a LNP government.

    On that score they were dead right.

    Seems the over 65 yos thought that applied to all those bludgers hanging around shopping centres and not them.

    I wonder where that group of oldies who cheered Abbott on just before the election are now?

    I suspect the “We Love Tony” signs might be in the bin – if not now, soon.

  7. Hockey’s mantra of “we rather than me” means absolutely nothing until he refuses his large pension or refuses to take the money he is being payed.

    I disagree. Hockey could well be wealthy enough to refuse his government salary and perks – he could choose to do so as a stunt, but it wouldn’t make his rhetoric any more valid.

    ie it means absolutely nothing under any circumstances.

  9. If you listen to Agony Radio, certainly the tune has changed.

    There is a kind of hurt tone in the oldies as they can’t believe that their side has kind of shafted them.

    The still want to kind of believe it will be all okay in the end but they sound very nervous about what might happen to their pensions. They are downright angry about the ‘work to 70’ gig as they point out that even where they are in an occupation where they can work longer, they may not want to and aside from this, anyone over 55 can just about Whistle Dixie if looking for a new job.

    Whether they will just cop it sweet we shall see I suppose.

  10. I have long been of the view that hockey just makes stuff up as he goes along.
    That’s not so bad when you are in opposition because you always have the fall back of not being in government so not having full knowledge.
    But he is in charge of the money now and just can’t come out with a thought bubble every day.
    Just look at his stance on interest rates. When they went down under labor it was a sign of an economy in distress and when the didnt go down last month he is said to have ring the Reserve and expressed his displeasure.
    He doesn’t like the dollar at US90c because if make it too hard for him. imagine what it was like for the previous government when it was at parity and better.
    He wants cuts to health welfare education etc but still supports his leader’s ridiculous PPL scheme.
    The man is just another Tory flake and the scary thing is that we are stuck with him for a while. 90 seats gives the Tories a fair bit of breathing space and I think they know it so they are going hell for leather to impose their twisted economic and social theories on us while they can.

  12. This budget, by the look of it, will really test just how ‘rusted on’ the rusted-ons are.

    I supposed when we hear about oldies back to having dog food as a treat it will be on for young and old.

    Mind you, Perth City Council is pushing to ban beggars from the CBD. It is not just that they want to ban this lot, it is that they exist at all the Land of Milk and Honey called Oz.

    Maybe more on the way? Or just gentile poverty for many?

  13. Jackol

    [I disagree. Hockey could well be wealthy enough to refuse his government salary and perks – he could choose to do so as a stunt, but it wouldn’t make his rhetoric any more valid.]

    + 1

  14. rossmcg:

    Hockey has always been a waffler. Who can forget that appalling performance when he was responding to one of Swan’s budgets? Even under mild questioning from journalists, he just fell apart.

  16. Seem to remember Rudd, Gillard and all going on about ‘cuts to Health, Education, Pensions and Welfare’ for long periods of time while in office – warning the electorate of what could be expected from a LNP government.

    The ABC showed footage of the debate between Abbott and Rudd where Rudd claimed Abbott would be cutting Medicare Locals. Abbott categorically ruled this out. The Sky News moderator then turned to Rudd and said “will you stop running that line now that you’ve heard this?”

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-22/abbott-says-he-wont-close-medicare-locals-2013/5402986

    linked in

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-22/medicare-locals-like-to-face-the-axe-in-budget/5402414

    It was an excellent summation of the interaction between the ALP the media and the LNP before the election. Abbott’s promises didn’t add up. The ALP said “they’re going to have to cut a bunch of stuff”. The LNP said “we’re not changing anything”. The media said “oh well, that’s ok then, we don’t need to ask any more, and the ALP are clearly running a scare campaign … look at the denials from Abbott!”

    Complete and utter media fail.

    And I know it’s been linked to before, but that page had a link and quote to the Chris Berg nonsense:

    Tony Abbott walked into a trap during the 2013 campaign when he excluded a bunch of policy areas from budget reductions.

    Abbott “walked into a trap”. WTF? It was the most blatantly deliberately dishonest strategy by the LNP. “Unity ticket” on everything anyone cared about so they didn’t have to answer questions before the election on their healthcare, education, NDIS policies.

