The BludgerTrack pendulum swings back to Labor this week following moves away from the Coalition in both Newspoll and Essential Research – although not Roy Morgan, which was little changed on what for it was an unusually strong result for the Coalition a fortnight ago. Newspoll in particular was a surprise packet, but it should be noted that Labor once again appeared to get the better of rounding on its two-party result. If a simple application of 2013 election flows is made to Newspoll’s rounded primary vote numbers, the result that comes out is 52-48 rather than 53-47. Even so, Newspoll has driven a shift of 1.0% on the BludgerTrack two-party preferred and caused six seats to flip on the seat projection – two in New South Wales, and one each in Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia and South Australia.
I say “moves away from the Coalition” rather than “moves towards Labor” advisedly, because this particular crop of polling actually found a degree of softness for both major parties. Both are down on the primary vote, the balance being absorbed by the Greens and especially “others”. The “others” result from Essential this week was at an equal high since it began reporting Palmer United separately last November. Newspoll’s didn’t change, but it was high in absolute terms – something it’s been making a habit of lately, as Kevin Bonham explains.
The other manifestation of collective major party weakness came from Newspoll’s leadership ratings, which have caused fairly substantial shifts to the relevant BludgerTrack readings. The uptick to Tony Abbott that was showing up in recent weeks has well and truly been blunted, and a weak result for Bill Shorten has also caused his upward trend towards parity on net approval to disappear. With both leaders down on net satisfaction to about the same degree compared with last week, there is little change this week on preferred prime minister.
This is the National Anzac Centre I was fortunate enough to get to see last week. First interpretive centre of its kind in Australia reportedly.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/wa/a/25325833/albany-opens-eyes-to-anzacs/
If only there had been transparency in NSW Labor during the Carr, Iemma, Rees and Keneally period. A transparent party does not let vast criminal behaviour escalate unchecked for over a decade.
Zoomster thinks the Labor party needs more time to deliberate. People like John Faulkner and Steve Bracks have been offering serious and precise proposals for party reform after every election loss this century. The proposals are not new. Everyone in the party has known about them for a long time. Most are still not in effect because they don’t suit the people currently in power and there are always people who aren’t in power, like zoomster, who for reasons of sentiment, nostalgia and team player mindset are willing to make excuses for keeping things largely as they are.
It is telling that the changes to the leadership election process only occurred when the party was desperate enough to return to a leader it despised – a leader who was mercifully free of factional loyalties.
Delegates to the national conference are still chosen in a profoundly undemocratic fashion which ensures that key power brokers can pre-determine the outcomes.
So the Greens are going to have a leadership challenge?
confessions
Looks that way
Who will run the Green Team…
[ don
Posted Thursday, October 23, 2014 at 6:55 am | Permalink
Is anyone else getting an ad for highly priced Cartier watches on this page? ]
Why aren’t you running a browser ad block add-on ?
guytaur:
I think ditching Milne in favour of the new generation is a good idea. But we’ll have to wait to see how the challengers and votes fall.
don
I mostly get adverts for bank loans. Don’t want/need one, but I ignore all ads as a matter of course.
Good news. Scott Ludlum is the most compelling public speaker of the Greens parliamentary team. He modulates his voice. He varies his volume, pitch, pace, and rhythm to put expression into his ideas and to connect with the audience. A party leader should have exceptionally good presentation skills. I think this is particularly important when it’s the leader of a minor party which is marginalized in the media. I also believe that Scott Ludlum is good at drawing together different policy themes into a coherent argument about the kind of nation we should be.
guytaur:
That is not Scott Ludlam’s twitter account. Looks to be a hoax.
Unfortunately Milne does snot have the face that launched a thousand ships. Yet she is excellent on her specialty subject.
[On issues like this, where the parliamentary Greens oppose something which appears to accord with their own policy positions (agreed to democratically by the party members) surely the parliamentary team should go back to the membership for advice?]
Maybe that could look at how the Labor Party deals with this issue.
snot = not. Ouch!!
confessions
Yeah, Twitter strikes again
The account profile says this
[
Not Senator Ludlam
]
Bit of a give away I would think.
This is his real account
https://twitter.com/SenatorLudlam
Confessions
Yes as you say we will have to wait and see. My choice would be Bandt leader (leader in Reps) Ludlam deputy.
Milne suffers in comparison with her predecessor as well. Whatever you thought of his politics Brown was certainly a comfortable and accomplished media performer.
[“@SenatorLudlum: ]
It’s Ludlam not Ludlum
Not quick enough 😉
ESJ@1: reckon you’re a bit of a rogue.
