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.
kakuru@2498: it was a typo: “these are deeply conservative people.”
Absolutely false. When lower income people pay house prices that include a massive capital gain, they are transferring wealth to people on higher incomes; when lower income people pay rent that is inflated because the rental market is overheated because so many people cannot afford the inflated house prices and are forced to rent, they are transferring wealth to higher income people. The current system involves massive upwards redistribution of wealth. That has to end. The current system causes inefficient allocation of capital, inefficient allocation of housing, and growing inequality of wealth (with all the attendant economic and social ills).
All selfie, no policy. Will Mal respond by getting his portrait done. Oops. Done that. Too fat and greedy.
https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedOzPol/status/706665877203079168
MB,
You might like to read this:
https://medium.com/@neweconomics/why-you-can-t-afford-a-home-in-the-uk-44347750646a#.itqms3z4f
It’s analysis of the UK system, which differs somewhat from ours. Nonetheless, it cuts to the heart of the wealth/surplus extraction mechanism that high property prices represent — that is, from relatively the poor to the rich.
Note that many of the piece’s arguments are made stronger by our negative gearing and CGT policies.
mehar baba
Surely 3 years as LOTO and 2 as PM gave Abbott enough income to be able to step down now.
guytaur
[Posted Monday, March 7, 2016 at 1:14 pm | PERMALINK
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”]
Dont understand the context
Scott Bales@2465
Of course it matters if al you want to do is nit-pick and find fault.
The fact remains that negative gearing and the CGT concession are major distorting factors in the economy and are causing demonstrable harm. Any step to reduce them is good.
And I am getting more and more incredulous at this blind faith in the ‘mystique of modelling’. It is time it was dispelled.
Modelling is useful when there is a body of historical data on which to build the model, but I question its value when there is a significant change in policy that will cause an inflection point. It then becomes much more dependent on assumptions that are made to model the change and those assumptions will differ vastly between those who favour the change and those who don’t.
I suspect it is often used to give an veneer of scientific detachment where the underlying assumptions are anything but.
[jenauthor@2482: “the majority of this new housing would be low to median cost housing, not from the upper level”
Why? ]
Because thats what people will build if they want to build something to rent out.
mb
[kakuru@2498: it was a typo: “these are deeply conservative people.”]
Still W.T.F. Is there an inference that deeply conservative people don’t have extramarital affairs?
I’m not buying into the Tony-Peta thing (I just don’t care). Just as a general principle.
“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.”
WeWantPaul 2496#
WeWantPaul problem is your blurring the lines between politcal philosophy and pragmatism for removing a Prime Minster. While I agree Abbott policies were terrible, they were largely made by Liberal party and it’s cabinet.
I wish people would not confuse the two because the fact is with had four Prime Minsters in four years. And some of it has been driven by people who are ambitious, self-interested, and largely opportunistic.
[Modelling is useful when there is a body of historical data on which to build the model, but I question its value when there is a significant change in policy that will cause an inflection point. It then becomes much more dependent on assumptions that are made to model the change and those assumptions will differ vastly between those who favour the change and those who don’t.]
Just put these types of guys in a situation where the modelling is going to have direct real world application and where it will be held against them professionally, it is a very funny experience.
Bernard Keane in today’s Crikey:
[Credlin’s failure, in fact, was not that she changed Abbott as PM, but that she failed to change him enough. His failure was rooted in his inability to understand that being prime minister involved far more than the relentless negativity that made him such a potent opposition leader. For Abbott, the 2013 election meant his elevation to the role of opposition leader-in-chief, tearing down what others — mostly Labor — had built and demonising whatever it suited him to oppose. But national leadership is far more than that. A good political leader also needs to be positive, to offer voters a sense of national vision. That’s why a PM needs attack dogs so that he or she can remain above the fray. Abbott was always his own best attack dog as opposition leader, but playing that role as prime minister rapidly undermined his standing with voters.
