BludgerTrack: 51.5-48.5 to Coalition

No signs of the trend away from the Coalition abating in the latest reading of the BludgerTrack poll aggregate, following a particularly weak result in this week’s Essential Research poll.

The only new poll this week was the regular result from Essential Research, but it was enough to contribute to another sizeable cut in the Coalition two-party lead for the fifth week in a row. Sharp-eyed observers will note that the state seat tallies now account for redistribution changes, which have added a seat in Western Australia and removed one in New South Wales. These changes have seen the abolition of a Labor-held seat in the Hunter region of New South Wales, and the creation of the notionally Liberal seat of Burt in Perth. However, the overall effect is favourable to Labor since three seats in New South Wales – Barton, Paterson and Dobell – have become notionally Labor on the new boundaries, with respective margins of 5.2%, 1.3% and 0.4%. The swing currently being in Labor’s favour, the model rates them a certainty in Barton and better than evens in Paterson and Dobell, and more likely than not to win to win Burt.

The upshot of all this is that BludgerTrack has the Coalition down three seats this week in New South Wales and steady everywhere else, whereas Labor is credited with two gains in New South Wales and one in Western Australia. Note that the national and state-level figures on the chart showing seat change since 2013 will no longer align, since the baseline for the national result is as per the election (Coalition 90, Labor 55), whereas those for the state numbers are post-redistribution (Coalition 27, Labor 20 in New South Wales; Coalition 13, Labor 3 in Western Australia). The post-redistribution margins are as determined by myself, following very similar methodology to Antony Green. A full accounting of the calculations can be found here for New South Wales, and here for Western Australia.

Other news:

• A ReachTEL poll of 712 respondents in New England, “obtained by Guardian Australia” (who commissioned it is not clear), suggests Barnaby Joyce would have a very serious fight on his hands if former member Tony Windsor sought to run again as an independent, which he is neithe ruling in or out. The numbers cited are 39.5% for Joyce, 32.2% for Windsor, 11.2% for Labor and 4.6% for the Greens, with 5.1% undecided.

• The mass exodus of Labor’s Western Australian federal MPs continued this week, with Senator Joe Bullock announcing his decision to retire in protest over the party’s support for same-sex marriage. Bill Shorten promptly announced that Bullock’s vacancy would be filled by Pat Dodson, a leader of the Yawuru people from Broome and former chair of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation. This scotched the ambitions of Louise Pratt, who was famously relegated to second position on the Labor ticket behind Bullock, then defeated at the April 2014 Senate election re-run following a collapse in Labor support. Many attributed this outcome to derogatory comments Bullock made about Pratt while speaking at a Christian function, which became public the day before the election.

• Labor has another indigenous parliamentarian lined up in the form of Linda Burney, who has held the seat of Canterbury in the New South Wales state parliament in 2003, and served as Deputy Opposition Leader since the defeat of 2011. Burney is running for preselection in Barton, which encompasses about half of her current electorate. The seat is currently held for the Liberals by Nick Varvaris, but Labor has been heavily favoured in the redistribution, which adds inner city territory around Marrickville and removes Liberal-voting Sans Souci. Burney has resigned as member for Canterbury to contest the preselection, which will result in a by-election.

• Mal Brough’s announcement that he will not seek another term has opened a Liberal National Party vacancy in his Sunshine Coast seat of Fisher. The party’s state executive had been withholding endorsement of Brough’s preselection pending the outcome of an Australian Federal Police investigation into his role in the leaking the diary of Peter Slipper, the then Speaker and his predecessor as member for Fisher. It was promptly suggested that Jarrod Bleijie, the controversial Newman government Attorney-General and member for the local electorate of Kawana, might be interested in the seat, but he has since ruled himself out. Amy Remeikis of Fairfax reports the seat might be of interest to James McGrath, who ran against Brough for the preselection in 2013 and has since found a place in the Senate.

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.

