ReachTEL: 52-48 to Labor

Little change on voting intention in a ReachTEL poll that also covers Section 44, the burqa, drug testing of welfare recipients, and likelihood of participation in the same-sex marriage survey.

Sky News reports its latest monthly ReachTEL poll has Labor with a 52-48 lead on respondent-allocated preferences, up from 51-49 a month ago. The primary votes provided do not exclude the undecided, the number of which isn’t specified, but the numbers we have to work with for now are Coalition 32% (down one), Labor 34% (steady), Greens 9% (up one) and One Nation 10% (down one). There will have been a further forced response question for the undecided, but the numbers for this have been a bit elusive lately – I will hopefully be able to get hold of them tomorrow, which will then allow me to report definitive primary votes excluding the undecided, and also a two-party preferred result based on previous election preferences, which will be stronger for Labor than the headline result. The poll also records Malcolm Turnbull with a slender 52-48 lead over Bill Shorten as preferred prime minister.

Among the other questions posed were likelihood of participation in the same-sex marriage plebiscite-survey, which recorded results of 79% likely, 10% somewhat likely, 4% somewhat unlikely and 7% very unlikely, with the oldest cohort apparently the least likely to participate. Contrary to YouGov, the poll did not find strong support for those embroiled in the Section 44 saga standing down, with 39% saying they should and 50% saying they should not. A question on whether the burqa should be banned found 44% strong support, 13% support, 12% opposition and 19% strong opposition. For drug testing of welfare recipients, the results were 53% strong support, 15% support, 9% opposition and 11% strong opposition.

The poll was conducted yesterday, presumably from a sample of around 2300 (UPDATE: Make that 2832).

UPDATE: As related by GhostWhoVotes, the primary votes after exclusion of the undecided are Coalition 34.5% (down 2.7%), Labor 36.7% (up 1.6%), Greens 10.3% (up 1.5%) and One Nation 10.4% (down 1.3%). That would actually transfer into a blowout Labor lead of 54.5-45.5, based on 2016 preference flows. However, taken together with the YouGov results noted in the previous post, it does seem respondent-allocated preferences are proving considerably more favourable to the Coalition. This may suggest that a 50-50 split of One Nation preferences, as per the 2016 election, is unduly flattering to Labor, as most of the support One Nation has gained since the election has come from former Coalition voters.

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.

699 comments on “ReachTEL: 52-48 to Labor”

  1. Dodgy poll:

    Sky News Australia @SkyNewsAust
    ·
    5m
    #BREAKING : Sky News/ReachTELL poll shows 53% support for random drug testing for people on welfare while 11% are opposed

  2. “the oldest cohort apparently the least likely to participate”

    So that’s 3 majors all having published the same conclusion recently (and none publishing the opposite)

    Will it actually be true? Or is it a shy homophobe effect, where young people don’t want to admit that they probably won’t vote bother to vote yes, and old people don’t want to admit that they will definitely vote no.

  3. Not a good poll on the face of it for the Government.

    The extra questions seem to show quite conservative attitudes with the exception of the likely to vote in the plebiscite.

    So, it will be interesting when the raw numbers come out.

  4. VE

    Or is it a shy homophobe effect, where young people don’t want to admit that they probably won’t vote bother to vote yes, and old people don’t want to admit that they will definitely vote no.

    What you suggest is a logically solid.

  5. William,

    Tony Windsor’s submission had the “recommendation” that if Joyce was found ineligible a replacement should be decided by a recount of the original ballot.

    What flexibility does the Court have in deciding how a replacement is determined?

  6. 68% support drug testing government welfare recipients when 50% of households receive government welfare??

    I think this is a case of some welfare is more sacred that other welfare.

  7. CTar1 @ #5 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:32 pm

    VE

    Or is it a shy homophobe effect, where young people don’t want to admit that they probably won’t vote bother to vote yes, and old people don’t want to admit that they will definitely vote no.

    What you suggest is a logically solid.

