BludgerTrack: 53.2-46.8 to Labor

As chaos mounts in Canberra, the situation on the polling front remains eerily quiet.

The recent action and excitement in federal politics continues to make no impression on the polls. This week’s reading of the BludgerTrack aggregate nudges very slightly to the Coalition on two-party preferred, but the vagaries of state breakdowns cause Labor to pick up two on the seat projection, with a gain apiece in New South Wales and Victoria. The only new addition this week is the regular Essential Research result, which provided no new data on leadership ratings. Full results on the sidebar.

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.

1,510 comments on “BludgerTrack: 53.2-46.8 to Labor”

Comments Page 2 of 31
1 2 3 31
  1. c@t

    The gall of Barnaby to actually whinge instead of being embarrassed that he is costing us the taxpayer money for a by election in which he is standing again. It is not as if he resigned and is giving someone else the position. What a pathetic excuse of a human being. And shame on the Frickin ABC for boosting him instead of admonishing his conduct

  2. jenauthor, Bob Day, Ludlam and Waters resigned too and were all still referred. The difference between the House and the Senate is the method of replacement. For the House, the method is the same – a by-election; so a reference probably isn’t necessary.

    For the Senate, a resignation causes a casual vacancy, to be filled by a joint sitting. The replacement can be any choice of the original party. A disqualification is filled by a recount of the ballots cast at the 2016 election. If Parry were to be replaced as a casual vacancy, the replacement senator could be challenged on the basis that it wasn’t a casual vacancy to begin with.

    There will be almost certainly be a referral to the High Court next week. I suppose an alternative would just be the Senate declaring that Parry was invalidly elected and ordering a recount, but I don’t think that’s likely.

  3. Ludlam and Waters both resigned and we’re both referred to the high court to decide how the replacement would be chosen.

  4. Lizzie

    Good morning.

    I am reloading my spare computer with stock standard Windows 10 today. Between tasks I will be doing mowing and inspecting the daisies and other flora.
    In the meanwhile:- bemused left a message for you yesterday evening regarding C+.

    Is C+ working for you:?:

    AR chimed in with pertinent information regarding his C+.
    To wit:- Make sure that C+ has “Override HTML comments” ticked as well as “Recent Comments First”.

    You will be aware that for C+ to work properly you will need to be logged on. I don’t mean to lecture so please be gentle with me.

    We now go boldly where we have often been before – to start mower.

    💮🌺🌼 😎

  5. Yes, Greg’s report was all about trade and international relations: Malcolm just simply governing, far above the squabbling riff-raff, they arguing tedious points of constitutional law, bickering amongst themselves as to whether his beloved Liberal party is more “United Nations” than the – you know – United Nations.

    You win some. You lose some.

    For every Ozemail there are a dozen permafrost ridden Siberian gold mines, state income tax brain farts, belly-up double dissolutions, NBN train-wrecks, and $1.7 million investments to pay your own party to be your friends. Yep, investment is certainly a big boys’ game of Snakes and Ladders. One minute you’re on a surefire winner, the next it’s all turned to custard. Just ask Michaelia Cash, or Godwin Grech (if you can find either of them).

    So nice for Mr Jennet to remind us of the more noble things in life, the real reason our PM is where he is, while we can but stand by and watch in awe at his magnificence.

  6. “I believe the AEC has already done recounts in QLD and TAS?”

    It has done recounts in WA, Queensland and New South Wales for replacements for Ludlam, Waters, Roberts and Nash respectively. The High Court will meet today to declare new senators elected, barring any challenge. We’ll get at least two declarations today, with the slight possibility of challenges to Hughes and Bartlett.

  7. Itep

    My apologies. I was going off Antony Green. I guess he is referring to Graham Bowland’s simulations????

    (apparently Parry being booted unelects McKim while Parry and Lambie being booted elects McKim)

  8. KayJay

    Hi. 🙂

    All restored now, thanks to you and Bemused, and AR of course.