2,683 comments on “BludgerTrack: 51.5-48.5 to Coalition”

Comments Page 50 of 54
1 … 49 50 51 … 54

  1. [ Because a mob that comes up with ill-considered and unresearched economic and tax policy designed to meet political and ideological objectives ]

    As far as i can tell, Liberal tax policy is aimed to fund a small, insignificant tax cut in the run up to an election. Nothing more. That is all they have been consistent on so far. 🙁

    And Ergas is a twit who as far as i can see does nothing other than spruik Liberal / IPA lines. The male version of that odious Sloan.

  3. Lizzie

    It would not be in Abbott’s interests to see Turnbull elected in his own right. Everyone would then b saying that Turnbull has a mandate blah blah blah. Turnbull needs to be exposed before election, for Abbott to have his revenge

  5. Libs really love the IPA, don’t they.

    [‏@MarkDiStef
    James Paterson at 28 years old has been parachuted into the top spot on the Victorian senate ticket. Incredible. ]

  6. Turnbull has not only kept all of Abbott’s agenda, apart from knighthoods, he has added more of his own – the abolition of Safe Schools and climate science are just a start.

    I don’t think anyone will be duped into thinking Turnbull is any better than Abbott.

  7. Just one last thing on the Credlin-Abbott relationship.

    The fact that some/many of his colleagues thought they were having an affair – and that is why Abbott would not do anything about her exercise of power – is highly relevant as to their state of mind. Beyond that, of course, it is irrelevant because anyone aware of the way her office operated and the way Abbott let her would know that it was due to Abbott’s unfitness for office, not any sort of sexual dalliance.

    It is frightening to think his party was in such denial of reality that they thought sacking Credlin would make things right, rather than take away the only thing that kept Abbott’s Prime Ministership functioning at all.

  8. Kudos to Grattan for concentrating on the mess that is the LNP in her latest article for the conversation.

    My impression of various journo’s seems to be dictated by who the PM is. Grattan bored the crap out of me when Gillard was PM, but has been one of the best since Turnbull. I still have hope for Lenore Taylor, but she seems to have lost some of her critical faculties since Turnbull took over. Savva meanwhile, was hilarious when Abbott was PM (after Credlin tried to have her sacked), and still is… in a very petty way. And then there is Uhlmann, who since the fall of Abbott, is about the only one who has said Shorten is actually quite good at his job.

    I suppose it’s human, but they all have pre-determined positions, and use or ignore the political stories of the day to confirm their bias. Policy is some distant notion that might be good for framing their like/dislike, but that’s about it. The contorted leadership changes have made all this quite obvious. If it was about policy, Turnbull is no better than Abbott.

    I do confirmation bias as well, but I’m not paid to tell it like it is.

    Here are Fran and Grattan…
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/politics-with-michelle-grattan/7225332

  10. TPOF@2445: “Because a mob that comes up with ill-considered and unresearched economic and tax policy designed to meet political and ideological objectives finds it inconceivable that their opponents could come up with tax policies that are the antithesis in development and content.”

    You’ve lost me here. There is zero evidence of Labor having researched, or given detailed consideration (eg, through modelling) of its neg gearing/CGT policy. It derives from suggestions from the Grattan Institute and others, which are themselves based on attitudes rather than analysis.

    I rarely agree with anything Ergas writes, but his article today is pretty much spot on. Labor’s proposal, if implemented, is likely to have a raft of unintended consequences. In fact, all the consequences are unintended, because Labor struggles to explain what they are attempting to achieve with the policy: is it to bring down house prices, or increase revenue, or stimulate new construction?

    I won’t go on, as I don’t feel like arguing about this issue on PB any longer. I hope like hell that, if Labor does win government, Treasury will talk them out of this idea and push them in the direction of the British system of capping the proportion of their income each individual can reduce through any form of deductions. It appears that the Turnbull Government had looked seriously at this proposal, but have now backed off under pressure from Abbott et al. Which, if so, would be a great shame IMO.

