YouGov Galaxy: Liberal 51, SA Best 49 in Heysen; Labor 50, SA Best 50 in Giles

Two more seat polls produce two more knife edge results involving SA Best.

The Advertiser has another two seat polls from YouGov Galaxy – one from a Liberal seat and one from Labor, with the incumbent parties under pressure in both cases from SA Best. In the Adelaide Hills seat of Heysen, to be vacated with the retirement of former Liberal leader Isobel Redmond, the Liberals are on 39% of the primary vote compared with 22% for SA Best, 16% for the Greens, 15% for Labor and 8% others. That would leave SA Best in need of 72% of preferences, and the respondent-allocated two-party result has them not quite getting there, with the Liberals leading 51-49.

In the Whyalla-based seat of Giles, where Labor have been making life difficult for themselves recently, Labor incumbent Eddie Hughes is on 37% with SA Best on 31%, the Liberals on 23%, the Greens on 3% and others on 6%. With SA Best needing 60% of preferences, the poll calls it lineball on two-party preferred. The polls were conducted on Wednesday and Thursday, from samples of 501 in Heysen and 504 in Giles.

We’ve also had the declaration of nominations for the lower house today, and there turn out to be 264 candidates for an average of 5.6 per seat. Labor, Liberal and the Greens are contesting every seat, SA Best are contesting 36, the Conservatives 33, the Dignity Party 30, and there are nine from small minor parties and 15 independents. The upper house will be done tomorrow.

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.

54 comments on “YouGov Galaxy: Liberal 51, SA Best 49 in Heysen; Labor 50, SA Best 50 in Giles”

Comments Page 1 of 2
1 2
  1. Still early in the campaign, so I don’t want to call anything yet, but I am getting that slight feeling that a real result we will have after this is a returned Weatherill Government with Xenophon being Opposition Leader (by virtue of having more seats than the Libs.)

    Still early, so don’t quote me on this but Weatherill is doing exactly what he needs to do to win: seem visionary and forward-thinking, and Xenophon is doing what he needs to do: Be visible and remain a factor. Whereas Marshall and the Libs so far are running the worst campaign I have ever seen them run (this includes the last campaign) and Marshall is such a non-entity. I know there’s merit behind being a small target but that’s not a good idea when there’s another option. Also, the pathetic policy announcements remind you of that “Old Adelaide” mentality of not doing anything except maybe putting a fresh coat of paint on something and pretending the place will economically boom by itself.

  2. Noting how large the systematic differences between the different pollsters (“house effects”) are on your Poll Tracker table*, Will, I regard the MoE even at State level as about 10%, and therefore these electorate-level polls as essentially meaningless. Repeat after me: “The only poll that matters…” It’ll make election night even more interesting, since we have no guidance whatsoever as to the likely result!

    * For those interested. see and sort out the lines by pollster. They have apparently been systematically polling different South Australias right through 2016 and 2017.

  3. I guess maybe Marshall hopes that the anti-incumbent mood is strong enough and the SA Best primary isn’t, that the votes flow strongly to the Libs and he rides in through that. That would be a shame, quite frankly, if that’s the lazy strategy being employed here.

  4. A returned Weatherill gummint with a majority in its own right, RL? I’d like to see that! Certainly your analysis of the campaigns tallies with the way I’m reading it from far-away Brisbun, but a majority???

  5. William:

    Just looking at those primary figures for Heysen, is it possible for the Greens to leapfrog over SA Best off the back of ALP exclusion, thereby putting them into the final 2 showdown? And, if that happened, what chance would you give them to take the seat?

  6. Jack, possibly with the help of independents. This is, by no means a calculated prediction, more just a general vibe feel right now

  7. Interestingly, if memory serves, the Greens made the 2CP in Heysen last time. FWIW, I believe the Lib v. Green 2CP was not that much different than the Lib v. ALP 2PP for the seat. (Maybe 1-2% difference.) But I am going from old memory here.

  8. But the point is that the Libs usually win on first preferences. Their polling here is only 39%. That’s dire for them in this seat.

  9. 39% usually isn’t a winning proposition for the Liberals against an independent, but the Greens get a lot of preferences directed against them. The Liberals would probably get most of that 8% “others”, and it wouldn’t take much leakage from Labor and SA Best to get them over the line. But I really have no hard way of knowing how strongly SA Best preferences would go to the Greens over the Liberals, how much their HTV card would have to do with it, and what it’s going to recommend.

  10. The liberal campaign is dull and inward looking. A small business tax cut. Including every Sole trader in Australia that benefits maximum 10% of workers. The other 90% get nothing, plus reduced services. So why should the other 90% vote for them?

