BludgerTrack: 52.8-47.2 to Coalition

For the third week in a row, the BludgerTrack poll aggregate detects movement away from the Coalition.

The BludgerTrack poll aggregate this week mostly splits the difference between a strong result for the government from ReachTEL and a weak one from Ipsos, translating into a 0.3% shift to Labor on two-party preferred and a two-point change on the seat projection, with Labor picking up one each in New South Wales and Victoria. The Ipsos poll also furnished one set of leadership ratings for the week, the impact of which on the trend measures is fairly minor.

On top of that, I’ve got an avalanche of new material to treat you with this week, most of which has been hived off to a separate post dealing with preselection news. There are two further poll results I’ve so far neglected to cover:

• This week’s Essential Research moves a point in favour of the Coalition on two-party preferred, who now lead 52-48. The primary votes are Coalition 43% (steady), Labor 33% (down two) and Greens 11% (steady). Further questions find 28% reporting the Malcolm Turnbull prime ministership has been better than expected, 22% worse than expected, and 41% as expected; a very even divide on the issue of babies born to asylum seekers in Australia, with 39% wanting them sent to Nauru and 40% believing they should remain in Australia; 34% believing conditions for asylum seekers on Nauru and Manus Island are good, versus 40% for poor; and 64% disapproving of suggestions the administration and payment of Medicare, pharmaceutical and aged care benefits should be outsourced, with only 17% approving.

• The Galaxy Queensland poll that provided state results for the Courier-Mail on the weekend also had a federal voting intention component, which had the Coalition’s lead in Queensland at 57-43 (unchanged from the 2013 election), from primary votes of Coalition 49% (up 3.3% since the election), Labor 30% (up 0.2%), Greens 10% (up 3.8%) and Palmer United 1% (down 10.0%). The poll was conducted last Wednesday and Thursday from a sample of 869.

Other notable news:

• The federal redistribution process for the Australian Capital Territory was finalised last month, leaving undisturbed the draft proposal from September. The Fraser electorate, which covers the northern part of Canberra, is to be renamed Fenner, with the Canberra electorate continuing to account for the capital’s centre and south, along with the unpopulated areas of the territory’s south. The two seats are respectively held for Labor by Gai Brodtmann and Andrew Leigh. Around 10,000 voters are to be transferred from Fraser to Canberra, leaving Labor’s two-party margin in Fraser unchanged at 12.6%, while increasing the Canberra margin from 7.0% to 7.4%.

• The process for a redistribution of the Northern Territory and its two federal electorates has commenced, but with a final resolution for the process being scheduled for early next year, the new boundaries will not take effect at the next election.

• The Northern Territory parliament has voted to change the electoral system from compulsory to optional preferential voting, so that voters will be required to do no more than number a single box, as is the case at state elections in New South Wales and Queensland. The bill was passed with the support of cross-bench independents in the face of opposition from Labor.

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.

2,149 comments on “BludgerTrack: 52.8-47.2 to Coalition”

Comments Page 38 of 43
1 … 37 38 39 … 43

  4. ama_media: The AMAs policy is clear – those seeking asylum should have same health services as Australians #healthasylum #letthemstay @amapresident

  6. [1832
    ratsak

    …The interim supply bill has to be through both houses BEFORE Turnbull can call the election. If he goes to the election knowing he has no supply for July he will lose. So all Shorten has to say is we’ll consider it after the Budget in Reply (on the 12th) and Turnbull is snookered and made to look like an amateur.]

    The last time Turnbull’s standing depended on a deal with his opponents was in 2009, when both he and Rudd placed their fortunes in each others’ hands. Nick Minchin, running the numbers in the Senate, over-turned them both.

    Turnbull will be very wary of again placing his freedom to manouvre in the hands of his opponents and the Senate….at least, if he’s learned anything at all from the fate of Rudd, he will avoid this at all costs.

  7. guytaur@1850

    bemused

    I agree as well. Thats kind of off shore and on shore processing.