  11. Vic @2444,

    Absolutely. I’ve been saying for days the biggest take out for me is that Turnbull’s only policy so far is a dirt-unit.

  12. The Liberal Party is partly / largely a creation of the IPA, which back in the 40s assembled it from the ruins of the United Australia Party.

  15. @ meher baba – the three impacts will be

    * Reduce the deficit
    * Contribute to stopping the transfer of money from the lower/middle classes to the rich.
    * Gradually deflate the housing bubble, making housing affordable for gen x/y/millenials, and preventing the negative consequences of a sudden burst of the bubble.

    Does it really matter which of these three is the ‘main reason’, and which are just added bonuses?

  18. Lizzie: “Things getting more exciting every day”. So Malcolm was right – there’s never been a more exciting time to be an Australian, especially an election-watching leftie. Though late 75 and early 83 were pretty good…

  19. At least, on my understanding, James Paterson is basically a moderate who would be more closely aligned to Turnbull than to the troglodytes of the far right. Although it’s sometimes a bit difficult to tell with the Victorian Liberal Party where, apart from the clearly right group around Kevin Andrews, there have always been shifting allegiances among sub-factions centred around Kroger, Costello, Kennett and others.

  21. And the IPA chap on the Victorian Senate ticket looks a little like Ian Thorpe. (“Not that there’s anything wrong with that…”)

  26. Scott Bales@2465. At the risk of getting sucked in

    1. Reduce the deficit.

    Not necessarily by much. Labor is claiming $32 billion over 10 years, but I would like to see detailed costings.

    2. Contribute to stopping the transfer of money from the lower/middle classes to the rich.

    The “lower classes” – if, by this, you mean people with incomes less than half of AWE – currently pay virtually no tax, and, on average, derive a rising proportion of their income from transfer payments largely funded by the middle classes (because there aren’t actually that many rich). Therefore, there currently isn’t any “transfer” from lower income people to the rich.

    In terms of “middle income earners” : Labor’s policy will hurt some and spare others. If Labor’s policy causes rents to rise at faster than CPI – which I believe any credible model would indicate – then many middle income earners will be adversely affected.

    Also, millions of middle income earners own, or are currently buying houses. Falling house prices will reduce the value of their savings, which won’t help them at all.

    * Gradually deflate the housing bubble, making housing affordable for gen x/y/millenials, and preventing the negative consequences of a sudden burst of the bubble.

    The idea that Labor’s policy will “gradually deflate the housing bubble” is an article of faith, which is not supported by a shred of evidence (eg, credible modelling). Labor is also predicting 25,000 new jobs in construction as a result of its policy: that would mean a major surge in the housing market, which could lead to a bigger bubble, and a harder crash, than we are currently experiencing.

  27. MB – If you can find bootlegs of Karajan live, many of them are spectacular. However, by the end of his career, particularly in the studio, he was killing the music with love. Bernstein did something similar, slowing up as if he just wouldn’t let the music go. Harnoncourt was revolutionary but not nearly as good a “musician” as them, IMHO.

  29. [Shorten just came closest ever to calling Turnbull a coward over SSM.]

    It is an image that leaders can’t recover from, and I don’t think there is all that much change Turnbull can escape it, he has to actually show leadership and not have it blowup in his face.

  31. So I wonder in 2010 if Abbott was managed in his negotiations with the Indies or if that was all his own work.

    Re Abbott’s behaviour in the leadup to an election, one bet is he will take the passive aggressive approach, perhaps not step over a line,or even leak (though that is in his DNA), but continually make unhelpful comment re tax and spending cuts, after all ‘this is his right as a former PM ‘

  32. [The idea that Labor’s policy will “gradually deflate the housing bubble” is an article of faith, which is not supported by a shred of evidence (eg, credible modelling). Labor is also predicting 25,000 new jobs in construction as a result of its policy: that would mean a major surge in the housing market, which could lead to a bigger bubble, and a harder crash, than we are currently experiencing.]

    Meher I think you’re being simplistic … or perhaps overthinking it.

