Fairfax-Ipsos: 52-48 to Labor

The second poll from Ipsos gives the Coalition relatively respectable readings on voting intention, although Tony Abbott gets another hammering on his personal ratings.

The second federal poll conducted for the Fairfax papers by Ipsos is somewhat less bad than what they’ve been accustomed to recently, while still giving Labor a lead of 52-48 according to preference flows from the 2013 election (up from 51-49 in last month’s poll) and 53-47 on respondent-allocation (steady). The primary votes are 40% for the Coalition (down two), 37% for Labor (steady), 12% for the Greens (steady) and 2% for Palmer United (down one). Ipsos was also about two points below trend on the Coalition primary vote last time, and landed a little high for them in its last poll before the Victorian election.

However, the poll corroborates other recent polling in having Tony Abbott’s personal ratings slumping, with approval down four to 38% and disapproval up eight to 57%. Bill Shorten is up three on approval to 46% and one on disapproval to 41%, and he now leads 47-39 as preferred prime minister after a 41-all result last time. The poll was conducted Thursday to Saturday from a sample of 1400.

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.

914 comments on “Fairfax-Ipsos: 52-48 to Labor”

Comments Page 6 of 19
1 5 6 7 19
  1. Looks like Abbott might be tying his own Windor knot now by the look of his collar and tie in the Koch interview.
    Simply nondescript.

  2. Tom the first and best

    I don’t think comparing Tasmania’s 5 MPs in Federal Parliament to Queensland’s 89 seat state parliament is that enlightening.

  3. guytaur

    [The Liberals are running an advertising campaign on Uni fees. How to remind voters of one of your most unpopular policies over the summer holidays]

    Coorey made an excellent point on Insiders. This policy is alienating the same aspirational voters that PM Howard wooed so effectively.

    The only reason the Universities are in favour of Pyne’s policy is that it allows them to increase their revenues on the back of fee-paying students. So the interests of the universities diverge from those of students (and their families) who resent being used as walking ATMs.

  4. [ “Well the GP co-payment was very extensively talked about in the lead up to the budget,” Mr Abbott began.

    “Not before the election,” interjected host Chris Uhlmann.

    “Well it certainly wasn’t ruled out before the election,” Mr Abbott protested.

    “You weren’t asked about it,” replied Uhlmann.

    “Well that’s right,” Mr Abbott finally agreed. ]

    Proving at the same time 1) what a lying piece of shit he is, 2) just how complicit the media were in his smash-and-grab raid on power, and most disturbingly of all 3) just how easy it is to expose him when the media set their mind to it.

    So why didn’t they do it BEFORE THE DAMN ELECTION!?!?!?

  5. Just Me:

    [So why didn’t they do it BEFORE THE DAMN ELECTION!?!?!?]

    Yeah, the mind boggles.

    I think you answered your own (rhetorical) questions. Coz he’s a lying piece of shit.

  6. [jules
    Posted Monday, December 8, 2014 at 12:41 pm | PERMALINK
    I have a lot more sympathy for Ricky Muir than I did before:]

    He did what any parent of small children would do in a similar situation.

    The villain in this piece is Morrison, using children as a bargaining chip in his quest for extreme powers over asylum seekers.

  7. What Abbott seems to have said is that he hasn’t broken the faith of the people because he kept quiet before the election about something he was intending to do, and nobody asked him about it so he didn’t have to say anything. This will go down about as well with the public as a transgender stipper at an ACL function!

    Despite all the harping criticism of Uhlmann on here, this morning’s interview was a bit of a triumph for him: a rolled gold gotcha moment of the sort that many PBers seems to be looking for from ABC interviews, but achieved without the aggro questioning style that many of you seem to see as de rigueur.

    Abbott is sounding really tired and extremely unprepared at the moment. If I were advising him, I’d suggest he go on holidays now. The fact that he hasn’t suggests to me that he feels under pressure from his own parliamentary team to be seen to be out in the public arena fighting the good fight. More evidence, if any were needed, that the Government’s internal dynamics aren’t all that wonderful right now.

  8. guytaur
    [The Liberals are running an advertising campaign on Uni fees. How to remind voters of one of your most unpopular policies over the summer holidays]
    They have learnt nothing from the WorkChoices fiasco.

    I’d say BRING IT ON, except for the fact that we are paying for it.

    Like the WorkChoice ads, they will backfire big time. People aren’t buying it, and no amount of glossy marketing wil convince them to buy it.

