The latest Newspoll result from The Australian has the Coalition opening a 52-48 lead after a 50-50 result a fortnight ago, from primary votes of Coalition 45% (up two), Labor 35% (steady) and Greens 11% (down one). Malcolm Turnbull’s lead over Bill Shorten as preferred prime minister has blown out from 57-19 to 63-17, and his personal ratings are 58% approve (up eight) and 23% disapprove (down two). Bill Shorten is down two on approval to 26% – his lowest Newspoll result yet – and up five on disapproval to 58%. The poll was conducted Thursday to Sunday by automated phone and online polling, from a sample of 1606.
UPDATE (Essential Research): Movement to the Coalition now from Essential Research as well, which has them up a point on both two-party preferred, on which they now lead 52-48, and on the primary vote, putting them at 45%, compared with 35% for Labor (down one) and 11% for the Greens (steady). This score is from a fortnightly rolling average of weekly polling, the latest tranche of which was conducted Thursday to Sunday from a sample of 1012.
Other questions relate to the union movement, and as usual they find it to be viewed more favourably than some of the narrative might indicate. Sixty-two per cent rated unions as very important or quite important for Australian working people today, a semi-regular question which has been tracking upwards from a result of 52% in September 2012, while responses of not very important or not at all important have fallen over that time from 38% to 28%. Forty-five per cent agreed that workers would be better off if unions in Australia were stronger, with 26% opting for worse off. However, 42% deemed the trade union royal commission “a legitimate investigation of union practices” compared with 27% who favoured the alternative proposition that it was “a political attack on Labor and the unions”, which is similar to when the question was last asked in August (“don’t know” remaining at a high 31%).
Another semi-regular question, on same sex marriage, records no significant change on August, with 59% in favour and 30% opposed, both of which are down one point on last time. Opinion is evenly divided on whether the matter should be determined by a plebiscite (43%) or a vote in parliament (41%). Also featured is a question on whether Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison will be better economic managers than Tony Abbott than Joe Hockey, with 50% opting for better and 10% for worse.
A lot of Labor supporters live in denial, thinking Shorten can survive this period, but I can tell you what WILL happen. Come election time, the Liberals engage in a massive smear campaign against Shorten using the stuff uncovered in the Royal Commission. If anybody thinks an unpopular leader who’s already tainted in the public will survive, they’re living in fantasy land.
Shorten’s numbers are bad, and they’ll get worse. Turnbull will have to monumentally stuff up next year for Shorten to even have a chance. He’s done, I’m afraid.
Too simple really, Mal just benefiting from replacing the worst PM Australia’s ever had.
Good for the country , all Labor needs do is concentrate on policy, matters little if it’s Mal or Bill that implements them.
Labor’s biggest turnoff for voters is the perceived union dominance of the party, and Shorten screams union man, back-room dealmaker, and machine man. If Australians had a centre-left party to vote for without the union baggage, with exactly the same policies as the ALP, and led by a Turnbull-esque character, they’d be miles ahead in the polls.
Whether its fair and reasonable that the union connection is seen as a negative by the electorate is beside the point. Fact is, it is, and the Libs are working it for all its worth with TURC.
If the ALP are going to return to government, it won’t be under the leadership of a former union leader.
Bored already…
All the pontificators pontificating about Shorten ad nauseum, never seem to suggest an alternative.
I’m not surprised by the polling, the government’s performance has been much more solid and before people ask “but what has changed” often it isn’t what is said that is the problem but the manner at which its been said, the voters clearly were over the three word slogans, over the death cult, over the flags and etc. This government while facing a number of potentially tricky policy issues is at least to this point performing better, the ALP just need to stay focused on the core issues of services and the economy.
Mexican
Well said.
And some of us are just patiently waiting to see how things turn out.
Wrong Adrian. I advocate Tanya Plibersek regularly.
Lizzie
I have been enjoying how you have been doing the morning links, BK should be impressed.
My alternatives: A Tanya and Penny team, or just skip this generation and go straight to Jason Clare.
I see Jason Clare having the same problem Bill Shorten has, both men appear to lack a lighter side, this is what I think the public is really hinting at with Shorten, although maybe unfairly.
Just to be clear, I am certainly not one of those advocating the replacement of Shorten. That would just make a bad situation worse.