    The surge in jobs come from construction of new housing (as you no doubt know but choose to ignore in your argument) and the majority of this new housing would be low to median cost housing, not from the upper level where the housing costs from existing dwellin

  33. John Reidy @2470: “He probably still things the BIS report is relevant.”

    Accurate prediction.

    Who knows, it might be relevant (despite the embarrassing typo on page one). I can’t say, because I still haven’t been able to get my hands on a copy so far.

    So far, it’s the only modelling undertaken in some years that looks at the potential impact on the housing market of changes to neg gearing. Even if it’s not very good, it’s all there is. Labor hasn’t produced any, other than claiming (untruthfully) that there has been “lots of modelling” in recent years.

  34. jenauthor@2482: “the majority of this new housing would be low to median cost housing, not from the upper level”

    Why?

  35. Watching Brandis bullshit his way through another press conference on ABC24.

    It occurs to me that under Liberal Party policy, only prejudiced bigots who want to block the freedom of others are entitled to exercise their conscience.

  36. 2/2 … gs is inflated by the position in inner suburbs/desirable suburbs.

    This would not be a bigger bubble because the price range would be affordable for those currently kept out.

    It would take pressure off the existing housing stock prices which WOULD slowly deflate the bubble and it would spread he wealth and investment across a wider range of owners/borrowers, which would be a much healthier housing market all around

  38. I’m acully tiring of people using words such as ‘chaos’ and the ‘government was failing to govern’ and all sorts of nonesense to justify removing first term Prime Minsters that has been largely poll driven.

    Truth is that removing a first term PM is amateurish, and alot of self interest is involved. From ambitious potential leaders to nervous backbenches that blink.

    Its no secret that Malcolm Turnbull always wanted the top job, and he used ‘economic leadership’ to remove Abbott. Since then he has literally done nothing. Julia Gillard said she was so insulted that Kevin Rudd sent out an adviser to test his numbers, but the truth is that really was a trivial thing at best and certainly not enough to plan a leadership coup.

    From dinners with staffers who alleged to fed Abbott from a fork, to Rudd complaining about not having a blow dryer. Its all trivial crap disguised to grasp at a couple of straws from people who are self-interested, ambitious, and disloyal.

  39. MB

    [Why?]

    Because you cannot build bulk new housing in Vaucluse/Potts Point etc. unless you knock down the PM’s house 🙂

    Bulk housing is currently being built in Sydney along the corridor of main roads where previous industrial/commercial premises has become unviable. These are mainly apartments and are much cheaper than a free standing dwelling.

    e.g. in my suburb, the median house price is $2M but median unit price (esp new units) is $500-600k. Do the maths

  41. Ryan Goss puts a good argument for politicians abandoning a Plebiscite on Capital Hill just now.

    If we ask voters directly on every issue then we don’t need politicians.

  43. Meher

    “Were they actually in a relationship? I very much doubt it: there are deeply conservative people.”

    Unbeleivable naivety.

  44. Wil_Anderson: Maybe Thorpey and his mate were just re-enacting scenes from Niki Savva’s book: “Ok Ian, you be Tony, I’ll be Peta. Here comes the train”

  45. @ MB – at the risk of actually debating the merits of a policy? That doesn’t seem like much of a risk.

    $32 billion is hardly a small amount of money. And looking at the amount earned “over the first 10 years” is not really a great comparison. Remember that this change only applies going forwards, with no retrospective changes. On day 1, the total amount being saved is $0, and it will be increasing for decades as more and more grandfathered properties are either sold or paid off.

    There is a transfer of money from the poor/median to the rich.

    http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2015/sep/10/australias-rich-are-getting-richer-everyone-else-is-stagnating

    Why would an increase in construction lead to the bubble getting worse? The bubble, is where people pay more $ than the house is ‘worth’, because they know that, later they can sell it to a bigger fool, who is going to pay more than the house is worth to sell it to a bigger fool later on (and so on…). The impacts are negative gearing and CGT discounts making this a viable strategy, nothing to do with supply or demand.

