Galaxy: 54-46 to federal Coalition in Queensland

After a week spent splashing cash at marginal seats in South Australia and Tasmania, new polls arrive from Queensland and western Sydney to steady the Coalition’s nerves.

The Courier-Mail today brings the Coalition one of its most encouraging poll results in a while, crediting them with leads on federal voting intention in Queensland of 54-46 on two-party preferred, and 46% to 33% on the primary vote. This compares with 57.0-43.0 at the 2013 election, and primary votes of Coalition 45.7% and Labor 29.8%. The only seats a uniform swing of 3% would net for Labor would be the Rockhampton region seat of Capricornia (margin 0.8%), which Labor has only lost three times since 1961, and the northern Brisbane seat of Petrie (0.5%). The poll was conducted Tuesday and Wednesday evening from a sample of 1176.

Also from Galaxy, the Daily Telegraph has electorate-level polling showing the Liberals leading 54-46 in Lindsay and by unspecified amounts in Gilmore and Reid, with 50-50 results from Banks and Dobell and a 51-49 lead for Labor in Macarthur, the scene of last night’s leaders forum. More precise figures on that will be available at some point, hopefully soon. The polls were automated phone surveys of around 500 respondents per electorate.

I’m aware at least one other big set of regional polling that will be with us this evening, so stay tuned for that one. Other news:

• The small sample of attendees at last night’s leaders forum came down 42-29 in favour of Bill Shorten over Malcolm Turnbull.

• Family First Senator Bob Day’s constitutional challenge against Senate election reforms got short shrift from the High Court in yesterday’s judgement, which said in reference to the plaintiff’s submission: “None of the above arguments has any merit and each can be dealt with briefly.”

• The government has maintained its recently developed interest in South Australia with a visit to the state yesterday by the Prime Minister, in which he committed to funding half of an $85 million rail project connecting Flinders University to the central business district, with a scheduled completion in late 2018. This helpfully runs through the electorate of Boothby, to be vacated at the election by Liberal member Andrew Southcott.

• Labor and Tasmanian independent Andrew Wilkie have attacked the federal and Tasmanian state governments over $22 million in grants from the Tasmanian Jobs and Investment Fund that were announced this week. Most of the money had been freed up by the demise of a proposed tourism visitors centre at the Cadbury’s factory in the northern Hobart suburb of Claremont, in Wilkie’s seat of Denison, but the bulk of the new projects were in the three marginal Liberal seats in the state’s north. The Hobart Mercury reports that $6.29 million has gone to Lyons, $5.55 million to Bass and $3.59 million to Braddon, compared with $3.6 million in Denison and $2.91 million in Labor-held Franklin.

• Some anonymous public-spirited individuals have put together an outstanding interactive data visualisation site through which you can explore disclosures of political donations.

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.

571 comments on “Galaxy: 54-46 to federal Coalition in Queensland”

Comments Page 11 of 12
1 10 11 12
  1. I don’t sense a mood for change out there, that I felt in 2007 and 2013. Or maybe it’s just that people as yet aren’t fully engaged or interested in the election campaign.
    Yes, those of us who are political junkies or social media heads tend to obsess about it 24/7, but I doubt that most punters pay any more attention than a 5 second grab on the nightly news or a newspaper headline. This suits Team Turnball very well – they need voters to be totally apathetic and uninterested and not engaged in the issues.
    I’m totally sick of boat people and asylum seekers. If the next 7 weeks is still all about that issue, Labor’s got zero chance. That’s what Turnball and the Libs want very much.
    Shorten’s trying to discuss education, but alas stunts like today’s one just drown his message out. Labor perhaps next time need to screen the people attending a rally or a big function.

  2. Re Peter Wicks of WixxyLeaks – As Airlines pointed out….of course the point I was making was his anti-Greens diatribe can be dismissed as the ranting of a paid up member of the ALP -hardly the view of an unbiased bystander.