    The extension C+ was lying to me. Said it was installed when it had become useless.
    So a bit of deletion and reinstallation and I’m back to normal.

  9. Oh yeah, the simulations have been conducted too :). And yes, that’s true. Lambie being booted also changes the order of senators elected more substantially, which has potential flow-on consequences for first and second class senators.

  10. White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller has been interviewed as part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe, according to sources familiar with the investigation.

    The interview brings the special counsel investigation into President Donald Trump’s inner circle in the White House. Miller is the highest-level aide still working at the White House known to have talked to investigators.
    Miller’s role in the firing of FBI Director James Comey was among the topics discussed during the interview as part of the probe into possible obstruction of justice, according to one of the sources.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/09/politics/stephen-miller-interviewed-special-counsel-russia-investigation/index.html

  11. Bushfire Bill (Posted Anonymously)
    Friday, November 10th, 2017 – 8:59 am
    Comment #57

    ———————————————————–

    “Noble” may be a buzzword lately.

    Last week while (I have no excuse) watching “The Drum” one of the panel referred to his great grandpere serving in the “Noble War” – which was World War 1.

    I cannot understand people who think this way, and for that I am well pleased with myself.

    Lovely day in Newcastle today. My Lilies grow apace and by Christmas I will have up to 20 beautiful blooms to remind me of departed friends.
    The “Gardening Page” on the new revived “Poll Bludger” is vastly superior to the Crikey model.
    AND the cooking page and recipes are just plain wonderful.
    Au revoir. 😍😍

  12. “So will Senators be unelected or is the recount confined to determining a replacement for the ineligible?”

    It’s unclear. Antony Green believes it will be confined to the specific vacancy caused by the determination of the referral. I’ve read some analysis that the alternative is at least possible and perhaps preferred in logic. If I had to guess, I think the HC will just determine the specific vacancy and choose the senator from the same party as the invalidly elected senator.

  13. lizzie @ #61 Friday, November 10th, 2017 – 9:03 am

    KayJay

    Hi. 🙂

    All restored now, thanks to you and Bemused, and AR of course.

    The extension C+ was lying to me. Said it was installed when it had become useless.
    So a bit of deletion and reinstallation and I’m back to normal.

    Careful Lizzie, you are on your way to becoming a Tech-Head. 😀
    Happy to have assisted.

  14. The gall of Barnaby to actually whinge instead of being embarrassed that he is costing us the taxpayer money for a by election in which he is standing again. It is not as if he resigned and is giving someone else the position. What a pathetic excuse of a human being. And shame on the Frickin ABC for boosting him instead of admonishing his conduct.

    Totally agree Vic.

    Huge cost to the taxpayer for this plus the uncertainty and cost of any of his ministerial decisions being challenged in making decisions he was not entitled to make.

    not one word from the ABC asking barnaby if he had taken the time to read the nomination form, did he understand the requirements, did he feel guilty for this wasted money and expense.

    lazy, lazy lazy lazy by both barnaby and the abc

  15. We’ll get at least two declarations today, with the slight possibility of challenges to Hughes and Bartlett.

    I thought Bartlett may have concern, his situation appears similar to Cleary, University is a state body like Cleary was at a state school, there is a conflict in that he could be voting on funding directly related to his employment at the university.

    He may be relying on Cleary being permanent whereas he was contract.

  16. C@t:

    I just read that story. Unbelievable really, the Trump Administration clearly doesn’t understand the concept of political interference.

  17. ltep says:
    Friday, November 10, 2017 at 8:45 am
    Confessions, he left the ABC ages ago to take up Laurie Oakes’ old position I believe?

    Chris has an awful lot of corporate lunches to catch up on

  18. Well here we go then.Asked and answered.
    http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/citizenship-crisis-labor-mp-justine-keay-concedes-high-court-referral-is-probably-the-only-step-20171109-gzigqt.html
    A Labor politician embroiled in the national citizenship crisis has released documents in an effort to clear her name, but concedes being referred to the High Court may be “the only step” left to resolve the uncertainty.