    Its certainly the most efficient and cheap way of dealing with the issue.
    Getting Indonesia to agree is the tough bit but I do not think its out of our ability as a country to get done.

    Indonesia does not want to be left with the problem. So it is imperative that we agree to take more than we return and offer inducements to Indonesia to stop or at least slow the rate of entry to Indonesia. There needs to be a net benefit to Indonesia.

  11. Re Guytaur @1850: Getting Indonesia to agree is the tough bit but I do not think its out of our ability as a country to get done.

    It is not something that can be done quickly or cheaply, but seems doable. Indonesia and other parties will want a quid pro quo. They have observed the desparation of both sides to address the problem over the years and will probably demand a high price. It will require a lot of hard work to get right. But that’s no excuse for our Government to behave immorally and likely illegally because it’s all too hard, which is what they have been doing when not trying to exploit the issue for political gain.

  12. Mind you since the carbon tax was abolished, lamb and other meat costs more. Yesterday my local butcher, bbq chops were $19.00 per kilo. They used to cost under $10.00 a kilo not so long ago!

    [Finnigans 天有道地有道人无道
    Finnigans 天有道地有道人无道 – ‏@Thefinnigans

    @Barnaby_Joyce warns ALP plans to wind back negative gearing could threaten the family home – wolf wolf you mean like your $100 leg of lamb]

  13. It’s pretty obvious that Turnbull cannot have an early election – a DD – before the budget. To do so would be to avoid the first responsibility of Government – to propose and prosecute budgets. He cannot have one after the budget either. The mechanics are far too risky.

    It follows we will have a normal half-Senate election in Spring. The most likely dates are in late September through to late October. My guess is 29 October.

  15. And just further on supply (and assuming my reading of the annual appropriations is right – and that seems to be supported by the government’s own website).

    It doesn’t help if the Departments have some surplus cash stashed away. Section 83 of the Constitution provides that no money shall be drawn from the Treasury of the Commonwealth except under an appropriation made by law. If the appropriations are only for spending up to Jun 30 then the money left over is returned to Consolidated Revenue and can only be spent if a new appropriation is passed by Parliament.

    The only issue that would leave me in any doubt about this is that the Appropriation Bills are repealed 1 year after the end of the financial year they apply to, so that might be an out (would need an expert to clarify that). But that still only works so long as there is still money left over from the amounts in the appropriations. That would contradict the Powers and Practices Worksheet I linked to earlier though, so I suspect not.

    Unless someone who really knows what they are talking about can show where I (and the Practice Infosheet) are wrong I think it’s fair to say that just calling a DD on May 11 for July is easier said than done.

  16. Re Briefly @1863: the mechanics of getting a DD in July look daunting, especially as this would need to include Senate voting reform. It would reek of desparation, no matter how much cover the Coalition get from the media.

    Of course, Christopher Pyne will screech that the Government is illegitimate if the election is held one day after the third anniversary of the 2013 election.

    October 29: that would be about as ‘late’ as the 2007 election, and no one made a fuss about that.

  17. [So ScoMo says, you keep your super (own money) and then you can believe you’re better off.
    http://www.9news.com.au/national/2016/02/21/08/58/govt-considering-super-opt-out-report … https://twitter.com/ScottMorrisonMP/status/699778154836045824 …]

    Not too sure that’s a winner. Compulsory super is pretty popular I would have thought so this looks a lot like moves to damage Medicare to me.

    I’m not sure a lot of young people working casually (many being students) are going to be jumping at the chance to vote Liberal because of this. Nor do I think many others would be so keen to make it more likely to have these people relying on the pension later in life instead of supported by their Super built up over decades.

  18. DeborahSnow: Doctors and nurses speaking out about what they witnessed on Nauru in defiance of gag orders – AMA conference sydney today #healthasylum

  19. Steve777@1861

    Re Guytaur @1850: Getting Indonesia to agree is the tough bit but I do not think its out of our ability as a country to get done.