Time and again, Abbott had opportunities to display true, positive leadership — on MH17, on the Lindt cafe siege, when Rosie Batty became Australian of the Year and the national conversation turned to domestic violence. At times he seemed to understand that a gentler, less truculent tone made him more effective as leader. But the attack dog would always return, whether the target was Labor, Australia’s Muslim communities, or the ABC. That was Credlin’s failure, to the extent that it wasn’t Abbott’s; if she had succeeded there, all the alleged bullying and abuse and control freakery wouldn’t have mattered — in fact, probably would have been acknowledged as part of her effective management. Success has a way of glossing over people’s personal faults.
And oddly enough, the restoration of a much more traditional dynamic in the PMO hasn’t replaced dysfunction with good government. Turnbull’s chief of staff is his former communications secretary, Drew Clarke. It’s almost literally impossible to find a more contrasting figure to Credlin. But the government is scarcely performing better than Abbott’s. Just yesterday, we were treated to genuinely weird sight of Attorney-General George Brandis committing to a same-sex marriage plebiscite by the end of the year and, within hours, the PMO in effect rebuking him by saying it might not be this year at all. This is a government that seems to struggle with getting even the basics, like ensuring all ministers are across the key points of high-profile policies, right. And there’s not a leopard-print outfit in sight.]
[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.]
And no one, least of all Gillard, has ever claimed it was.
[WeWantPaul problem is your blurring the lines between politcal philosophy and pragmatism for removing a Prime Minster. While I agree Abbott policies were terrible, they were largely made by Liberal party and it’s cabinet.
I wish people would not confuse the two because the fact is with had four Prime Minsters in four years. And some of it has been driven by people who are ambitious, self-interested, and largely opportunistic.
]
I don’t think that is right, lets ignore the change from Rudd to Gillard, it has got a little focus already here, and the change from Rudd II to Abbott (achieved by the voters) you would have to think that the other two were poll driven, and the correct decision (and I’m ignoring what drove the bad polling too)
So there should be a welter of polling fodder over the next few days, with Newspoll and Morgan out tonight, the weekly Essential tomorrow, and presumably an Ipsos Fairfax this coming weekend.
What are the odds for an ALP lead on the 2PP for any of these, given the disastrously chaotic last week for the Coalition, and the high likelihood of the Abbott Insurgency dominating this week in politics?
Inga Ting @ingating 3m3 minutes ago
Calls for a permanent Aboriginal medical service in western Sydney as another one goes under http://beta.smh.com.au/national/health/calls-for-a-permanent-aboriginal-medical-service-in-western-sydney-as-another-one-goes-under-20160303-gn9jhc.html … @smh
Savva Book’s seven juiciest moments :
Oh …. and it was Joe that broke that marble table according to Savva
READ MORE :
http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/the-best-bits-from-niki-savvas-explosive-book-the-road-to-ruin-how-tony-abbott-and-peta-credlin-destroyed-their-own-government/news-story/25aad244814c0a38d8f0eaae87a0df27
What are the odds for an ALP lead on the 2PP for any of these, given the disastrously chaotic last week for the Coalition, and the high likelihood of the Abbott Insurgency dominating this week in politics?
Closer to 1 than 0.
Essential at least is a big chance because it’s big 2 pt move indicates last week’s same was already showing Labor in front.
David @ 2510
[your blurring the lines between politcal philosophy and pragmatism for removing a Prime Minster. While I agree Abbott policies were terrible, they were largely made by Liberal party and it’s cabinet.]
I’m commenting on my part, not WWP’s, but the simple fact is that Abbott and his government are the most incompetent, ignorant and unproductive government I have ever seen in this country.
Their policies might have been terrible, but that was not the problem. The problem was the quality of professionalism and leadership. As I said in an earlier post, it is stunning that any Prime Minister can accept being abused by their Chief of Staff in front of colleagues. At least Rudd was delivering the profanities, not receiving them!
[
kakuru
Posted Monday, March 7, 2016 at 1:39 pm | Permalink
mb
kakuru@2498: it was a typo: “these are deeply conservative people.”
Still W.T.F. Is there an inference that deeply conservative people don’t have extramarital affairs?
I’m not buying into the Tony-Peta thing (I just don’t care). Just as a general principle.
]
The US states with the highest rate of STD are in the Bible belt. All sins solve with confession I suppose; STD requires a trip to the doctor
Fess
bernard Keane is articulating precisely what i think. The Turnbull govt is even more dysfunctional than the Abbott one. Who are they going to blame now that Credlin can no longer be the scapegoat?