    I am a current member of the Labor Party and two unions, the MEAA and the USU

    was a quick cut and paste of point 6 from his background from:

    That’s right, as a proud unionist, one who worked for 2 years on the Deakin Your Rights at Work campaign, including being a member of a strategic planning team, I am anti-union.

    That’s right, as a Greens supporter, instead of campaigning for the Greens, I was part of a union grassroots campaign, essentially a defacto Labor campaign, makes me anti-union.

    The Greens are anti-union – patently absurd.

    While Gillard was talking about “needing a tough cop on the beat” during her first term, all the while, with the ABCC still in place, the Greens continued to advocate for the ABCC’s abolition.

    Here is the Greens Employment and Workplace relations policy:

    How can this policy be interpreted as anti-union and anti-worker?

    Adam Bandt worked as a public interest lawyer representing some of Melbourne’s lowest paid workers, including outworkers in the clothing industry.

    He has also represented many unions and worked on cases involving freedom of speech and implementation of international covenants into Australian law.

    Prior to his election to parliament, Bandt lived in Parkville and worked as an industrial, labour relations, and public interest lawyer, and was a partner at a major national law firm. He had articles published on links between anti-terror legislation and labour laws[5] and worked on issues facing outworkers in the textiles industry.[6]

    I could go on but you get the drift.


  3. Another point – remember social media is a huge echo chamber of lefties, because the Libs are universally despised on Twitter or Facebook or in here doesn’t mean they’re as unpopular in the general community.

  4. Briefly- (Bagdad Bob)
    WA may be looking good but 4 may be otimistic. 3 seems a good bet
    SA – can anyone predict SA – NXT may win seats, not sure about ALP
    Tas_ you are dreaming. For some reason Tas seems locked in to the Libs. It might change , but at this stage there is nothing to point to more than 1 seat gain in Tas
    Vic- Yes 2 seats is do-able – possibly even three
    NT – yes 1
    NSW – It is starting to look much better in NSW than it did a few weeks ago, but it is still early days. But 4 seats is possible, maybe more
    Qld- based on today’s polling only 2 seats would be won but I am optimistic for a few more. So let us agree on 4. However very big swings are needed to get a lot of seats (6% or more), and this is a big ask.

    So I make it 15 seats as likely wins. Good but not a majority.

    NSW remains the winld card. They are traditionally a Labor state, so there is a pretty good chance of a big swing back to ALP. I would be inerested in the rational comment from NSW posters.

  5. AB
    I agree. Howard’s biggest sin was adding to the AS mess; and that can only be sorted by bi-party support; there is nothing to gain trying to sheet blame home; there is enough to go around.

  6. Frednk the government position is that reducing company tax, and it isn’t just for the rich, will encourage investment and increase employment. However that is a social concept adopted by conservatives rather than an accepted economic theory.

  7. McDonald and Obeid are long gone. They were parasitic growths on the Labor movement, probably a better fit in the spivs’ party. They robbed NSW residents of the equivalent of about $14 per head.

    But neither attacked the poor, defunded health and education, started dismantling Medicare, get us into futile wars or dogwhistled to racists and bigots.

    Obeid and Mcdonald are irrelevant.

  8. davidwh
    You have described trickle down economics.
    No-one puts their hand up now: Turnbull is too late: but in it’s time, for supply side economic theory, look to the Chicago school of economics.

  9. N,

    Labor supporters are aggressively verballing Casey.

    Deliberately so. Albanese will be re-elected but he and his supporters are appearing strident and hysterical re the Greens so-called threat.


    I doubt the Casey video was leaked given it was on the Greens YouTube page. More likely the tell me crap newspaper was combing the sites looking for anything to make up crap about

    Exactly. But this scenario doesn’t fit with the clutching at straws tactics of some Laborites.

    It’s hilarious how some Laborites are supporting the DT on this issue when it’s often wall to wall whining about the Murdoch press and how it misrepresents the Labor ‘message’.