  18. 163

    A politician refusing their salary because they are wealthy could push in the direction of returning to the bad old days of unpaid rich politicians. It would never go all the way back but it is not a good direction to head in.

  20. Retweeted by sortius
    Gregory Perry ‏@GregoryPerry14 16m

    So to sum up fellow #auspol people. In just over 7 months, the coalition have earmarked 100bn of spending. Rudd spent that in three years

  22. Zoomster – ESJ is just trolling.

    7 months out from losing the last election and these polls are supposed to indicate bad news for the ALP and Shorten’s leadership because they aren’t 55+ over the Libs?

    It’s just Liberal partisan stirring.

    If we’re looking at historical lessons, the main lesson is presumably that one term governments have been incredibly rare in Australian political history. As such the expectation should be that the ALP will not win government in 2016. Winning government back next time would be quite exceptional, and yet ESJ is positing that Shorten is failing because he doesn’t have the ALP in a winning position right now.

    It’s just nonsense.

  24. Tricot,
    ‘The(y) still want to kind of believe it will be all okay in the end but they sound very nervous about what might happen to their pensions.’

    Simple to fix really, give them all a knighthood or damehood and they will be happy.

  25. Tricot:

    [There is a kind of hurt tone in the oldies as they can’t believe that their side has kind of shafted them.]

    Chickens voting for Colonel Sanders.

  26. RD

    [We were the lucky country once upon a time…]

    Donald Horne was being ironic when he coined that phrase. The book was about Australia’s lazy and complacent governance.

  27. COS Credlin is busily preparing the required budget spin for the Canberra Press Gallery to put pensioners minds at ease.

  29. The Libs will have just irreversibly pissed off most people in their 50s and above. I suspect Labor promising to wind back the policies that come would win them substantial votes….unless of course they don’t, then votes leak back to the Libs again. So there is a big opportunity for Labor in this, if they take it.

  32. Joe Hockey needn’t decline his salary, merely decline to accept any Parliamentary pension before the age of 70. He’s 48 now, his career in the senior ranks of Government is unlikely to last that long and when it goes bad (e.g. Liberals lose an election) he’ll want out of Parliament.

  33. [So there is a big opportunity for Labor in this, if they take it.]

    I agree but the ALP need to embrace revenue raising policies to make their position credible. A revamped mining tax is a ‘must have’ IMO but will Labor have the courage to again take on the miners? Shorten will need to be a better salesman that KR and JG combined to win the propaganda war on this policy alone.

  35. I have waited in vain for a journalist to ask Hockey what sacrifices he will make so that he carries his share of the burden. Not a peep so far.

  36. Tom Hawkins #183

    Shorten just needs a short sharp honest message re a revamped mining tax , rather than a long drawn out nails-down-the-chalkboard spiel.

  38. Last single term Federal Government was Jim Scullin 1929-1932. But Labor almost won in 1998 (with 51% of 2PP) and Tony Abbott nearly won in 2010, whereas a year previously the ratings of the Rudd Government were stratospheric. There is no iron law saying that Governments have to have a second term.

  39. A revamped mining tax is a ‘must have’

    No, it really isn’t.

    I think we should have a substantial mining tax as a matter of principle (but funneled into a sovereign wealth type fund), but in the scheme of things (with commodities on the downward slide now) there aren’t going to be super profits to harvest after the next year or two for quite a while.

    If the ALP look to additional revenue raising to make a credible case for properly funding services into the future (and they should) then it will need to be more stable ‘conventional’ taxes that do the heavy lifting, but the Henry review is still there to be consulted and there are ideas there that the ALP can and should use.

    (and, land tax?!?)

  40. bemused@134

    Player One@51


    Yes, yes. We get it bemused. You believe violence against women only occurs in the presence of mental illness, becasue .. because … well, men just wouldn’t do that unless they were mentally ill and therefore not responsible for their actions, would they?


    You are now resorting to downright lies obnoxious grub.

    Mental illness is but one of a number of factors that can cause violent behaviour. Drugs and alcohol are two others.

    The importance of knowing underlying factors is so they can be addressed, in an appropriate manner, hopefully before tragedy occurs.

    Obviously a far too sophisticated idea for your tiny brain cell to process.

    In the case of the death of Luke Batty, mental illness was a factor as his mother has said.

    This is but one of many reports along similar lines. You, victoria and Puff should read it.

