BludgerTrack: 50.6-49.4 to Labor

The BludgerTrack poll aggregate continued to inch its way in favour of Labor in the lead-up to Tuesday night’s budget.

There was a pre-budget lull in the federal polling storm this week, but the BludgerTrack aggregate has nonetheless had the regularly scheduled Roy Morgan and Essential Research results to play with. Both recorded next to no change on last time, and the changes on all indicators of voting intention have been barely measurable. Despite that, the seat projection has Labor up one in New South Wales, Tasmania and Western Australia (the results in the latter being particularly remarkable at present), but down two on the back of a very small voting intention shift in highly sensitive Queensland. Last week I reported that I was going to start counting Fairfax as a Liberal National Party seat, so today’s announcement by Clive Palmer that he would not be recontesting the seat was very timely. The result is that the Coalition is down one seat on last week rather than two, and “others” is now recorded as four seats rather than five. Nothing new this week in the way of leadership ratings.

bludgertrack-2016-05-05

Preselection news:

• Liberal MP Ann Sudmalis has had her preselection confirmed for her south coast New South Wales seat of Gilmore, after suggestions she faced a moderate-backed challenge arising from her perceived public criticism of the Baird government over council amalgamations. The Prime Minister had made it known that he did not wish for any move against Sudmalis to proceed, out of concern at factional tensions being stoked ahead of the election. Two state Liberals, Kiama MP Gareth Ward and Bega MP Andrew Constance, are reportedly eyeing the succession to Sudmalis in 2019. You can read a lot more about this electorate in yesterday’s Seat du jour.

• The Liberal Party’s trial preselection plebiscite of party members in Parramatta has been won by Michael Beckwith, development operations manager for Lend Lease. The other candidates were Jean Pierre Abood, a Parramatta councillor; Charles Camenzuli, a structural engineer and building consultant who ran in 2010; Maroun Draybi, a local solicitor and hardline conservative; and Felicity Finlay, a school teacher. You can view the recent Seat du jour entry on Parramatta here.

• The Liberals have preselected Yvonne Keane, deputy mayor of The Hills Shire and former television presenter, for the western Sydney seat of Greenway. Keane was also a preselection aspirant in 2013, but the numbers were sewn up by the power bloc of Blacktown councillor Jess Diaz on behalf of his son, Jaymes Diaz. Following a disastrous campaign, Diaz suffered a 2.1% swing in favour of Labor incumbent Michelle Rowland in this highly marginal seat. Step this way for today’s Seat du jour entry on the seat.

• The Nationals preselection to replacing the retiring John Cobb in Calare has been won by Andrew Gee, the state member for Orange, ahead of Orange councillor Scott Munro, Wellington councillor Alison Conn and Bathurst businessman Sam Farraway.

• John Hassell, Pingelly grain farmer and CBH Board director, is the Nationals candidate for the regional Western Australian seat of O’Connor, which was won for the party by Tony Crook from Liberal veteran Wilson Tuckey in 2010, then lost to Rick Wilson of the Liberals when Crook bowed out after a single term in 2013. Hassell has pledged to serve as an “independent WA National” if elected.

• The Canberra Times reports that the Liberals have endorsed candidates for the two seats in the Australian Capital Territory: Livestock and Bulk Carriers Association director Robert Gunning in Fenner, and lawyer Jessica Adelan-Langford in Canberra.

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.

1,178 comments on “BludgerTrack: 50.6-49.4 to Labor”

Comments Page 3 of 24
1 2 3 4 24
  1. Gee, the Guardian’s live blog does the SMH’s like a dinner. The SMH hasn’t even got onto the revelations of Rolex Tony (who I suspect is about to have a visit from the Plod)

  2. LU

    The rooftop PV capital was money well allocated. Fast take up of solar as a result.

    Same will apply to batteries. The outcome is worth the distortion in the market.