  9. Boerwar@ 242

    “I reckon the Koch interview is the most damaging interview Abbott has done since he became prime minister.

    There may be other possibilities that I have missed that rival it for sheer political damage.”

    As I have said, I think the Uhlmann interview this morning is equally bad: a bit of a daily double!!

  10. Meher

    Don’t know if it was picked up in the East but Julia Gillard was asked at a book signing in Perth the other day if she had any advice for Tony Abbott.

    She did: go on holiday

  11. 241
    Boerwar

    The Murray report goes where this Government dare not venture: towards something genuinely serious.

    The idea that Abbott has the wherewithal do something hard and constructive is self-evidently absurd. They can hardly tie their shoelaces in policy terms and have no interest in learning how to do more than that. Abbott will hide the Murray Report. After all, he almost certainly will not find it in him to read it.

  12. [If Pyne or Hunt think they have any shot (and I can’t believe they really do) they should get psychiatric help pronto.]

    I agree. they do. It will never happen, but it won’t stop them trying their hand/scheming.

  13. 252

    The big swings gaining bigger seat hauls than in other states, at least partly, replicates itself in the Commonwealth seats in Queensland. The ALP were reduced to one seat in 1975 and 2 in 1996 but won 60% of the seats in 1990. The effect is slightly less evident because the ALP does not get far over 50% 2PP in Queensland at Commonwealth level. The Ryan by-election is an example though.

  14. Interesting that the interview where Abbott appeared the most comfortable, and went largely unchallenged was on 7.30, ABC’s supposedly flagship current affairs program.

    Why, even ‘Kochie’ can get Abbott to appear like a blithering ignoramus, but he gets protection from Leigh Sales.

  15. [What Abbott seems to have said is that he hasn’t broken the faith of the people because he kept quiet before the election about something he was intending to do, and nobody asked him about it so he didn’t have to say anything. This will go down about as well with the public as a transgender stripper at an ACL function!]

    the other thing he hasn’t been called on was his deliberate deceit before the election of saying “We won’t make any changes to X, Y , Z until after the following election” and in the same conversation referring to howard taking the GST to an election. this gave the impression that they’d seek a mandate for any proposed changes at the 2016 election. They then legislated and budgeted (or tried to) during this term of government, but with the changes coming into force after 2016, and then have claimed they have ‘kept faith’ because the changes will not come in until after the next election.

  16. SF

    Abbott can say what he likes but there were several notable instances of his ministers denying a medicare co-payment would be in the budget during the Griffith by election campaign.

    So can we add a new category of broken promise? If it is denied before the budget it is not the same as denying it before an election.

  17. [258
    meher baba

    Despite all the harping criticism of Uhlmann on here, this morning’s interview was a bit of a triumph for him: a rolled gold gotcha moment of the sort that many PBers seems to be looking for from ABC interviews, but achieved without the aggro questioning style that many of you seem to see as de rigueur.]

    I have a bit of sympathy for Uhlmann, who has to go out of his way to avoid accusations of pro-Labor bias, due to his wife’s position.

    But he is not due that much credit just for finally doing his job.

    Same criticism applies to the bulk of the political journos. Not too impressed with them finally starting to do their job, after a shift in public opinion has made it safe to do so.

  18. Leigh Sales and the ABC need to come clean about how that whole interview was set up and run.

    Because it stinks.

    At the very least they were bullied into giving Abbott a soft interview.

  19. [Despite all the harping criticism of Uhlmann on here, this morning’s interview was a bit of a triumph for him: a rolled gold gotcha moment of the sort that many PBers seems to be looking for from ABC interviews, but achieved without the aggro questioning style that many of you seem to see as de rigueur.]

    I think that the fact that Kochie, Stan and even Bolt have gone a bit bolshie means the toolman feels he doesn’t have to give abbott the head job interviews he has specialised in over the past few years. Toolman is an ex-seminarian and NCC hack who once stood as a candidate for a quasi-DLP party. he and abbott are soul mates – I have seen too many interviews where he has simply supportively stated abbott’s position and then let him elaborate without any criticism.

  20. briefly@266: Nobody would be better placed than a Liberal Government to implement change in some of the areas indicated by Murray. Labor are always likely to face mining tax-style campaigns against them, but, if the Liberals were to increase taxes on the superannuation of the wealthy, or modify negative gearing, then there would be nowhere for any opponents to go.