  11. One more thing on the tram plan if any Labor transport people are reading. The line to Norwood should be great, but somebody is selling Weatherall a pup with the plan to have a terminus in the Parade and a second line up Magill Road. This will be slow, require twice as many services and be very inefficient and costly to run. They should do one line, if necessary taking Portrush road under at the Parade intersection in order to get the tram line further east.

  12. Portrush Road holds up traffic on Magill Road and The Parade for inordinate lengths of time. A solution to these bottlenecks should be a top priority.

  13. – – I wouldn’t have thought SA Best preferences would flow to the Greens strongly enough to get them ahead of the Liberals on these numbers. – –

    I wouldn’t have thought so either. A lot of the fall in the Lib primary has gone to SABest and a good proportion will flow back.

    And I would suggest that neither SABest or Greens have thought they were in with a chance as their candidate selection and campaigning efforts show. This may seem harsh; Vonow has been around the traps for a while and Illingworth has an impressive CV. But neither will grab headlines in an electorate where a high profile is important. And Vonow has a presence in an area of the hills that are not in Heysen.

    Illingworth has a lot if history in the area Teague lives in – Crafers/Stirling – as well as the Mount Barker Region through his previous work. But he has a moustache with a quintessential plod face – I feel the first thing he would say to me is ‘you’re nicked!’.

  14. Labor’s running by far the best campaign of the three biggies. The Libs are dull and SA Best is just showbiz.

    These impressions are not reflected by the limited polls we’ve seen so far, however.

    Labor appears to be done in Hurtle Vale and is in grave danger of losing Whyalla and Lee to SA Best.

    The Libs are in trouble against X in Hartley and the independent Troy Bell in Mount Gambier. Bell is a Lib anyway and will return to the fold if he clears his name in court.

    Labor will be hoping SA Best slips a bit in Labor seats but soars in Lib seats.

  15. Statewide polling would be fairly meaningless now for the lower house, given that SAB are not contesting every seat. Some respondents would take that into account, others wouldn’t.

  16. One thing to take from these little bits and pieces polls is that the ALP primary seems to be losing double digits everywhere…and these are the seats where they are trying hard.

  17. If SA Best are getting to 51/49 in Heyson with a PV of just 22%, it won’t be too hard for them to pick up a few extra % of PV in the next couple of weeks and win this seat. The Liberal PV at 39% seems a touch underdone, but with no incumbent with a rusted on personal vote, I reckon SA Best are a really good chance to win Heyson.

  18. Donald Rumsfeld could not pick this known unknown election. None of us know what will happen. Polling is interesting for the tragics. X is no doubt pleased about his vote in heartland seats.
    But what does it mean? Where do preferences go?
    Three men could be Premier – although one of them says he doesn’t want the job, and one of the others simply doesn’t look up to it.
    The Hare Clark in Tassie makes it hard enough to be confident about a result. But a three tiered contest makes it impossible.

  19. For Toff: Port Adelaide
    1 TINGEY, Bryan Dignity
    2 HANCOCK, Nicholas Animal Justice
    3 JOHANSON, Gary SA Best
    4 McLAREN, Chad Libs
    5 MOORS, Danica Greens
    6 MATTHEWS, Peter Danig Party
    7 CLOSE, Susan ALP
    8 HAMBOUR, Bruce Conservatives

  20. Indaily has a thing about the Greens preferencing SABest over ALP in Rau’s seat.

    Apparently the ALP policy of urban infill is one of the reasons.

    Anyone know what the Greens dont like about urban infill?

    Oh and a correction – Teague lives in Bridgewater. Not that I have ever seen him and the Bridgy pub.

  21. Anyone know what the Greens dont like about urban infill?

    I could sugar coat it but to be frank: To appeal to inner city voters who don’t want to live in or near higher density living areas and, if I can be blunt, poor people.

  22. I could sugar coat it but to be frank: To appeal to inner city voters who don’t want to live in or near higher density living areas and, if I can be blunt, poor people.

    Shocker. Time to start a local YIMBY group.

  23. I agree the Greens policy on opposing Labor’s urban infill is very hypocritical. Apart from the housing supply issue, much urban infill in Adelaide (eg Bowden, next Lonsdale) has consisted of re-mediating old industrial sites that are often contaminated. So there is a major environmental benefit from doing this work.

  24. Whilst it was a little cynical of Labor to delay all the key announcements till the election, there is now some really good stuff coming out about the proposed Adelink tram network. This will be great for inner urban development in the city, and is far more worth funding than outer urban sprawl or more upgrading of South Road, which, south of Anzac Highway, does not have much freight anyway. The tram projects are cheaper too; about $80M/km vs $150M/km for South Road. The factories in the south are all gone; time for a new strategy.

  25. Some of these issues are reported on in the article.

    It didnt go into the background of why the Greens do not like urban infill – at least not from the skim that I gave the article.

  26. Not really interested in what the Green spin doctors have to say. It’s obvious it’s pandering to inner-city voters, particularly in the seat of Adelaide.