  10. Sadly, Labor in NSW is still on the nose. Federally that will cost them dearly.
    I say that as a Labor supporter.
    Labor in NSW is on the nose thanks to the efforts of Obeid, Macdonald et al.
    Not even Baird’s anti-democratic efforts to amalgamate NSW councils can ameliorate the foul stench left behind by Carr’s boys.
    Who is the NSW Labor leader? John Who? Bob Who? Bill Who? Luke Who?

  11. NSW – thoughts from a local.
    Baird is still way too popular here, and the media is dominated by the Daily Terror and 2GB – conservative mouthpieces.
    The State Opposition is useless, Luke Foley is ineffective as a media performer, and his shadow ministers are non-existant, with one or two exceptions.
    Plus, Turnball is the boy from Wentworth.
    Federal Labor at best, in my opinion, picks up Barton, Dobell, Patterson and one or two in Sydney’s West.
    Shorten needs 8 or 9 out of NSW………can’t see him getting that many, at this point.

  12. It’s hilarious how some Laborites are supporting the DT…

    Well, don’t include *me* in that, because I reckon it’s the Kiss Of Death.

  13. Fred

    Tell me why are the liberals proposing company tax cuts?

    1. They claim to believe that the problem of lack of demand will be solved by more investment

    Say’s law is the supply creates its own demand. It isn’t right, but is widely believed (including by the President of France, who seems to base his belief wholly on the fact Say was French).

    2. Either they don’t understand (which is more than possible) or they think that this investment need to come from “global capital” whose appetite is supposedly tied to the corps tax rate.

    Corps tax rates have little effect on local investors’ (including super funds) total returns due to dividend imputation.

    However, reductions in the corps rate will tend to mean firms retain and reinvest more funds (Australian firms’ % distributed as dividends is very high in comparison to international norms and this will thus fall). Hence the rate of “capital recycling” – where dividend payments from large firms are reinvested (often in smaller more promising firms). Initially the corps rate reduction is limited to smaller firms and thus reduces recycling from small to large whilst not affecting recycling from large to fall. This might be regarded as a good thing, but if so it’s then difficult to understand why it would be progressively extended to larger firms as a sort of self-undermining policy.

  14. A multinational company operating in Australia makes $100 million in profits in Australia, hides $50 million offshore and pays tax on the remaining $50 million @30%, $15 million.

    The company tax rate is cut to 27%. What do they do with the $1.5 million saved?
    1. Create one or two new jobs in Australia?
    2. Increase R&D funding
    3. Innovate
    4. Increase dividends, which mostly go offshore.
    5. Hire More tax accountants and lawyers to see if they can hide more of their income?

    Well, we don’t do research and innovation here, so not 2 or 3. Corporations will bypass the Australian Labor market if they possibly can, so not 1.

    When we fix things so they can’t hide a large part of their profits, maybe we could look at tax cuts.

  15. Wow so many defeatist people around here. No one has votes “locked in”. Bludgertrack is 50.3-49.7. Net approvals are still moving. Election campaigns are just starting.

    The eventual seats won will depend on ground campaign, door knocks, phone banks etc.
    Too early to make conclusions like “Tasmania is locked into Liberals etc”.

  16. My early predictions for Labor seat gains
    NSW – Barton, Patterson, Dobell, Eden Monaro, one out of Macarthur or Banks
    VIC – Status quo, although Deakin is a roughie
    QLD – Capricornia, Petrie, Brisbane.
    SA – Hindmarsh
    WA – Burt. If the unpopularity of Barnett is reflected federally, then Cowan, Swan, Hasluck come into play
    NT – Solomon
    Tassie – Lyons

  17. Frednk the government position is that reducing company tax, and it isn’t just for the rich, will encourage investment and increase employment. However that is a social concept adopted by conservatives rather than an accepted economic theory.

    Say’s Law – supply (generated by investment) creates its own demand – was more or less universally believed by economists prior to the experiment known as Great Depression.
    In any scientific discipline following the scientific method an experiment that disproved a theory would result in that theory being abandoned. Economics has its own methods however; in particular economists are affected by their desire to be members of the best country clubs.