    Father who killed son, Luke Batty, at cricket ground had history of mental illness, says boy’s anguished mother

    You are the one trying to use the tragic death of an 11 year old boy to make the bizarre point that men who inflict domestic violence must be mentally ill, and presumably therefore not responsible for their actions.

    I think it is clear which of us is a “grub”.

  41. [there aren’t going to be super profits to harvest after the next year or two for quite a while]

    That’s why I said the policy needs to be revamped. Increase the tax on every dollar they earn not just the so called super profits.

  42. Increase the tax on every dollar they earn not just the so called super profits.

    Then this is to abuse the fundamental idea behind the RSPT and MRRT.

    And it’s to miss the point I was making that any mining tax is going to be very volatile due to the nature of commodity pricing.

    (And why I think any mining tax should have/should be framed in terms of putting money in a sovereign wealth fund rather than being a component of consolidated revenue – collect the money when times are good and put it away).

    If we’re looking for increased revenue for ongoing service delivery, and we should be, then more stable taxes should form the backbone of that additional revenue.

  44. Retweeted by Josh Taylor
    la Marquise d’Wilcox ‏@cathywilcox1 6h

    Joe Hockey’s speech is hard to hear. pic.twitter.com/QJmiSrfyV4

  45. Todays Trivia :

    Royal fumble for Abbott

    “MA’AM” as in ham, not “ma’am” like palm.

    Prime Minister Tony Abbott did not take heed of the line made famous by the film The King’s Speech when referring to Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, in Canberra on Thursday.

    “Your grace and warmth, Ma’am, have been abundantly on display,” Mr Abbott said in a nod to the duchess’s efforts during her Australian visit.

    While the slip might have left sticklers aghast, but it didn’t seem to faze Kate.

    In the 2010 film starring Australian Geoffrey Rush as King George VI’s speech therapist, then Queen Elizabeth instructs Rush’s character: “It’s ‘Your Majesty’ the first time. After that, it’s ‘ma’am’, as in ‘ham’. Not ‘ma’am’, as in ‘palm'”.

    Opposition Leader Bill Shorten followed protocol, referring to “her royal highness”.

    http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/royal-fumble-for-abbott/story-e6frfku9-1226894903386

  48. What do you have in mind?

    Well, obviously the starting point is some of the stuff the ALP were putting in place but the Libs have rolled back – tax on big super, closing FBT loopholes, carbon pricing.

    Unpopular as it is around here I think there is a valid reason to look at removing the exemptions that currently exist in the GST, and raising the rate slightly would be better than a lot of other suggestions.

    Income tax at the high end can be raised a bit and/or cut out deductions, other loopholes to close off current tax minimization at high income levels.

    I have no idea about the numbers involved but personally I would like to see a Tobin tax. It would make the finance industry squeal like stuck pigs, but that’s a good thing in my book.

    If it were politically acceptable (which it probably isn’t) a deal with the states to have a consistently applied land tax going to state revenue (that they would agree or be bound not to compete with each other to lower) in return for lowering the transfer of funds from Fed revenue to the states along with abolishing those ugly state revenue sources like stamp duties, payroll tax. But I acknowledge that’s all too hard for politicians.

  49. Tom Hawkins@183

    So there is a big opportunity for Labor in this, if they take it.


    I agree but the ALP need to embrace revenue raising policies to make their position credible. A revamped mining tax is a ‘must have’ IMO but will Labor have the courage to again take on the miners? Shorten will need to be a better salesman that KR and JG combined to win the propaganda war on this policy alone.

    Rudd was an idiot to try to introduce a mining tax as an election loomed. He was warned against doing it.

    Gillard compromised too much of it away.

    The introduction needs to be done early in a term of government so it bedded in long before an election and the squeals have died down.

    Perhaps it could be sold as merely an extension of the long existing PRRT to other minerals.

  50. Steve777@188

    Last single term Federal Government was Jim Scullin 1929-1932. But Labor almost won in 1998 (with 51% of 2PP) and Tony Abbott nearly won in 2010, whereas a year previously the ratings of the Rudd Government were stratospheric. There is no iron law saying that Governments have to have a second term.

    Agree absolutely!

    And the previous margin is not relevant either. If you get the votes, you win the election.

Comments Page 4 of 34
1 … 3 4 5 … 34

Leave a Reply

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