    There have been doubts about the eligibility of Justine Keay, the Labor MP for the Tasmanian seat of Braddon, for several weeks but Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull upped the ante on Wednesday by suggesting she may have to resign.
    No agreement on citizenship

    Despite a two hour meeting to try resolve the citizenship crisis, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Labor leader Bill Shorten haven’t come up with a resolution.

    Ms Keay, who was a British citizen on the night of the election, is relying on the steps she took to renounce her dual citizenship to make her eligible for Parliament.

    In February 2016, the Labor Party’s legal division notified Ms Keay of the required steps to be eligible as a candidate – but it was not until the election was called in May she began the renunciation process.
    The emotional MP teared-up when explaining why it took three months to renounce her British connection.

    “I delayed it – it’s one of those things with the citizenship I knew I could never get it back,” she said.

    “If I don’t get elected I can’t get my citizenship back and for me, it was a very personal thing.

    “I try not to be upset about it but – it was that last tangible connection with my dad.”

    She acknowledged the renunciation could have been done earlier, and the delay had created the cloud hanging over her head.

    The date of Ms Keay’s renunciation took effect from July 11 – more than a week after the July 2 federal election, and well past the June 9 deadline by which candidates must declare to electoral authorities they are not dual citizens.

    Despite taking steps to renounce her citizenship prior to the election, Ms Keay’s political opponents have seized on the confirmation she was British on election night.

    “What’s frustrating is I have done everything possible and I have taken the constitutional requirements that I have very very seriously – you’ve got people like Barnaby Joyce and like Stephen Parry, possible Jacqui Lambie who have not even asked the question,” she said.

    After the resignation of Mr Parry last week Ms Keay again sought legal advice about her own situation.

    On Wednesday, Ray Finkelstein QC and Susan Gory advised she was eligible to sit as a member of the House of Representatives.

    Ms Keay said there was no reason for her case to be tested in the High Court – but acknowledged it may be the only way to determine her fate.

    “I would be incredibly confident of getting through that process,” she said.

    “Part of me sort of thinks – that probably is the only step to really put an end to all this and completely clarify it.”

    She was cautious about using the nation’s highest court as a testing ground and instead hoped universal disclosure in Parliament would finalise the fiasco.

    “For me to go to the High Court and say, can you just test my case, but I have no grounds for you do so, is pretty stupid,” she said.

    “Should the government decide to act in a partisan way and do that, that’s for them to determine.

    “If they want to try to take out me on the way through their crisis – so be it, I’ll deal with that.”

    Mr Turnbull on Thursday threatened to break with longstanding precedent and use the government’s slim majority to refer any Labor MPs under a citizenship cloud to the High Court.

    The Coalition has until now staunchly insisted that any High Court referrals must be made by an MP’s own party, as part of a bid to prevent an outbreak of partisan referrals.

    The government believes three Labor MPs – Ms Keay, Susan Lamb and Josh Wilson – have questions to answer about their citizenship status at the time of the 2016 election.

    Each considered at threat because they had not received confirmation of their renunciation until after they nominated as candidates in June last year.

    Lower house crossbencher Rebekha Sharkie is also believed to be in a similar situation.

    – The Examiner

  19. I reckon Mal’s delaying tactics over citizenship is as much to get all members ready and legal for by-elections as it is to save his own job (though that would be the result).

    Like his idea of ‘fixing’ the senate with the DD, he thinks he’ll increase his majority with by-elections thereby making his hold on power stronger within his own party.

    Sam Maiden hinted at this with the fact that Keay & Lamb are on ‘slim’ majorities and insinuating they could go the other way.

  20. The more you think about the more it looks like Shorten is still calling all the shots here.

    He wouldn’t have come out with the demand for universal declarations if he wasn’t preparing for Labor to do exactly that. He wouldn’t be demanding all the declarations to be in by the Monday of the last sitting week if he didn’t have his people ready to go on that date. He wouldn’t be demanding extending to Grandparents if Labor wasn’t already well aware of any issues related to Grandparents for their people.