  18. I think Labor will do a lot better in the NSW regions than in Sydney – perhaps picking up Page (North Coast), Eden-Monaro and/or Gilmore (both South Coast), Paterson (Hunter), and Dobell as well as an outside shot at Robertson (both Central Coast). C@Tmomma would know more about Robertson. My personal and entirely unprofessional opinion is that Gilmore and Robertson are at this stage still with the Libs, while Dobell is line-ball.

    Sydney is a major obstacle to Labor taking power. The only seat that’s a pretty sure win for Labor is Barton, and that’s primarily due to the very favourable redistribution.

    Of all the Sydney seats Macarthur seems to be the best shot given that the redistribution was favourable to Labor.

    Reid and Banks were once upon a time traditional Labor seats, but because of gentrification and massive house price growth, as well as having first-term sitting MPs, may be beyond Labor’s reach.

    Lindsay is anybody’s guess, but at this stage, still well entrenched with the Liberals.

    Bennelong and Macquarie are more than likely a bridge too far at this election.

  19. EG Theodure
    In Australia if you own a company (and I do and have) the way to reduce profits is to invest in the company; repairs 100% deductible; investment in equipment depreciation depends on the kit; labor a direct cost. If anything a reduction in tax would discourage that sort of behavior.

  20. EP @ 10.06

    I don’t sense a mood for change out there, that I felt in 2007 and 2013.

    I think that is true. The baseball bats were put away after Abbott got dumped. But I don’t think the corollary exists either – there is no real record in the current government that inspires uncommitted voters to vote for it.

    Both Turnbull and Shorten are not really what the public perceives them as. Election campaigns often reinforce existing prejudices and perceptions because, by and large, they are not far from reality.

    This time is different. Turnbull is not a great communicator, despite his reputation. He talks at too high a level, gets flustered easily and waffles and waffles and waffles. Shorten is not a grey back room hack who really can’t string many words together. On the contrary he is engaging, can be quite passionate and speaks pretty clearly.

    The government has a totally crap record, apart from stopping the boats. That could be a tie breaker if both parties are otherwise seen as pretty much the same stuff. But I think as the campaign progresses, the already clear policy distinctions between the two will come even more in focus – across Australia. Education, home affordability and health care affordability are really big sleeper issues. If Labor can show that the voters have a choice of imperceptible tax cuts for middle income earners and for businesses, and continuing huge tax subsidies for property investors, or else spending the money on health and education and create a level field in housing affordability, then it is a winner.

    Unlike any election I have seen before, this is one that is really open for either party. But so far every move the Coalition has done has been to satisfy the demands of the wealthy and business. And everything Labor has put out has been focussed on the issues of middle-class and lower middle class uncommitted voters.

    As I said before, boats can still be an issue. Labor can’t win on it, but if it can convince the voters that it is in lockstep with the government on turn-backs, etc, it can largely neutralise the arguments. And Labor does have the national conference motion behind it.

  21. “Sadly, Labor in NSW is still on the nose. Federally that will cost them dearly.
    I say that as a Labor supporter.
    Labor in NSW is on the nose thanks to the efforts of Obeid, Macdonald et al.
    Not even Baird’s anti-democratic efforts to amalgamate NSW councils can ameliorate the foul stench left behind by Carr’s boys.
    Who is the NSW Labor leader? John Who? Bob Who? Bill Who? Luke Who?”

    If that was case Labor would have done alot worse federally in NSW last federal election. And votes that have gone to the Greens that are disillusioned with state Labor have came back to Labor federally.

    NSW Labor state 2011 primary vote: 25.55% TPP: 35.78%

    NSW Labor federally 2014 primary vote: 34.52% TPP: 45.65%

  22. William (if you’re around) – are you still expecting to get the additional regional polling you mentioned tonight?

  23. FredNK
    See (for example):
    In particular:

    It’s well-known Australian companies pay out a high proportion of earnings as dividends. This is currently 75%, and it’s averaged around this since the late 1980s. Banks, telcos, consumer stocks and utilities are the big dividend payers. By contrast in the major global markets dividend payout ratios range from 31% in Japan to 49% in the UK.

