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.
lizzie
3 kids= to many . Bloody hell a bit rough. I would have thought back then more was better. Wondered if some economic downturn had struck at the time but no the official number of people unemployed in 1959 was 21 !!!
WeWantPaul @1942
The assumption is that voters, due to not being a hivemind, would want their votes to go to a variety of different places depending on the individual. Some would prefer it want to a different micro party with a similar ideology. Some would want it to go to their preferred option out of the Coalition, Labor or the Greens. Some wouldn’t care as long as it doesn’t go to a major, and some don’t care at all. And some (I wouldn’t be surprised if its quite a lot of people, in fact, just going by conversions I’ve had with fairly apolitical friends about this), aren’t even aware that their preferences even get distributed, and assume voting 1 above the line is just that, a single vote for the party of their choice that then exhausts.
So, why not just let people choose without having to number 50-100 separate boxes, the majority of which being candidates and parties that they’ve never heard of and could not give a single shit about whether one is preferenced above the other. (And this is, IMO, another big advantage of the proposed system that doesn’t get mentioned much – those who still want to vote below the line can do so without wasting time deciding whether they should preference the candidates of “Uniting Australia” above or below those of the “21st Century Australia Party” or “Group U” or worrying that their vote will be informal because they accidentally wrote 46 twice. This could potentially make a substantial difference in cases where a major party puts a contentious candidate in the No. 1 spot on the ticket, like with Don Farrell and Louise Pratt.)
Additionally, its incorrect to claim GVTs only effect micro party voters. They effect voters of every party. Unless a candidate somehow happens to get the exact amount of votes required for a quota (or quotas), either they are eliminated from the count before getting a quota, and their preferences are distributed, or end up with a surplus, from which preference are distributed. Sure, you can make the (spurious, IMO) argument that most micro party voters just want to elect any of the micro party candidates, but I doubt that a lot of Labor parties would be happy with inadvertently electing a Family First candidate (which has, of course, happened in several notable occasions), nor would a lot of Coalition voters probably want their preferences going to, say, the Sex Party. Yes, you can look up where all the parties are directing their preferences, and you can vote below the line, but why force voters to do that when there’s a far simpler method available that achieves the same thing, one that both makes things easier for voters and for those counting the votes.
poroti
We just assumed that NZ had higher standards than Oz. Apparently 2 was the limit. I volunteered to stay in England but wasn’t allowed as I was a minor. The only other local family I knew about who also came to Oz was a welfare type with 13 children. Don’t know what happened to them!!
craigthomler: Dutton backs down on baby Asha, but still claims best interests of baby would have been to send her to Nauru #auspol https://t.co/OQzuKiiiMF
airbnb_au: Verushka has been busy hosting all sorts of fabulous folks at MG Fair Day, including local MP @tanya_plibersek https://t.co/IiHzaj2NTT
lizzie
NZ’s loss and Aus’s gain 🙂
You have an interesting point here. And it had occurred to me. It depends what body of voters you are talking about. On the main this discussion has been about the body of voters who try to vote for one micro party and then accidentally vote for another (perhaps politically incompatible) party.
There are a couple of reasons for this. But not a lot of consistency. Firstly the really small parties winning just feels wrong. I think a lot of very respected people have fallen into this trap. It feels wrong lets look at how it must be going wrong. They start at the wrong place and carry a whole of unhelpful assumptions into the analysis with them.
Noone would blink twice if the third liberal senator was elected without a single first preference vote. But a minor party person with 1000’s of first preference votes couldn’t possibly be who people meant to elect. You start with that assumption then you are going to go funny places.
I guess we are pretty lucky that most people have started with the assumption that OPV is the solution without even really bothering to work out if there is a real problem at all. And while intellectually it is very unsatisfying getting OPV of the back of this process, worse things could happen.
I’ll cling to that straw like a drowning man if I must 😉
The Federal Government currently requires super funds to protect the accounts of members with low balances by rebating fees charged to members with less than $1000 in their super.
From 1 July 2013, this requirement will no longer apply, and be able to rebate fees deducted from members’ accounts, even if the member’s balance is less than $1000.
Bring on the changes to the senate voting system – it is ridiculous that we could have had two senators elected last time on less than 1% of the primary vote (we had only because WA result was overturned)and Madigan in 2010 and Family First in 2004 were both elected with under 2%. And Xenophon was deprived of his running mate as well despite have 1.74 quotas. It is just purely and simply unrepresentative.
The other question relating to the microparties is how many members do they actually have? And how many double ups there are? The Liberal Democrats and Outdoor Recreation in NSW have the same postal address so it appears there is gaming of the system.
Confession time. Ever since I was first able to vote I have voted 1 Labor and 2 HEMP Party in the Senate, then proceeded to number every square below the line. I wanted my vote to be a distinctly personal expression of my democratic will. 🙂
People who defend the broken status quo Senate voting system seem to regard filling in dozens of boxes in numerical order in relation to people they’ve never heard of and have no opinion about as their version of a character-building exercise or an indicator of Spartan virtue, like swimming in the ocean in the dead of winter, or trampolining in a thunder storm while chanting Buddhist sutras. Unlike other people, however, they aren’t content to limit the test of character to themselves – they insist that everyone else do it too, and if other voters decline the test it is because they lack virtue, don’t deserve to control where their vote goes, and can be safely ignored when designing an electoral system. Convenience and maximising voter control are not criteria that interest them.
c@tmomma
I have always voted below the line – though when I got to about #50 last time I was regretting my decision! I soldiered on however.
blackburnpseph @ 1960,
‘ The Liberal Democrats and Outdoor Recreation in NSW have the same postal address so it appears there is gaming of the system.’