    He knows (and Trumble knows too) that after Canavan there are cases that can legitimately be referred to the HC without an immediate resignation because they are at least arguable. He and Trumble also know that after Canavan there are cases that are so clear that the only option is immediate resignation.

    Shorten and Trumble also know that the ALP issues fall in the former category and the Coalition cases (largely) in the latter. For instance Frydenberg is maybe an arguable case, but Alexander is toast and must resign.

    Once all the Labor members put their cards on the table the only place for the witch hunt to go is back to the Libs who haven’t. Anyone found in the position of not even attempting to renounce will be pilloried worse than Parry. They won’t be sitting in the Reps from the instant that information hits the public.

    So it’s all about the last sitting week. Shorten will be looking to force all the Coalition members that are clear cut goners to resign so the numbers simply aren’t there for the Government. If there’s an equal number of referrals/not resigning on both sides then that’s all to the good. Doesn’t make it look like Labor pulling a dodgy hanging onto questionables to force a no confidence motion then. But if three or four government MPs are simply unable to justify not resigning then this Government will probably fall in the last week.

    If the numbers aren’t there for Trumble any longer the fact that by elections will be held to fill the vacancies shouldn’t have any particular importance to the GG. What the numbers might be after those by elections isn’t relevant to the current situation of a government without confidence of the current make up of the house. If Trumble loses the confidence of the house then he must resign and Shorten be sworn in. Because of the timing Shorten would probably be happy enough to see out the rest of the sitting week (assuming the numbers and probably leaving the Speaker in place unless he resigns), and then setting about getting some runs on the board as a competent PM over Christmas.

    He’d hold off on by elections until the HC dealt with the referrals and then assess if holding the by elections will produce a result that will allow him to govern until an election for both houses can be held (and probably try to trigger a DD) or if he really needs to just call a house only election instead of the by elections in which case he’ll do so just before Parliament is due to return.

    Trumble’s in a BAD BAD place. Ironically though the Citizenship issue might be the thing that saves him from his own party in the last sittings.

  21. Regarding s.44: Citizenship

    Massola in today’s Age states: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/citizenship-crisis-bites-nxt-mp-rebekha-sharkie-20171109-gzi5t9.html

    [However, if it was demonstrated that the “person has taken all steps that are reasonably required by the foreign law to renounce his or her citizenship and within his or her power” they are in the clear.]

    He goes on to state:
    [Some legal experts believe “reasonable steps” only applies in situations where a nation does not allow its citizenship to be renounced.]

    The above 2 propositions aptly captures the debate on this site between myself (prop 2) and others (Zoomster, Ratsak, BIGD are prop 1 proponents).

    Windhover, unlike Massola, is an anonymous keyboard commentator with NO authority by reason of my say so. The ONLY value of my posts is the extent to which my posts are based on facts that can be independently checked and the logic (if any) of the conclusions I reach. With that caveat in mind:

    IMO the HC has made abundantly clear in the recent decision of Canavan et al that Massola’s first proposition is WRONG and the second proposition is the law. For those in any doubt I refer to my previous posts on the subject and, ultimately, to the HC judgment at [42] to [46]. Those wishing to disprove my interpretation should look particularly at what the HC described as “the Constitutional imperative” at [43] and should look at how that was used at [73].

    The Sharkie case (and the Keay case) raise the issue as to the time at which a person must renounce.

    The HC decided in Sykes v Cleary that the relevant time at which a person must not be s.44 conflicted is the period from the date of nomination to the date of declaration of the poll – see [27] of the majority judgment with whom all other members of the Court except Deane agreed. Deane would have allowed the relevant time to be the date of declaration of the polls only -see [23] of Deane’s reasons.

    Since the relevant time at which a person must not be a dual citizen is the whole of the period from the date of nomination to the date of declaration of the polls it is obvious from the publicised admissions by Sharkie and Keay that they are disqualified to sit as MoP. Even Deane might have ruled against them as he reserved his decision as to the effect of the wrongful declaration at the date of nomination, it being apparent that they must have wrongfully declared their eligibility.