  46. [From dinners with staffers who alleged to fed Abbott from a fork, to Rudd complaining about not having a blow dryer. Its all trivial crap disguised to grasp at a couple of straws from people who are self-interested, ambitious, and disloyal.]

    Well David you make and interesting point, and I am of a view that parties should have to stick with winning leaders they took to an election, regardless, might focus the minds a bit better when the leadership ballots happen.

    But any suggestion that Abbott’s government wasn’t totally dysfunctional on every imaginable level, and the worst Government Australia has ever seen is absurd.

  47. [Why would an increase in construction lead to the bubble getting worse? The bubble, is where people pay more $ than the house is ‘worth’, because they know that, later they can sell it to a bigger fool, who is going to pay more than the house is worth to sell it to a bigger fool later on (and so on…). The impacts are negative gearing and CGT discounts making this a viable strategy, nothing to do with supply or demand.]

    Scott I know MB is not an idiot, but in relation to negative gearing he declared the yet to be released Coalition policy would be a lot better than the announced Labor policy. I don’t think there is much hope for anything but absurd advocacy from MB on this issue.

  48. [“Were they actually in a relationship? I very much doubt it: there are deeply conservative people.” ]

    W.T.F.

  49. Enough of neg gearing: back to Abbott and Credlin.

    I completely agree with TPOF, the problem all along was Abbott’s profound unsuitability for the job. I have watched his political career closely and he never had that much going for him.

    He is a reasonably good parliamentary performer. He is quick to get across his brief sufficiently to talk about a subject, but he has consistently struggled to gain complete mastery of any issue. He has always reminded me of a smart adolescent, the sort who often interrupts the teacher to say “I’ve got that” when they really haven’t got it.

    I don’t think he was really that crash hot at being LOTO: and a long way from being “the best LOTO ever” as many have claimed. For 3 of the 4 years when he was officially LOTO, Kevin Rudd was operating as the true LOTO. Then, for the last few months, he he was up against Kruddy at his very loopiest.

    (BTW, I have always believed that, far from saving the furniture, Rudd actually threw quite a few seats away in the lead-up to the 2013 election by his hyperactive ratbaggery. I think a more considered approach led by either Gillard or Rudd and focused on a fear campaign against Abbott a la Keating against Hewson in 1993 would have resulted in a far less comprehensive defeat.)

    People I know deep inside the Liberal Party machine were always really worried what Abbott PM would actually be like (similarly to how some people I know within Labor were pretty worried about Rudd leading up to the 2007 election). They saw Credlin very much as their insurance policy. She’s really extremely capable, albeit scary and quick-tempered.

    It’s a pity that, after the first challenge against Abbott, Loughnane and Credlin didn’t see the writing on the wall and try to transition Abbott out. Indeed, one got a bit of a sense that they were tentatively working towards boosting Morrison as a potential alternative.

    The real problem they faced – and one which I think is critically important and which it sounds as if Savva has not addressed in any detail – was Abbott’s need for money. It seems that this was so great that even the wonderful pay and conditions provided to the High Commissioner to London could not attract him away from Parliament. One wonders what might be driving this.

    Apropos of nothing, I have known people in high paid jobs who are effectively on the verge of bankruptcy, but who don’t want to declare themselves bankrupt because it would destroy their personal reputation and most likely their careers. And they are also reluctant to retire, because then they would have to take their superannuation, allowing their creditors to get their hands on it.

  50. Well, it all smacks of ‘blame the woman’ to me. Credlin was hired to do a job, manage Abbott.’ She did a good job, considering the material she had to work with. Maybe she did have to cutesy up to him a bit to assuage his machismo, as part of the strategy. A few giggles here, a pat on the shoulder there, a forkful of food, some google eyes, but that is all.

    Sometimes you have to calm the coach horse so you can attach the harness.

Comments Page 50 of 54
1 … 49 50 51 … 54

Leave a Reply

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