[But also underlying the affair claim is a sense that Abbott’s judgement was profoundly undermined because he was so entranced and besotted with his chief of staff. In this framing, Credlin, the statuesque, elegant woman with the leonine hair, emasculated Abbott, rendering this political titan who destroyed two Labor prime ministers suddenly feeble and incapable. It’s a familiar narrative, of course, one that goes back thousands of years. That they were both married to others adds a frisson of traditional values comeuppance — in melodrama, straying from the marital home must always be punished.
Never mind that Credlin was crucial to Abbott’s remarkable performance as opposition leader. Never mind that it was Abbott’s ministerial colleagues who repeatedly bungled and gaffed along with their leader — his senior colleagues and his treasurer, most of all. Credlin must be the first woman to not merely to drain a besotted male of his judgement and power, but to drain his colleagues as well.]
Puff – Bernard Keane making the same point. These elected blokes were too weak to stand up to an unelected staffer in PMO, albeit the top one.
The Conversation @ConversationEDU 6h6 hours ago
Sydney is at 28 days (and counting) over 26C. The previous record is 19 days. So what’s going on? http://theconversation.com/sydney-so-hot-right-now-whats-behind-the-citys-record-run-of-warm-weather-55756 …
Sorry, left the link off @2522
http://www.crikey.com.au/2016/03/07/keane-credlin-the-succubus-story-doesnt-explain-abbotts-failures/
[I’m commenting on my part, not WWP’s, but the simple fact is that Abbott and his government are the most incompetent, ignorant and unproductive government I have ever seen in this country. ]
without a doubt … by a long long way.
also as for the ego, these people have to be ruthless and have massive egos just to get preselection (on the whole you’d have a class of specially selected captains picks who got to skip this step and are more or less usually poorer for it), you are kidding yourself if you think you can take the ego and ruthlessness out of politics.
I think this wins the award for the silliest comment on PB for the year to date …
[ Were they actually in a relationship? I very much doubt it: these are deeply conservative people. ]
Shaun Marsh gone for 31 by the looks of it, very disappointing.
Crikey, now there are posters on here disputing the value of modelling in the case of a proposed major change to the taxation system with potentially massive implications for the pattern of future investment in the housing market, residential rents, the value of people’s savings in their homes, etc.
Need I remind you that all predictions of average global temperature rises and their likely impacts are based on modelling.
According to Brandis, any LNP confusion and discord over the SSM plebiscite is all in your imagination:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-07/timing-of-same-sex-marriage-vote-clear-ministers-say/7226016
meher baba @ 2409,
I think I know the answer to this. Can’t say of course, but I think you have hit the nail on the head there, mb.
wonder if Savva interested in writing a book about Turnbull’s attempt to bring down an elected govt ie Rudd/Swan with utegate.
Also what about a book on the Slipper conspiracy to bring down the speaker and the Gillard govt.
The most ‘deeply conservative’ members of the British Parliament always seem to be the ones wearing fishnets under their suits, hiring rent boys and being caught at bondage clubs.
Is Abbott still British?
[Crikey, now there are posters on here disputing the value of modelling in the case of a proposed major change to the taxation system with potentially massive implications for the pattern of future investment in the housing market, residential rents, the value of people’s savings in their homes, etc.]
No just gun for hire, lowbrow, headline generating publicity modelling, like we saw last week.
Modelling at its best (and predominantly outside economics which is a joke of a science) is a highly tuned balance of science and art.
From the ( Age) news out of Victoria it looks like the IPA is in full steam ahead mode. The top senat spot goes to the (male) IPA candidate despite two highy experienced and expected (female) candidates being preferred by the party.
I expect this pattern to be repeated across the LNP in all states. Malcolm will have no chance of reeling in the far right push for seats by the IPA. Expect the LNP to be a much more right wing creature in future than it is now. TA was just the beginning.
[Who are they going to blame now that Credlin can no longer be the scapegoat?]
And that has been my point in dismissing the affair allegations. Credlin kept Abbott in the game – barely. Abbott knew that; Credlin knew that. Their party was in total denial.