    Voting against SSM does not make you a homphobe.

  8. Barney .. Antony Green just said it has never happened in Australia (that a voided HoR election has resulted in a recount rather than a by-election) however Antony said there was one British legal case where that did happen – one that Windsor’s lawyers are likely to cite in support of such an outcome.

  9. Teh Narrowing!

    Voters still view Malcolm Turnbull as a better prime minister than Bill Shorten, though the gap between the leaders has narrowed.

    The latest poll puts Mr Turnbull ahead of Mr Shorten 51.6 per cent to 48.4 per cent, with the 20 July poll split at 54.5 per cent to 45.5 per cent in the prime minister’s favour.

    So much for, ‘PPM is what allows the Coalition to keep on keeping on, despite being behind in the 2PP polling.’

  10. victoria @ #10 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:35 pm

    Boerwar/Gecko

    Much appreciated

    Hi Vic,

    Condolences for your loss.

    However, your comments earlier about him being a great person and a committed family man resonate with me.

    Life is a journey. We all know the destination. However, it’s whatytou do on taht journey that is important.

    Clearly your BIL is much loved by his family and respected by his broader friendship group.

    If we are all celebrated for these achievements, then the world is a better place.

  11. I honestly dont like the automatic recount argument from Windsor. I think a byelection is the only fair option. However if the original winning candidate fell foul of s44 they should not be allowed to stand at the byelection

  12. C@tmomma @ #13 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:39 pm

    Teh Narrowing!

    Voters still view Malcolm Turnbull as a better prime minister than Bill Shorten, though the gap between the leaders has narrowed.

    The latest poll puts Mr Turnbull ahead of Mr Shorten 51.6 per cent to 48.4 per cent, with the 20 July poll split at 54.5 per cent to 45.5 per cent in the prime minister’s favour.

    So much for, ‘PPM is what allows the Coalition to keep on keeping on, despite being behind in the 2PP polling.’

    I remmeber Shanahan going on and on and on about this metric before the 2007 election. It’s bulldust. It did not or would never save Howard

    The only one you look at is the primary and the TPP.

  13. Hanson looks like a moderate compared with the Australian population. I think she was just wanting it banned from parliament. As a country, we want it banned completely.
    Random drug testing looks a vote winner as well.

  14. GG,
    The only one you look at is the primary and the TPP.

    Of course that’s correct. However, now the Coalition don’t even have that leg to stand on as the figure is probably within the MOE to make them equal. : )

  15. Diogenes @ #17 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:47 pm

    Hanson looks like a moderate compared with the Australian population. I think she was just wanting it banned from parliament. As a country, we want it banned completely.
    Random drug testing looks a vote winner as well.

    Creating underclasses is not something I support.

    How much crime are you prepared to accept?

  16. Alias, last thread:

    Presumably Barnaby might be cross-examined about the reasonableness of his position that he had no clue he might be an NZ citizen. Counsel representing Windsor might reasonably wonder why the thought never traversed across the Barnaby mind as to whether his father’s place of birth might not just be relevant here. Also, Windsor’s team would no doubt make full use of the official NZ government web tool which takes about 90 seconds to give a crystal clear answer that Barnaby is indeed a Kiwi.

    The really interesting cross-examination of Barnaby would put to him his tv interviews AFTER the Greens self-outed. He should be asked why he mentioned his great grandmother being born in the same Tamworth hospital as him whilst failing to mention that his father was born in NZ.

    Whether such cross-examination will be permitted is uncertain as the Guardian reports Keifel as having said to Merkel “the relevance of a candidate’s “subjective” state of mind – whether they knew they were dual citizens – may not lend itself to useful cross-examination.”

    Keifel is of course correct that cross-examination of a subjective state of mind (did I believe at the time I nominated that I might have been a dual citizen) is fraught with difficulty. It is a strong reason why interpreting s.44 as requiring such an assessment should be rejected. After all in the memorable response of Christine Keller, any Parliamentarian actually seeking to assist a foreign country (the problem for which s.44 is the Constitutional solution) would say that – that they didn’t know -wouldn’t s/he?