Nicholas
[Zoomster thinks the Labor party needs more time to deliberate.]
Really, if that’s your take out, it’s of little use trying to converse with you.
It’s a state by state process. The members of each state need to get together to make these decisions. There are set times and places where that happens, and in the case of some states, that hasn’t happened yet.
Secondly, we’re talking about some specific proposals here, which the Greens think are great. It’s possible that the majority of Labor members don’t agree. A party has the right to make its own decisions, even if they’re different to the decisions another party might make.
In the meantime, of course, Labor is doing what it always has done and constantly reforming (unlike the Greens, who seem to accept their party processes as if they were handed down from Mt Sinai). Victorian Labor, for example, has two party conferences each year. I have never heard of one where SOME form of reform hasn’t been passed (despite press reports to the contrary).
A party which has existed for over a century is obviously going to have chucked out a lot of things that don’t work over that period. If anything, one would expect the older parties to be in the least need of change, and younger parties to be in a more fluid state. The apparent inertia of the Greens (and their smug acceptance that they’ve arrived at the best of all possible party models and thus no change is needed) should be concerning in this context.
[People like John Faulkner and Steve Bracks have been offering serious and precise proposals for party reform after every election loss this century..]
Yep. And they’re very seriously discussed and debated, let me tell you, and bits of them are accepted. As always, the newsworthy items are the ones that are rejected – and often they’ve been rejected for good reasons.
Again, it seems the Greens’ notion of reform is that just because someone has suggested something, it should be implemented, regardless of the merits of the suggestion.
[Most are still not in effect because they don’t suit the people currently in power and there are always people who aren’t in power, like zoomster, who for reasons of sentiment, nostalgia and team player mindset are willing to make excuses for keeping things largely as they are.]
Seriously? You read my serious critique of Labor last night and that’s your take out?
I have worked for reform. I’m still working for reform. But I’m working for sensible reforms which will actually work, most of which (as I’ve already pointed out) have been implemented by the Labor party already in states other than my own.
It’s insulting of you, after I’ve criticised my party far more than you have yours (which is, of course, perfect in all its aspects) to then accuse me of blind partisanship.
I’m afraid you’re heading into ModLib territory when it comes to my estimation of your ability to engage in a sensible discussion.
Mea Culpa on my part.
My apologies. I do think a change would be good. My only saving grace is I was not alone in falling for it. Not much of one..
Actually I think there are several Greens who are performing (media and parliament) a damned sight better than the Coalition. And with more intelligence.
lizzie
[ Yet she is excellent on her specialty subject.]
Indeed and on other issues. Pity that people make such superficial judgments based on appearance and tone of voice. If some people would takes the time to stop and listen to the substance of what she has to say, they would be impressed.
MartinB
[Maybe that could look at how the Labor Party deals with this issue.]
Ah. So you don’t dispute that it’s a problem.
Labor has set processes for dealing with the need of the parliamentary party to depart from the party platform laid down and accepted by the membership.
The Greens apparently don’t.
There is a difference. In one scenario, you accept that there are reasons why the parliamentary party can’t always consult and have processes to deal with that. In the other, you pretend it never happens, and indulge in huge contortions to explain why it hasn’t when it does.
In my neck of the woods, which is not in the inner cit ;-), we are experiencing an influx of members, including young people who are doing the hard yards door knocking and the like.
It’s great to see people are energised and wanting to change the status quo 🙂
lizzie:
She may have an excellent subject knowledge, but she’s as dreary as all get out and represents a by-gone era of Greens MPs.
It’s past time the Greens passed the baton to the next generation.
No sooner have they buried one of their previous leaders in Gough Whitlam, the Greens have gone aleatoric on their leadership.
heh heh
Ludlum, BTW, is on the disarm Australia side of Greens ‘Peace’ Policy Aleatory.
The ultra-democratic Greens are so interested in transparency and accountability that they do their national policy process behind locked doors.
200 faceless men and women?
[Actually I think there are several Greens who are performing (media and parliament)..]
Under Milne’s leadership other Greens parliamentarians are achieving a higher profile. This is a result of Milne’s collegiate team approach.
Sure, Bob Brown was more charismatic but he became the iconic symbol of the Greens, in part, as demanded by the MSM. This was to the detriment of other team members being heard in the MSM.
[My apologies. I do think a change would be good. My only saving grace is I was not alone in falling for it. Not much of one..]
Since coming a cropper on a fake tweet a couple of years ago, I ALWAYS check.
They reckon S H-Y wants the job as well.