Nor do I see his union ties as being the main cause of his low ratings. These are most likely a combination of his rather bland public persona and his reputation – fuelled particularly by The Killing Season – as a backstabber if Prime Ministers.
If Labor had an alternative who was clearly better than Shorten, then maybe. But they don’t
I see reports that Tony is having a nice holiday in France with his staff, where is his wife, does this kind of confirm some of the suggestions that have been floating around here and elsewhere for sometime?
Mexican
Thank you.
[ Come election time, the Liberals engage in a massive smear campaign against Shorten using the stuff uncovered in the Royal Commission. ]
Come election time, the Liberals will do this no matter who the Opposition Leader is.
(…the smear campaign, that is..)
So was Malcolm lying all the time when he supported the 2014 Budget?
[Malcolm Turnbull Verified account
@TurnbullMalcolm Why the Budget is Fair – powerful speech by @JoeHockey http://jbh.ministers.treasury.gov.au/speech/009-2014/ … ]
Zoomster
Had Abbott remained Liberal leader then that pretty much is all they had to run on, with Turnbull and in this regard he has a weakness (the caymans) might be more willing to stick to policy.
meher baba @ 111:
its all part of the mix. Robotic, over-rehearsed presentation, union history, back room deals, and his role in knocking off Rudd and Gillard. None of its good!
Shorten’s going to be replaced, its just a matter of when. Before or after the election. Even the most optimistic lemmings think it unlikely he can win from here, with the more likely outcome a thumping defeat.
So, is it better to make the change before or after an election? Any new leadership team won’t be blamed for a big loss, but Shorten most certainly will be, so its just delaying the inevitable.
But whatever, throw yourselves of the cliff if you must.
Liberals’ biggest turnoff for voters is the perceived big business domination of the party, and Turnbull screams lawyer, merchant banker, and money man.
If Australians had a centre-left party to vote for without the big business agenda, with exactly the same policies as the ALP, and led by a Turnbull-esque character, they’d be miles ahead in the polls.
Whether its fair and reasonable that the big business connections are seen as a negative by the electorate is beside the point. Fact is, it is, and Labor are working it for all its worth with Cayman.
If the Liberals are going to retain government, it won’t be under the leadership of a former merchant banker.
zoomster @ 114:
Sure, but it will be far more effective against Shorten because of who he is.
Poor old Barnaby doesn’t trust scientists at all.
[Latika M Bourke @latikambourke · 3m3 minutes ago
Australia’s Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce on WHO report says bacon should not be compared to cigarettes and report is a ‘farce.’ (ABC)]
Picture this for an ad
Background image of the Caymans
With a voice over saying something like, the debt has risen, services cut yet some use this place to reduce their contribution to budget repair.
Then finish with a picture of the PM.
Zoomster
‘Liberals’ biggest turnoff for voters is the perceived big business domination of the party, and Turnbull screams lawyer, merchant banker, and money man.’
The problem with this thinking is that this in the increasing part of the labour market, a large chunk of university grads go off to the corporate sector/banks/law, in effect the ALP risk losing many of the urbane middle class that it has been competitive with since Whitlam.
zoomster mate, there are plenty in the electorate who admire Turnbull, yes admire, because he’s been successful in business. It makes a huge difference in people’s minds that he’s self-made and wasn’t born with the proverbial silver spoon. Leaders personal stories matter, and on balance, Turnbull has a good one to tell. Shorten’s story is meh at best.
The Cayman island thing is a complete waste of time and strategic error. They should be focusing on reminding the electorate that Turnbull still leads a party full of RWNJs.
The Lorax
To be fair to Zoomster, she is very much a creature of Indi, Indi people are generally less warm and fuzzy towards the Turnbulls of the world hence why MP’s in similar seats were more likely to have supported Abbott.
The risk for the ALP is that they may get a 3 or 4% swing in Indi, but lose Melbourne Ports or Chisholm to the Liberals.
Lorax@118: if Shorten leads Labor to a thumping loss, then he will be out of the game and the Party will be able to move on. If he is replaced now, and – as seems inevitable – they lose anyway, then the Party will have two tarnished potential leaders: Shorten and the person who replaced him.