    I do not believe there is enough juice in most of the cases to warrant obtaining a HC ruling of ineligibility. I doubt any competent Constitutional lawyer would seek to argue the case and I predict they will, eventually, fizzle out without the need for judicial hearing.

    I do think the Freydenberg case is interesting, but only as a factual case not as an understanding of s.44. As explained before he may be able to argue that making an application for citizenship was a prerequisite to accessing his Hungarian citizenship. If so, like Canavan, he would avoid being a dual citizen.

    I finally note that an interesting Constitutional argument might be raised before the HC in relation to replacement Senators like Bartlett who was qualified in the relevant period but, since the declaration of the polls, has ceased to be qualified by taking an office of profit under the Crown (if he has). The question will be whether the relevant period under s.44 (held to be from the date of nomination to the declaration of the polls in Sykes) should be extended.

    The answer will depend on the meaning of “being chosen” in s.44. If the period of being chosen is limited to the period in Sykes then Bartlett would be safe. OTOH, Sykes did not have to consider the factual circumstances now arising. The process of “being chosen” might well be interpreted as including all the processes by which a candidate ends up being declared elected. If the process by which a candidate is declared elected involves a recount in circumstances in which a vacancy has arisen (and it seems to me it probably does) then Bartlett, if he holds an office of profit would be disqualified.

    I am not generally disturbed by the operation of s.44 as it has been interpreted but, if Bartlett were to be disqualified for getting on with his life post-election this would be an outrageous result.

  22. Lamb could quite easily lose her seat in a byelection given the QLD election, Adani and jobs.

    I thinl Keay would be reelected given Tasmania is looking terrible for the coalition (unless JLN runs?)

  23. ‘The Business’ last night (after Lateline) had an interviewee saying that the government might be forced to write down the value of the NBN. This is because the NBN will likely never turn a profit because the telcos are luring customers with better wireless products and G5 wireless will exacerbate the trend.

    The result will mean taxpayers’ money used to prop up the NBN (those loans have to be repaid somehow).

    Another triumph for Turnbull’s fraudband product.

  24. victoria

    The only shining light left at the ABC is fourcorners. Surprised they haven’t scrapped it yet!!

    They will after 4C does a reality check on Truffles next week.
    Although Brissenden has tended to be straight down the line govt, so if he shows any spirit, it will be interesting.

  25. BT puts QLD as behind only WA and territories for swing since last election (4.8% to Labor).

    Anything that was Labor marginal, say 1.2%, should now be taken to be safe Labor on 6% margin, as the default assumption.

  26. ratsak laid it out very well I thought as to why those who had taken reasonable steps to renounce before nomination would be viewed as compliant by the HC.

    Setting the the date of confirmation of renunciation as by the date of nomination opens too many variables which would see multiple rulings depending on the circumstances of each case. The HC in past rulings appears to go for guidelines instead of determinate set factors.

    Deane said that date of declaration should be the date taken as being chosen as that is when the successful candidate is chosen, the other six disagreed and said it should be viewed as being able (eligible) to chosen from the date of nomination.

    Deanes approach whilst appearing sensible could create problems where;
    a candidate resigned the office of profit but delays/faults in processing such paperwork meant candidate could technically be viewed as still an employee at the date of declaration.
    a candidate divested themselves of or put in place arrangements to contracts and holdings so that they no longer held in an interest in businesses involved with government but delays in processing meant this had not been completed by the day of declaration.
    a candidate renounced dual citizenship but delays in processing meant still a dual citizen at time of declaration.

    The UK process notes that registration of renunciation can be delayed in times of war, a candidate can be disqualified through no fault of their own.

    The HC appears to recognise that their are factors outside a candidates control in complying with the requirements and would not likely want to be going back to court to rule on each new factor that arises, the unknown unknowns, which is why the reasonableness test applies.