That’s the Greens for you: so many wannabe chiefs and so few indians.
confessions
You mean she’s too ‘green’ for you? The speech she gave on the potential for renewable energy at the Press Club stands out as one of the best and most forward looking I’ve heard. Can’t remember the date.
Was that a parody tweet on a parody account about a parody party?
Where’s Spurr when we need him?
Boerwar:
Ludlam is one of the few Greens MPs who isn’t shrill and skys-falling-in hysterical.
confessions
Ludlam always comes across as well informwd and measured in his delivery.
lizzie:
No, I mean she’s too dreary for me. Gotta say it pleases me to hear the Greens are finally talking about the environment after years of faffing about with issues such as boats and same sex marriage. It’s about time.
Boerwar
Whereas the Coalition is all indians and not a decent chief among them.
Ludlam is the brains side of the Greens, IMHO; kempt, too.
Nor, when he speaks, does he sound like he is either whinging, about to cry, or about to tell someone else they ought to be guilty of something or other because they don’t come up to Greens’ standards of hyper-morality.
When he talks he is, and sounds, rational.
But if you want Australia to have a decent ADF, do not support Ludlam.
[Maybe that could look at how the Labor Party deals with this issue.
Ah. So you don’t dispute that it’s a problem.]
I’m not describing it as a “problem” but it’s going to arise in any parliamentary party that purports to represent its membership on policy.
Saying that the PLP has the right to ignore/override policy doesn’t really address the actual issue (but yes, marks for honesty).
Great. Maybe in another fifteen years the ALP will have caught up to the Greens’ level of party democracy.
A post ago you said a weakness of the Greens is that they took too long to decide a position on wind farms. Now you claim the Greens adopt suggestions too quickly without regard for their merits.
There are several reform ideas on the agenda of the next Greens AGM. Giving members a vote in electing the parliamentary leader. Giving members a direct vote in the election of national conference delegates instead of letting state delegates make those choices entirely. Lowering the threshold for initiating a plebiscite on an issue. Among other things.
I don’t consider the Greens perfect. I just think it is far ahead of the other parties in terms of democratic procedures. There is always room for improvement but the more developed you are, the harder it is to make improvements. The low lying fruit have already been plucked. Labor still has lots of low lying fruit to harvest. When you said that Labor has done more party reform than the Greens recently, that is like saying that South Sudan had real GDP growth of 240 percent last year, whereas Australia only had 2.5 percent, therefore South Sudan did better. Labor is improving from a low base. This is laudable. But Labor should not get cocky about its long overdue effort to catch up to the Greens.
Spurr in court today against New Matilda.
NM has Fairfax’s barrister of choice in its corner.
This now looks like it will put the AFL right under the spotlight.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-23/players-trying-to-fast-track-asada-outcome-players-association/5835168
I think Milne is doing an OK job and the greens should not shift yet. Milne is NOT charismatic and the Greens will probably no grow much under her but if they can stay steady and return to the position they had when Bob Brown led, then Milne will have done well.
There are I think three Greens MPs who would make excellent Cabinet Ministers, better than most in the ALP and all of the Coalition. These are Ludlum, DiNatale and I will include Milne in a steady as she goes portfolio – She is the Jenny Macklin of the Greens. Larissa Waters and Adam Bandt and even SHY would make excellent junior ministers. I think Waters will emerge as leadership quickly and SHY will grow up. I am not a big Bandt fan.
@ItsBouquet: Comedian Josh Thomas and Liberal MP Wyatt Roy go tweet to tweet over asylum seeker policy
http://t.co/rXe6VUeU35 http://t.co/YBcbUSixsS
All of those Labor types on here who despise the Greens should be hoping that Ludlam or Bandt replace Milne as leader sooner rather than later. The more the Greens embrace far left positions, the more they will ultimately get marginalized.
BTW, Ludlam is ok but not as great as some of you think. It’s amazing how good looks can impress people.
I wonder what Spurr thinks he will gain from litigation. It only draws more attention to his emails and compounds the embarrassment to his employer. Surely his focus should be on trying to retain his job by apologizing unreservedly, committing to some kind of counselling and outreach work to improve his empathy for racial minorities and women, doing a long period of penance, and begging the university not to sack him.
Ludlam is certainly not good looking IMO, and he impresses me because he is calm, not judgemental and doesn’t shriek like most of his colleagues.
mb
[Ludlam is ok but not as great as some of you think]
Consistent failure to go in for the ‘kill’.
“@HannahD15: Barry Spurr is relying on the ‘sex video tape cases’ to establish breach of confidence here”
[Barry Spurr is relying on the ‘sex video tape cases’ to establish breach of confidence here]
He is in one?