    It is not something that can be done quickly or cheaply, but seems doable. Indonesia and other parties will want a quid pro quo. They have observed the desparation of both sides to address the problem over the years and will probably demand a high price. It will require a lot of hard work to get right. But that’s no excuse for our Government to behave immorally and likely illegally because it’s all too hard, which is what they have been doing when not trying to exploit the issue for political gain.

    Not sure about Joko Widodo, but his predecessor seemed to me to be dropping hints when he spoke of ‘taking the sugar off the table’.

  20. @1866 – I remember the howls of ‘Howard’s just delaying the inevitable’ in 2007. I don’t think they can justify going beyond the anniversary.

  22. Replacing compulsory super to low paid workers with cash payments is a backdoor way to end the contributions. In will mean that employers can pretend to give a one-off pay rise, but in a few years the net effect for most workers would be as if mandatory super were simply abolished. 7/11 would love it.

  23. [1864
    victoria

    briefly

    Me thinks Turnbull will want to go as quickly as practicable]

    The earliest date for a double dissolution was 2 February. He let that date – by far the most propitious one from his point of view – pass unnoticed.

    He can have a DD anytime from now until 11 May. But he won’t do this. Apart from anything, he has neither any policies nor a handy pretext with which to run a campaign.

    So he has to have a normal election. He’s as good as said this himself. He has said November would be “a little” late.

    An election in July or August would require a relatively early dissolution – probably too close to the budget to be workable. I think he will want to give himself the best opportunity for budget measures to be presented to the Senate and passed – to make the most use of all the advantages of incumbency. The longer he can go, the better for him. He will want to use the budget to hold and exercise the initiative…something now slipping away from him.

    He needs more time, not less. Labor made the error of bolting to elections in 2010 and 2013. Turnbull will not likely try the same flawed gambit.

  24. Ratsak, WWP and others – Bemused’s informant is probably right. Though an Appropriation Act is passed in a particular financial year it is a general approval of the spending of money and the money doesn’t have to be spent by the end of the financial year. The Approp Act no 1 2015-2016 (the one for the ordinary “annual” services of the government) does have a sunset section saying it is repealed at the start of 1 July 2018, so if any 2015-16 money was still left over by then it couldn’t be spent. See http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/num_act/aa120152016203/index.html

    The practical question is how quickly do departments spend the money. If they’ve been spending it too fast, under s 10 the Finance Minister can authorise additional spending up to at total of $295 mill. (This section, and only this section, applies only to spending in the current year.) If they blow even that, then they need a Supply Act. If Bemused’s informant is right, they seem to be spending within budget and there’s no prob till October. (If the gummint does need a Supply Bill that will tell us which departments have been overspending!)

    And pensions, etc, are safe – they’re paid under a permanent appropriation in s 1363 of the Soc Secdurity Act which says ” Payments of pensions, benefits and allowances under this Act must be
    made out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund, which is appropriated accordingly.” Of course the department would have to be able to pay the public servants who run the payment system but, as discussed above, that’s apparently safe till October.

  25. lizzie

    Great to see so many bludgers jumping into action on this story about baby Asha and acknowledging that you started it all off.

    It is times like this that we see the best of our country.

  28. If the LNP really want to develop the North, why not insist that ‘new settlers’ live there. The climate would suit many refugees from the tropics.

  35. And Lizzie you can take credit for reporting tweets. I have nothing to do with Twitter and but for you I wouldn’t have known anything of the #LadyCilento goings-on. You got DTT and me to go there, and maybe a few others. (And I stood about 80cm away from the Veronicas, and one of them smiled at me – sigh!)

  36. Pensions are totally safe. That’s appropriations bill No. 2. Those are appropriations for a purpose, not for annual departmental expenses.

    So the only question is does the ‘annual’ appropriations bill allow for expenditure after that year? The info sheet (and Antony Green in his earlier comments here) would appear to say not. Not much use calling it an annual appropriation and defining ‘current year’ to mean the relevant financial year if not.