    The problem of course is that most Liberal parliamentarians themselves use to the max every inconsistency that exists in the taxation system and are resistant to change: do you remember what happened when Treasurer Costello proposed to do something about family trusts?

    BTW, if you want to reform the tax system, the first place to look in my view is not negative gearing but the rules around the establishment of companies and trusts. It is far too easy for high income earners to set up pseudo-businesses into which they can direct their salary income and avoid paying tax.

    As for negative gearing: with interest rates having been at near-record lows for a long time now and likely to fall further, it doesn’t provide a great deal of tax relief for people even on very high incomes unless they are prepared to take substantial risks. As I understand it, financial investors nowadays are increasingly recommending that people favour equities over geared investments. So I think the long boom of negative gearing is coming to an end.

    The consequence of any change in the rules re gearing at this time will simply be to put pressure on the supply of rental housing, which we don’t need right now. Without gearing, the high purchase cost of housing makes the rate of return on most rental properties unattractive to investors. Of course lefties would respond to this by stating that governments should invest in a lot more public housing.

    Speaking as someone who worked in the public housing sector for quite a while, I think that it is the most effective poverty trap ever invented by the human mind. But I appreciate that many who post on PB don’t think this way.

  21. I presume all the critics of Gillard’s use of Hyper-Bowl instead of Hyperbole are prepared to criticise Abbott of his use of Chris/Koch, Canadia, Tasmania/China, Suppository.

    I remember watching that rabid lightweight Paul Murray devote a good five minutes to the Hyper-Bowl incident.

  22. I don’t mind Uhlmann – he’s a Consertaive voice who isn’t a waste of oxygen.

    The ABC often seems to think that because a panelist such as Waleed Aly is “progressive”, that they need to “balance” the situation with a John Roskam or Peter Reith or whatever.

    I heard the Abbott interview this morning. It certainly wasn’t an overly tough one – Abbott was allowed to make ridiculous claims without any challenge, and I don’t recall a lot of probing follow-up questions – but at least Uhlmann put some difficult questions to him in the first place.

  23. The way that public housing has been done in Australia is not world’s best practice – Vienna and Germany lead the way and should inform changes to our own arrangements. I wouldn’t write off the whole concept of increased investment in public housing as a “poverty trap” just because we haven’t got it right in this country so far.

    I’d also point out that more people would be able to afford to buy if prices reflected economic fundamentals such as rental yields, real household incomes, economic growth, population growth, and construction costs. Australia’s prices are 20 to 30 percent overvalued. So let’s get those prices down to reasonable and sustainable levels by abolishing the CGT concession, abolishing negative gearing for existing dwellings, and limiting the amount a buyer can borrow to no more than 10 times the annual rental of the property they are buying. Those policies should stop bubbles from emerging in the real estate market, which would make housing affordable to far more people and protect our economy from systemic risks.

  24. God, the AFR pumps out drivel. Back page today, Tony Boyd says the murray recommendation of default funds for super is dangerous because Australian firms won’t be able to compete and then build up to become global players. In other words, Australian workers should subside the finance industry so they can buy more yachts (oops, sorry, compete overseas). The AFR screams for competition until it affects its mates, then it goes deathly silent. Pathetic.

  25. Two other insights from the AFR:
    1. According to Coorey, the clear-cut pretender to the throne is Madam Asbestos (not Tone);
    2. Laura Tingle says that Tone’s distabilising of his potential competitors has seriously eroded his support in the party.

  26. [What Abbott seems to have said is that he hasn’t broken the faith of the people because he kept quiet before the election about something he was intending to do, and nobody asked him about it so he didn’t have to say anything.]

    Far worse than Howard’s Core and Non-Core promises

  27. [ As for negative gearing: with interest rates having been at near-record lows for a long time now and likely to fall further, it doesn’t provide a great deal of tax relief for people even on very high incomes unless they are prepared to take substantial risks. ]

    Good, so there is a window here to move on changing it. 🙂

    [ The consequence of any change in the rules re gearing at this time will simply be to put pressure on the supply of rental housing, ]

    Not if they change it so it only applies to new builds.

  28. Strewth… Hell hath no fury like a pin-striped political editor scorned.

    Peter Hartcher seems to have finally chucked the tanty we’ve all bee waiting for. Tummy-up and legs wriggling in the air, Pete’s leeting it all hang out in Abbott’s direction.

    Note the first person mode of address. He’s talking to Tony directly. Peter must think Abbott actually reads his weekly advice on how to do better.