  3. triton

    “I’ve only flicked to Sky News twice in the past week or so. The first time Ross Cameron was in the middle of gushing over Donald Trump. The second time Mark Latham was doing the same thing. I was somewhat surprised both times. ”

    No surprisement on my part. The ‘sexist pig’ demographic is a huge part of Trump’s support base.

  4. In addition to WA, Qld also has a number of seats that could change hands.
    Malcolm will have his hands full just holding the line at a tie.
    The trend is once again my friend.

  5. LU
    Those of us South Australians that didnt or couldnt get solar before 2010, are now subsidising those that did for their locked in 44c/kW feed in tariff. An ongoing subsidy till 2030 ish.

    Anyone hooking up solar now only gets 6c from the retailer.

  6. It seems RW governments love “jobs and growth”.

    Not only George W Bush in 2003 (see Scott Bales at 11:01am) but also the Conservatives in Canada in 2012:

    The Jobs and Growth Act, 2012[2] (informally referred to as Bill C-45) is an Act of the Parliament of Canada. It was passed in December 2012 from the second omnibus bill introduced by the Conservative government to implement its 2012 budget,[3] following the passage of the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act in June 2012.[4] Both bills attracted controversy both for their size (>450 pages each) and for the breadth of provisions contained that were not fiscally related.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_and_Growth_Act

  7. Libertarian Unionist

    Do these numpties know who pays the fossil fuel companies? Energy users.

    Honestly, this is pure muppetry.

    Only a muppet would fail to see the logic of the Greens plan.
    If fossil fuel companies pass on the cost, then this further skews the market towards renewables and storage, which is the Greens intention. Storage adopters will save money, and the business model of the fossil fuel industry will be further curtailed.
    Another good plan would be to stop subsidising fossil fuel industries altogether.

  8. BK
    I am trying to remember the jibe about something trickling down a leg due to the workings of an invisible hand.
    You get the gist tho.

  9. I went looking (Google) for DiNatale’s budget in rely for the Greens, could only find PDF file and no youtube video or other video of the speech; not even on the Greens ‘site. Strange.

  10. Guardian live blog 2m ago
    11:17
    Show us the money, prime minister

    Down in the House, Labor is going to town on this morning’s Sky interview with the prime minister, which was, as they say in the classics, untidy.

    The shadow treasurer Chris Bowen has moved that the House notes that “in an extraordinary interview with David Speers on Sky News this morning”:

    The prime minister said that Treasury “has not identified the dollar cost” of the centrepiece of his budget, the 10-year tax cut for big business;
    But a moment later, the prime minister said Treasury had modelled the cost;
    Still later, the prime minister said the cost of his centrepiece 10-year tax cut for big business was outlined on page 3-11 of Budget Paper No. 1 despite the fact that page does not mention companies or corporations or small businesses even once; and
    The prime minister said the $55bn cost of his centrepiece 10-year tax cut for big business nominated by economist Chris Richardson “may well be right”.
    The motion condemns the prime minister ..

    For delivering a budget which is a fraud on the Australian people by having a centrepiece without a cost attached; and
    Calls on the prime minister to attend the House to finally come clean about the 10-year cost for the 10-year tax cut for big business.
    The government has gagged the motion. They are voting now

  11. I wonder if the “well known millionaire” that Abbott received a paper bag with $5k in it was actually Malcolm Turnbull.

    I guess we’ll never know (unless Abbott reveals that info ).

  12. Simon Katich

    Those of us South Australians that didnt or couldnt get solar before 2010, are now subsidising those that did for their locked in 44c/kW feed in tariff. An ongoing subsidy till 2030 ish.

    Anyone hooking up solar now only gets 6c from the retailer.

    As a South Australian with a large power bill and no solar as yet, I know where you are coming from, but disagree with the premise.

    That early subsidy has enabled penetration of PV which has upset the market and, with wind power, helped SA to achieve 50% power generation from renewable sources.
    The real villains in this equation are:
    1) The lousy 6c feed in tariff
    2) The massive increases in network charges due to gold plating of the grid due to privatisation by, you guessed it, a former liberal government.