  17. C@tmomma @ #18 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:50 pm

    GG,
    The only one you look at is the primary and the TPP.

    Of course that’s correct. However, now the Coalition don’t even have that leg to stand on as the figure is probably within the MOE to make them equal. : )

    if you think the Coalition is equal, then you don’t talk to enough people!

  18. This is why we need strong leadership:

    Eliot Higgins @EliotHiggins
    ·
    23m
    White Nationalists on 4chan start a fake social media campaign to smear #Antifa as promoting the targeting of white women for violence

  19. Greensborough Growler @ #21 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:52 pm

    C@tmomma @ #18 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:50 pm

    GG,
    The only one you look at is the primary and the TPP.

    Of course that’s correct. However, now the Coalition don’t even have that leg to stand on as the figure is probably within the MOE to make them equal. : )

    if you think the Coalition is equal, then you don’t talk to enough people!

    Okay, okay, pedantic dog! I meant that, as even the PPM can now be said to be equal within the MOE, those supporting the Coalition line that, even though the 2PP favours Labor the PPM is what keeps the Coalition in the game, they can no longer use that as a leg to stand on.

  20. [alias
    Barney .. Antony Green just said it has never happened in Australia (that a voided HoR election has resulted in a recount rather than a by-election) however Antony said there was one British legal case where that did happen – one that Windsor’s lawyers are likely to cite in support of such an outcome.
    ]

    Thanks alias, will have to try and chase that up.

  21. From last thread …

    grimace @ #944 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 2:03 pm

    P1 is in favour of a boycott, as is their right. Others don’t agree with P1. Various arguments have been made, remade and misrepresented. Complimentary character assessments have been exchanged. The process has been repeated ad nauseam.

    This is an excellent summary. Thank you. The main problem here seems to be that some posters here simply don’t regard as ‘legitimate’ any opinion that disagrees with their own.

  22. [Ides of March
    I honestly dont like the automatic recount argument from Windsor. I think a byelection is the only fair option. However if the original winning candidate fell foul of s44 they should not be allowed to stand at the byelection
    ]

    But then the candidate takes all the blame and the Party gets off scot-free.

  23. C@tmomma @ #26 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:59 pm

    Greensborough Growler @ #21 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:52 pm

    C@tmomma @ #18 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:50 pm

    GG,
    The only one you look at is the primary and the TPP.

    Of course that’s correct. However, now the Coalition don’t even have that leg to stand on as the figure is probably within the MOE to make them equal. : )

    if you think the Coalition is equal, then you don’t talk to enough people!

    Okay, okay, pedantic dog! I meant that, as even the PPM can now be said to be equal within the MOE, those supporting the Coalition line that, even though the 2PP favours Labor the PPM is what keeps the Coalition in the game, they can no longer use that as a leg to stand on.

    Popularity comes and goes.

    So the Rex’s of the world peeve you. But they have NFI. They are trollimg you.

    Soldier on. You’ve dealt with more important rubbish in your life.

  24. This is why we’re supposed to be a constitutional representative democracy, not an arbitrary direct one. Any time the majority believe in harming a minority or lessening their rights* the majority are wrong.

    It’s a shame that, as is, we and our politicians forget that frequently. It breaks my heart especially when self-described leftists, socialists and other people who believe in sticking up for the little guy forget this.

    Cooler heads and rational thinking, not raw populism and demagoguery need to prevail with issues like welfare etc.

    Also, doesn’t hurt to remember that scapegoating weaker groups like the poor, minorities, refugees etc. is often a tool of wealthier and more powerful people to distract from their greed and shadiness. Indeed, when Hanson did her burqa stunt, all I could think to myself was “I wonder what kind of money and financial advantage (aside from the standard remuneration for a senator) is she getting out of this stint in office, that we’re ignoring because we focus on stupid shit like this?”