    FWIW, I don’t think Labor should get too hung-up over the issue though. Just move on and try to win the seat regardless. Preference-sewing can only get you so far and it looks lazy if you start talking about preferences winning the race for you.

  27. Waiting to find out the ballot order of the LC tickets. ECSA will put it up later today but I haven’t seen any hints from any journos yet.

  28. Greens SA policy on Planning gives some idea what the issues are re urban infilling in Enfield:

    Often people only encounter the “Planning System” when they see inappropriate development or discover rezoning of land in their local area. At that point, many are horrified to realise that they have very few rights. It can be difficult to find information before decisions are made, hard to have your voice heard and nearly impossible to challenge bad decisions, whether made by a local council or the State Government.

    The only people who seem to consistently get their way are from the big end of town – with large property developers also featuring prominently in the lists of donors to the old political parties. Many now understand that the rules are stacked against public participation.

    Greens candidate Robert Simms running in Adelaide:

    Simms nominates housing affordability, renewable energy, homelessness and opposition to Labor’s planning reforms as issues inner-city voters care about, but about which they have had little representation.

    “I am committed to ensuring we put the ‘people’ back in planning rather than this Labor government’s development-at-any-cost attitude.

    Simms said he would campaign to give a “real voice” to local councils, and the state parliament, in planning decisions.

    “I’ll [also] be campaigning strongly on putting democracy back into the planning process,” he said.

  29. Peg, in South Australia it is pretty much free for someone to appeal a Council Decision. You also get to be heard by both the Council Planner AND the Council Assessment Panel (often with a sizable Greens members).

    Now some of these developments are now classed as full merit developments and you are not able to appeal the decision. This has many NIMBYs in a TIZZY because they failed to let their thoughts be known during the rezoning process.

    Rezoning processes can take many years. The one recently gazetted in the Adelaide Hills took 9 years! With opportunities to be heard and oppose it at many steps along the way and plenty of loud warnings.

    Now, when you want to stop urban sprawl and more efficiently utilize the existing infrastructure by encouraging urban infill then you are going to crack a few eggs. But the thing is, this higher density planning arrangements have increased the value of the land in those areas. So, yes, while some people feel their eggs have been cracked, they are able to sell their land at a much higher price than prior to the planning changes.

    You dont get better outcomes for the environment by tiptoeing around NIMBYs. Urban infill is essential. If you doubt it – go and look what happened in Mount Barker for the destruction of viable farming land and valuable native bushland not to mention the construction and ongoing carbon footprint of such developments.

  30. Legislative Council Ballot in order of placement:

    A: Stop Population Growth Now – 2 candidates
    B: The Greens – 5 candidates
    C: Dignity Party – 4 candidates
    D: SA Best – 5 candidates
    E: Liberal Democrats – 2 candidates
    F: Advance SA – 2 candidates
    G: Animal Justice Party – 2 candidates
    H: Liberal Party – 6 candidates
    I: Child Protection Party – 2 candidates
    J: Conservatives – 2 candidates
    K: Labor – 6 candidates
    L: Independent Amrik Singh Thandi – 2 candidates
    Ungrouped – 3 candidates

    Total tickets: 12 + ungrouped
    Total candidates: 43

  31. SK

    As I don’t live in SA, I appreciate your info.

    “If you doubt it …”

    I am just trying to understand why the Greens oppose it and went looking.

    I never said I opposed urban infill.

  32. ** I am just trying to understand why the Greens oppose it and went looking. **
    Me 2. It is weird. Certainly the Greens up here in the Adelaide Hills are all for urban infill, because they rightly dont want development in the environment and food bowl area.


    A bombshell might drop in the South Australian election campaign today when the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption (ICAC) releases a report investigating potential misconduct and maladministration involving the now-closed Oakden aged care facility.

    It shut last year after the state’s chief psychiatrist found elderly dementia patients were abused and neglected by their carers over a decade.


    South Australia’s Independent Commissioner Against Corruption has made damning findings of maladministration by the Weatherill Government over the management of the now-closed Oakden nursing home.

    In a scathing report titled “Oakden: A Shameful Chapter in South Australia’s History” Commissioner Bruce Lander made findings of maladministration against five individuals.

    He made strident criticisms of government ministers, but stopped short of making maladministration findings against them.

  35. If our Opposition were even mildly capable, this would be certain death for Labor but, as it stands, there’s a chance they will survive this. Although it was a good move to dump Vlahos off the ballot – which prevents any embarrassment of a narrative of “Labor are still standing by her.”

    Weatherill’s objective will be to handle this in a way that looks like he is not trying to sweep the issue away but, at the same time, placates the issue quickly enough so campaign issues can return to normal.

Comments Page 1 of 2
1 2

Leave a Reply

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