    The mantra needs to be: Stop Subsiding Fossil Fuels and Pay Wholesale Market Rates for Feed In

  13. @ Dan – if it was, Abbott would still be PM and Turnbull would have resigned from the Liberal party the day before the partyroom ballot, and there would be an AFP investigation into Turnbull going on now.

    There’s only so long you should keep your powder dry. Eventually, you’ve gotta use it.

  14. Dan and Scott

    Re the ‘well-known’ millionaire, I think Abbott wants people to suspect it was Turnbull. Without any more specific hints, its a nasty piece of seeding doubt while looking perfectly pure at the same time. Classic Abbott nastiness. Abbott is at his most efficient when he has someone to hate and beat up.

  15. PaulBongiorno: So Treasury can cost the govt’s and Labor’s ten year tobacco tax but not the ten year company tax cut. Go figure.Taking voters for fools.

  16. @ Simon Katich which is more efficient is not as simple as most people think.

    Sure, the rated max power output of utility scale solar is higher than rooftop solar, $ being equivalent. This is due to economies of scale and locating the panels in a good spot for sun.

    On the flip side,

    An advantage of rooftop solar, particularly with battery storage, over building big power plants out whoop whoop, is that you reduce the need to invest in poles and wires.

    You reduce transmission losses as well, which can be very significant in Australia.

    You also unlock a huge amount of funding that isn’t available otherwise – people are happy to coinvest in solar panels on their roof, but wouldn’t be so willing to chip in towards 1/10000000 of a big solar plant far away.

    There’s advantages from having your solar located in your population centres. With load in Melbourne and generation in outback Vic, you end up with a problem if it is sunny and 43 C in Melbourne, but rainy and 28 C in the outback. With rooftop solar, the peaks in generation line up more closely to the peaks in demand.

    Ideally, we want lots of each. And the government is requiring network companies to look into “non-network solutions” (of which storage is a significant part), to encourage utility storage.

  17. Turnbull’s “interview” on Sky was a trainwreck, plane wreck and multi-car highway smash-up rolled into one. Labor HAS to use that in its election ads.

  18. An advantage of on site and off site storage of power generated and also power generation is that you have back up. Just as with computers you have on the computer a back up on site and a backup off site having on site power generation combined with network access you create ways to avoid blackouts.

    Not only does this make for more efficient use of power in a smart power network but it avoids blackouts while repairs from storm damage and the like happen.

    For consumers that will be a revelation.

  19. Simon

    Investing in utility scale PV more efficient and fair use of funds than rooftop solar?

    We need to do both. The power distribution model is complex, here are some examples:
    Utility scale PV may be more efficient, but there are major losses if it has to be transmitted over distance.
    Many sites such as mining, remote and bushfire prone areas, are better off without the grid dependence at all
    More and more power will be generated locally as PV costs drop and just about any surface can become a cheap PV cell

    There is another argument altogether, which is the same one that can be leveled against nuclear power generation, and that is centralised power generation is essentially undemocratic owing to the huge amounts of capital involved.
    If you generate your own power you control your own ‘power destiny’.

  20. Anyone else notice how Abbott always cries poormouth and has always done so throughout his whole political career as a well-paid politician, Minister and Prime Minister? Ever wondered why he had a Second Mortgage on his house even after all this? One day that story will be told.

  21. JimmyD,
    “Turnbull’s “interview” on Sky was a trainwreck, plane wreck and multi-car highway smash-up rolled into one”. In what way?

  22. Transcript of the Speers/Turnbull train wreck:

    SPEERS: So, the company tax plan: what is it going to cost over 10 years?

    TURNBULL: Well we have not – the Treasury has not identified the dollar cost of that particular item.

    SPEERS: What not?