    My statement (and the above) relates to what happens to earnings (retained versus distributed)

    Your statement relates to what happens to those earnings that are retained, and that chart gives cash held as a percentage of assets, not of earnings.

  24. There is a QLD state poll out, so far I’ve found one article, one op-ed, and one editorial – all talking up movement on leadership figures, and no mention of TPP, primaries, or voting intentions at all… (free?)
    Queensland voters embrace LNP’s new leader, Tim Nicholls (paywalled)
    Opinion: Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk at risk of becoming Labor liability as approval rating shrinks (paywalled)
    Editorial: Tim Nicholls presents a challenge for Queensland’s Labor Party

    I’m wait until after midnight to see if there is any other article with actual voting intention.

  25. News Corp specialises in spinning polling results. For what they are worth I would like to see Galaxy’s tables for those five NSW seats. Otherwise the only take is that Labor will struggle to gain Lindsay but the others are still in play.

  26. David above makes a reasonable point imho. NSW voters hit NSW Labor with the baseball bats they thoroughly deserved in 2011, giving them a pv of just over 25 percent. The Federal result in 2013 was nothing even close to being as bad. Labor will do ok in NSW; just how well though is hard to tell; even if we look at the poll from this morning, it looks like a number of NSW seats are on a knife edge and could go either way.

  27. I agree with Doyley about the mapped out campaign

    I think they are spending a week on each separate policy area to really hammer it home rather than a scattergun approach. Last week was education, and I don’t know anybody who didn’t get the message esp the CPG.

    This week it might be health (would be fortuitous since the AMA are starting their campaign tomorrow – though I doubt it’d be co-ordinated). I heard there’ll be a major ALP announcement tomorrow so that will start off ths issue with a bang.

    They’ll hit the economy after PEFO because they need to have ALL their numbers exact … and may use ec. policy thrust in the last week to finish campaign where most people will pay attention

    Just my humble opinion

  28. As I said this morning, the Lindsay pv results don’t look believable to me. Liberals down 2 and Labor down 5, in an electorate where PUP got 5 percent at the last election? Where have all the votes gone?

  29. Just for anyone interest here is a link to Anthony Green view on the Greens chances in House of Representatives seats. I am posting this get a realistic argument- sorry but some Greens are calling any seats like Fremantle as likely gains in the media. However, by saying that I’m not interested arguing getting into the Greens vs Labor debate.

    As a Labor supporter I’m more concerned by the polling in Queensland where elections are won and lossed with 30 seats in the state.

  30. I really do think people make sweeping statements about individual seats when they don’t know candidates. Reid is a distinct possibility (from on the ground) because the candidate is very much liked and respected in the Concord/5 Dock end of the electorate).

    And for you tragics, I reckon 1 in 100 would even remember who McDonald or Obeid are.

    We forget that just because we are paying attention it doesn’t mean the rest of the country is. They ain’t. And won’t until late June.

  31. Galaxy Research CEO David Briggs:

    “However the poll confirms most of these seats are definitely in play and with seven weeks to go to election day there is still a long way to go.”

  32. I’d focus on the betting markets, especially Sportsbet(the only one so far that has up odds for every seat in every state)
    Labor’s favourites to win 66 seats, including Eden Monaro and Deakin(yes, Deakin), and in WA Burt, Swan and Hasluck(believe it or not).
    The only Liberal held Western Suburbs of Sydney seat Labor are favourites to pick up is Macarthur.

  33. Reid is one I think might be a smokie, due to the quality of the ALP candidate, the now ex Mayor of Canada Bay Council. Yes, the council amalgamations thing might impact here, as does the West Connexs Road Project, which isn’t popular in parts of the electorate.
    Laundy’s going to need a big vote in the Western suburbs part of the electorate to retain it

  34. [5. Hire More tax accountants and lawyers to see if they can hide more of their income?]

    What a great idea, I massive uptick in demand and spiralling wages would be very welcome in this hard done by sector.
    [I’d focus on the betting markets]
    Interesting advice, it seems very much to be a trailing indicator to me, well behind the polls, and they are a trailing indicator.