    The fact the bill is self repealing after two years doesn’t of itself mean the appropriations are valid for two years. It could simply be a tidy up mechanism that stops old and irrelevant bills staying valid.

    Antony in a 2014 discussion of an early DD made these comments:

    [The term ‘supply’ has a specific meaning for the parliament, but in its common use means the main Appropriation Bills that sets out how much money has been set aside for the normal working of each department in the next 12 months.

    The current appropriation bills were introduced with the budget speech last Tuesday. They specify how much money each government department can spend between 1 July 2014 and 30 June 2015. These bills are in the process of passing the House, will soon go to the Senate, and have to be passed by by both houses before 30 June this year or government will cease to function on 1 July.

    That is why the blockage of the Appropriation bill cannot be a trigger for a double dissolution. As currently formulated, it is not possible for the Appropriation bills to be defeated and the parliament come back and debate them again in three months time. The government would have run out of money by then…

    A key point of difference between today and the Whitlam government is the timing of the budget. Today the budget is in May and the appropriation bills cover the whole of the next financial year. Until the mid-1980s the budget was in August, and what is more correctly known as a ‘supply’ bill was passed in May to authorize government expenditure between 1 July and 30 November, pending the passage of the budget.

    In 1974 it was the blockage of the interim supply bill that saw Gough Whitlam advise for a double dissolution based on six other pieces of legislation. Whitlam warned the Senate he would do this if it blocked supply, and the holding of the election was made easier as the election replaced an already announced separate half-Senate election…

    First, if the government chose to call an election of any sort, an interim supply bill would have to be passed allowing government to continue functioning from 1 July until a new parliament could convene.

    When the Hawke government announced its intention to call a double dissolution election for early July 1987, it had to continue with the sitting of parliament until supply had been passed to cover the period until after the election.]

    So I would think Antony’s thinking on if appropriation continues after Jun 30 corresponds to mine (it doesn’t).

  39. Sorry if I missed it being mentioned earlier but does anyone know who Barry Cassidy was alluding to when he mentioned the ALP having a couple of ‘show stopping’ high profile candidates lined up for the federal election?
    Cheers.

  42. Antony is a very good mathematician but he’s not a constitutional lawyer, Ratsak. “Ordinary annual services” just means routine government activities; there’s a built-in assumption that there’ll be an annual appropriation every year, but it’s not spelled out as compulsory. Gough Whitlam, who did know a lot about const law, even speculated that a newly-elected Parliament could pass a 3-year appropriation. In any case, none of this matters unless Malcolm II really wants to risk a DD, and nobody knows that.

  43. Stony Habbott

    No idea. But inexperienced celebrities/sportspeople are not necessarily good choices. Let’s hope better than that.

  44. [Antony is a very good mathematician but he’s not a constitutional lawyer, Ratsak. “Ordinary annual services” just means routine government activities; there’s a built-in assumption that there’ll be an annual appropriation every year, but it’s not spelled out as compulsory.]

    Hence my concession that I may be wrong. May I enquire as to your expertise on these matters?

  45. Lizzie and other PBers

    #letthemstay and #baby asha seemed to have struck a chord on Twitter trending worldwide

    I was getting up to 500 tweets, retweets each half hour my poor tablet had to be rested overnight as did I 😀 AND not a troll around

  46. “May I enquire as to your expertise on these matters?” Well, you tell me you real name Ratsak and I might tell you mine. But I attended the annual UNSW Constitutional Law Conference last Friday at the NSW Art Gallery, if that’s any help.

  48. [Unless someone who really knows what they are talking about can show where I (and the Practice Infosheet) are wrong I think it’s fair to say that just calling a DD on May 11 for July is easier said than done.]

    I think there is a distinction between announcing the election and doing the formalities. If they really want too, I’m sure they can and Labor would be suicidally stupid to not allow an interim measure to pass.

Comments Page 38 of 43
1 … 37 38 39 … 43

Leave a Reply

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