And I bet London to a brick that the ‘Outdoor Recreation’ they mean is Hunting with a gun. 🙁
I am not quite sure why there is not just ticket voting for the senate with one box for each ticket at the top. List the candidates names by all means. The whole above and below the line system does add confusion.
blackburnpseph,
As it’s only once every ~3 years so do I. 🙂
They are not Outdoor Recreation ‘Stop the Greens’ for nothing!
StrongUnionsStrongCountry
Is that date correct?
Statements by Qld Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk
CNN News
I have been musing about who the 2 *Star* candidates that Labor will announce for the upcoming election are and I am thinking one will be from the West to replace Melissa Parke in Fremantle, as Labor have one male, Tim Hammond in Perth and it seems a female will stand in Gary Gray’s old seat.
So who could it be?
Just a wild guess but could it be a retired Fremantle Docker? They are the down home team compared to the Swans.
Bill Shorten was only over in WA last week, so….
As far as the other *Star* candidate, I’m thinking Indigenous and maybe Adam Goodes or Stan Grant.
C@tmomma
Would it be awful of me to prefer Stan Grant?
The * candidate is not that guy from Gardening Australia? He was running for something for the ALP in Fremantle a few years back.
C@tmomma
I would be happy to have them both.
Can’t say that’s much of a surprise. His handling of the Ann Leahy matter earlier this week was appalling. Honestly, I’m still baffled that the LNP went back to him in the first place.
That said, the Queensland LNP doesn’t exactly boast much in the way of talent to replace him. Tim Nichols is probably the most obvious candidate, but you have to wonder how much the public will warm to the idea of Campbell Newman’s treasurer becoming Premier (though I suppose you can always count on voters having pretty short memories). Who else is there? Jarrod Bleijie? Fiona Simpson? Surely not Jeff Seeney again?
Neither stan grant not adam goodes are from WA and star or no star IT is hard to see the ALP parachuting into WA an interstate candidate.
I only found out today that Baby Asha is in hospital with burns suffered as a result of a cooking accident on Nauru. So of course it would be wrong to send a one year old burns victim back to an atoll in the middle of nowhere and without a proper Burns Unit.
There was a report last week of Jeff Seeney going federal in Wide Bay.
How is this even possible? A handful I can fathom, but 17?
Peter Bell perhaps?
blackburnpseph @ 1978,
‘ Neither stan grant not adam goodes are from WA and star or no star IT is hard to see the ALP parachuting into WA an interstate candidate.’
Sorry, I didn’t mean to imply AG or SG would be parachuted into Fremantle but that they might be an Eastern States star candidate, whilst maybe a local star from the Fremantle Dockers could be a possibility to take over from Melissa Parke.
1981
Most of them are investment properties and we have some wealthy MPs.
confessions
They didn’t state the number but Sydney radio was talking about this issue about fifteen minutes ago.
Josh Byrne.
MTBW@1975
I am not at all happy with the idea of celebrity candidates unless such candidates feel a sense of true vocation toward politics and are firm in their loyalty and convictions in support of the party.
They should also submit themselves to the pre-selection processes prescribed in the rules of the party. If they are truly worthy of selection, they will win.
Fulvio Sammut,
Are you over in WA?
Who is Peter Bell? I was thinking of Rove McManus’ cousin actually. 🙂
Coverage is interesting
The guardian: Quickly becoming the go-to paper for actual news; full text of speach:
http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/feb/21/prolonged-detention-is-state-sanctioned-child-abuse-says-head-of-doctors-group
The age: Quickly becoming the pop paper:
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/david-marr-and-gerard-henderson-get-heated-on-insiders-20160220-gmzfbg.
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peter-dutton-baby-asha-wont-be-sent-back-to-nauru-20160221-gmzjbv.html
THE HERALD SUN
One line
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/doctors-issue-demands-on-asylum-seekers/news-story/ec236eca52d0944aa981ae09bac58f21
bwmused
Agree!
confessions @ 1986,
‘ Josh Byrne.’
Wasn’t he supposed to be a bit of a tosser?
No offense intended. 🙂
Former captain of the Dockers, lawyer, radio personality, businessman, Korean mother American father, adopted by WA couple, all round clean cut nice guy, no known vices or skeletons in closet. Peter Bell.
Wouldn’t it be a novel (and nice) thing to be able to cast negative Senate votes for those candidates you wouldn’t like to see anywhere near the place!
BK
Now there’s an idea!
And yes, I am in WA, CatM.
Of course they’re investment properties! I don’t imagine for one second that a person has spread their residency around 17 different homes just for the sake of it!
C@t:
No clue about Byrne. My only exposure to him is through that gardening show.
I am sure you can harden your heart a little more and declare it acceptable.
Look at the comments under the age article; some have managed it.
http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/peter-dutton-baby-asha-wont-be-sent-back-to-nauru-20160221-gmzjbv.html
The record of ‘star’ candidates is not particularly encouraging. Some have done reasonably well (e.g. I would put Glen Lazarus in that category), some were failures (Cheryl Kernot as a Labor candidate), others didn’t do badly but went nowhere (Maxine McKew, John Alexander), while some good people were just not cut out for politics (Phil Koperberg, well respected head of NSW Emergency Services during the 1994 Bushfire emergency).
Any way, lets play the mugs’ game.
Tips for Newspoll tonight. Labor 50.01 – Coalition 49.99 TPP.
Just to drive ’em crazy.