That’s why I believe replacing leaders mid-term is almost always a mistake: eg, Rudd with Gillard, Crean with Latham, Howard with Peacock in 1990, etc. One could even mount an argument (unless, unlike me, you believe the nonsense about Abbott being the “best ever Opposition leader”) that Turnbull might have actually beaten Gillard in 2010 (although, to be fair, the Libs didn’t vote Abbott in as leader because they thought he would be a winner: that contest was a rare case of a leadership battle over policy).
You can be pretty certain that many within Qld Labor wanted to replace Palaszczuk at various stages between 2010 and 2014: she was often seen as ” not cutting through”. The same was said about Daniel Andrews early on. But look what happened with them. (Not that I’m saying that Shorten will win.)
If there is clear evidence that a different leader would do better – arguably the case with Rudd in 2006 and clearly the case with Turnbull this year – then a change would be good.
That clear cut evidence does not exist with anyone vis-a-vis Shorten.
The Lorax
[Robotic, over-rehearsed presentation, union history, back room deals, and his role in knocking off Rudd and Gillard.]
Seen in a different light:
Robotic? That’s your personal prejudice.
Over-rehearsed? You sound like the Commish complaining about JG ‘knowing the answers’. How very suspicious.
Union history, back room deals? Try: able to negotiate with the bosses as well as talk to all levels in workforce.
Role in knocking off Rudd and Gillard? He wasn’t the main agent over Rudd, and you’re implying that he had all the Caucus under his thumb.
Get real. Your admiration of Coalition values is showing.
lizzie
It is a disgrace that action and the advice did not come out loud and strong many years earlier. The dangers of powerful carcinogens like nitrosamines has been known for at least 40-50 years.
I look forward to the accountant Barnyard explaining why the work by hordes of scientists over decades is wrong and his opinion correct. No doubt a variation of “My granny ate them all her life and lived to 100”
Both leaders have baggage. Neither are perfect. Both lead parties which have baggage and are not perfect.
Shorten may or may not be the best leader for the Opposition at this time. However, putting in a new leader now won’t change the likelihood of Labor winning the next election, because that’s not what makes the difference – an Opposition wins because the government fails, not because of their own brilliance or otherwise.
Putting in a new leader now risks prematurely burning a future talent for no clear gain. (And that was one of the unspoken tragedies of the Rudd/Gillard/Rudd era – Labor lost several MPs who were potential future leaders).
Better PPM might give some people a warm inner glow, but it doesn’t win elections.
So I suggest: Labor sticks with Shorten, Liberals stick with Turnbull, and what happens happens (and will not be changed by people on this blog screaming for change).
Lizzie
I would replace robotic with overly serious, although it isn’t easy to show a lighter side while trying to put forward a compelling reason as to why you should be PM.
Zoomster
Bingo
People are acting like the polls are showing 62-38 rather than 52-48
Here are the cartoons for today:
David Rowe on Jerry Hall’s new beau:
http://www.afr.com/content//afr/photogallery/brand/david-rowes-cartoons-20141024-11beym.html
Mark Knight and strange events in the racing industry:
http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/829ae85d0af976efcea229b61bdc5ed9?width=1024&api_key=zw4msefggf9wdvqswdfuqnr5
Lifters, leaners and double-dippers:
Our new PM, agile and nimble:
Parking charges at airports:
David Pope thinks the Metro may not be a wholly good thing:
Question time annoyances:
PS. If Labor wants to start thinking sensibly about leadership post-Shorten, and possibly regaining office in circa 2019, their highest priority right now should be finding a benchwarmer in the House of Reps who can be persuaded/forced to give up their seat for Wong.
Maybe she isn’t the answer to the Labor leadership problem. But, if she were in the House, she’d be seriously in the mix.
poroti
I suspect just living causes cancer, if only Scientist were as successful at finding cures as they are at claiming something causes cancer.
I think there might be a bit of misreporting, as I think I heard one of the researchers say that a certain amount per day could increase the risk by 18%.
I am guessing devon should no longer be a staple food of mine.
david
[DN I think it’s because Turnbull looks and acts like a PM. Something we sort of lost a while back.]
I’m just pointing out that what we’re witnessing at the moment is a contest of personality, not policy.
Overall, a good result for Labor. If you’d told the ALP hard-heads that the LNP would plateau out at about 52 (we will see) they would have taken that. At the moment, Liberal support is full of hope and expectations that the Merchant Banker will be able to control his party and shift policies. Voters haven’t really been listening when Malcolm basically said that nothing has changed. They still expect he needs a bit of time to deliver substantial change.