    *(Don’t be smartarses and take that to absurd extremes with silly “Murderers are a minority, I suppose you think they should be protected” style comments. You know what I mean.)

  25. alias @ #11 Thursday, August 24th, 2017 – 4:35 pm

    Antony said there was one British legal case where that did happen – one that Windsor’s lawyers are likely to cite in support of such an outcome.

    Surely if the framers of the Constitution didn’t want foreign nationals sitting in Parliament it follows that they also don’t want foreign case law/decisions being cited in the Courts?

    I think they’ll have a hard time arguing that established local precedent should be changed based upon an overseas ruling.

  26. I was listening with great interest to the radio today on a story about the Barefoot College in India.
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/barefoot-college/8827590

    Then the news came on – Ausaid relying more on big multinationals to deliver its ‘aid’ programs.

    I know some of these companies. I know why they added IDA divisions (they call it a market) to their business. To them ‘big government contracts = profits’. Their glossy Development Aid brochures and the use of meaningless jargon and management speak makes me sick.

    Everyone who is independent in the field of Development Aid knows that the projects are best run and managed at the small scale, locally, with support of proper state governance (ie monitoring that there is no corruption) AND projects are selected independent of home country government interference. But Ausaid seems to be heading the other way on both fronts.

  27. And to my previous post, this is why I hate ongoing rhetoric about political elitists, intellectuals and, in extreme cases, “shadow government.” While I don’t want people excluded from our political processes because of lack of connections and certainly think the influence of the wealthy and powerful is too much at times, I’d prefer policy being influenced and driven by people who know what they’re talking about and listen to experts than those who just read polls or follow their feelings. We have enough of the latter category as is.

  28. Simon,

    Yes, that’s one of the problems with Government aid.

    Too often it’s used to allow Australian businesses to access to foreign markets.

  29. Gawd, and I struggle with how high the L-NP are in Essential and Newspoll (the most accurate at the last Federal election).

    One thing partisan me likes about Reachtel, is the way they deal with the undecided makes the PPM so close. Hardly a good number for the incumbent. What exactly do they do?

  30. Abbott sticks his head out again:

    Josh Taylor @joshgnosis
    ·
    14m
    Abbott too drunk to vote on GFC bailout.

    Abbott too drunk on power more likely!

  31. Barney

    Thats a fair point. Some significant fine should also be applied to the party for not checking. However the individual candidate still needs to have satisified the provisions themselves.

  32. BiGD
    Merging Ausaid with DFAT was just a joke. A joke on the poorest people in the world.

    I note that 20 million for “Administrative Support Services” on Nauru is classed as AID. Hmmmm.

  33. AR.. British legal precedent is cited every day of the week in every court across the country. Ever heard of Lord Denning?

    Windhover.. I’m no lawyer though I have spent quite a bit of time around the courts. You sound as though you might be a lawyer. If I were a High Court judge, though, I would relish the novelty of having a witness sworn every now and again. And surely, Canavan is an even riper candidate for cross-examination. There are actual questions of fact eg: Did your family never discuss your citizenship application when you sat around Sunday lunch for years after your mother made the application? That type of thing.

  34. In the Senate, you would generally be replacing a person with someone of the same party. In the HoR, it’s necessarily not the case. It would appear, though, that the remedy for a voided election is left to the discretion of the court.

  35. I think they’ll have a hard time arguing that established local precedent should be changed based upon an overseas ruling.

    Yeah. But where there is little local case law it can have weight. In State courts, judging State law, they regularly use other states rulings to assist where there is no or little local case law to guide them.

    As I am not a lawyer I may have muddled my way through that one.

  36. [Simon Katich
    BiGD
    Merging Ausaid with DFAT was just a joke. A joke on the poorest people in the world.

    I note that 20 million for “Administrative Support Services” on Nauru is classed as AID. Hmmmm.]

    With the current Government if it helps their political agenda then you argue a case for it being foreign aid. 🙂

Comments are closed.