    All the ones who took reasonable efforts before nomination date should be fine, there was a clear expectation that they had renounced their dual citizenship before the nomination date, the date of effect of that renunciation is a factor they do not have control over.

    ones who have dual citizenship and did not renounce because of a belief they were not entitled to it would have to show that they took reasonable steps to confirm this.

    if your parents grandparents came from a country that no longer exists you still need to take reasonable steps to establish whether they and you are entitled to citizenship of the new country or area. Such ones could be Rhodesia/ Zimbabe, East Timor/ Indonesia and perhaps the USSR.

    Similar if your family fled a country due to religious/ political persecution, there are may examples of regimes/ dictatorships being overthrown and the new regimes pleading with those who fled were expelled to come back and rebuild.

  27. I hope as was discussed after the last Federal election that the labor party machine took on the learned advice of the PB forum and has rectified the situation pertaining to going out full steam ahead and door knocking all the out lying islands,settlements and nursing homes etc to assist and encourage the locals to register to vote and do all that is possible to increase the likelihood of getting the voters to have a vote.
    This is going to be critical in Queensland me thinks.

  28. What I really want for Christmas though is for Barnyard to be elected on the Saturday and then be found ineligible the next week because Nanna made him a Pom. Absolutely nothing could top that.

  29. victoria @ #51 Friday, November 10th, 2017 – 8:49 am

    c@t

    The gall of Barnaby to actually whinge instead of being embarrassed that he is costing us the taxpayer money for a by election in which he is standing again. It is not as if he resigned and is giving someone else the position. What a pathetic excuse of a human being. And shame on the Frickin ABC for boosting him instead of admonishing his conduct

    Joyce was on 7.30 last night, the news and AM, all the while whining and moaning about how hard done by he had been. Totally unchallenged by any interviewer of course.

  30. Crikey today.

    PM safe, for the moment — Sharri Markson (The Daily Telegraph $): “Here’s what some of their discussions around replacement leadership candidates sound like: Dutton is not tried and tested and is unpopular with moderates; Morrison has abandoned his conservative credentials while his superannuation policy was one of the first moves costing the Liberal Party support among its base; and Tony Abbott is too divisive, and while Bishop may be the ‘sugar-hit’ the party needs to get it through an election, they doubt she’d withstand the scrutiny of a 33-day campaign.”

    It would give Bishop the chance to display all her wardrobe (including earrings) over the 33 days.

  31. I doubt any competent Constitutional lawyer would seek to argue the case and I predict they will, eventually, fizzle out without the need for judicial hearing.

    I think Ray Finkelstein might disagree with you. Or do you not rate him as his expertise is Corporations law. Or just because he’s a bit ‘activist’?

  32. Windhover, I think the most sensible interpretation of ‘being chosen’ is the Sykes period, and the period alternatively could be any time within a 6 year window for Senate candidates, which would be ridiculous.

  33. ratsak @ #89 Friday, November 10th, 2017 – 10:00 am

    What I really want for Christmas though is for Barnyard to be elected on the Saturday and then be found ineligible the next week because Nanna made him a Pom. Absolutely nothing could top that.

    I think such negligence on his part might just do the trick and pee off his electorate enough for him to be vulnerable to a strong opponent.

  34. adrian @ #90 Friday, November 10th, 2017 – 10:02 am

    victoria @ #51 Friday, November 10th, 2017 – 8:49 am

    c@t

    The gall of Barnaby to actually whinge instead of being embarrassed that he is costing us the taxpayer money for a by election in which he is standing again. It is not as if he resigned and is giving someone else the position. What a pathetic excuse of a human being. And shame on the Frickin ABC for boosting him instead of admonishing his conduct

    Joyce was on 7.30 last night, the news and AM, all the while whining and moaning about how hard done by he had been. Totally unchallenged by any interviewer of course.

    Do you think any of it helped him?
    Do you want the next 4C to devote 50% of its time to the ALP?

Comments Page 2 of 31
1 2 3 31

Leave a Reply

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