  35. For mine, I think the driver of economic growth is investment that improves both real wages and the returns derived from the existing capital stock (also to be thought of as improved returns to scale). Higher real wages add to the demand-potential of the household sector, effectively cycling higher real wages into increased output and employment. If we also add to the returns derived from the capital stock (defined most broadly) then we will attract additions to the stock, permitting further improvements in real wages.

    This process is, by now we can see, not autonomous. The market, by itself, does not necessarily allocate investment to loci where these conditions – improvements in real wages and improved returns to scale – may apply. Since we can observe persistent, endemic, pervasive failure of the private sector to invest appropriately – instead, the private sector chooses to hoard capital in financial instruments of various kinds – the public sector has to lead investment cycles. Public investment, of course, will lead private investment and public policy can also be used to “force” private investment, or, at least, to “repress” hoarding.

    It’s also axiomatic that every dollar of income we receive is a product of investment undertaken in the past in either this economy or in the economies of our trading partners. So, despite the errors of Say’s Law, we must look to investment as the means to create the incomes of the future. It is by managing both investment and demand policies that we can drive self-sustaining growth.

  36. evan parsons @ #541 Saturday, May 14, 2016 at 11:45 pm

    I’d focus on the betting markets, especially Sportsbet(the only one so far that has up odds for every seat in every state)
    Labor’s favourites to win 66 seats, including Eden Monaro and Deakin(yes, Deakin), and in WA Burt, Swan and Hasluck(believe it or not).
    The only Liberal held Western Suburbs of Sydney seat Labor are favourites to pick up is Macarthur.

    Maybe I have missed a sudden change somewhere but I make it 68 seats where Labor is in front on Sportsbet. There are also another 13 seats where Labor is being ‘kept safe’ in bookie parlance -i.e. now into $2.50 or less. That seat betting spread is not dissimilar to 2007. There has been a big swing back to Labor in the last 3-4 months. I think it is too early to give up on there being a further 1 to 1.5% during the campaign.

  37. Briefly

    Economic growth is associated with higher real wages, and sometimes driven by same; noted communists such as Henry Ford and Robert Bosch knew this of course, but today’s communists appear not to.

    Now, where does growth come from? The “sources of growth” calculation (Solow etc.) shows that it mostly comes from technical progress rather than from inputs (direct investment and labour).

    Now, where does technical progress come from (including both invention and business adoption aka innovation)?

  38. This really does sound like blarney to me:

    Why Malcolm Turnbull will win the election
    The marathon election campaign is now well underway and things are neck-and-neck. At least, that’s the story if you take conventional opinion polls that measure voting intentions as your guide – the Fairfax-Ipsos survey released last Monday showed the Coalition and Labor locked at 50-50 after taking account of which party those polled would preference.

    But it’s a different story when you ask who people expect to win, rather than who they intend to vote for. When the Fairfax-Ipsos survey put that question to voters, 53 per cent said the Coalition, 28 per cent said Labor and 22 per cent did not give an opinion. An Essential poll asking a similar question late last month found 42 per cent thought a Coalition victory was mostly likely, while 28 per cent opted for a Labor win and 29 per cent did not give an opinion.

    Those results are good news for Malcolm Turnbull because researchers have discovered voter predictions about elections tend to be a more accurate guide to the result than asking who they will vote for.

    So why is asking people the question “who will win?” a more powerful predictors of election outcomes that asking “who will you vote for?”
    The PM has a fighting chance, according to polls of expectations.

    The PM has a fighting chance, according to polls of expectations. Photo: Andrew Meares
    The researchers argue it is because asking voters for a prediction has the effect of greatly broadening the sample.

    It allows survey respondents to consider not only their own views but also the attitudes of those around them. It is akin to taking “a personal poll of approximately 20 friends, family, and co-workers”

    Read more:

    They expected Campbell Newman to win too. And Hewson in 1993. And Howard in 2001.

Comments Page 11 of 12
1 10 11 12

Leave a Reply

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