Malcolm, of course, being Malcolm, intends to bridge the expectations gap at the next election by going into waffle hyper-drive. After all, he is a merchant banker: he is good at selling shoddy products to people who don’t need them.
I wait with keen interest to see how the voters react.
And let us not forget that, by the next election:
1. People will (I assume) know that Tones will be returning to linger in the shadows (surely that will carve off 1 or 2 percentage points);
2. The economy will be catching a bad cold.
It’s game on, I would say.
Can someone tell me why the Nationals are so enthusiastic about direct action. I assume it’s because farmers get lots of lolly. Anyone know how much?
Do the Libs really have their own matched set of faceless men?
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/next-premiership-set-to-be-a-photios-finish/story-fni0cwl5-1227583061845
Lorax mate
The Liberal’s present lead is entirely built on Turnbull, who has failed as leader before and leads a less than united party.
He carries a huge weight of expectations, which are (for a variety of reasons) undeliverable.
Turnbull falls over, and so do the Liberals.
A lot of Turnbull’s popularity is based on assumptions that don’t hold up – that he objects in some way to the present Liberal party agenda, for example. There’s absolutely no evidence to support that.
This is a honeymoon period. Come back and whinge at us in a couple of months, when things have settled down a bit (one way or another).
At the moment, all bets are off.
(Qualifier: it is more likely than otherwise that the Liberals will win the next election. If they do, it says nothing about Shorten or his leadership. Everyone was expecting that they’d win the next election after the last election. The extraordinary badness of Abbott raised false expectations for Shorten and Labor, just as they have for Turnbull).
K17
$13.95 per tonne of CO2
What is also interesting is the double standard in the discussion of Shorten’s person and Turnbull’s. One seems to be fair game and the other not.
In my view, Tanya Plibersek is far more effective at speaking to the masses than Penny Wong, much as I admire her intellect and all-round abilities.
On Abbott’s holiday in France and the absence of Margie, I wouldn’t usually comment on such personal matters but they become rather relevant in terms of the very significant role Credlin played in Abbott’s downfall. The very long piece last week in the Oz by Pamela Williams detailing the coup contained lots of fairly subtle but pointed references alluding to this. For instance, she made much of the fact that John Howard paid particular tribute to Margie in his comments after Abbott was deposed. Lots of other references too, skiing holidays with Credlin but not Margie etc.
Costello telling us all how to fix the problem he created
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/my-reform-is-bigger-than-yours/story-fni0cwl5-1227583055053
Morning all.
I agree with meher baba that changing leaders would be silly for the opposition. It’s their first term in opposition and they’d be better served offering a genuine alternative to the regressive policies the govt is pushing.
In actual reality, what has the government changed?
It’s just the style and rhetoric so far but it makes a difference. Far less agression. At least talk about bipartisanship. Peace seems to have been declared in the War on Renewables. No more ‘death cult’ talk, weekly security ‘announcables’ and 12-flag press conferences, even in the face of the Parramatta shooting.
We have yet to see the substance, if any, behind the change in style.
K17 “Overall a good result for Labor”. The only sense in which it’s a good result for Labor is that it surely crystallises the need for leadership change sooner rather than later.
alias:
My own view is that the only people who really know what’s going down in the Abbotts’ marriage is the Abbotts. And even then there is no guarantee.
Frankly I’m shocked that Jerry Hall turned out not to have such good taste in men. Mick Jagger was one thing, but Rupert Murdoch?! What is she thinking?
mexicanbeemer
Sadly there will be sensationalist headlines but there are no ifs or buts about nitrosamines being carcinogens.
The scientists are not saying you cannot have any but the numbers make it a no brainer to reduce intake below a certain level.
As for a cure, yeah it would be great to find a cure but not getting it in the first place is a good idea.
Kevin
Thanks for this good analysis. There should have been at least a few sentences of this kind of reasoning in the Bowe article in Crikey yesterday. It read as a correlation piece – the kind of thing that political journalists routinely do, to the detriment of public understanding of political phenomena.
For each of the three instances of minority Labor governments that relied on Green votes in the parliament, there should be a discussion of the major policy debates, economic conditions, and political scandals that were affecting public opinion at the time. I like the way you address these other factors and explain why the nature of Labor-Greens collaboration had a significant influence on both parties’ public standing.