And Keane continues to peddle the crap that Abbott was an effective Opposition Leader. He, like his colleagues in the media, are also in denial. Abbott’s unfitness was there for all of us to see if we were looking. The ‘shit happens’ interview, the patently hypocritical opposition to the Malaysian people swap, the failure to hang around to answer media questions all pointed to a lack of fitness for the challenges of being PM. And not one of these was picked up by the press gallery, which was obsessed with the Gillard/Rudd ructions. The worst collective professional failure of journalists I have ever seen.
booleanbach
Yep. Yet Savva and her ilk are attempting to distract all and sundry by suggesting it was all Abbott and Credlin, and a very tiny amount of supporters who are making noises. Otherwise Turnbull and fhe rest of the party are a centrist progressive bunch. Pulhease!!!
PO@2526: “I think this wins the award for the silliest comment on PB for the year to date.”
Well, come on, out with it. What do you know differently? And please remember that this site is effectively a publication and there is potential for defamation actions against William as editor.
Tough Talk…
Guardian Australia @GuardianAus 2m2 minutes ago
North Korea threatens to reduce US and South Korea to ‘flames and ash’ http://trib.al/D6p34hK
victoria @ 2531,
I want to read the book about Abbott & Howard conspiring to bring down Pauline Hanson. So effective she ended up in jail!
booleanbach@2534: “I expect this pattern to be repeated across the LNP in all states. Malcolm will have no chance of reeling in the far right push for seats by the IPA. Expect the LNP to be a much more right wing creature in future than it is now. TA was just the beginning.”
The IPA has nothing to do with the far right of the Liberal Party. They are libertarians who have no truck with the sort of social conservatism favoured by Abbott, Abetz, Andrews et al.
James Paterson, Tim Wilson, Chris Berg, John Roskam et al are all inclined towards Turnbull’s world view: free market economics and individual liberty.
[Is Abbott still British?]
He said he’s not.
So yes he is.
[Who are they going to blame now that Credlin can no longer be the scapegoat?]
Abbott and his whiteanting and the behaviour of his supporters.
@ MB – the climate comparison is hardly valid.
The criticism of economic modelling is that no-one understand economics, we don’t have a scientific or mathematical ‘objective’ way to approach it. People approach economic modelling by picking a conclusion, and working backwards to find the assumptions they need to make so that that conclusion does come out.
Climate modelling is very different. We have a great understanding of how sunlight travels through various greenhouse gasses. We have a perfect understanding of where countries have stated they intend for their CO2e emissions to go. We have a set of objective best practice ways of modelling things such as thermohaline circulation and any improvements to these must meet some fairly objective criteria to be accepted. The majority of Climate Science takes place in Peer Reviewed Academic Journals, which provide quality control of the assumptions made.
Climate science is not a fit rebuttal to the claim that economic modelling is useless because most people beg the question with their assumptions.
[According to Brandis, any LNP confusion and discord over the SSM plebiscite is all in your imagination:]
Of course, it’s not his fault that we heard what he said not what he wanted us to hear.
It’s been a common theme for this government – from Abbott and Pyne trying to finagle their way out of their commitment to Gonski to Hockey telling us that poor people don’t drive cars much to now. Just because a couple of exponents of this absurdity have had their political comeuppance does not mean that this madness does not continue infect the government.
c@t
Yep. I left that one out!
Anyhoo. I am anxiously awaiting the next leak to damage the govt. Of course, Turnbull will
Point the finger at Abbott, cos we all know what a great guy Turnbull is!
‘Due to unforeseen circumstances good government has been indefinitely delayed. We apologise for the inconvenience. We will advise passengers of the estimated time for arrival of good government as soon as possible. Thank you again for flying Coalition’
meher baba @ 2537
You are the one making laughable assertions – I think the onus of proof falls on you.
[The Turnbull govt is even more dysfunctional than the Abbott one.]
That’s a bold statement.
[ The Turnbull govt is even more dysfunctional than the Abbott one.]
[That’s a bold statement. ]
But, arguably true. They have had an opportunity to do stuff, a glaringly obvious NEED to do stuff, and fluffed it because they simply cant get their act together.