    TURNBULL: Let me just go on. What is has does is set out a medium-term outlook in which, which takes account of the company tax cut and of course all the other tax arrangements. So, it takes a number of assumptions including the 10-year cuts to company tax which at the end of that period sees all companies paying 25% tax and as you can see from the budget papers is shows the budget returning to balance which is where is should be. Which is where we seek to bring it.

    SPEERS: What price? This cut to company tax. I mean surely you’ve modelled this, there’s need some consideration on what it costs?

    TURNBULL: The Treasury has modelled that.

    SPEERS: So, what’s the cost?

    TURNBULL: Well the Treasury has modelled that and set out in the budget, showing in the medium-term outcome.

    SPEERS: I’m asking about the 10-year – you put a 10-year plan in the budget, what’s the cost?

    TURNBULL: All of those costs are taken into account in the medium-term outlook and it’s set out.

    SPEERS: What is the cost?

    TURNBULL: Well, it’s set out there. You can see the outcome.

    SPEERS: I can’t see it in the budget?

    TURNBULL: You can.

    SPEERS: What the 10-year figure is.

    TURNBULL: You can see it there. The budget outcome, the balance over to 26-27 is set out there on page 3-11 on budget paper 1.

    SPEERS: And what’s the figure?

    TURNBULL: Well you can see it there. It shows the budget returning to balance.

    SPEERS: Doesn’t say what the cost is though, not the budget returning to balance. What’s the cost of your company tax plan?

    TURNBULL: The cost of the plan is set out in the medium-term outlook and shows the budget returning to balance.

    SPEERS: So what is it? I don’t understand what the cost is? What’s it going to cost taxpayers to cut the company tax rate to 25%?

    TURNBULL: Well, what it ensures is that we’ll have stronger jobs and growth. David, you’re asking for a …

    SPEERS: Dollar figure.

    TURNBULL: No, look lets be quite clear. What the Treasury does and every budget does this, is set out very detailed itemised assumptions over four years. Ok, that’s why they’re called the forward estimates. And then they make their assumptions going out for 10 years and they set out what they call the mediu- term outlook and that medium-term outlook takes into account assumptions which include the 10-year enterprise tax plan which will drive jobs and growth over those 10 years. And is clearly affordable, lives within our means.

    SPEERS: Well how do we know it’s affordable? How is it clearly affordable, what does it afford, what does it cost? It’s pretty simple question, prime minister.

    TURNBULL: David, what you’re asking is …

    SPEERS: The cost …

    TURNBULL: … for me to unpick every single line item of those assumptions going out to 26-27 and the budget papers do not do that –

    SPEERS: I’m not, I’m just asking what the overall cost is. This is not a difficult question.

    TURNBULL: David. David, I’m not going to add to the detail that is in the budget papers, and the budget papers set out.

    SPEERS: Then why put a 10-year plan in the budget papers? Why not just put the four-year plan in the budget papers?

    TURNBULL: Because what we, well, the budget papers set out a medium-term outlook and they do that every budget. And they make assumptions about tax rates, they make assumptions about GDP, they make assumptions about commodity prices. And of course, the further out they go, you know, the, the, there is a – the longer, further out you forecast, there is more uncertainty. One of the certain assumptions that is in the medium-term outlook is of course the policy which will be legislated to reduce company tax, down to 25% over 10 years.

    SPEERS: The economist Chris Richardson reckons it’s about $55bn …

    TURNBULL: Well look, he may well may be right. He may well be right. He may well be right in the dollars of 26-27. I mean, again, this is, you see. People can –

    SPEERS: Let’s talk about today’s dollars before people get too confused on, in factoring in inflation. But $55bn is about right?