    “This is about YOU Prime Minister.”

    Peter’s little homilies on fixing the rort culture, fixing foreign relations, and a thousand other things have fallen on deaf ears.

    And now Pete’s glad, I tell youse… glad, glad, GLAD!… that Tony’s in a pickle. Pete never really loved Tony. Tony was a charity root. He only said he liked the man to make Kevin jealous.

    And now it’s too late. Tony ignored Pete, and now Tony’s swimming up the creek. That’ll show him for ignoring Lord Har-Har.

    [With the government’s support falling only marginally but Abbott’s precipitously, the people seem to be making a personal point.

    This is about you, Prime Minister.

    Abbott, seen by the people to be incompetent and untrustworthy, is a liability for his government and an asset for the Labor Party.

    http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/tony-abbott-is-the-problem-with-the-federal-government-poll-20141208-12247a.html ]

  29. [Speaking as someone who worked in the public housing sector for quite a while, I think that it is the most effective poverty trap ever invented by the human mind.]

    I am genuinely interested in a more detailed explanation of this claim.

    For example, does your definition of publicly supported housing include first home buyers schemes and ‘bonuses’?

    I would have put low minimum wages, excessive educational and health fees, and punitive bankruptcy conditions as the primary structural culprits in the poverty trap. (Which is not to say that public housing is an unadulterated good that has been managed perfectly.)

  30. [ What Abbott seems to have said is that he hasn’t broken the faith of the people because he kept quiet before the election about something he was intending to do, and nobody asked him about it so he didn’t have to say anything.

    Far worse than Howard’s Core and Non-Core promises ]

    Which is remarkably damaging since now, pre-election, he wil HAVE to be asked:

    “Ok Mr Abbott, given your previous, self admitted behaviour of staying silent about things you thought he electorate may not react well to, is there anything you are NOT telling us this time around???”

    And variations can be directed at ALL of the Liberal front bench since they were ALL involved in the 2013 campaign. 🙂

  31. [Rowan Dean spits the dummy over the opinion polls]

    He has basically called a majority of Courier Mail readers fark wits. That an editor allowed that piece to get a public airing is crazy.

  32. Here’s a little common knowledge question. Which well-known psephologist wrote:

    [As for the Liberals, the state party is understandably keen to sheet home the blame to the Abbott government. There can be little doubt that this is largely justified — perhaps even entirely so. Nonetheless, a party room that faces another three excruciatingly frustrating years in opposition must be sorely tempted to find a scapegoat closer to home. In particular, it will be asking itself whether its leader Steven Marshall, who seemed to offer so much this time a year ago, has the requisite killer instinct to overcome the cockroach-like survival powers of the Weatherill government.]

  33. Rowan Dean does dumb and dumber.

    He can’t give himself a Darwin Award.

    It’s against the rules.

    You have to be dead to be in the competition.

    Oh, wait…

  34. MB/276

    [The consequence of any change in the rules re gearing at this time will simply be to put pressure on the supply of rental housing, which we don’t need right now. Without gearing, the high purchase cost of housing makes the rate of return on most rental properties unattractive to investors.]

    This is the argument usually mounted in order to justify -ve gearing concessions. The empirical situation does not support it. Nearly all -vely geared purchases are directed to the existing housing stock, not to the expansion of supply, which would actually bring down housing costs and rents.

    It is, furthermore, completely incorrect to characterise housing as an “investment”. Housing is a consumption good/service. The tax system now subsidises consumption of housing, elevates its price and distorts both consumption and investment more generally.

    Not only that, -ve gearing is exploited by about 1/6 taxpayers. The remaining 5/6 support the tax-sheltered dealing of this usually relatively well-off minority. -ve gearing should be reformed, and, with it, the CGT concessions so foolishly introduced by Costello and Howard.

  35. shellbell

    I assume that we can gauge two bits of what is in the confidential arrangements:

    (1) whether anonymity of the source is maintained
    (2) whether NM keeps the emails up on its web site

    Assuming these, are there others you might be able to glean?

  36. [the CGT concessions so foolishly introduced by Costello and Howard.]

    Do you think there is an argument for structuring CGT to discourage short term speculative investment? Or should it be the same rate independent of the length of the investment?

  37. BW

    No that is about all.

    I sent an email to one of the lawyers mentioned in the NM press release to say the lawyer had been defamed by being referred to, in the release, as awesome and ethical.

Comments Page 6 of 19
1 5 6 7 19

Leave a Reply

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