    TURNBULL: No, I’m not. I don’t, look. What I’m saying to you is, we know what it will cost over the forward estimates, which is in excess of $5bn as Scott Morrison has said. And economists like Chris Richardson can make assumptions and they can, you know, work them out and they can forecast them just as the Treasury has done, but what the Treasury does, and this is, I’ve got to be very clear about this, they do this every year. We’re not doing anything differently. They provide very detailed, itemised assumptions over four years and then they say, ‘Our best forecast of what the budget is going to look like over the decade, over the medium-term outlook is as follows, and you can see there it sets out –

    SPEERS: But you’re the one who has made this 10-year commitment and you’ve put it in the budget –

    TURNBULL: Can I just say to you, I’m not confirming or commenting on Chris Richardson other than to say, he’s a former Treasury economist and no doubt you should heed what his advice is. It may or may not be correct.
    http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2016/may/05/tony-abbott-suggests-the-mining-industry-should-demonstrate-their-gratitude-to-ian-macfarlane-politics-live (posted at 11.25am)

    And the campaign hasn’t even begun. I predict that Bullturn will implode long before July 2 comes around.

    I think I’m about to OD on schadenfreude.

  23. [The cost advantage of utility-scale PV generation is unlikely to be reversed by differences in transmission, distribution, or ancillary services costs. The emissions and other environmental reductions of utility-scale PV are also anticipated to be roughly 1.5 times as large as for residential-scale PV.]
    http://brattle.com/system/news/pdf2s/000/000/901/original/Comparing_the_Costs_of_Utility-Scale_and_Residential-Scale_PV_-_Factsheet.pdf?1436800302

  24. BK – he continuously evaded (and not very well) what seemed like a very basic question: how much will his centrepiece corporate tax cut cost over the next ten years. It was Turnbull at his waffly best/worst. Honest to goodness, it could’ve been a Clark and Dawes sketch.

  25. SK

    Utility scale generation includes rooftop solar and really the electricity companies are ripping people off by making them pay the costs. They should be paid a rent for the space to put the panels instead.

    Of course you will never hear business people tell you that.

  26. SK

    What I am getting at is that with every surface available for power generation especially if the windows as power panels comes along a much more secure utility power generation capacity will exist. Every building with a suitable surface will be a power generator.

  27. Thanks Jimmy. Dan G posted a transcript. It really WAS a train wreck!
    How could they possibly not have seen this line of questioning coming?

  28. Turnbull: “The Treasury has not identified the dollar cost of that item(Company Tax Cuts)…but at the end of the 10 years all the costs are take into account in the medium term outlook and it shows the Budget returning to Balance.”

    But *crickets* about how much it will cost.

    Until David Speers stated that Chris Richardson has estimated it will cost ~$55Billion.
    Turnbull: “That may well be right.”

  29. C@tmomma – Speers did a phenomenal job. Labor just has to splice together Speers asking over and over again what the tax cut will cost and Turnbull trying to evade that question and they’ve got an election-winning ad. This interview confirms every negative impression of Turnbull out there as a waffler – not the mention that he came across as both tricky AND incompetent.

  30. Last week we had the 1 year old child investment home from Turnbull.

    This week that Treasury unable to cost tax cuts but it can do so with cigarette taxes.

    I wonder what he will put foot in mouth for next week?

  31. Storage adopters will save money

    And everyone else will pay.

    … and the business model of the fossil fuel industry will be further curtailed.

    Just bloody curtail them then! Like the Labor electricity ETS policy does.

    The Greens are trying to be too clever by half here.

  32. LU

    The problem is the power companies are not paying the owners of power storage enough for the electricity generated. We know they have gone out of their way to undercut the consumer becoming electricity generators. If owners of those panels could have the costs of installation come out in taxes we would see at least every business using depreciation to make power generation a profit part of their business.

  33. BK
    How could they possibly not have seen this line of questioning coming?

    Is it possible that Turnbull genuinely thought he didn’t need to be across the detail because he thought the media would be patting him on the back, or that he doesn’t want to say because it undermines his fairness argument? Either way, a very bad look.

Comments Page 3 of 24
1 2 3 4 24

Leave a Reply

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